suit - News - The Coastal Star2024-03-29T15:11:10Zhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/feed/tag/suitBoca Raton: Builder that rented Ocean Strand road may be sued for not repaving ithttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-builder-that-rented-ocean-strand-road-may-be-sued-for-2023-11-01T14:48:59.000Z2023-11-01T14:48:59.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong></p>
<p>A construction company that was given a temporary easement through Ocean Strand Park so its trucks and crews could reach a waterfront job site just north of the park is not living up to its part of the contract.</p>
<p>Georgia-based JJ Morley Enterprises Inc. paid $15,000 for the easement, which ran from December 2021 through February 2023, and promised to repave the park’s only road and restore vegetation and anything else it disturbed at Ocean Strand.</p>
<p>At an Oct. 2 meeting Jacob Horowitz, a lawyer for the Greater Boca Raton Beach and Park District, told district commissioners that the company had offered to reimburse the district for the restoration instead of actually doing the work.</p>
<p>But two weeks later Horowitz recommended changing tactics.</p>
<p>“I’m reluctant and sad to report that the counsel for JJ Morley has been wholly non-responsive to all of our efforts. They’ve not returned phone calls. They have not responded to emails,” he said.</p>
<p>Commissioners authorized him to sue the company. They also told Briann Harms, their executive director, to give the remedial work to Maracore Builders LLC, the firm that cleared Ocean Strand of many of its invasive plants and installed an asphalt walkway, mulch path and picnic tables there. </p>
<p>Maracore suggested milling the existing road in addition to paving it, adding fresh mulch to the path and hiring an expediter for the permit process, for a total bill of $92,000.</p>
<p>But the agreement for the temporary construction easement noted only one dollar amount: $38,250 for repaving. It also said JJ Morley would be responsible for replanting vegetation and making other amends.</p>
<p>The construction company needed access through the park to build Manatee Pointe at Lago Mar, a three-unit condominium facing the Intracoastal Waterway. The multimillion-dollar project is at the west end of Lago Mar Lane, which has several homes along it and is too narrow for construction traffic.</p>
<p>Ocean Strand opened to the public as a pedestrian park in February.</p>
<p><strong>In other business</strong> Oct. 16, beach and park commissioners got updates on plans for North Park from their consultants and from developer Malcolm Butters, whom they chose to build an indoor paddleball facility at the park.</p>
<p>“We’re in the very early stages. Obviously we’re going to get a lot of input from the board,” Butters said.</p>
<p>Mike Kroll of consultants Miller Legg told commissioners that the city had asked that an 8-foot-wide shared use path be added to the plan on Northwest Second Avenue from Jeffery Street north to 67th Street.</p>
<p>“Question: That’s not really on our property, right? So why are we responsible for widening that sidewalk?” District Chair Erin Wright asked.</p>
<p>“Our goal is to counter that with the city,” Harms said. “We’re certainly not just going to do it without questioning it more.”</p></div>Boca Raton: Therapists’ lawyers want city, county to pay them $2.1 millionhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-therapists-lawyers-want-city-to-pay-them-2-1-million2023-06-28T14:22:48.000Z2023-06-28T14:22:48.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Mary Hladky</strong></p>
<p>Attorneys who prevailed in litigation that resulted in a court ruling striking down Boca Raton and Palm Beach County ordinances banning the controversial practice of conversion therapy on minors are now seeking $2.1 million in attorney fees and costs they incurred fighting the ordinances.<br /> Liberty Counsel, which represented two therapists — Dr. Robert Otto of Boca Raton and Dr. Julie Hamilton of Palm Beach Gardens — stated in a June 12 federal court filing that its attorneys spent 2,274.8 hours representing their clients pro bono at a cost of $1.4 million.<br /> The attorneys increased the amount they are seeking, saying they are entitled to a fee “enhancement” because the therapy provided by their clients and Liberty Counsel’s efforts to represent them are widely condemned by medical professionals and local governments that passed ordinances banning conversion therapy.<br /> The attorneys represented the therapists without asking them to pay and now want to collect the amount they spent doing so from the city and county.<br /> Conversion therapy seeks to change a person’s sexual identity or sexual orientation to align with heterosexual norms. Many professional medical organizations have denounced it for causing depression, hopelessness and suicide.<br /> The city and county repealed their ordinances after a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2020 that the bans were unconstitutional because they violated the free speech rights of Otto and Hamilton and the full court declined to reconsider that decision.<br /> In an effort to end the protracted litigation, the city and county both made “offers of judgment” earlier this year that Otto and Hamilton accepted. Boca paid Otto $50,000 and Hamilton $25,000. The county paid both Otto and Hamilton $50,000.<br /> The offers did not specify how much the two governments would pay for attorney fees and costs.<br /> In a June 26 response, the city’s outside attorneys said the amounts Liberty Counsel is seeking are “not reasonable” and “an excessive windfall” when compared to the hourly rates charged by Palm Beach County attorneys, and asked U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg to reduce the city’s share of the fees and costs to $213,000. The county had not filed a response as of June 26.<br /> In a June 13 news release announcing that Liberty Counsel was seeking fees and costs, founder and chairman Mat Staver said, “Minors who are struggling with gender confusion now can get the help they need from counselors who are free from political censorship. As a result of the victories over these counseling bans, Liberty Counsel is now entitled to attorney’s fees and costs.”<br /> City Council members repealed Boca Raton’s ordinance last August. Shortly thereafter, they adopted a resolution that opposed conversion therapy on minors.<br /> Otto, who spoke to council members at a June 13 meeting, noted the resolution was almost identical to the ordinance.<br /> “That is offensive,” he said. “It shows you don’t understand the Constitution of the United States.”<br /> He asked council members to repeal the resolution. They did not respond.</p></div>Boynton Beach: City agrees to settlement over whitewashed muralhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boynton-beach-city-agrees-to-settlement-over-whitewashed-mural2021-10-20T01:33:17.000Z2021-10-20T01:33:17.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p style="text-align:center;"><strong><em><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}9717107889,RESIZE_584x{{/staticFileLink}}"><img class="align-center" src="{{#staticFileLink}}9717107889,RESIZE_584x{{/staticFileLink}}" alt="9717107889?profile=RESIZE_584x" width="517" /></a></em></strong><em>Photographs of firefighters were used as the base for a mural named 'Community Heartbeat' by Boca Raton artist Lynn Doyal. In the mural sample above it can be seen how the face of Deputy Fire Chief Latosha Clemons was obscured. In a different panel (below), images of both Clemons and former Fire Chief Glenn Joseph were removed and replaced with images of white people. <strong>Image provided.</strong></em></p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>By Jane Smith</strong></p>
