Article
Courtesy of The Herald-Tribune
By Michael
Pollik
Published October 26, 2015
If a Sarasota couple prevails in two Sarasota Circuit
Court cases, judges would be confirming their ownership of some of the most
valuable submerged land in Florida — roughly three acres of navigable bay
bottom in two swaths.
The watery deeds owned by Achim and Erika Ginsburg-Klemmt run up to the
seawalls of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, the 888 condo, and the Sarasota Quay,
which is now a blank slate in new hands.
On Wednesday, a judge heard closing
arguments in one of the two cases, in which the city of
Sarasota and Sarasota County are both suing the couple,
saying they have no right to ownership of a small but
important portion of the land that now is used as a drainage
ditch by the city and county.
This 130-by-30-foot section is important because it provides
access to the rest of a 1.4-acre, underwater tract, which in
general is 880 feet long and 86 feet wide, stretching west
from U.S. 41 between the Ritz and the Quay beyond the 888
condo building. The submerged property is wide enough for
the couple's proposed use of mooring boats, plus providing
passage for other boats entering and leaving this dredged
inner harbor area.They have
even obtained two permits from the state of Florida for a
mooring field. |
|
Achim Ginsberg-Klemmt stands atop a seawall where a
nearby ditch empties into Sarasota Bay. Ginsberg-Klemmt and his wife
say they own a section of property there, some submerged, that
Sarasota city and county claim he does not own.
|
"We have every permit we need in place except from the city of Sarasota,"
said Achim Ginsburg-Klemmt.
The county, which handles storm drainage for the city, has long used the
east end of this parcel as a storm-water drainage ditch. Although the county
and city could obtain the piece they want through the legal process of
eminent domain, they have chosen instead to try to ask the court to rule
that the couple's tax deed never included this small section.
Both the city attorney, Michael A. Connolly, and the county's, David M.
Pearce, told the Herald-Tribune they agree that the couple owns the rest of
the underwater parcel. They only dispute ownership of the piece that
connects it to the land.
Both sides point to different surveys conducted over the decades that the
property has been changing hands, back to 1965, when Karl Bickel, who
retired to Sarasota after running United Press, died and his estate deeded
some of the land to New College Inc.
But the only recent survey in which actual measurements of the property were
made was completed by the Ginsberg-Klemmts after they obtained the parcel
through a county tax deed sale in 2010 for $8,000. Their surveyor, John A.
Poppell of Tallahassee, found the brass monument that marks the southern
corner of the parcel, on a small bridge next to a pizza parlor north of the
Ritz. He started his measurements from that point.
Since acquiring the property, the Ginberg-Klemmts have kept the tax payments
current and insured the parcel. They used Poppell's survey plus their own
architectural drawings to obtain the two permits from the state for their
proposed nine-boat mooring field.
Four boats would be moored on the north side of the channel, roughly in
front of the 888 condo building. The other five would be on a second parcel
the couple obtained, along the south side of the channel, in water that
fronts the Ritz, the Residences at the Ritz and the Lawrence Pointe
condominium.
Another parcel, another lawsuit
That second parcel is the subject of another lawsuit being heard separately
in circuit court. It was filed against the couple by Lawrence Pointe
Condominium Association. That suit also pits the couple against SLAB LLC,
which controls the neighboring Ritz-Carlton property, adjacent to Lawrence
Pointe.
Connolly told Circuit Court Judge Rochelle Curley that she did not need to
decide whether the couple owns the 130-by-30-foot segment under dispute with
the local governments, but simply that they do not own it.
That position was “not only disingenuous, it's ludicrous,” said the couple's
attorney, Steven Chase, arguing that the plaintiffs could not have it both
ways. In effect, they were trying to tell the judge she could only rule that
the couple does not own the drainage ditch property, but could not ascertain
that they do own it.
Curley concluded the four-day trial by asking both sides to submit proposed
orders by about Oct. 30.
No date was set for her ruling.
|