|
|
||
|
Home
Tampa Bay columnists Mary Jo Melone Howard Troxler News Sections Action Arts & Entertainment Business Citrus County Columnists Floridian Hernando County Obituaries Opinion Pasco County State Tampa Bay World & Nation Featured areas AP The Wire Alive! Area Guide Auto Classifieds Comics & Games Employment Health Forums Lottery Movies Police Report Real Estate Sports Stocks Weather What's New Wheelfinder Weekly Sections Home & Garden Perspective Taste Tech Times Travel Weekend Other Sections Buccaneers College Football Devil Rays Lightning Ongoing Stories Photo Reprints Photo Review Seniority Web Specials Ybor City
Market Info Advertise with the Times Contact Us All Departments
|
Judgment sought in Sunshine lawsuit
By DAVID PEDREIRA © St. Petersburg Times, published February 27, 2000 TAMPA -- To the Tampa Palms Community Development District, Bob Doran's lawsuit is about nothing -- a frivolous squabble over a moot point. But to Doran's attorneys, who specialize in Florida Sunshine Law cases, the case reaches down to the bedrock of the Constitution. "We are talking here today about the essence of democracy itself," Jake Kaney said Thursday, as both sides asked Hillsborough Circuit Judge Manuel Menendez Jr. for a summary judgment on a lawsuit that has cost the CDD more than $30,000 so far. In the next month or so, Menendez will decide whether Doran's civil suit against the taxing district should move ahead, be dismissed or be given an immediate ruling. Doran wants a finding that the CDD violated Florida's open meeting laws at least four times from 1996 to 1999. He also wants his attorney fees paid. The CDD wants to get on with its business. Frustrated with the lawsuit's mounting costs and its "chilling effect" on their ability to conduct business, CDD board members voted this month to pursue "to the last nickel" legal fees from Doran if his case is thrown out by the judge. Peter Winders, an attorney from the law firm of Carlton Fields representing the CDD, told Menendez Thursday there is no reason for Doran's case to move forward -- because there isn't any case at all. All the issues that Doran brought up about the CDD's public meetings have been rectified, and the issues that were discussed in four allegedly illegal meetings were revisited in public session, Winders said. "It's our position in this case that there is no dispute," Winders said, adding there needs to be a "practical" dispute before the court for it to have jurisdiction. Kaney countered there is a dispute of the utmost importance, focusing on how the CDD conducts public business. Citing a number of state Sunshine Law cases, Kaney told the judge that a declaration from the court that the CDD violated the law is needed, even if the CDD adopted policies that would supposedly prevent similar infractions in the future. "They have continued to deny these violations," Kaney said. - David Pedreira can be reached at (813) 226-3463 or pedreira@sptimes.com.
© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved. |
|
![]()