<p>Latosha Clemons, a Boynton Beach native, will receive $100,000 to settle discrimination claims against the city after her face was whitewashed from a mural honoring the history of the city's fire department.</p>
<p>“We will not be erased,” said Commissioner Christina Romelus, who is Black, when voting for the two settlements on Oct. 19.</p>
<p>A retired deputy fire chief, Clemons, will receive $80,000 to settle her lawsuit, filed in April, and $20,000 to settle a federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission discrimination complaint against Boynton Beach.</p>
<p>Clemons, 48, is now fire chief in Forest Park, Georgia.</p>
<p>“No amount of money can make up for what was done,” Romelus said.</p>
<p>Clemons face was restored after all the people in the mural were contacted about having their likeness displayed in the windows of the new fire station.</p>
<p>Clemons was not the only Black fire leader whose face was whitewashed in the mural.</p>
<p>Ex-Fire Chief Glenn Joseph’s face also was altered. As the city’s second Black fire chief, he declined to have his face restored, saying he had only been with the Boynton Beach Fire Rescue Department a few years.</p>
<p>Clemons, though, served the city for nearly 24 years before retiring in 2020. She grew up near where the new fire station opened in June 2020. She wanted her face restored in the mural to be a role model for young Black girls.</p>
<p>The public arts manager at the time was let go three days after the altered mural was discovered. The fire chief at the time was demoted initially, then decided to leave that position.</p>
<div dir="ltr">“What happened to the deputy chief was disgusting,” said Commissioner Ty Penserga before joining in the unanimous commission vote.</div>
<p> </p></div>Boca Raton: City dealt another setback on beachfront duplex planhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-city-dealt-another-setback-on-beachfront-duplex-plan2021-08-19T22:25:44.000Z2021-08-19T22:25:44.000ZThe Coastal Starhttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/TheCoastalStar<div><p><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong></p>
<p>Appeals judges have denied a request from Boca Raton to review a ruling that the City Council must hold another vote -— minus two prejudiced members -— on whether to allow a duplex to be built on the beach.</p>
<p>The three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal on Aug. 18 also denied the city's request to hear oral arguments in the case.</p>
<p>The dispute centers on a Feb. 26, 2019, council decision not to allow construction of 2600 N Ocean LLC's proposed four-story, 14,270-square-foot residence east of A1A between Spanish River Park and Ocean Strand.</p>
<p>In a Sept. 16, 2020, ruling, Circuit Judges Jaimie Goodman, Janis Keyser and G. Joseph Curley said emails to residents from council members Andrea O’Rourke and Monica Mayotte — saying they had “no intention of granting [the application]” and “[would] do all I can to prevent this from happening” — showed they were not impartial.</p>
<p>“This was more than mere political bias or an adverse political philosophy — it was express prejudgment of Petitioner’s application,” the circuit judges said.</p>
<p>Their ruling said the landowner “is entitled to a new hearing without the participation” of Mayotte and O’Rourke, who has since become deputy mayor. That would leave Mayor Scott Singer and council members Yvette Drucker and Andy Thomson to rehear the application.</p>
<p>The city appealed the circuit judges' decision to the 4th DCA on Nov. 18 and 20, 2020.</p>
<p>Each side of the proposed duplex's roof would have a pool, spa, fire pit and outdoor kitchen. The building would have special glass facing the ocean that would transmit only 10 percent of interior light, below the city’s request for 15 percent, and have only 8 percent reflectivity.</p>
<p>Lighting is a concern for nesting sea turtles and their hatchlings.</p></div>Highland Beach: Town settles lawsuit over boat lifthttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/highland-beach-town-settles-lawsuit-over-boat-lift2021-06-02T13:47:36.000Z2021-06-02T13:47:36.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Rich Pollack</strong></p>
<p>Highland Beach commissioners have reluctantly agreed to settle a lawsuit stemming from actions by the town’s planning board dating back to 2017 and involving the height of boat lift pilings. <br />As part of the settlement, the owner of waterfront property agrees to reduce the height of 10 wood pilings from 12 feet high to 7 feet and the town agrees not to enforce its contention that the pilings should be no more than 4 feet tall.<br />In addition, the property owner, 1006 Grand Court LLC and Richard Touchette also agree to pay $2,500 for the town’s legal fees. <br />At a meeting last month, town commissioners voted 4-1 to approve the settlement with Commissioner Evalyn David casting the no vote. <br />Even the commissioners who voted to approve the settlement did so with reservations, understanding that some residents in the Boca Highland Beach Club and Marina fear the loss of their view should a large boat be placed on the lift.<br />In voting against a settlement, David said she thinks it sends a wrong message to the community. <br />“We need to say you can’t interfere with the quiet and enjoyment of someone else’s property,” she said<br />Mayor Doug Hillman, who like David lives in the Boca Highland community, noted that the property owner will be cutting 5 feet off the current pilings, which will then be just 3 feet higher than the town’s request.<br />“It’s not perfect but we don’t live in a perfect world,” he said. “Compromises have to be made.”<br />Hillman and Vice Mayor Natasha Moore used the case to re-emphasize the importance of town boards’ doing due diligence before making decisions.