Latest news with #AdministrativeCode
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Alabama Library Association ‘concerned but also confused' by new APLS content policies
Signs are posted in the young adult section of the Autauga-Prattville Public Library on Feb. 23, 2024. The Alabama Library Association said in a letter earlier this month it was "concerned but also confused" by new definitions of the term "sexually explicit" by the Alabama Public LIbrary Service board. (Ralph Chapoco/ Alabama Reflector) The Alabama Library Association said in a May 16 letter that it was 'concerned but also confused' by new Alabama Public Library Service policies on sexually explicit content and what it called ill-treatment of directors and staff of local libraries at a meeting earlier this month. The organization said it was notably concerned by 'the lack of discussion about how the board will codify this new definition into the APLS administrative state code,' referring to a letter that APLS Board Chair John Wahl sent to local libraries to further clarify definitions related to sexually explicit materials after the board approved the update during a meeting on May 8. 'That is just one of many questions we have about this memo, and we hope to learn the answers in the coming days,' the letter said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Wahl said in an interview Tuesday that several local libraries approached the APLS asking for additional clarification regarding the definition. 'We wanted to be very clear with what we felt our definition was so local libraries would have the information they needed to comply with state code,' he said. 'I can't imagine why anyone would be upset with having more information.' The organization also criticized how some members of the APLS board responded to statements made by local library staff, characterizing the comments that were made to library directors, librarians and supporters of libraries as 'discourteous and dismissive.' A part of ALLA's statement referred to a letter that Wahl sent May 12 to inform local libraries that board members approved an update to its policies that further defines 'sexually explicit' content. These include books or materials that include descriptions of sexual activity, from sexual excitement and nudity to masturbation and sadistic or masochistic abuse. 'This definition is based on existing state and federal guidelines and is intended to serve as a clear and practical reference as you address this matter in your libraries,' Wahl stated in his letter to local library directors. The correspondence stemmed from actions that board members took at the May 8 meeting to further explain the meaning of sexually explicit materials after the board fielded comments about how vaguely the term was defined in the policies. The ALLA executive council also recommended that APLS withdraw Wahl's memo. 'If the APLS is to pursue further policy requirements of Alabama libraries, follow established legal procedure for amending the Administrative Code, with appropriate public comment opportunities and thorough consideration of the constitutionality of both memos,' ALLA said in its statement. The organization also wants APLS to issue an apology to local library staff and directors as well as host a session to field comments from public librarians. Wahl said that board members were respectful to speakers and said multiple times how much he and the other board members cared about local libraries, going so far as to secure funding that the state stands to lose from the federal government. 'There has to be dialogue, and if someone presents information that is factually incorrect, that leaves out entirely, one side of the narrative, it is entirely appropriate for the Board to address that immediately,' Wahl said. Wahl proposed an update to the policy based on a different section of state statute that also includes adult bookstores. The policy update was authorized more than a year after members of the APLS board issued directives to local libraries to adopt regulations to further restrict minors from having access to some library materials. A May 2024 update of the code required libraries to relocate materials within their circulation that have obscenity, are sexually explicit, or ones deemed inappropriate for minors. Obscenity is a legal term and is further defined in state statute. Wahl and other board members said they believe the term 'sexually explicit' needed additional clarification. The APLS board did not update what the term 'inappropriate' during the May 8 meeting. Legislators sponsored bills and Gov. Kay Ivey sent several letters to the APLS aimed at further limiting access to materials for minors. Several bills that would have affected library operations failed to pass the Legislature this year. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Associated Press
16-04-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Pryor Cashman Welcomes Partner Paul Proulx to its Leading Real Estate Group
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Apr 16, 2025-- Pryor Cashman is pleased to announce that Paul J. Proulx has joined the firm's New York office as a partner in the Real Estate Group and Land Use + Zoning Practice. Paul comes to Pryor Cashman from Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP, where he advised New York's most respected developers on sophisticated land use and real estate transactions. With a practice focused on land use, zoning, and urban development matters, Paul counsels clients through a range of transactions including joint venture deals and site acquisitions and dispositions. He advises on both as-of-right solutions and discretionary procedures under the New York City Zoning Resolution and Administrative Code, and frequently represents purchasers and sellers of development rights in transactions between adjacent property owners. Drawing on his background as an urban planner, Paul has extensive experience leading teams in making changes to the Zoning Resolution and other land use controls that determine the shape of development projects. He often drafts and prosecutes land use applications and the restrictive declarations that accompany them. In parallel with his land use entitlement work, Paul provides counsel on New York tax incentive programs. 'Paul has had a hand in some of New York's largest assemblages of the last two decades—projects that have transformed our city,' said David C. Rose, managing partner of Pryor Cashman. 'Paul's extensive experience across land use matters strengthens the premier real estate practice for which our firm is known. With his mastery of both the big picture and technical details, Paul will add immediate value to our clients' development projects.' 'We're excited to welcome Paul to the firm,' said Dennis Sughrue, co-chair of the firm's Real Estate Group. 