|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
County and cities resolve differences
By SUZETTE PORTER
Article published on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 |
PINELLAS COUNTY – With no admission of fault by any of the parties, Pinellas County and its municipalities agreed to a settlement on May 2, bringing closure to a lawsuit concerning amendments to the county’s charter.
At a noon hearing, Circuit Court Judge Robert E. Beach, approved an agreement whereby all parties agreed to drop the lawsuit. Board of County Commissioner’s Chairman Ronnie Duncan, said Friday that the action was good news for taxpayers.
“I’m glad that we have all managed to reach a successful local compromise,” Duncan said. “This process has taken patience and perseverance by all sides. Today’s settlement is an example of unification by the county and the cities in the best interest of all of our citizens.”
"We're definitely pleased,” said Clearwater Mayor Frank Hibbard. “I don't think it's ever in our citizens' collective best interests to have an extended legal battle, and we feel that this compromise honors the wishes of the voters and effectively resolves the situation. I look forward to continuing our partnership with the county and our city partners moving forward, especially in light of the major issues that lay ahead."
In the 41-page lawsuit filed by 21 municipalities in August, several reasons were given for opposition to seven proposed changes to the county’s charter, including violations of the Sunshine Law and procedural violations. Despite efforts to keep the measures off the November ballot, Judge Beach decided to allow the questions to go to vote.
Voters said yes to charter amendment No. 5, one of three concerning annexation laws. Amendment No. 5 would have restricted annexation without the owner's consent by requiring mail notice prior to all non-voluntary annexations and establishes a seven-year moratorium on repeat annexation attempts without consent.
Voters also said yes to charter amendment No. 6, which would have limited the amount of public funds that can be spent for annexation incentives if the incentive does not provide public improvements.
Both amendments required approval by the state; however, due to the lawsuit, none of the local state legislative delegates would agree to sponsor a bill. The May 2 settlement agreement avoids legislative action and allows a local compromise to settle the matter.
Duncan said the result was actually a good thing.
“Now we can solve the annexation issue at the local level,” he said.
A committee made up of the Pinellas Planning Council and the Board of County Commissioners will meet to work out annexation changes to be made by countywide ordinance rather than by charter amendments, Duncan said.
He said working out an ordinance at the local level, rather than changes coming from the state, would allow municipalities and the county to come together to make policy for Pinellas County instead of the state making the rules.
He said he wasn’t comfortable with the changes coming through charter changes or by decisions made by state lawmakers who might not be familiar with Pinellas County and its needs.
He said “the people’s will” spoken by approval of the two annexation measures during the November referendum would be done.
“The changes will be resolved without going to Tallahassee,” he said. “The voters have spoken and whether we like it or not, we have no choice but to make it (annexation changes) happen.”
The only unsettled element is the cost of the lawsuit to taxpayers.
Duncan said a final figure of legal costs at the county level was not yet available. He said he had no way of knowing how much municipalities spent.
“I have asked for the cost,” he said. “I want to know every nickel and dime that was spent. It’s important to know.”
|
Article published on Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Copyright © Tampa Bay Newspapers: All rights reserved. |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tampa Bay Newspapers
9911 Seminole Blvd.
Seminole, FL 33772
(727) 397-5563
Open Monday-Friday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
|
|
