Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Politics

County appeals decision on charter

As Nov. 7 approaches, the cities and county are going toe-to-toe in court over charter amendments on the ballot.

By WILL VAN SANT
Published October 5, 2006

CLEARWATER - Another legal punch has been thrown in the fight between the county and cities over proposed changes to Pinellas' charter.

County attorneys Tuesday appealed the decision of a Circuit Court judge who had rejected their call for mediation and ordered the speedy trial sought by a group of Pinellas municipalities.

At issue for voters is whether they will decide the proposed charter amendments on Nov. 7, as the county wishes, or whether votes cast for or against the amendments are nullified, as the cities wish.

The county has asked the court for a quick review of its appeal. Should the court side with the county, both sides agree that the charter amendments will be on the ballot and counted.

"It is our intent to have the people vote on these matters," said Jim Bennett, chief assistant county attorney. "That is the right we are trying to defend."

In a move Bennett found promising, the court Wednesday ordered the cities to respond to the county's appeal by early Monday.

"They have said, 'There is smoke; we want to see if there is fire,' " Bennett said of the court.

The charter outlines the powers and duties of county government. In June, a review commission recommended that seven amendments go before voters. As required by law, the County Commission placed them on the November ballot.

A group of 21 Pinellas municipalities filed a lawsuit in August, arguing that the amendments grant the county expanded powers at the expense of cities.

Particularly irksome to the cities are three proposed charter amendments that could curb their ability to annex land and one that would eliminate a never-invoked provision that allows municipalities to opt out of countywide regulations when their voters reject them.

In their lawsuit, the cities claim that the charter changes give the county broader authority than state law allows, that the ballot language crafted is unclear and that Florida's Sunshine Law was violated when the changes were developed.

The county had sought what's an often lengthy process of mediation that is standard under state law when one government sues another.

But Circuit Judge Robert Beach, while not ruling on the validity of the charges made by the cities, has been clear that he wants a trial to happen before Nov. 7. So in mid September he rejected mediation and later set a trial date of Oct. 20.

In their appeal, Pinellas attorneys argued that the ruling robbed the county of its legal rights to mediation and adequate time to prepare for trial.

Clearwater attorney Alan Zimmet, who has argued the cities' case before Judge Beach, said the appeal is without merit and is a stall tactic.

Knowing that judges are loathe to reject the will of voters after the fact, he said the county's strategy is to ensure a referendum on the amendments come November.

"I'm surprised it took them this long," to appeal, Zimmet said. "The county intent has been to delay having a substantive hearing on the issues until after the election."

Will Van Sant can be reached at 445-4166 or vansant@sptimes.com.

[Last modified October 5, 2006, 07:47:11]