The petition calling for a vote on disbanding Port Richey is riddled with procedural and legal problems and should not be considered, he says.
By ALEX LEARY
Published June 26, 2004
PORT RICHEY - City Attorney Jerry Figurski said Friday that a petition calling for a vote on disbanding Port Richey has numerous procedural and legal flaws and should not be considered.
"The most glaring deficiency," Figurski wrote in a letter to the City Council, is the petition's not including the proposed ordinance that would dissolve the city. "In addition, the various matters set forth in the statutes, e.g., indebtedness and vested rights of employees, must be included as part of the process."
Figurski's opinion should not surprise either side in the debate.
City officials previously raised similar points about the petition, which was submitted Tuesday along with more than 300 signatures, while the backers anticipated more opposition.
"The purpose of the memo is not to be an obstructionist,' Figurski told the Times on Friday. "The law says what it says, and you have to comply with it."
Dr. Robert Goluba, a dentist who is organizing the move, said the letter will be turned over to the group's attorney, Donald Peyton. "We're just wanting to give the voting public an opportunity to make a choice," Goluba said.
The group, which announced its intentions in January and has struggled with the city since then, says residents no longer should have to pay property taxes to Pasco County and the city. They want the city of about 3,000 residents to become an unincorporated part of the county.
Goluba said earlier this week that the petitioners will go to court to seek a referendum on the issue if the city does not act.
Figurski's letter cites provisions of the City Charter that, among other conditions, mandate that a referendum initiative be steered by a committee of five qualified voters and that those five people be responsible for circulating the petition, in which the proposed ordinance must be set forth in full.
The petition as it has been submitted calls on the City Council to "adopt an ordinance dissolving the municipal corporation."
The group has filed some paperwork with the city, however. In January, the names of five people were submitted, along with their addresses. The group includes Goluba, Charles Boyer, Ed Olson, Eugene Reas and Steve Johnston.
A closer examination of the petition shows other flaws:
People signed twice in at least 14 instances, while one woman's name appears three times. Another woman who signed the petition no longer lives in the city.
In some places, people did not write their full addresses, using ditto marks to signify that they live in the same building as the person who signed above them.
One page with 14 signatures has different petition language than the 32 others.
"It just appears haphazardly done," council member Bill Bennett said. "They didn't follow the charter or the statutes."
Goluba said that if there is any repetition in signatures, it was not intentional.
By submitting the 300-plus signatures, the group is hoping to satisfy a requirement that says a petition signed by 10 percent of all registered voters is needed to place a question on a ballot.
The Supervisor of Elections Web site indicates that there were 2,035 registered voters for the April 13 city election. That would mean the petitioners need 204 verified signatures in addition, the city argues, to correct paperwork.