<br />“The proper research has to be done before a vote comes to the board,” Hillman said. <br />In the case of 1006 Grand Court, the town’s planning board twice approved the project as early as 2017, but the town’s building department stopped construction from continuing once 12-foot-tall pilings were installed. <br />When the property owner came back to the planning board and asked to be allowed to keep the pilings at 12 feet, the request was denied. <br />The planning board later denied the owner’s request to have the pilings at 7 feet, which led to an appeal to Palm Beach County Circuit Court. <br />In court filings, the lawyer for the property owners said part of the problem is that the town code addresses the height of dock pilings but not boat-lift pilings.<br />“The confusion arose because the initial application showed four-foot pilings for the dock which the town assumed also applied to the pilings for the boat lift,” attorney Scott Weires wrote. <br />Town Manager Marshall Labadie said that part of the problem was that the town, which has a full-time planner on staff now, did not have one at the time.<br />“This should have been caught but it wasn’t,” he said. <br />The town is in the process of amending the code to address the height of boat-lift pilings, he said. <br />“This is an unfortunate circumstance,” Commissioner John Shoemaker said. “It shouldn’t have happened but it did.” </p></div>Boynton Beach: Mural alteration results in lawsuit against cityhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boynton-beach-mural-alteration-results-in-lawsuit-against-city2021-04-28T14:50:21.000Z2021-04-28T14:50:21.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Jane Smith</strong><br /> <br />A retired deputy fire chief in Boynton Beach has sued the city after her face was altered in a mural displayed briefly last June in the new Town Square fire station. <br /> Latosha Clemons was the city’s first Black woman to be deputy fire chief. Her boss, Glenn Joseph, was the city’s second Black fire chief. Both of their faces were whitewashed to render them indistinguishable.<br /> <a href="{{#staticFileLink}}8862218454,RESIZE_180x180{{/staticFileLink}}"><img class="align-left" src="{{#staticFileLink}}8862218454,RESIZE_180x180{{/staticFileLink}}" width="101" alt="8862218454?profile=RESIZE_180x180" /></a>They were part of the Community Heartbeat mural, a collage of firefighters in action and at city events with a red heartbeat line running through it.<br />Clemons, 48, retired on March 1, 2020, after nearly 24 years of service with the city. <br /> A Boynton Beach native, she filed the lawsuit April 9 against her former employer, claiming defamation and negligence. <br /> The city does not comment on open lawsuits, city spokeswoman Eleanor Krusell wrote April 22 in response to a question from The Coastal Star. <br />City Manager Lori LaVerriere, in a public statement issued June 4, said: “I sincerely apologize this occurred and will take every measure necessary to ensure this never happens again.<br /> “Please understand that this unfortunate incident is not indicative of our values.”<br /> On June 6, LaVerriere fired the public arts manager and removed the fire chief as part of her investigation into how the mural became altered. <br /> The new mural with Clemons’ face was revealed in early November. <br />Joseph was removed from the revised mural at his request. He did not want to be in the mural because he had worked for Boynton Beach for only a few years before retiring. </p></div>Boynton Beach: Developer blames parking garage delay on lawsuithttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boynton-beach-developer-blames-parking-garage-delay-on-lawsuit2021-03-31T14:42:57.000Z2021-03-31T14:42:57.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Jane Smith</strong><br /> <br />Town Square in Boynton Beach has new municipal buildings, a renovated historic high school and a new fire station. But the lack of parking garages makes the area appear unfinished. <br /> Boynton Beach has been waiting for nearly two years to have garage parking for 465 vehicles, promised by JKM BTS, its Town Square private partner. While the city waits for the garages — estimated to cost $34 million — construction costs are rising by an estimated 5% annually, according to analytics on EdZarenski.com. The website provides in-depth analysis on the economics of construction.<br /> In late November after more negotiations seemed fruitless, Boynton Beach sued JKM BTS, asking a judge to decide whether the city had met its obligations under a March 2018 developer’s agreement and can sever that relationship.<br /> JKM built the Cortina apartment buildings and a dog park west of the interstate in Boynton Beach. <br /> Boynton Beach sold 7.68 acres to JKM affiliates in three parcels for $10 each in 2018. It also gave JKM nearly $2 million in cash for development costs and redid the streets in the entire Town Square area — including new water and sewer lines, storm drainage and buried power lines. <br /> To its credit, the firm did supply 301 surface parking spaces on the land it received from the city, as required in the March 2018 developer’s agreement. Those spaces are used during the day by the city, Community Redevelopment Agency, the Schoolhouse Children’s Museum and library workers. Customers doing business at City Hall and visitors to the museum and library also use the parking spaces during the day. “Negotiations between the city, potential workforce housing developers and separately with JKM have taken place,” read a written update by John Markey, a JKM principal, presented at the March 16 City Commission meeting. <br />“Pending litigation has negatively affected the prospects of obtaining any project construction financing.” <br /> Commissioner Justin Katz contradicted Markey by saying no workforce housing negotiations are taking place. He was backed up by the city manager.<br /> “The financing fell apart years before COVID and the litigation was filed,” Katz said at the meeting. <br /> In mid-March 2020, Boynton Beach and cities worldwide shut down to help stop the spread of the coronavirus. <br /> Markey finally appeared virtually at the second City Commission meeting in July, saying he and his wife had stayed home for a few months to avoid catching COVID-19. He missed four months of virtual meetings, even though Katz had asked for monthly updates. <br /> The south garage received a building permit on Sept. 5, 2019, and was supposed to be finished by June 5, 2021, Colin Groff, then assistant city manager, said during the July 21 Town Square update. The north garage was estimated to be finished by Dec. 5, 2021. <br /> But no work on the garages has begun.<br /> “The timelines are completely gone,” Markey said at the July 21 meeting. <br /> He asked for taxpayer dollars from the city’s Community Redevelopment Agency to help underwrite the private portion of Town Square. <br /> Katz said “absolutely not” to that, pointing to the low cost of the properties, the $2 million in cash and the redone streets. Developers normally would do road improvements on their own.</p>
