Skip to main content

Tag: White Sands

Bomb threat causes evacuation at Holmes beach resort

Bomb threat causes evacuation at Holmes beach resort

HOLMES BEACH – Police aren’t sure whether Bobby Entrekin is a disgruntled former guest, employee or even the name of a real person, but a man going by this name called in a bomb threat Saturday, Oct. 22 that resulted in the evacuation of everyone at the White Sands Beach Resort.

It began when Police Communications Officer Christopher Liotti received a call from a male subject who identified himself as Bobby Entrekin. The subject said
he had planted explosive devices in planters near the pool area of the White Sands Resort, and additional explosive devices around other areas of the property that would detonate 30 minutes after his call to police. He also said police would not be able to find the devices.

Liotti said the man sounded agitated and said he was upset with “Cubans” in the area. According to the police report, the phone number came from an area code in California, and the caller said he currently lived in Shreveport, Louisiana, but that could not be verified.

At 1:47 a.m., Holmes Beach Officer Ryan Welch and Sgt. Mike Walker responded to White Sands, but parked their patrol cars in the 200 block of 66th Street, out of view of the resort. Protocol for bomb threat-related incidents requires officers responding to the area to turn off their radios, so the officers did and then checked the perimeter of the area for suspicious items, none of which were found. The decision was then made to evacuate the property for the safety of the guests.

“Once the guests were evacuated, they were led to 65th Street near the intersection of Holmes Boulevard,” Welch said in his report. “Officer Bennett remained with the guests for the duration of the call. The Monkey Bus was called and asked to respond to provide the guests with a place to sit and stay warm. The Monkey Bus staff accepted and arrived on scene with two buses near the intersection of Holmes Boulevard and 65th Street.

After guests were safely evacuated, the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) brought in their K-9 lieutenant and two other members of the bomb squad, who did a search of the property and declared it “all clear.” There were no signs of explosives detected, and
it was determined the incident was a false threat. Security cameras located around the property also yielded nothing suspicious. Police have no suspect at this time, and no arrest has been made or charges filed against any individual.

Illuminated sign vote on hold

Illuminated sign vote on hold

HOLMES BEACH – Commissioners are skipping a vote on the city’s new sign ordinance, at least for the time being, while they make allowances for suggested changes by city staff and get legal advice on the settlement of a lawsuit.

During an April 13 meeting, Holmes Beach city commissioners were scheduled to take the first of two votes on an ordinance limiting the use of signs in the A1 and R4 residential districts. Under the proposed ordinance, the use of backlit illuminated signs in the districts would be prohibited with three existing signs required to be brought into compliance with new regulations within six months and another to have a five-year sunset period. The new regulations would allow for a sign with a single spotlight to light the sign from above or below, requiring a retrofit of the four backlit signs.

While a permit was given to the sign at the Anna Maria Beach Resort by a previous building official, it was given in error, resulting in the consideration of a five-year sunset clause for that sign. After that, the sign would have to be retrofitted to meet city regulations for the district. The reason for the sunset clause was to allow the resort’s owners to recoup some of the cost for the installation of the sign, about $40,000. Because the roadside sign, LED board and neon lettered sign on the portico were permitted by the city, though erroneously, they are the subject of an ongoing lawsuit between the resort’s ownership and the city.

The sign that started commissioners’ review of the city’s sign ordinance is one of the reasons for the delay in a vote on a new sign ordinance. – Submitted | Google Maps

Resort owners’ attorney, Aaron Thomas, said the proposed five-year sunset period was not enough time for his clients to recoup their investment in the sign. Rather than continue litigation, Thomas proposed a settlement agreement to commissioners.

In the settlement proposal, Thomas said that the sign on the portico would remain and remain in use. The LED board on the roadside sign would remain on the sign but not be used unless requested by the city for public address, such as an evacuation notice. The roadside sign itself would remain lit daily but be turned off at 11 p.m. and illuminated to only 25% of its maximum light output capacity.

Commissioners said they would need to review the proposed settlement agreement with their legal counsel handling the lawsuit before responding to Thomas’s offer. Thomas warned that if the settlement agreement is not accepted, his clients would continue with the litigation against the city.

City Planner Bill Brisson recommended several changes to the proposed ordinance, enough that it may have to be significantly modified and readvertised for a first reading and public hearing at a future meeting.

Upon further research into the issue, Brisson said there were several things he couldn’t identify, including if the three other backlit signs in the A-1 and R-4 district were ever permitted by the city, how long they’d been there, when the city had prohibited illuminated signs in a residential district and when the A-1 district was incorporated as a residential district.

Due to the confusing nature of the appearance of the other three signs, he suggested that if commissioners approve a five-year sunset period it should extend to the other three backlit signs while prohibiting any more from being constructed. He also suggested commissioners consider allowing signs to be double-sided and lit with a single spotlight on both sides.

Commissioners took a vote and agreed to incorporate both of those suggestions in the proposed ordinance. They also agreed on some wording changes to the ordinance to make the new regulations clearer.

Due to the pending ordinance changes and the proposed lawsuit settlement, City Attorney Patricia Petruff recommended commissioners delay the first vote on the sign ordinance until the document could be amended and commissioners receive appropriate legal advice.

Related coverage

 

Commissioners close in on illuminated sign regulations

 

Special magistrate rules on seven code issues

 

Lighting up the neighborhood