Save Boca is Prevented from Presenting Defense In Lawsuit As City of Boca Bolsters Plaintiff’s Case to Squash 12,900 Citizen Signatures

Prior to the hearing yesterday on the case against Save Boca, the plaintiff--Ned Kimmelman--dismissed Save Boca and Jon Pearlman on November 12th as defendants from the case.  This is despite the entire lawsuit being directed at Save Boca to squash the citizen petitions that achieved 12,900 citizen signatures.  As is now clear, the dismissal was a tactic to prevent Save Boca from presenting a defense in the case and the judge allowed the hearing to take place absent a Save Boca defense.  The two other parties named as defendants, the City of Boca Raton and the Supervisor of Elections, ended up being the only remaining "defendants" at the hearing yet they were defendants in name only.
 
The City of Boca Raton did not put up any defense at the hearing and went further to bolster the plaintiff's case.  Prior to the hearing, the City of Boca Raton submitted a “Stipulation” to the court that was a compilation of quotes from Scott Singer and Marc Wigder in which they made statements opposing the Save Boca ordinances.  The stipulation brief and the included quotes bolstered Kimmelman’s case to squash the 12,900 signatures of Save Boca through these excerpts.  The lawyer representing the Supervisor of Elections did not make any comments of substance during the hearing.

The City of Boca threw their citizens under the bus and did not give any defense at the hearing, despite 12,900 signed petitions for the Save Boca ordinances. 

Despite being prevented from defending the case, counsel for Save Boca was granted a “limited appearance” at the start of the hearing by the judge and stated that Save Boca and Jon Pearlman were the impacted and aggrieved parties.  Counsel for Save Boca stated that dismissing Save Boca and Jon Pearlman from the case was improper, as was allowing the case to move forward against two parties that weren’t even defending the case while dismissing the two parties that would have defended the case.  Counsel stated that this was the second time Save Boca was dismissed from the case, and the “two dismissal rule” upholds that two dismissals is deemed an adjudication on the merits of the case.  Despite this, the judge allowed the plaintiff to go against the City of Boca in the hearing.
 
The city was perfectly fine with losing and they did not present a defense in the case.  The issue came up regarding the fact that the city charter states that “in no event shall the charter amendment be voted upon later than three (3) months from the date of certification.”  The law puts the onus on the city not to delay the vote and to have this vote within 90 days and no later.  The charter petition was certified on October 2nd and so as per this law the election should be held prior to January 2nd.  Given that the City scheduled the election for January 13th, after the 90 days, the plaintiff presented this as grounds for issuing an injunction on the election.  The city did not give any response at the hearing as to why they did not schedule the election within the time frame that the charter requires.
 
The judge stated in the hearing that he would not be ruling on anything about Save Boca and Jon Pearlman yet he ruled to grant the injunction to the Plaintiff and in turn remove the Save Boca ordinances from the January 13th election, as had been scheduled.  This is a temporary injunction and does not prevent the Save Boca ordinances from being voted on at another election.  The case is still active and ongoing.

The will of the great citizens of our city will prevail.  There were obstacles for us to get here, and there will be obstacles in the future, however we will accomplish our shared mission to restore protection to all of our parks, beachfront properties, and public land across our city.  We will secure the brightest future and the highest quality of life for our citizens, our children and grandchildren. Thank you to everyone for supporting Save Boca and our shared goal to Save Our City.