<p><strong>History of the deal</strong><br /> Boynton Beach signed a developer’s agreement with Markey in March 2018. The agreement detailed what the city was supposed to do and the obligations of Markey’s affiliates that had been set up individually for each project.<br /> The financing mechanism changed from having the city set up a community development taxing district to serve the area’s long-term needs to an outside nonprofit that specialized in public/private partnerships and could issue the Town Square bonds quickly. <br /> The $78 million in bonds were issued by Community Facility Partners of Minnetonka, Minnesota, in July 2018. But the nonprofit could not finance private projects, Markey found out in the fall of 2018. That left him scrambling for financing for the two projects. <br /> As of June 30, JKM had spent nearly $5.8 million on development costs of the three parcels, Markey said at the Sept. 1 commission meeting.<br /> The three parcels that Markey’s firm purchased for $30 in September and December 2018 were appraised at $19.7 million in May 2018. That was several months before the old City Hall and library were demolished to make way for Town Square.<br /> The city agreed in December 2018 to remove its right to repurchase the land after JKM said it needed that clause lifted in order to gain construction financing.<br /> Both City Attorney James Cherof and Markey declined to explain their reasoning, citing the lawsuit. <br /> But official county real estate records do not show a construction loan taken out by JKM on the Town Square parcels.<br /> On Dec. 28, 2018, a $3.5 million letter-of-credit was lent by City National Bank of Florida, secured by the three Town Square parcels. That loan was satisfied on Feb. 7, 2020. <br />Another $5.5 million “bridge” loan was given by BI 58 LLC on Dec. 23, 2019. The Miami-based partnership specializes in short-term financing for commercial real estate projects. JKM paid off that loan on Dec. 17, 2020. <br /> In the fall of 2019, Markey said, city staff was working toward becoming a co-guarantor of the garage loans that would be financed by Iberia Bank. Then the city decided that was too risky, he said, without owning the land.<br /> In February 2020, the city talked about borrowing $34 million to build the garages by agreeing to “pre-buy” them. <br /> Then, Markey said, the finance world shut down because of the pandemic. Ú</p></div>Boca Raton: Appellate court agrees city not liable for Midtown inactionhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-appellate-court-agrees-city-not-liable-for-midtown-ina2021-03-03T17:12:20.000Z2021-03-03T17:12:20.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Mary Hladky</strong></p>
<p>The legal battle is over for Crocker Partners’ ambitious plan to redevelop Midtown into a $1 billion live-work-play area where people would have lived in up to 1,274 residential units and walked or taken shuttles to their jobs, shopping and restaurants.<br />The state’s 4th District Court of Appeal on Feb. 3 upheld a lower court ruling that Crocker Partners is not entitled to $137.6 million in damages it claimed it was owed because the city illegally prevented the redevelopment.<br />City zoning allows commercial, office and retail development in the 300-acre area located east of the Town Center mall, but not residential. <br />Crocker Partners and other landowners contended that they reasonably expected to be able to build residential units because of changes to the city’s comprehensive plan in 2010 that allowed the City Council to permit residential projects in Midtown.<br />But the City Council never made a decision to do so despite a lengthy persuasion effort led by Crocker Partners.<br />Crocker Partners sued in 2018 under the Bert Harris Act, which is intended to protect the rights of property owners when a government restricts or limits their private property rights.<br />Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Howard Coates Jr. threw out the suit in 2019, holding that the Bert Harris Act provides compensation to property owners who lose existing or vested zoning rights but not to property owners who do not receive new development rights.<br />The 4th DCA agreed, saying that the Bert Harris Act protects against governmental action, but not inaction that maintained existing zoning.<br />Shortly after Coates’ ruling, Crocker Partners dropped a previous lawsuit that sought to compel the city to allow residential development and a third suit that claimed the city made misleading statements in public documents and violated the state’s Sunshine Law to prevent residential development.<br />The company opted only to continue its effort to seek damages. That decision clearly signaled that Crocker Partners was abandoning its revitalization push.<br />But by then, the Midtown project was already dead. Other landowners who had joined with Crocker Partners drifted away, pursuing other plans for their properties.<br />Angelo Bianco, Crocker Partners’ managing partner, said at the time that it would be a waste of time and money to pursue legal action when it was clear that Midtown was not going to happen.<br />“The city killed Midtown several years ago. It was unfortunate we were not compensated for our losses, but we have moved on to other projects,” a Crocker Partners spokesperson said about the 4th DCA ruling.<br />Chief among those projects is the Boca Raton Innovation Campus at the former IBM campus, where the first personal computer was made.<br />Crocker Partners acquired the 1.7-million-square-foot office building, the largest in the state, in 2018 with a vision of transforming it into a science and technology hub.<br />City spokeswoman Chrissy Gibson described the ruling as “very favorable” for the city.<br />“The court also reaffirmed, clarified and improved the state of the law for local governments throughout Florida by embracing the city’s position that property owners cannot state a claim under the Harris Act based on their development expectations, “ she said. Ú</p></div>Along the Coast: U.S. appeals panel finds Boca, county bans on conversion therapy unconstitutionalhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/along-the-coast-u-s-appeals-panel-finds-boca-county-bans-on-conve2020-12-02T16:26:54.000Z2020-12-02T16:26:54.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming<div><p><strong>By Mary Hladky</strong></p>
