| 
Public Record
Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927
Paid electioneering communication paid for by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927
Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John,
FL 32927. No candidate approved this advertisement.
Maureen Rupe's D1 Commission candidacy opens Maureen Rupe up to public scrutiny. If you know nothing about
-- or are not allowed to know anything about -- a candidate, then you can't decide if that candidate is
right for the position he/she is running for. This is why it is good to search and find the public records
available to us to find out the facts concerning the candidate in question. In this instance, Maureen Rupe.
(Don't worry, Amy Tidd, your turn is coming.)
Public records include, but are not limited to, anything sent, e-mailed, given to, recorded by, or in the
posession of any public official. That includes the County Commissioners, City Council members, and County
and City staff of all kinds. The public record is unofficially anything you find on the internet that is from
their own hand. I found a lot of items on the Space Coast Audubon Society's Public Bulletin Board (a Yahoo.com®
board) and it was very useful (apparently they didn't like me using her postings there and no one has posted
on it for a few weeks now). Public record is also anything written for public consumption: newspaper articles,
letters to the editor, interviews for local magazines, etc. All of this comes in handy if you are trying to
research your candidate, or the candidate you strongly oppose.
When researching the public record, be patient, use search engines (multiple: as some find things others do not),
and be sure to look in unexpected places. Read things you think may have nothing to do with anything you are looking
for: you'll be surprised how often it does relate to your search. Also, be ready to have people call you names, attack
your intelligence and your mental stability, attack your advocacy of remembering and learning from the past, etc. You may
also wish to be ready to be threatened with a lawsuit for telling what you found out and for voicing an opinion as well.
Maureen Rupe alone has threatened to sue me four times. Others within the PSJ For Tomorrow group who threatened to sue me
include Amy Tidd, Carmine Ferraro and someone else I can't think of right now. Isn't free speech fun, folks?
This is America, the greatest country on earth, but that doesn't stop the idiots from trying to silence you.
So it is
that I continue my research and I continue to prove my points and I continue to make the other side angry: very angry.
My response: If you don't want the past to jump up and bite your bumm (a little Britishism there), don't do something
stupid today. Ghosts have a habit of hanging around; especially when we can Google® them!
Public record shows:
How does Maureen Rupe really feel toward North Brevard?
From Titusville City Council minutes: "The City Council of the City of Titusville, Florida met in
regular session in the Council Chamber on the second floor of City Hall, 555 South Washington
Avenue, on Tuesday, June 11, 2002 at 6:30 p.m." At this "regular session",
"Attorney Severs also mentioned that the City of Titusville received correspondence dated
March 11, 2002 from Maureen Rupe, Co-Chairman of Port St. John for Tomorrow. The letter expressed
the committee’s concerns regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment allowing residential development
by Flagler Corporation in close proximity to Space Coast Regional Airport.
Mayor Swank opened the public hearing. Thomas King, Vickie Mace, Beverly Pinyerd, Amy Moser, Amy Tidd,
Mary Tess and Maureen Rupe expressed their objection to the City of Titusville Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to allow residential development in close proximity to Space Coast Regional Airport.
Vickie Mace, Principal of Atlantis Elementary School, expressed concern relative to the fact that the
flight path was so close to the school. She felt if the runway were extended north and south,
it would constitute safety hazard to school children.[my bolding]"
My comment: It is Titusville's property, Titusville's City Council and Titusville's poeple who should
have been up there if they had an objection. The people of PSJ have the right to free speech, but does that
mean they have the right to control a government that isn't answerable to those who are complaining: people
who don't live in the City of Titusville? As quoted in HAPPENINGS, August 2002 edition, this is the
Titusville City Council meeting about which Bob Socks, wrote in the News Observer of North Brevard, dated
June 22, 2002:
"Kudos to City Councilman Jeff Rainey for a great oratory on
Tuesday night, June 11th, at the city council meeting. Jeff
refuted two Port St. John leaders who addressed the council regarding
the zoning of the Flagler Property (Hwy 405 to Kings Why.) These two
women were very negative toward Titusville and gave the distinct
impression that they wanted nothing to do with Titusville nor our citizens.
