HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 27 1989 Charter's Legality To Be DeterminedCharter's Legality
To Be Determined
By PATRICIA DiLALLA
Sebastian Bureau Chief
As part of their defense in the
airport lawsuit, Sebastian city
councilmen claim that the airport
charter amendments'
and proposed ordinance
implementing them are
in violation of the U.S.
and state constitutions
and federal law.
The five council mem-
bers, who are being sued
by Burt Snell to force
them to implement the
charter amendments,
are asking 19th Circuit
Court Judge Paul Kana- Ka
rek for a declaratory
judgment on the issue of legality.
If forced to adopt an ordinance,
council would be in violation of
federal and state constitutions
and law, the restrictions and con-
ditions of the quitclaim deed
transferring the airport from the
federal government to the city of
Sebastian and the standstill
agreement with the Federal Avi-
ation Administration, state docu-
ments filed with the court
Monday.
Adopting the ordinance would
result in "... burden-
some litigations, the
loss of the airport
property, a waste of
judicial economy and
a needless expenditure
of public funds," states
a summary of the
councilmen's response
prepared by their spe-
cial lawsuit attorney,
Nicholas Tsamoutales.
narek The council also is
asking Kanarek to dis-
miss Snell's lawsuit based on his
lack of standing and because
writs of mandamus can only re-
quire performance of ministerial
duties, not legislative ones.
One member, of the City Coun-
cil opposes Tsamoutales' strate-
gy in asking for a declaratory
judgment.
Please See CHARTER/2A
Charter From Pg. ,A
"I disagree with it 100 percent,"
said Vice Mayor Robert McCarthy.
"I am not for that defense and I
will tell Tsamoutales, as I did
when I had that private meeting
with him."
McCarthy, a strong supporter of
the charter amendments, said he
never agreed with the legal opin-
ions expressed by four attorneys
and cited by Tsamoutales in his re-
sponse.
"They are only opinions; they are
not constitutional lawyers,"
McCarthy said.
Tsamoutales did not return sev-
eral telephone calls Monday.
In a counterclaim to the lawsuit,
Tsamoutales cited legal opinions
rendered by City Attorney Charles
Nash, the city's airport attorney,
the chief counsel to the FAA and
an attorney hired by the fixed
based operators at the airport.
"All the opinions essentially con-
cluded that the proposed charter
amendments were subject to chal-
lenge on numerous legal grounds
and could result in reversion of the
airport property to the (federal
government)," states the coun-
terclaim prepared by Tsamoutales.
Councilmen Robert McCollum
and Lloyd Rondeau, who were both
elected in March on pro -refer-
endum platforms, said at the time
the airport referendum was voted
on they believed it was legal.
McCollum said he had questions
about the referendum, but was told
it was legal by attorneys.
Although reluctant to name
those attorneys, McCollum
admitted one of them was John
Evans, attorney for the Citizens
Airport Watch. The CAW success-
fully mounted a petition drive to
have the referendum put on the
March election ballot.
Asked about the apparent turn-
around in his position, Rondeau
said "I wish I could give you an
answer."
Rondeau said he voted against
the standstill agreement with the
FAA because he was in favor of
passing the ordinance.
"That is whate the people wanted
and that is what they voted for," he
said.
Councilman Frank Oberbeck,
who opposed the airport charter
amendments and voted against the
standstill agreement, said he had
been seeking a declaratory
judgment since he was elected in
March.
"I never felt it was legal or con-
stitutional. I thought it was a vio-
lation of our. -deed," Oberbeck said.
McCarthy said he objected to the
city asking for a declaratory
judgment. That was something
that should have been requested by
Snell or someone else, he said.
On June 28, council unanimously
voted to reject a motion to have the
city attorney seek a declaratory
judgment from a court on the le-
gality issue.
Although council was required to
adopt an ordinance implementing
a referendum on airport charter
amendments, passed by voters in
March, it instead approved a
standstill agreement with the
FAA.
Under the terms of the standstill
agreement, the city would not
adopt the airport ordinance and
the FAA, which objected to certain
provisions of the amendment,
would not sue to reclaim the air-
port. Both sides agreed to wait
until a comprehensive airport
study was completed before taking
any further action.