<p>A three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down as unconstitutional Boca Raton’s and Palm Beach County’s bans on the controversial practice of conversion therapy.<br />The 2-1 ruling on Nov. 20 held that the bans violate the free speech rights of therapists who offer “talk therapy” to children who have “unwanted same-sex attraction or unwanted gender identity issues.”<br />“This decision allows speech that many find concerning — even dangerous,” Judge Britt Grant wrote for the majority. “But consider the alternative. If speech restrictions in these ordinances can stand, then so can their inverse.<br />“Local communities could prevent therapists from validating a client’s same-sex attractions if the city council deemed that message harmful.<br />“People have intense moral, religious and spiritual views about these matters — on all sides,” she wrote. “And that is exactly why the First Amendment does not allow communities to determine how their neighbors may be counseled about matters of sexual orientation or gender.”<br />In her dissent, Judge Beverly Martin wrote that conversion therapy — which seeks to change a person’s gender identity or sexual orientation — is known to be harmful. She cited many professional medical organizations that have warned it causes anger, anxiety, depression, guilt and hopelessness.<br />“It was reasonable for the localities to enact the ordinances based on the existing evidentiary record as to harm,” she wrote, while also noting that the ordinances were narrowly written to apply only to children.<br />Grant and Judge Barbara Lagoa were appointed to the 11th Circuit by President Donald Trump. Martin was elevated to the court by President Barack Obama.<br />Jamie Cole, an attorney representing Boca Raton, said the city “is analyzing the decision to determine how to proceed.”<br />“This is a difficult legal issue, as evidenced by the split decision,” he said. “The city is disappointed with the majority decision but agrees with the well-written and well-reasoned dissent.”<br />County Attorney Denise Nieman told commissioners they could accept the ruling or ask for a hearing before the entire 12-judge federal appellate court, The Palm Beach Post reported. If the plaintiffs lost there, she predicted they would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.<br />Boca Raton passed its ordinance, proposed by then-Mayor Susan Haynie, in 2017. It was based on a model ordinance drafted by the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council.<br />Two therapists, Robert Otto and Julie Hamilton, sued the city and county, arguing the laws violated their free speech rights. U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg did not grant their request for an injunction, and they appealed to the 11th Circuit.<br />Otto and Hamilton were represented by Orlando-based Liberty Council, a religious liberty organization that provides legal services on religious issues and is opposed to LGBTQ rights.<br />Twenty states and many cities, including Delray Beach, have passed similar ordinances on grounds that conversion therapy not only causes psychological harm but wrongly presumes that homosexuality and gender nonconformity are mental disorders that can be “cured.” Ú</p></div>Boca Raton: Judges quash council decision against beachfront duplexhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-judges-quash-council-decision-against-beachfront-dup-12020-10-28T15:00:12.000Z2020-10-28T15:00:12.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming<div><p style="text-align:center;"><em><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}8087229052,RESIZE_584x{{/staticFileLink}}"><img class="align-center" src="{{#staticFileLink}}8087229052,RESIZE_584x{{/staticFileLink}}" width="412" alt="8087229052?profile=RESIZE_584x" /></a></em></p>
<p><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong><br /> <br />Boca Raton’s City Council must reconsider its 5-0 decision not to grant permission to build a duplex on the beach, Palm Beach County circuit judges say.<br />Council members Andrea O’Rourke and Monica Mayotte prejudged the application by 2600 N. Ocean LLC proposing a four-story, 14,270-square-foot residence east of A1A between Spanish River Park and Ocean Strand, the judges decided.<br />At a Feb. 26, 2019, City Council meeting, attorney Robert Sweetapple, representing the landowner, showed a campaign video of then-council member and now Mayor Scott Singer standing on a dune and declaring he could not support plans for a house on the beach. Sweetapple also had copies of emails that O’Rourke and Mayotte had sent constituents saying they would vote against variances for construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line.<br /> In a ruling issued Sept. 16, Circuit Judges Jaimie Goodman, Janis Keyser and G. Joseph Curley said Singer’s statements constituted a “general political stance made in a campaign video” and were permissible. But O’Rourke’s and Mayotte’s emails to residents — saying they had “no intention of granting [the application]” and “[would] do all I can to prevent this from happening” — showed they were not impartial, the judges said.<br /> “This was more than mere political bias or an adverse political philosophy — it was express prejudgment of Petitioner’s application,” the judges wrote. <br /> Their ruling said 2600 N. Ocean LLC “is entitled to a new hearing without the participation” of Mayotte and O’Rourke, who has since become deputy mayor. That would leave Singer and council members Jeremy Rodgers and Andy Thomson to rehear the application.<br /> But Rodgers, a Navy Reserve officer, has been deployed on active duty to the Mideast and has not attended a council meeting since late June.<br /> Sweetapple promised even more litigation over the parcel, which was recently appraised at $7.2 million.<br /> “Boca Raton has engaged in a decades-long program to deny any development of this private, taxpaying, oceanfront property. To date it has failed to acquire the property as part of its spectacular oceanfront park system,” he said. “The continued denial of any reasonable development of this parcel constitutes a taking. The ongoing illegal actions of the city will continue to be addressed in the courts.”<br /> Each side of the proposed duplex would have had a rooftop with a pool, spa, fire pit and outdoor kitchen. Sweetapple said the building would have special glass facing the ocean that would transmit only 10% of interior light, below the city’s request for 15%, and have only 8% reflectivity. Lighting is a concern for nesting and hatchling sea turtles.<br /> Council members caused an uproar when they gave a zoning variance in late 2015 for a four-story beachfront home two parcels south, at 2500 N. Ocean Blvd. The state Department of Environmental Protection issued a notice to proceed with that project, which still needs review by the city’s Environmental Advisory Board and another council vote. Ú</p></div>Boca Raton: Crocker Partners drops 2 of 3 Midtown lawsuitshttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-crocker-partners-drops-2-of-3-midtown-lawsuits2019-10-30T14:10:29.000Z2019-10-30T14:10:29.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Mary Hladky</strong></p>