They mentioned that they did not want our kids in their schools, nor
our citizens using their parks or civic center."
Sound like Maureen Rupe cares for north Brevard as one of her supporters is
trying (on Florida Today's RUPE page via blog) to assure me Rupe does?
How does Maureen Rupe REALLY feel about CAPIT?
The 2002 lawsuit
Maureen Rupe participated in to stop CAPIT (the first CAPIT) is the truth about how Maureen Rupe feels about CAPIT. Notice
on her website video in which she gave her three minute
post-candidacy-anouncement talk to the BOCC that she never said that she supported the first CAPIT? Notice also, that
she never admitted to being involved in the lawsuit on that video? She admits it in her
"The Truth about CAPIT" page,
but nowhere on her website does she say that she joined the 85.25% and voted FOR CAPIT. Watch her video. Listen to what
she says, how she says it. Do you think she's sincere in her assertions about her support for CAPIT?
Also, on her website she states that she was a member of the Charter Review Committee
(1997-1998 and
again in 2003-2004). But on the CAPIT video Maureen Rupe states that,
"In 1996 CAPIT was approved by 85% of the voters on a 19% turnout at the polls.
At that time there was no provision for constitutionality review. The County had an illegal
charter. As limitations on CAPIT had already been ruled unconstitutional in three counties. [my italics]"
As part of the Charter Review Committee the year after (1997-1998) CAPIT was approved and after CAPIT had been
ruled unconstitutional in three counties, why did Maureen Rupe not put something in writing and complain about
CAPIT then and there: put an end to it before it got to lawsuit status? If CAPIT had already been ruled
illegal in three counties, wasn't it the (1997-1998) Charter Review Committees' responsibility and duty to pull it
from the Charter? However, Maureen Rupe did not do that. She waited six years, until 2002, to join a convenient
lawsuit which took away our 85.25% vote. Lawsuits cost money, folks. They cost money, time, and appearane efforts.
I think that the lawsuit -- and its appeals -- are more indicative than anything Maureen Rupe is
currently saying in favor of CAPIT or CAPIT 2. Actions speak louder than words. She didn't vote for it,
she didn't find the problem and fix it; she took the time, money and effort and sued to stop it. That,
or a three minute speech?
How does Maureen Rupe really feel about the environment?
PSJ HOA Newsletter, May 1995, Maureen Rupe writes:
"On May 16th, the Brevard COunty Commission voted unanimously
to accept the recommendations of negotiations between our association and Lawyer,
Tim Bradley, the Brevard County Attorney, and Florida Dept. of
Community Affairs. What this amounts to is monitoring of groundwater in
PSJ, installation of an aerobic septic system for new homes, and have a study
started by the end of the year. With these, we will be able to basically
stop all talk of sewers indefinitely."
PSJ has had septic tanks for years and years; ever since General Development
started developing PSJ. Some of PSJ to the east of
the railroad tracks have sewers, but most houses
have septic. Sounds to me as though Maureen Rupe supports septic systems in PSJ.
Right? Let's take another look.
Spring 2007
Indian River Lagoon Update:
"Maureen Rupe, who volunteers with the Marine Resources
Council, pointed to septic tanks, power plants and shoreline growth
as issues that must be addressed if the lagoon is to be protected."
So now she's against us having septic tanks? Which is it? How does
Maureen Rupe really feel about the environment and the impact -- or lack thereof --
of septic tanks?
How does Maureen Rupe feel about her candidacy?
In the July 17th edition of The Beacon,
Maureen Rupe is asked, "Why are you running for commissioner?" Her answer speaks volumes:
"To build upon my experience in community service. I will be a full-time
county commissioner whose only interest is the people of Brevard."