'He has a deep understanding of the New York City real estate market and a strong track record of guiding developers, lenders, and other key players through complex land use matters. His practical, business-minded approach and entrepreneurial spirit make him an ideal fit for our practice and our clients.' 'I'm delighted to join Pryor Cashman,' said Paul. 'The firm's Real Estate Group is known for providing end-to-end services for even the largest transactions, and I have long admired the creative and efficient approach of the firm's lawyers.' Paul serves on the New York City Bar's Committee on Land Use Planning and Zoning. He received his B.A. magna cum laude from the University of Detroit Mercy, his M.S. in City and Regional Planning from Pratt Institute, and his J.D. from Brooklyn Law School. Before entering private practice in 2006, he briefly spent time in government and worked in-house at a hotelier and real estate development firm. About Pryor Cashman Pryor Cashman is a premier, midsized law firm headquartered at 7 Times Square in New York with offices in Los Angeles and Miami. With broad and sophisticated transactional and litigation practices, Pryor Cashman provides a full range of services to meet the complex legal needs of institutions, mid-market businesses, bold emerging entities, entrepreneurs, and individuals. View source version on CONTACT: Media Contact Margaret Bontemps Pryor Cashman [email protected] KEYWORD: UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA NEW YORK INDUSTRY KEYWORD: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMERCIAL BUILDING & REAL ESTATE LEGAL CONSTRUCTION & PROPERTY URBAN PLANNING SOURCE: Pryor Cashman Copyright Business Wire 2025. PUB: 04/16/2025 09:30 AM/DISC: 04/16/2025 09:30 AM
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Yahoo
Former Santa Rosa County School District Administrator Kelly Short arrested for grand theft
A seven-month Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigation has resulted in the arrest of former Santa Rosa County School District administrator Kelly Short, who is accused of stealing just under $3,500 from a fund she was given access to as treasurer of the Santa Rosa County Association of School Administration. Short was taken into custody Monday on a single third-degree felony charge of theft of less than $5,000. The investigation began Aug. 14, 2024 after the School District presented the results of an independent financial audit of the SRCASA's account, a news release from FDLE said. Short's responsibilities as the SRCASA treasurer included collecting members' dues, purchasing awards and gifts, writing checks for payments and reimbursements, and maintaining the annual SRCASA account reports. "Short wrote eight checks to herself from the SRCASA account and she added the SRCASA bank account to her personal Venmo to divert monies from the business account to her personal bank account," the release said. An affidavit summarizing the FDLE investigation established that the Venmo account had been created in July of 2022 and $750 paid into it by school district employees were transferred and deposited into Short's personal account. Investigators said that between March 25 of 2020 and Dec. 11 of 2023, Short reimbursed herself eight times from the SRCASA account for a total of $2,748. Many of the fraudulent reimbursements for which the FDLE found probable cause to charge Short had been previously uncovered in a School District internal investigation in which district officials had relied upon an independent agency for assistance. That investigation into possible educator misconduct was launched July 30 of last year and concluded that Short, who held the title of district director of in-service and instructional technology, had been stealing for at least two years. The internal investigation, released publicly in November, determined Short had committed three violations of Florida's Administrative Code, along with violations of School Board ethics and anti-fraud policies to include 10 actions constituting fraud. Short resigned from the School District rather than facing termination by the School Board at its Nov. 19 meeting. The resignation came on the same day Short received a letter from School Superintendent Karen Barber notifying her of the internal investigation findings. More: Santa Rosa School District employee 'engaged in financial improprieties' resigns "Your actions and inactions constitute immorality, misconduct in office, gross insubordination and willful neglect of duty as defined in the Florida Administrative Code," Barber wrote. In the same note the superintendent notified Short she had been placed on unpaid suspension pending the termination hearing. In a statement issued Tuesday, the School District thanked FDLE for its "diligent work." "We have fully cooperated throughout the process and remain committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and accountability for all employees," the statement said. The FDLE findings indicate Short reimbursed herself in amounts of less than $1,000, and typically less than $500. The largest single fraudulent reimbursement unveiled by FDLE was $995. In that July 2023 instance, she sought and received payment by claiming she had made a partial payment in advance of a breakfast event. The Santa Rosa Education Foundation had in reality covered the entire $3,943 cost of the event. The scam was one the FDLE findings revealed Short had successfully attempted in the past. In September of 2022, the agency affidavit said, she had reimbursed herself $690 for a breakfast whose $2,010 tab had been covered by the Santa Rosa Education Foundation. When Short was originally placed on paid administrative leave, she was directed by the School District to make herself available during daily work hours so that investigators digging into her alleged misappropriations could call her in to speak with them. She waited a week, however, to respond to an Oct. 7 request to appear before the investigative team and forfeited her right to inquiry. "Your lack of communication during this period constitutes an abandonment of your position and a failure to participate in the due process opportunity provided," the internal investigators told Short. Both the internal investigation and the FDLE investigation alleged that Short had altered bookkeeping records or altered invoices to avoid detection. The internal investigation said that when confronted by irregularities Short had presented two years worth of altered bank statements to officers of the county's Association of School Administrators. The internal investigators also determined Short, as SRCASA treasurer, had provided a false report to the group's board regarding its end of year balance for fiscal year 2022-23. This article originally appeared on Pensacola News Journal: Santa Rosa School District Administrator Kelly Short charged stealing
Yahoo
02-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Can condo board scrap election results just because several residents didn't sign ballot?