<p>Crocker Partners has curtailed its contentious legal battle with the city, dropping two lawsuits that sought to compel city officials to allow it to redevelop Midtown.<br />But Crocker Partners continues to pursue litigation that seeks $137.6 million in damages the developer and landowner claims it has sustained because Boca Raton illegally prevented the redevelopment.<br />By dismissing the two lawsuits, Crocker Partners has signaled that it is giving up its long-held ambition to transform the 300-acre Midtown, located east of the Town Center mall, into a $1 billion live-work-play area with as many as 2,500 residential units near offices, restaurants and shopping.<br />“After trying to work with City Council for four years, revitalizing Midtown is off the table — a tremendous missed opportunity for the city and the community,” Angelo Bianco, Crocker Partners’ managing partner, said in a statement issued three days after his company informed the court on Oct. 18 that it was dismissing the lawsuits.<br />“We are pleased that the Crocker entities have voluntarily dismissed two of their three pending Midtown lawsuits,” city spokeswoman Chrissy Gibson said in an email.<br />In an interview, Bianco said that after recovering the damages, he will be ready to move on and sell his company’s 67 acres in Midtown.<br />“We will focus all our attention on the (lawsuit) I feel most confident about,” he said. “When we win, we will get paid for the damages we suffered. At least my investors will get the money the city has taken from them.”<br />Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Howard Coates Jr.’s July 19 dismissal of Crocker Partners’ damages case played no role in his decision, Bianco said. Crocker Partners has since appealed the ruling to the 4th District Court of Appeal.<br />Rather, he said he recently reassessed the situation and determined that even if he won the lawsuits, Midtown redevelopment as he envisioned it would not happen.<br />Crocker Partners had sold its holdings in Midtown but reacquired them five years ago with an eye toward redeveloping an area in need of revitalization.<br />Bianco then teamed up with other landowners in the area, assembling 300 acres for the Midtown project.<br />But protracted negotiations with the city led nowhere, and the council has yet to decide whether to allow residential development in Midtown.<br />Even after a pivotal 2018 City Council vote that did not resolve the issue, Bianco said he still thought it would be possible to create a smaller version of the original project.<br />But other landowners drifted away, pursuing other plans for their properties. Bianco said Glades Plaza is under contract for sale and landowner Cypress Realty of Florida has put its property up for sale.<br />An official with Glades Plaza owner Trademark Property Co. declined comment, and Cypress Realty principal Nader Salour did not respond to an email.<br />“I realized the consortium of property owners is gone,” Bianco said. “It is all breaking apart. Why was I trying to get the relief I asked for (from the courts) when there is not going to be any Midtown development? It would be a waste of time and money.”<br />Crocker Partners is a longtime developer whose projects include iconic Mizner Park. Its holdings in Midtown include Boca Center, The Plaza and One Town Center — properties that Bianco said eventually would be sold.<br />The death knell for Midtown sounded on Jan. 23, 2018, when City Council members indefinitely postponed a vote on proposed land development regulations that would have allowed residential development in Midtown if certain conditions were met.<br />Instead, the council voted to have city staff develop a “small area plan” for Midtown, a decision that kicked final decisions at least a year down the road and badly frustrated Crocker Partners and other landowners.<br />The council eventually passed what city officials say are land development regulations on Jan. 8. They address improvements to streets, lighting, parking and landscaping, as well as building heights, setbacks and facades, but not residential development.<br />Crocker Partners’ now-dismissed first lawsuit asked a judge to compel the city to write land development regulations, which the city had said is now moot because it has done so.<br />The second, a Bert Harris Act case now on appeal, seeks the $137.6 million in damages on grounds the delay in enacting regulations created an impermissible building moratorium that took away Crocker Partners’ property rights.<br />In a July 19 ruling, Judge Coates sided with Boca Raton and against all of Crocker Partners’ legal arguments.<br />His order states that the Bert Harris Act provides compensation to property owners who lose existing or vested zoning rights, but not to property owners who do not receive new development rights. It also states that Crocker Partners retained the ability to build commercial, retail and office, as was allowed before and after the City Council passed new development regulations for Midtown.<br />The now-dismissed third lawsuit, filed March 27, claimed the city made misleading statements in public documents and violated the state’s Sunshine Law to prevent residential development in Midtown.<br />It also made the explosive allegation that city officials, including two or more unidentified City Council members, acted in secret to thwart Crocker Partners’ plans for Midtown. <br />In a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, city officials said Crocker Partners had made “scandalous” but unsupported allegations which “distract from the fact that Plaintiffs have not stated (and cannot state) a claim for a Sunshine Law violation.”</p></div>Boca Raton: Judge sides with city, throws out $137 million Midtown suithttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-judge-sides-with-city-throws-out-137-million-midtown-s2019-07-31T14:18:11.000Z2019-07-31T14:18:11.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Mary Hladky</b></span></p>
<p class="p3">A Palm Beach County circuit judge has thrown out a lawsuit brought by developer and landowner Crocker Partners that sought $137 million in damages from Boca Raton for actions Crocker claims left it unable to redevelop its Midtown property.</p>
<p class="p3">In his July 19 ruling, Judge Howard Coates Jr. sided with Boca Raton across the board, granting the city’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit and ruling against all of Crocker Partners’ legal arguments.</p>
<p class="p3">“We are pleased to have received a favorable order” on the motion to dismiss, the city said in a statement.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners will appeal the ruling, said managing partner Angelo Bianco.</p>
