A judge recently gave the go-ahead to count the votes on a Palm Coast charter amendment that would have given the city greater authority to borrow money, despite a lawsuit calling the measure’s ballot language misleading and urging the vote to be nullified.
On Nov. 4, Judge Christopher France of the Seventh Judicial Circuit Court rejected a challenge to Charter Amendment 1 filed in September by a former City Council candidate, Alan Lowe. Voters in the Flagler County city near Daytona Beach turned down the measure, with 30,684 residents voting “No” and 21,870 supporting it, according to county election results.
The amendment asked voters whether a section of the City Charter should be amended by removing a provision “related to fiscal contracting authority that limits the city’s ability to enter into public private partnerships, have the ability to address growth by having future residents contribute to infrastructure costs, respond to emergencies and use available financial instruments including, but not limited to, bonds.”
The lawsuit argued that the text of the measure was unclear and omitted information essential for voters to make an informed decision.
“The ballot summary is also misleading by failing to explain the chief purpose of the proposed amendment to the City Charter, which is to take away the right of the citizens of Palm Coast to approve by referendum vote clearly defined fiscal limitations placed on the city and, effectively, to allow the city unlimited (borrowing) discretion,” the lawsuit states.
The amendment would have removed a provision from the charter that bars the city from lease-purchase contracts or unfunded multiyear contracts in excess of 36 months – or such a contract that exceeds $15 million.
“The language of the Charter Amendment fails to comply with the Florida Election Code’s mandate … requiring ballot language to be ‘clear and unambiguous,’” the lawsuit says.
The complaint had also sought the removal of the measure from the ballot and an injunction barring the city clerk or other officials from tabulating the ballots cast on the measure.
The amendment, which the City Council approved in July, proved controversial as three of the five council members who voted in favor of putting it on the ballot were defeated in their primary elections. Among them was Councilman Ed Danko, who was also censured in a 3-1 vote on Nov. 12 that was initiated by Councilwoman Theresa Pontieri. The vote came just before a new mayor and two new council members were sworn in.
During a Nov. 12 council meeting, Pontieri accused Danko of “orchestrating” the filing of the lawsuit against the city and urged the city attorney to look into filing an ethics complaint against the councilman.
Danko, who was censured during his final council meeting, said the 3-1 vote was an attempt to censor free speech using “second-hand accusations.”
“This is typical Pontieri behavior, like a spoiled child lashing out in anger because she did not get her way,” the councilman said in an email to the Florida Record. “She is distraught because the bonds failed and she didn’t get a blank check from the voters, she didn’t get her pick to fill the recently vacant council seat, she didn’t get her half-percent sales tax increase, and I stopped her attempt at imposing (a Florida Power & Light) franchise fee.”
He also described the censure as “last-minute garbage.”
“She can't stomach the fact that I have been the only person who has stood between her and the taxpayers’ money, and I wear this censuring as a badge of honor,” Danko said.