news 
 
 August 10, 2005
 

 A federal judge may have cleared the way for Florida residents to buy directly from out-of-state wineries.

TAMPA - Wine connoisseurs may wish to toast U.S. District Judge James D. Whittemore over their next glass of cabernet.

Whittemore has struck down a Florida law that blocked out-of-state wine shipments from going directly to consumers.

That could clear way for bons vivants in the Sunshine State to buy from their favorite wineries without going through a middleman.

The ruling mirrors a May decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which voted 5-4 to strike down similar laws in Michigan and New York.

Whittemore's order on Friday said Florida's law also violates the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Until now, Florida law has made it illegal for residents to buy directly from out-of-state wineries. They had to go through a store or wholesaler. But the law didn't apply to in-state wineries.

"Florida's statutory scheme thereby discriminates against out-of-state wine producers to the advantage of in-state wine producers in violation of the commerce clause," Whittemore wrote.

Supporters of the law say it ensured the state got its fair share of taxes and that minors couldn't purchase alcohol over the Internet.

Whittemore expressly stated that his ruling applies only to wine, not beer or spirits, and one legislator plans to address access to wine by underage buyers in the next legislative session.

Wine fans say the law was a sop to wholesalers who wanted to force people to purchase their shiraz or pinot from them only. The result was that wines from small producers that didn't bring in much profit could be difficult to find.

"No. 1, the law against the Internet sale of wine and spirits was simply a protective measure by the local people to avoid competition," said Bill Jung, a Tampa lawyer and wine fan. "It's not like we're saving grandma from the sherry bottle in the kitchen."

The impact of the ruling is not immediately clear. Winery organizations are awaiting word from Florida's Division of Alcoholic Beverages, which is expected to make an announcement this week, according to Wine Spectator magazine.

In theory, Jung said, wineries should be able to start peddling their specialty offerings immediately. But it's likely they will wait to analyze the ruling and its tax implications.

The Legislature could move next year to ban all direct-to-consumer wine sales.

State Sen. Paula Dockery, who withdrew a doomed bill last session that would have allowed direct sales, applauded the ruling and said she will submit a new bill to prevent people under the legal drinking age from being able to order wine. "While my bill did not pass during the 2005 legislative session, it turns out that 2005 will nevertheless be a good year for wine producers and consumers in Florida," Dockery said in a news release Tuesday. "Both consumers and Florida vintners will benefit from this ruling."

The Florida lawsuit was initially brought in 1999 by a small group from Sarasota and an Indiana winery.

"It literally gave the wholesalers, in our view at least, a monopoly control over what wine you could buy in Florida," said Jerry Bainbridge, one of the plaintiffs. "If the wholesaler didn't carry it, you couldn't buy it."

The case had been on hold while the Supreme Court took up the matter.

Bainbridge, who runs an investment advisory firm in Sarasota, is a big fan of Turley zinfandel, a cult favorite lauded by Wine Advocate publisher Robert Parker. But it is produced in small quantities and comes with a hefty price tag, so few wholesalers purchase it.

"You could search for a year in Florida and not find a bottle," Bainbridge said.

But he's not waiting for the impact of the ruling to settle out. He's flying to California next week and plans to pick some up while he's there.

Researchers Carolyn Edds and Cathy Wos contributed to this report, as did Chris Sherman, who writes about food and wine for the Times.

Kelly Link: http://www.sptimes.com/2005/08/10/news_pf/State/A_ruling_for_wine_lov.shtml

Top     Back

  Naples Daily News...State drops dispute over Dry Tortugas ownership

 

A no-fishing zone proposed for part of Dry Tortugas National Park in 2001 remained in question after a vote Tuesday in Tallahassee.

Gov. Jeb Bush and the Cabinet voted unanimously to drop a decades-old dispute between Florida and the federal government over ownership of submerged lands in the park at the western end of the Florida Keys, some 100 miles southwest of Naples.

The vote only clears the way for a larger debate over whether to enact the no-fishing zone, called a Research Natural Area, that scientists and conservation groups praise as a landmark achievement in ocean preservation.

The Coastal Conservation Association of Florida, a recreational fishing group, is opposed to the no-fishing zone.

In a nod to CCA concerns, the no-fishing zone would not become effective unless the governor and Cabinet approve it after getting input from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, according to Tuesday's agreement.

Bush and other Cabinet members said Tuesday that they consider the creation of no-fishing zones to be the bailiwick of the Conservation Commission, which could meet Sept. 22 to discuss the issue.

"My guess is I'll defer to their decision," Bush said.

Chief Financial Officer Tom Gallagher agreed.

"If they say absolutely no, I guess that means that it's dead," he said.

Attorney General Charlie Crist called the back-and-forth votes between the Cabinet and the Conservation Commission "convoluted."

"I don't really understand why the Cabinet is being asked to do their (the Conservation Commission's) job," Crist said.

The unsettled no-fishing zone issue did not dampen enthusiasm for Tuesday's vote.

Dry Tortugas National Park Superintendent Dan Kimball called it a "big, big step."Kimball said he is "looking forward to fruitful conversations" with the Conservation Commission.

