Robb’s waterloo? NextDoor.com

Chaz StevensPolitics0 Comments

So next week, I will be meeting with the Broward State Attorney’s Office … they’ve reached out to me, seeking my counsel regarding their ongoing criminal investigation of Jean Robb.

Seems they’re calling in an expert.

No, not you Pat … they’re not seeking individuals who very likely require heavy doses of chemicals.

Are you familiar with NextDoor.com? It’s a nationwide digital experience, comprised of myriad local chapters (neighborhoods). There’s one for The Cove, Deercreek, etc. In order to join, you need to be vetted, each site is guarded under lock and key by an admin and user-specific password.

I was a member of The Cove chapter for about 3 hours … then well, they grew weary of my words.

Opa!

The Cove contains the usual mumbling, bumbling, stumbling cast of characters straight from Rainman’s Island of Misfit Toys. Political speech is supposedly off-limits.

Supposedly.

One member of The Cove, though not a resident, is Jean RottenRobbCrotch, and back last October (2015), that turd made a few comments on the boards.

Being the curious motherfucker, I filed a public records request, seeking those comments.

Here’s the email thread with the City Clerk (who is a wonderful asset to the town) following that request.


From: Chaz Stevens

Ma’am.

I am really not trying to be problematic with my answer … truly, I am not, as I really value the work you ladies do for the city.

That being said.

I’d like all comments made by Mayor Jean Robb, on NextDoor.com … The ones in my possession (so I know they exist) were made a few years back.

So, why then ask records that I already have? Simple really. As you know much better than I, under FS 119 it’s Robb’s responsibility to be the record’s custodian. And, as we all know, Robb’s not very responsible for this sort of stuff.

Sure, she’s mean, nasty, and gassy.

But responsible?


From Samantha Gillyard:
We will contact her outlining the verbiage that you provided and will let you know of the outcome.


From Chaz Stevens:
Also will you pass along I filed a criminal complaint alleging a violation of FS 119. As she us intentionally withholding public information.


From Samantha Gillyard:
I asked Heather to follow up with Mayor Robb concerning your request. She advised that her account was previously closed with NextDoor.com and she no longer has any comments for the site.

Additionally, NextDoor.com is not under the City’s jurisdiction and therefore, any information contained therein, we would not have access. In an effort to provide superior service, two employees, 1 from IT and 1 from the Clerk’s Office has tried to access the site; however, you must belong to a homeowner association in order to do so. Thus, we cannot provide any additional information.

Lastly, Mayor Robb did state that she is not trying to withhold information, but does not have anything to provide.

We will consider this public record request closed.


From Chaz Stevens:

Ma’am.

With regards to Jean Robb denying her comments made on NextDoor.com, as they were made as a private citizen, I offer her own words from October 8, 2015, where Robb indicates and I quote “I would not count of four votes” with regards to the Cove hotel. On the very same comment thread, Robb continues, “those two may get a surprise when it comes to voting on the variances. They may have counted their chickens before they hatched.”


From Chaz Stevens:

Ma’am.

Then there’s this little ditty.

Please, for the love of Festivus, explain to me how this is the blabbering of a private citizen.

Jean Robb -When I met with the developer, it was before the issue of 9 variances raised its head. I did not meet with the developer after that. Please allow me to clarify that Tom Connick was not the SOB’s attorney in the outrageous agreement he and Miller and the Bruno’s put together. Voting for the hotel was a foregone conclusion; however the taxpayers were once again stuck with 350,000 that the developer will not pay for the maintenance of the parking lot for the next 10 years. The agreement that Miller put before the commission also prevents the city from assessing the property owners for that money or metering the parking lot for ten years.


Chaz Stevens
Cc: Heather Montemayor <HMontemayor@deerfield-beach.com>, “Jean M. Robb” <JRobb@deerfield-beach.com>, Andrew Maurodis <andy@maurodislaw.com>, City Manager Burgess Hanson <baahanson@deerfield-beach.com>, Commissioner Joe Miller <jmiller@deerfield-beach.com>, Commissioner Bill Ganz <bganz@deerfield-beach.com>, Timothy Donnelly <tdonnelly@sao17.state.fl.us>, Anne Geggis <ageggis@sun-sentinel.com>

Ma’am.

Nice try … however, perhaps the City Attorney can opine on the FS 119 Records Retention … as Robb’s comments were made less than one year ago. It is Robb’s responsibility to keep those records, as defined under Florida Law.

