Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Judge sets trial date on county charter changes

He agreed there's no time before the election for mediation in the suit against Pinellas County filed by 21 cities looking to halt the changes.

By LORRI HELFAND
Published September 17, 2006

When governments fight each other in court, a mediator often is brought in to smooth out the differences.

But time is of the essence in the case of 21 Pinellas municipalities vs. the county's charter review commission and other Pinellas officials.

A batch of proposed amendments to the county's charter is scheduled to go to voters Nov. 7, and attorneys for the cities argued Thursday that there is no time for mediation.

Agreed, said Circuit Judge Robert Beach, who decided to skip the mediator. He also scheduled a trial for Oct. 16 after attorneys from both sides okayed the date.

About 35 local officials and attorneys attended the three-hour hearing, during which Beach agreed that some proposed charter amendments, if passed, might injure the cities' interests. He also said at least one of the charter questions could be ambiguous.

County attorneys had argued that the cities did not prove legal harm and that citizens' rights would be deprived if they didn't get a chance to vote on the amendments.

Twenty-one of the 24 municipalities in Pinellas filed the 40-page lawsuit last month seeking to have all proposed amendments to the county charter removed from the Nov. 7 ballot.

Among other things, the cities have contended that the county's charter review commission violated Florida's Sunshine Law and public meeting procedures. They also say the commission crafted language that is "unclear, ambiguous and confusing."

The cities took the rare step of filing the lawsuit, which also names the County Commission and Supervisor of Elections Deborah Clark as defendants, after spending months protesting proposed charter changes they feared would usurp their power.

For example, the cities have argued that three proposed amendments regarding annexations would place constraints on them that go beyond requirements set by state law.

One of the annexation amendments concerns the annexation of commercial land. It would require consent from 67 percent of the property owners rather than the current 51 percent.

Another key complaint in the cities' case concerns the right of municipalities to opt out of certain countywide regulations.

Currently, proposed charter amendments that would change the function, service, power or regulatory authority of the county or cities have to be approved in a countywide vote and by the voters in cities - a dual referendum. A dual referendum has not been used since it was implemented in 1999.

In the suit, the cities also contend the ballot language in a question eliminating a dual vote fails to specify that voters and municipalities would lose control.

In response, Alan Bomstein, the chairman of the charter review commission, has said that fear is unfounded.

Attorneys for Pinellas County plan to file a motion to dismiss the cities' complaint. A hearing on that motion is scheduled for Sept. 25.

[Last modified September 16, 2006, 20:23:34]