Maureen Rupe wants to build upon her experience in community service? She wants to
use it to better herself? Is that what she is saying? Out of twenty-two words,
she mentions herself twice. That's almost 10%. So she's more focused on herself
in her answer, than on the people: "To build upon my...." and "I will be..." Two
personal pronouns focusing on herself to one mention of the people. Sounds to me like
she's going to be a really focused commissioner.
In the Florida Today
interview she did, there were only eight (8) "I" pronouns and three (3)
personal pronouns that included herself ("my" or "our"). Hmmm... Sounds a little preoccupied
to me. Let's try another one. This time we'll look at other answers from other candidates, also.
In the July 17th edition of The Beacon several
of the other candidates answer the same questions. As you saw above, Maureen Rupe used 10% of her
answer to the first question ("Why are you running...") to focus on herself. Let's see how the other
candidates answered the question:
- Al Yorston, 79 words: three (3) personal pronouns focusing on himself, one "we": approx. 5%
- Robin Fisher, 74 words: zero (0) personal prounuons focusing on himself, one "we", one "our": approx. 2.8%
- Ilene Davis, 49 words: two (2) personal pronouns focusing on herself, zero "we", "our": approx. 4%
- Jeff Rainey, 62 words: one "I"; one "my"; one "we", one "our": approx. 6.45%
- J. Roger Shealy, 91 words: one "I"; zero "my", zero "we": approx. 1%
Ten percent of Maureen Rupe's answer focused on herself; compared to 6.45% for the next highest candidate's?
I think we get the message here.
How does Maureen Rupe feel about D1 staying unchanged?
On her handout (titled "Rupe WalkPiece 08.cdr") when she first declared her candidacy, Maureen Rupe said,
"We need to protect the rural environment of Mims,
Scotsmoor [sic], and all of Canaveral Groves."
Yet, she supported the incorporation of Mims, advising the people involved in that on
how to get it done. She supported the incorporation of
Grant/Valkaria, and Viera, she authored
the PSJ incorporation scheme and now she wants us to believe that she wants to "protect the rural
environment of Mims and Scotsmoor [sic]"? I don't think so! I'm wondering when Canaveral Groves will be in for it.
If she's elected D1 Commissioner, how long will it be before Canaveral Groves is targeted since it is the only
one Maureen Rupe hasn't tried to influence into incorporating? Just asking, folks. Just asking.
How does Maureen Rupe really feel about your money?
According to the NORTH BREVARD COMMISSION ON PARKS & RECREATION MINUTES,
dated Thursday, August 9, 2001, in City Council Chambers at Titusville City Hall, at 5 p.m., Maureen Rupe:
"cautioned about the ramifications of the limiting County-owned tax exempt property"
So that's why she
supports above appraised value purchases of EELs land!
Remember what I showed you on my
No Maureen Rupe 8 page? Remember who I pointed to? Remember how similar the ideas were?
Look at the truth:
"To pass this purchase, there must be at least a 4 to 1 vote to purchase the
property above appraised value. Jackie Colon and Helen Voltz voted no on
fiscal responsibility. This is NOT a budget item. This is a self-imposed
tax we voted in to Save Critical Habitat. In fact, during the Preserve
Brevard Campaign to bring EELs to ballot, the Thousand Islands were
presented as an example of what we would save through the Environmentally
Endangered Lands Program.
"Two commissioners are not doing what the people want. Let us show them who
is "BOSS". Mark the 23rd on your calendars. Don't let nature down. [my italics]"
This is Maureen Rupe. This is the truth.
Now how do you feel about Maureen Rupe? Do you think you can trust her? Do you want
her to be your next D1 Commissioner? Or do you think we should support someone else (I'm
voting for J. Roger Shealy) in order to save ourselves the headaches of dealing with an ever
changing stance of Maureen Rupe?
Paid electioneering communication paid for by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927
Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John, FL 32927
Paid political advertisement. Paid for and approved by Linda McKinney 6025 Keystone Ave. Port St. John,
FL 32927. No candidate approved this advertisement.
Now available:
Coming Soon!
|