And, isn’t it funny, Robb is now offering a 2nd excuse why she won’t provide … first excuse, you will recall, these were private remarks, so screw you Chaz Stevens. When I provided a few of her remarks, now we get her dog named Pat ate ‘em.

Sorry, not can do.

If the City Attorney of Deerfield Beach is unfamiliar with FS 119, I would gladly offer a free seminar to instruct him on how it works.

Allow me to provide superior customer service here … this is complete bullshit and Andy is just protecting his client.

That being said, I love the Clerk’s Office and IT, finding no fault with either.

This matter, young lady, is far from closed.

My best.


From: Chaz Stevens
To: Timothy Donnelly <tdonnelly@sao17.state.fl.us>

Mr. Donnelly

As you can plainly see, the Mayor of Deerfield Beach is playing games with Florida Statute 119.

I ask that you pass this along to your new case investigator. And if the timing seems right, please kick Robb right in the ass for all of us.


From: Chaz Stevens
To: IG

Dear Broward OIG;

Can you please add this to my previous filed complaint against Robb’s mishandling of records under FS 119.

Also, perhaps you could ring up Mr. Maurodis — while he’s a very good egg, it seems he’s forgotten how 119 works also.


From: Chaz Stevens

Madam Clerk;

Let’s recap this, for a moment, shall we?

1. Having evidence of Robb’s comments on NextDoor.com, and knowing in advance she’d not follow the law, I asked for copies of those comments.
2. Robb’s reply was “they’re not public.”
3. I provided one of the comments, clearly proving otherwise.
4. Robb’s changed her excuse, aka piss off, I don’t have them anymore.

This begs the question … how did Robb “know” the context of the comments if she didn’t have access to them?  When I proved that lie, Robb changed her tune.  While Robb’s excuse is “lie du jour”,  her excuse does not excuse her from Florida Statute 119’s records retention policy.

Who is to say Robb and Richard Lackenballs weren’t conducting business out of the sunshine?  Does she get a mulligan because “oopsie, I don’t have them.” Who is to say Robb’s not applying this very same metric to emails made on her personal account.  No one knows, so she’ll claim them all to be of a private nature.

These comments of hers, made in her capacity as Mayor of Deerfield Beach, were made on a password protected website.  Her comments were made in regard to an upcoming matter before the commission, a matter she voted upon.

The public has a legal right to know what was said, hence why FS 119 exists.

As to her comment “she’s not withholding, she’s got nothing to give” does NOT EXCUSE her legal duty to keep copies.  If Robb wants to go blabbering about, mouthing off like Rainman on a crack bender, then she needs to keep copies.

It is not up to me to keep copies, it is her legal obligation to do so.

Therefore, since you are an expert with Florida’s public retention policy, I ask you this:

1. What does Florida Law (FS 119) state regarding the retention policy with regards to comments such as Robb’s?
2. What is Robb’s statutorial requirement for retaining such comments?
3. Is there an AGO that provides Robb an outlet for not keeping track of what comes out her cake hole?

I thank you in advance for your future learned answers.


From: Chaz Stevens

Ma’am.

Let me short-circuit this … and not try to catch you in-between a rock and a harder rock.

Question: what is the city’s record retention policy for the official Facebook page?  How long is the city required to keep a copy of comments made?  In particular, comments made by elected officials?

Now, I recognize that Facebook is somewhat different from NextDoor.com, in the sense that the City maintains the site … however, other than that there’s much similarity.

1. To view both Facebook and Nextdoor.com, visitors are required to have an account.
2. Those without an account are prohibited from viewing the contents.

So, for citizens who are not members of Facebook, or who don’t have Internet access, the only way for those individuals to follow along would be to request copies of those comments from the City.


From Samantha Gillyard:

Mr. Stevens, I appreciate your questions and desire to have a clear and concise understanding of the public records law and records retention. With that in mind, I will provide you answers to your questions no later than Tuesday, citing specific Florida Statutes. To simply respond with my answers I do not feel would be fair as I would like you to have background knowledge on how I arrive at these answers.

Thank you for your patience in this matter.



Our Liberties Are Under Attack.

Our vital work depends on the support of members like you from every corner of the country. Donate today and take a stand for our rights and freedoms. Help support the efforts of MAOS by donating to our Religious Liberty Project.

Help show your support!
Please donate now!