Live in a home governed by a condominium, co-op or homeowner's association? Have questions about what they can and cannot do? Ryan Poliakoff, an attorney and author based in Boca Raton, has answers. Question: Our recent election was stopped by the board and the association's attorney because "too many election packages" were being rejected due to owners' failure to sign the exterior of the outside envelope. We have 65 units; it was reported that we had 53 responses: 35 were OK and 18 had no owners' signature. I believe we only needed 13 clean ballots to have a legal election. The board president, who was attending by Zoom from Canada, said that we needed to redo the election because those 18 owners needed a second chance. While the meeting was still going on some of those 18 were called and asked to come to meeting and amend their ballot package. After realizing that the vast majority of the 18 were not available to correct their ballot they told us that there would be a new election. I am one of the four candidates for two open seats, and I am under the impression that there are no "do overs" for ballot packages missing the owners' signature. Information from ballots and envelopes are being kept secret from all the owners except for the board members. Signed, K.W. Dear K.W., I cannot think of a legitimate reason that a properly conducted election could be abandoned because more envelopes were invalid than the board preferred. I think you have excellent grounds to challenge this decision, but you need to act quickly. The Condominium Act and Florida's Administrative Code contains very detailed election procedures and provides that if an outer envelope is not signed by the voter it must be disregarded. Such an envelope would not count towards the mandatory 20% participation requirement. But, based on your numbers, there were more than enough valid ballots to conduct a legal election, and the decision to abandon the election was improper. The only reason I can think of that such a decision would be valid is if for some reason the voting package gave owners incorrect instructions, leading to owners failing to sign their envelopes. But otherwise, the simple fact that owners don't follow directions is not a reason for a do-over. You have only 60 days to file an election complaint, and so you either need to contact the Division of Condominiums or file a petition for arbitration (after sending the required pre-arbitration demand) right away—particularly because the board could improperly discard the original election materials (that would create an entirely different problem for them, but it would also prevent the original results from being counted). I would do one or the other as soon as possible—an attorney can help you decide the pros and cons of both options. Question: I live in a condominium, and the unit above me was bought, remodeled and flipped without the owner ever living in the unit. As soon as a new owner bought the flipped property I noticed the noise was so bad that I brought it to the attention of the new owner and board of directors. It was determined that the incorrect underlayment was approved by the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and installed by the flipper. The board simply said they would do nothing and on advice of counsel would not speak about it. What can I do? Signed, D.R. Dear D.R., The Board has a problem here. You say that the approved underlayment was 'incorrect,' and so I'm going to assume that there was some existing specification that was not followed or was ignored by the ARC, and not just that there are no guidelines of any kind. If the ARC just made a mistake and approved a flooring installation that should never have been approved, they could very well have liability to the new owner, but that also doesn't mean that the violation is automatically grandfathered, particularly because it is creating an active nuisance. The Condominium Act, at Section 718.303, Fla. Stat., provides that every owner is governed by the statute and the governing documents, and that any owner can bring an action against any other owner to enforce those documents. That would include any nuisance provisions, as well as any flooring guidelines that might be contained in the declaration. I agree that the association itself would have a difficult time pursuing this owner after they gave the owner permission to install the flooring. However, that does not necessarily prevent you from bringing your own action, particularly one based on the nuisance caused by the excessive noise (I am assuming that the noise is in fact excessive, but that's something that would require sound testing and some detailed analysis of the types of noises you are experiencing). What would happen is that you would sue the neighbor, and then the neighbor would likely bring in the association, arguing that they detrimentally relied on the association's approval of the flooring, and that if they are obligated to remove or modify the flooring, the association should be responsible for the cost. The association has created a complicated dispute, but that shouldn't leave you without any options. I recommend consulting with an attorney so they can advise you of your rights and potentially bring a lawsuit to correct the nuisance. Ryan Poliakoff, a partner at Poliakoff Backer, LLP, is a Board Certified specialist in condominium and planned development law. This column is dedicated to the memory of Gary Poliakoff. Ryan Poliakoff and Gary Poliakoff are co-authors of "New Neighborhoods — The Consumer's Guide to Condominium, Co-Op and HOA Living." Email your questions to condocolumn@ Please be sure to include your location. This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Can condominium board require election do-over when vote was valid?
