Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

St. Pete Beach group asks judge to reconsider case

The lawyer for Citizens for Responsible Growth says a recent appeals court decision could affect this case.

By PAUL SWIDER
Published January 4, 2006

ST. PETE BEACH - Responding to a judge's order invalidating three referendum questions it sponsored, the group opposing the city's redevelopment plans is petitioning the judge to reconsider his decision.

Citizens for Responsible Growth is saying Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Walt Logan was misled by the city's counsel and was not made aware of a recent appeals court decision that could be a binding precedent for the court.

In December Logan threw out referendum questions that would have required citywide votes to approve comprehensive plans and amendments, community redevelopment plans, and restrictions on building heights because he said the referendums were counter to state law and therefore unconstitutional.

CRG had sought the referendums to oppose the city's plans to encourage mixed-use development and tall resort buildings to enhance its tourist economy. CRG has said the city's plans will harm the character of St. Pete Beach.

CRG attorney Ken Weiss asked Logan last week to rehear the case and to reinstate the referendums. He cited a decision in the 3rd District Court of Appeal that suggests a city's charter, not its elected officials, governs comprehensive plan decisions, meaning the referendums seeking to change the charter would not run afoul of state law. The appeals court reached that decision in a Miami case Nov. 16 and it was published Dec. 2, three days before Logan heard the St. Pete Beach case.

"I don't think it's discretionary," Weiss said of whether Logan would have to follow the appeals court's decision even though it came so close to his own hearing and was in another district. Weiss said that if there is no precedent in the second district, where St. Pete Beach lies, then the third district case would become a precedent. He said the city's attorney used the same logic in introducing a third-district case at the first hearing.

Tom Pelham, the city's outside attorney in the matter, disagreed with Weiss. "I don't think the decision is on point at all. This is a totally different factual context," he said.

Weiss is also claiming that on dates and readings of law, Pelham "misrepresented facts" to the judge. Weiss said Pelham and the city told the judge they had to have a decision by the end of the year in order to know what referendums to put on the ballot, when in fact the city has until Jan. 23. He also said Pelham said the city's amended comprehensive plan was in effect when another set of petitions had suspended it, and that Pelham had misinterpreted case law in trying to convince the judge of the city's argument.

"The real issue is misrepresentation to the court," Weiss said. "There are Florida Bar ethics rules against that." Weiss said he is not accusing Pelham of violating those rules.

Pelham said Weiss is misunderstanding the language of his argument and of the state law it is based on. Pelham was the first secretary of the Department of Community Affairs, which governs comprehensive plans, and played an integral part in implementing the Growth Management Act passed in 1985.

Logan could dismiss CRG's rehearing request, but both attorneys expect there to be a hearing. Weiss said that if his request is denied, CRG would then appeal Logan's original decision.

Pelham said he thinks the action is merely an attempt to delay the finality of Logan's decision.

[Last modified January 4, 2006, 01:07:18]