Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

County dealt charter setbacks

Two court rulings in the county's skirmish with 21 cities involve a critical trial and a panel's Sunshine Law violation.

By WILL VAN SANT
Published October 13, 2006

Courts have delivered a dual setback to Pinellas County in its legal fight with the cities over changes to the county charter.

The most grievous blow came from an appeals court, which on Wednesday rejected the county's request to set aside a lower court ruling that called for a prompt trial to determine whether voters decide the charter changes on Nov. 7.

That trial is set for Oct. 20. Circuit Judge Robert Beach will hear arguments from the county, which supports putting the changes to a vote, and the cities, which oppose having them on the ballot.

Had the county won at the appellate level, votes cast on the amendments would have been counted, though the legal struggle between the counties and cities would surely have worn on.

"We are elated," Alan Zimmet, an attorney working for the cities, said of Wednesday's ruling.

"The county has been intent on trying to avoid the trial."

The second defeat for the county came at the hands of Judge Beach himself.

He ruled on Wednesday that the county's Charter Review Commission, which developed the proposed changes, violated the state's Sunshine Law when it met on Sept. 11 to discuss legal strategy.

When a government body holds what's called a shadow meeting outside of public view, state law limits who can participate.

A private consultant was present at the shadow meeting, which Beach ruled was a violation of the law.

Beach's decision will enable the cities' attorneys to question Alan Bomstein, chair of the review commission, in greater detail about what was discussed at the meeting.

Thomas J. Trask, an attorney working for the cities, has filed a separate lawsuit in an attempt to get a transcript of the shadow meeting.

"It's significant," Trask said, because certain decisions may have been made "behind closed doors that should have been made in the public and we won't know until we have the transcript."

The legal adventures began in August, when a group of 21 Pinellas municipalities filed a lawsuit that argues the amendments grant the county expanded powers at the expense of cities.

The cities strongly object to 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 alleged Sunshine Law violations in the cities' August lawsuit deal with matters separate from Beach's ruling Wednesday on the Sept. 11 shadow meeting.

Both sides have been sending out fliers at taxpayer expense to promote their respective positions, even though it's uncertain whether any votes cast on the amendments Nov. 7 will have any meaning.

County attorneys are hopeful they can prevail, but to date they have had little success before Judge Beach.

"We think the law is on our side," said Sarah Richardson, managing assistant county attorney. "But we will leave that up to the court."

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

[Last modified October 12, 2006, 22:36:47]