<p class="p3">“We consider it an incorrect application of the law,” Bianco said. “At the end of the day, we believe the 4th District Court of Appeal will rule in our favor.”</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners will continue to pursue two other lawsuits it filed against the city, Bianco said.</p>
<p class="p3">The litigation arose out of unsuccessful efforts by Crocker Partners and other landowners to persuade the city to allow them to build residential units on 300 acres they wanted to redevelop in Midtown, located just east of the Town Center mall.</p>
<p class="p3">After years of negotiations, the City Council on Jan. 23, 2018, was to vote on proposed regulations that would have allowed residential development. But the council indefinitely postponed that vote and instead agreed to have city staff prepare a “small area plan” for Midtown — a decision that stymied the landowners’ ability to move ahead with redevelopment.</p>
<p class="p3">The city abruptly halted small area planning on Oct. 9 and passed a resolution stating the planning was concluded on Nov. 14. Early this year, the City Council approved an ordinance that enacted land development regulations for Midtown that allowed for cosmetic improvements but did not include any residential development.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners first sued on May 23, 2018, seeking to have a judge compel the city to write land development regulations for Midtown, and to rule that the council’s delay in adopting them and creating a small area plan were illegal.</p>
<p class="p3">It followed that up with a Bert Harris Act lawsuit on Oct. 23 seeking $137 million in damages caused by its inability to redevelop its land. The act is intended to protect the rights of property owners when a government restricts or limits their private property rights.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners’ third lawsuit, filed on March 27, claims the city made misleading statements in public documents and violated the state’s Sunshine Law to prevent residential development in Midtown. It also accused city officials, including unidentified City Council members, of acting in secret to thwart its plans for Midtown.</p>
<p class="p3">Coates’ order states that the Bert Harris Act provides compensation to property owners who lose existing or vested zoning rights, but not to property owners who do not receive new development rights.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners retained the ability to build commercial, retail and offices, as was allowed both before and after the council passed new ordinances pertaining to Midtown, the order states.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners contended it had a reasonable belief that the city would allow residential development in Midtown because the area’s land use designation permitted residential. The small area plan process also gave Crocker Partners reason to believe residential would be allowed because it was discussed and city residents generally did not oppose it.</p>
<p class="p3">Coates rejected that, saying it was not a reasonable expectation.</p>
<p class="p3">“Further, to allow such expectations to be founded on comments made by staff, at workshops, or even in council meetings, in the absence of a final act or decision by the legislative body, would open the flood gates to potential claims of parties based on what was said as opposed to what was actually done by a governing body,” he wrote.</p>
<p class="p3">In a footnote, Coates also rejected Crocker Partners’ claim that the council’s delay in creating land development regulations for Midtown created an illegal building moratorium. A moratorium temporarily prevents permitted uses of land, but residential development has never been permitted for Midtown, he wrote. <span class="s2">Ú</span></p></div>Delray Beach: Fired manager files suit against cityhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/delray-beach-fired-manager-files-suit-against-city2019-05-02T18:00:00.000Z2019-05-02T18:00:00.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Jane Smith</strong></p>
<p> Ex-Delray Beach City Manager Mark Lauzier sued the city on April 29, claiming his firing was in retaliation for not allowing the mayor to fly her 15-year-old son to Tallahassee at taxpayers’ expense.</p>
<p> <a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960866476,original{{/staticFileLink}}" target="_blank"><img src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960866476,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-left" alt="7960866476?profile=original" /></a>Lauzier was fired by the City Commission at a March 1 public meeting after the city’s internal auditor testified about “questionable hiring and promotion practices” and other red flags raised earlier this year.</p>
<p> Lauzier’s Palm Beach County Circuit Court lawsuit, though, gives another reason to explain his firing. Three days before he was fired, Lauzier denied Mayor Shelly Petrolia’s request to have the city pay $291 for her son’s plane ticket to Tallahassee, according to the lawsuit. </p>
<p> Petrolia had charged two Tallahassee plane tickets on a city purchasing credit card, which she is allowed to do provided she reimburses the city.</p>
<p> Both were going to the state capital for the first week of the legislative session, she had said. The mayor was going to lobby state representatives and senators during Palm Beach County Days. Her son, Anthony, was going to be a senate page for one week.</p>
<p> The mayor wanted them to be on the same flight in case her son got bumped, she had said. Petrolia reimbursed the city the following day, Feb. 26.</p>
<p> Petrolia declined to comment about the lawsuit on the advice of the city attorney.</p>
<p> Lauzier’s lawsuit claims his firing violates the state’s Whistleblower Act. The law protects workers from retaliation after they report unethical or illegal acts by their employers.</p>
<p> But, it was Commissioner Ryan Boylston who wanted to call the special meeting. He had met with the city’s internal auditor, Julie Davidyan, in late February to listen to her concerns about the city manager.</p>
<p> Boylston decided to think about her concerns over the weekend and met with Lauzier on Feb. 26.</p>
<p> But Boylston wasn’t satisfied with Lauzier’s answers and wanted to call the commission together to discuss the auditor’s concerns. City policy, though, allows only the city manager and mayor to call a meeting.</p>
<p> Boylston then reached the city attorney, who called the mayor to let her know that a colleague wanted to hold a special meeting. The city attorney explained why, and the mayor agreed to call the meeting.</p>
<p> Six weeks before Lauzier was fired, he received a 4 percent raise, the lawsuit says — bolstering his claim that he was wrongfully fired.</p>
<p> But, the lawsuit didn’t say the pay vote was 3 to 2. The mayor and Commissioner Shirley Johnson voted against giving Lauzier a raise.</p>
<p> At an annual salary of $244,000, Lauzier was the highest paid Delray Beach employee.</p>