The ownership issue has stalled efforts to create the RNA, which is proposed to cover 69 square miles of the park under a 2001 management plan.

Under the 2001 plan, recreational fishing would be prohibited in the RNA. About half of the park, including the park's most popular fishing grounds, would remain open to recreational fishing, according to a 2001 management plan. Commercial fishing is prohibited in the park.

Some 97 percent of public comments received on the management plan were in favor of it, according to federal records.

David White, regional director for The Ocean Conservancy, said after Tuesday's vote that he is optimistic the no-fishing area will survive a vote by the Conservation Commission.

"I just have a hard time imagining the Conservation Commission standing up and saying we don't care what 97 percent of the people want, we're going with the CCA on this," White said. "It's hard for me to imagine."

Scientists say the no-fishing zone will cover shallow-water habitats that are not represented in reserve areas created in 2001 in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary.

Keeping track of the health of these areas, free from human disturbance, will allow scientists to measure human impacts in other parts of the oceans, scientists say.

Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Superintendent Billy Causey said a no-fishing zone in the Dry Tortugas would crank up a biological machine that produces juvenile fish for anglers to hook in other parts of Florida.

CCA-Florida Director Ted Forsgren disputed that claim, saying Conservation Commission studies have shown that a no-fishing area off Cape Canaveral only serves to hold fish — not replenish other areas.

Forsgren said catch-and-release fishing should be allowed in the proposed Research Natural Area instead of closing it to fishing.

"We don't believe that's necessary," Forsgren told the Cabinet.

Boatyard owner Bruce Popham, chairman of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary advisory board, said CCA doesn't represent the views of fishermen or marine-related business owners he knows in the Keys.

"We are the famous silent majority," Popham said.

Kelly Link: http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/news/article/0,2071,NPDN_14940_3990521,00.html

Top     Back

Palm Beach Post...Nation watches Fla.'s pre-K plunge

When more than 3,800 4-year-olds from Palm Beach County cross the threshold into pre-kindergarten for the first time this morning, mommies and daddies won't be the only ones watching.

"Early childhood professionals and advocates across the country are looking at Florida," said Libby Doggett, executive director of Pre-K Now, a Washington-based advocacy group.

Florida is trying something no other state has attempted: Creating a free pre-kindergarten open to all 4-year-olds all at once — with more than 80,000 expected to start this month — despite having only months to enroll children and qualify schools.

And while most agree the opening days are unfolding with remarkable ease, many say they are focusing on what comes next when it comes to teacher credentials, curriculum and how much schools will be reimbursed in the future.

The sheer size of Florida's $400 million endeavor makes it worthy of national scrutiny.

"Everyone else who has done it has ramped up much more slowly," said Steve Barnett, president of the National Institute for Early Education Research in New Jersey. "Of course, some places — New York is an example — have tried to ramp up and just got stuck."

New York's program began by targeting poor children in 1997 and has yet to grow any further.

Floridians, by contrast, demanded state-financed pre-K for all children in 2002 by constitutional amendment. The amendment set a 2005 start date but lawmakers didn't spell out some of the details until last winter; a reimbursement rate for child care providers wasn't decided until May.

State officials estimate that through the school year and next summer, more than 147,000 children will sign up — 66 percent of all 4-year-olds in Florida. It is unknown how many were enrolled in private pre-K last year, but the state estimates 60,000 attended Head Start or pre-Ks subsidized by the state.

Georgia has been in the pre-kindergarten-for-all business for a decade and only last year hit an enrollment of more than 76,000 — 56 percent of its 4-year-olds.

"This is not anywhere close to my version of a perfect world, but we've made some real progress from which we can build," said David Lawrence Jr., who helped spearhead the signature drive for the pre-K vote and later served as the governor's special assistant for implementing the program.

"The overall fundamental issue is quality," Lawrence said. To him, that means eventually requiring that pre-K teachers hold four-year degrees as opposed to a simple certificate that can be earned without a high school diploma.

There is also the matter of what is taught, Lawrence and Doggett agree.

The state now has a list of standards in reading and math but does not tell schools how to meet them. It does not require a specific curriculum or even list which are appropriate. Schools need only sign a paper promising their curriculum will help kids achieve the state's goals.

State Rep. Shelley Vana, D-Lantana, wants more specifics on curriculum, better teaching requirements and more money for providers.

Only two other states offer pre-K to all 4-year-olds — Georgia and Oklahoma — but more governments are coming aboard. Thirty-eight states have some sort of state-financed pre-K, according to the National Institute for Early Education Research.

During the past decade, preschool has become today's kindergarten. Although some states still make kindergarten optional, what happens in the classroom of 5-year-olds is increasingly geared toward academics, making preschool necessary to prepare, according to the National Institute for Early Education Research.

Pre-K is a place for children to become familiar with books and numbers, to learn how to get along with other children and to follow directions.

"When you put policies in place, you still don't know what's really going to happen on the ground," said Barnett, the national institute president. "People will be waiting to see what are the qualifications of the teachers, what progress do the children make, how satisfied are the parents."

Kelly Link: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/nation/epaper/2005/08/10/s1a_prek_0810.html

Top     Back