Yahoo
06-02-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Do garages count as a 'story' when it comes to condo building inspections in Florida?
Live in a home governed by a condominium, co-op or homeowner's association? Have questions about what they can and cannot do? Ryan Poliakoff, an attorney and author based in Boca Raton, has answers. Question: Does the three stories or higher new inspection rule count a parking level below the three living levels of a condo, thus actually making the building itself four stories? — Signed, T.A. Dear T.A., Under the Florida Building Code stories are measured from the grade plane, upward — so underground garages would not count. But, if you are talking about an above-ground garage, with the living space beginning above that garage, it would count as a story. Question: Can a person who is not on the deed of a condominium but holds a legal power of attorney for the property run for a position on the Board of Directors? — Signed, R.J. Dear R.J., A power of attorney is a legal document that allows a person to step into the shoes of another for specific purposes. So, for example, a unit owner could grant someone a power of attorney to manage their condominium unit for them, communicating with management on their behalf, making decisions and even attending and participating in meetings. However, whether a person is eligible to serve on a corporate board of directors depends on the language in the governing documents (usually the articles or bylaws). The Condominium Act expressly states that owners may serve as directors — but not all governing documents limit board members to only owners. Some documents have no limitation at all, and technically any person could run for the board: tenants, family members, even people entirely unassociated with the condominium (I have rarely seen this occur, but it's a technical possibility). However, a person with a power of attorney is not, by that document, an owner — so if the bylaws limit board membership to owners (persons listed on the deed as recorded in the public record) a power of attorney would not grant another person the right to serve on a board in their stead. In case there was any question, Florida's Administrative Code also expressly states that where non-unit owners are prohibited from serving on the board, a person acting under a power of attorney is similarly disqualified. Question: I live in a development governed by an HOA. We just voted out a board member/president of the HOA last year. He is not a resident of the community and doesn't even own a house outright. He is in partnership with another person (no stated formal partnership or corporation). He really wreaked havoc on our community, and we are close to bankrupt because of him and two of his buddies on the board. The current board wanted to amend our bylaws to state that only 'homestead exemption' owners can be on the board. Our HOA lawyer says we can't do that but has provided no documentation. Can you lend some insight into this? Can we make the change to our bylaws, and have it upheld legally? — Signed. T.L. Dear T.L., I agree with your association's lawyer. Your question is adjacent to the issue I addressed above. The HOA Act, at Section 720.306, Fla. Stat., expressly states that 'all members of the association are eligible to serve on the board of directors.' Your governing documents will define who your association's 'members' are, but most of the time it will be any person who is listed as an owner on the deed. So, it doesn't ultimately matter if this person has a formal business relationship with the person with whom he co-owns his lot — if they are both on the deed, they are both owners, and so are likely both 'members' who are entitled to serve on the board. And if that's the case, you can't amend your bylaws to say otherwise. You might be wondering whether you could amend your documents to change the definition of 'member' — but I don't think that would be possible for a number of reasons. These include that it's tied into so many other aspects of how your HOA works, and also because the HOA Act expressly defines 'member' as any person or entity obligated by the governing documents to pay an assessment — and you certainly don't want to exempt this person from assessments just to avoid him serving on the board. In fact, you did exactly what you should have done — you voted him out. Ryan Poliakoff, a partner at Poliakoff Backer, LLP, is a Board Certified specialist in condominium and planned development law. This column is dedicated to the memory of Gary Poliakoff. Ryan Poliakoff and Gary Poliakoff are co-authors of "New Neighborhoods — The Consumer's Guide to Condominium, Co-Op and HOA Living." Email your questions to condocolumn@ Please be sure to include your location. This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Florida condo law 2025: Expert on building height on inspection
