Our Founders Would be in Disbelief

Our Founders never would have envisioned the granting of eminent domain powers to non-elected bodies nor that the arm of Government would have become so far reaching as today.

In my personal opinion, the central question that every resident, every property owner, every citizen should be asking and which is really central to these conversations is, “does government ultimately have ownership of property?” The argument of giving equal parity to FSDB as granted to 67 other State Universities and Colleges is not the issue. Further, it is the responsibility of every property owner to follow ordinances enacted by local communities and commissions and follow the process of appeal as granted by our laws.

Eminent domain was a practice which came to America from England and by the time of the Revolutionary war and the writing of our Constitution had taken root in America and was a major concern of our Founders.

As the Constitution was being written this practice was a crucial issue debated by the Founders and compromises negotiated as to how or if we would be different from Britain and the tyrants of “English justice” to landowners.

Thomas Jefferson contended that all remnants of the practice known as feudalism, from England in regard to property, should be eliminated. He pushed vigorously for absolute ownership of land by individuals; free from the ability of the state to reclaim it in an act of eminent domain.

James Madison, who wrote the Fifth Amendment, hoped to restrict the takings that had been made in the colonies under British rule and in the new states after the revolution because he wished to make individual property rights more secure, but didn't go as far as Jefferson would have liked, perhaps he was unwilling to do so because he felt without compromise he would be unable to gain sufficient support for the Constitution. He chose instead to require compensation explicitly, and he used the term public use rather than public purpose, interest or benefit which has now been accepted by the Supreme Court in a 2005 case known as Kelo vs. City of New London.

If freedom of speech or Civil Rights were gutted as severely as the Fifth Amendment has been, there would be no end to the public outcry. Property belongs to those who hold title to it. It is not the property of the State and the State should not have the ability to execute proceedings to take it back. Alan Kelso is a local businessman and current candidate for St Johns County
Commissioner of District 5.

Redistricting – Bargaining or Compromise

While recently attending the St. Johns County School Board Workshop concerning Redistricting, after the public was given an opportunity to address the Board, I heard a repeated word or idea being proposed between board members.

The feeling of some on the Board was that there must be a compromise between the School Board and County Commissioners in order to appear more willing to work out differences.

The idea of compromise is nothing new especially in the world of politics. What is often proposed as “compromise”, is in essence a bait and switch tactic; opening a back door to moral relativism.

The idea is that   there are no absolutes, no right or wrong, and that cultural differences justify action or  belief.

Compromise is often touted as a virtue. However, what is usually put upon a pedestal, in reality, is a package deal; containing two different concepts under the same label -– that of bargaining and  compromise.

The first concept, hashing out details under a shared basic principle, we call bargaining. The basic  principle is to trade — the details are how much of X to trade for how much Y. Both traders will try to get a good deal, but will only deal if they can get a price that is beneficial to both.

The second concept, compromise is the surrender of basic principles to achieve some agreement, not  simply bargaining out details to attain a consensus. Basic principles are either followed or not followed. They cannot be partly followed.

When there is an attempted compromise between honesty and dishonesty, the result is dishonesty.  When there is an attempted compromise between justice and injustice, the result is an injustice. When there is an attempted compromise between rationality and irrationality, the result is irrational. When there is an attempted compromise between integrity and not acting in accordance with ones  convictions, the result is an act not in accordance with one’s convictions.

During this time of redistricting, we are forgetting why people from around the world came to America and what has continued to make us unique and great among the nations of the world.

It is not just our “Free Enterprise System” or that of “Democracy” or our “Freedom to Worship”.

The concept was so important to our founders that they placed it ever before us on our coins to be a constant reminder to us, E Pluribus Unum – “out of many, one”.

Redistricting is not an attempt to place a group of people on “one side of the tracks” or the other. Nor is it intended to isolate a segment of society, except by those who would try to use race as a means to  group people into one district or another.

To accept the argument that race is an issue and that we must segregate groups of people by the color of their skin, is, first, to accept that the argument exists as an issue. Secondly, it is a gross step backwards in time, or “retrogression”, taking us back to the days of real racism; prior to the 60′s and the Civil Rights era.

I cannot speak for other counties; but here in St. Johns County, we do not have a racism problem. Though a small few may be racist, this county is not.

Racial separatism is the belief that different races should remain segregated and apart from one another. Plan C revised does not promote such a concept; however, arguably, plans E and J do — by proposing that the African Americans of our county be grouped together, or segregated. The suggestion is that, through segregation, minority voters become a more powerful voting-block. Since minorities are more often Democrats, and the City of St Augustine is predominantly Democrat, minority “voting power” is actually reduced by the segregation in Plan E and J — revised or otherwise.  There is nothing noble about compromising people’s well-being and integrity.

Historic City News learned at last night’s delegate selection meeting of the Republican Executive Committee that Alan Kelso intends to run for County Commissioner from District 5.

County Commission seats for Districts 1, 3, and 5 are all up for election next year and constitute a voting majority of the Board.

Kelso is the second person to enter the 2012 election process as a potential new commissioner; in March, Brian Iannucci filed to compete for the District 1 seat currently held by two-term commissioner and former Chairman, Cyndi Stevenson. Although Stevenson has not filed for re-election as of yet, she told Historic City News that she does intend to seek a third term.

Recently I attended the St. Johns County Town Hall meeting at the Bartram Trail Library. At the conclusion of the meeting another meeting took place in which our County Attorney would attempt to answer some questions about the recent decision of our Commissioners concerning the Hopewell Baptist Church construction on Roberts Road in the Julington Creek area.

After two plus years of hearings and the church filing three law suits against the county, a settlement was negotiated by the County Attorney and accepted by the full Commission without providing adequate notice and input from the residents of District One upon whom this burden will so heavily fall.

Alan Kelso's professional career training started back when he was a student in a small town on the south side of Indianapolis. As a young teenager,he volunteered, following the example of service and involvement to the community instilled in him by his parents, he became involved in organization's whose goal was to develop leaders with strong ethical values. He helped form softball and basketball teams and raised funds to provide them with professional uniforms and equipment. He served as "Mayor for a Day" and was elected by his contemporaries to serve as class Vice President and President during his junior and senior years.