<p> As the city manager, he had the power to hire and promote, the lawsuit says. He is seeking severance to cover five months of pay and benefits, seven months of paid leave and a year of health insurance benefits.</p>
<p> His lawsuit seeks a jury trial. </p>
<p> On April 5, Lauzier’s attorney, Isidro Garcia, had sent a demand letter to the city, seeking $500,000. Garcia’s letter said Lauzier was owed a minimum of $279,200 for 20 weeks of pay at his current salary, health insurance benefits for one year and earned leave, sick and vacation days. The remaining amount was for damages to his reputation and to his good name.</p>
<p> The city’s outside counsel responded in a mid-April letter that read, “Mr. Lauzier’s claims are wholly without merit.”</p>
<p> Davidyan presented her findings to city commissioners individually and to the City Commission on March 1, consistent with the City Charter, attorney Brett Schneider wrote to Garcia.</p>
<p> Schneider’s response also states that Lauzier’s rights were not violated under Amendment 14 of the United States constitution because he was given sufficient opportunity to clear his name at the March 1 meeting.</p>
<p> Schneider also wrote the city is willing to allow Lauzier to appear before the City Commission for “the specific purpose of clearing his name.”</p>
<p> As to the whistleblower charge, Schneider wrote: “Mayor Petrolia was specifically told that she could purchase tickets and other items for her son using the city’s credit card, provided she reimbursed the city for said charges (which she did).”</p>
<p> Even so, the city is willing to meet in pretrial mediation, according to Schneider’s letter. The city gave Lauzier and his attorney until April 19 to respond.</p>
<p> Their answer was the Whistleblower lawsuit.</p></div>Gulf Stream: Town, O’Boyle at odds over legal feeshttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/gulf-stream-town-o-boyle-at-odds-over-legal-fees2019-05-01T16:42:45.000Z2019-05-01T16:42:45.000ZThe Coastal Starhttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/TheCoastalStar<div><p><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong><br /> <br />Resident Martin O’Boyle and town officials are girding again for a court battle — this time over how much O’Boyle’s attorneys should be paid in a public records case they won.<br /> O’Boyle’s legal team tallied up its costs at $61,800 and offered to settle the debt for $35,000, Gulf Stream’s outside attorney, Robert Sweetapple, told town commissioners April 12.<br /> Commissioners rejected the settlement offer after Sweetapple told them an expert who reviewed the bills decided even $35,000 was not reasonable. He said he would argue Gulf Stream should pay $10,000.<br /> “At the O’Boyle Law Firm, in their billings, there are over one dozen time keepers who put in billing on this matter — over a dozen,” Sweetapple said. <br />“On this small public-records case,” Mayor Scott Morgan said.<br /> Sweetapple said the firm, which is headed by O’Boyle’s son, Jonathan, said it worked 44,000 hours compared to 8,700 hours the town’s legal team needed.<br /> “It appears to me to be a classic case of churning,” Morgan said. <br /> But Sweetapple acknowledged the town might not win its argument.<br />“There’s always a risk that a judge is just going to, you know, split the baby,” he said.<br /> An April 23 hearing to decide the fees was postponed after Elaine Johnson James, another O’Boyle attorney, told the Circuit Court judge there was not enough time to prepare following the Town Commission’s decision to fight. Among other conflicts, James had been subpoenaed for a hearing that day on the validity of a divorcing Gulf Stream couple’s prenuptial agreement.<br /> “The imminent Easter weekend, and the schedules of the parties, their counsel and the witnesses make it impracticable to complete the discovery and report on the issues as to which there is disagreement before April 23, 2019,” James wrote in her motion.<br /> The hearing will be rescheduled for some time in August or September, Judge Edward Artau said.<br /> Last December, the town and O’Boyle resolved nine other lawsuits between them, with Gulf Stream admitting that it violated the state’s Public Records Act in four cases and paying O’Boyle $15,000 to drop the remaining five.<br /> Both sides are negotiating how much O’Boyle’s attorneys will be paid in the four cases settled in his favor. Each party is paying its own legal bills in the five dismissed suits.<br /> The nine cases were all that were left of 44 lawsuits that arose from more than 2,500 requests for public records by O’Boyle and fellow resident Chris O’Hare, town officials said. The town and O’Hare signed a settlement in 2017.<br /> <strong>In other town business</strong> on April 12, a Comcast subcontractor told commissioners that work to connect homes via underground conduits would take until the end of June. Previously he had estimated he would finish in April.</p></div>Boca Raton: City wants court to dismiss drowning lawsuithttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-city-wants-court-to-dismiss-drowning-lawsuit2019-05-01T14:44:46.000Z2019-05-01T14:44:46.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Mary Hladky</b></span></p>
<p class="p2">The city has asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed against it after Francis Roselin drowned during Boca Bash last year.</p>
<p class="p3">Before being reported missing, Roselin, 32, of West Palm Beach, was last seen swimming in Lake Boca on April 29, 2018, during the popular boating party. His body was found five hours later at the bottom of the lake.</p>
<p class="p3">Tamekia Rich, the mother of Roselin’s 5-year-old daughter, A’niylah, and the personal representative of Roselin’s estate, filed the lawsuit in Palm Beach County Circuit Court, contending the city and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission did not regulate or control the “wild and overcrowded” event.</p>
<p class="p3">She also argued that the city and wildlife commission were negligent because they allowed too many boats into Lake Boca and failed to remove boats when it became apparent they caused a hazard to public safety.</p>
<p class="p3">In its motion to dismiss filed on April 5, the city countered that it did not host or sponsor Boca Bash and that Rich had failed to state a valid liability claim.</p>
<p class="p3">Lake Boca is part of the Intracoastal Waterway, which the city does not own and does not have the authority under Florida law to regulate. Further, previous court rulings have established that cites are immune from lawsuits based on claims like Rich’s, the motion states.</p>
<p class="p3">“While the city acknowledges that Mr. Roselin’s passing was a tragic event, it is simply not an occurrence for which municipal liability can be imposed,” the motion states. “All of the alleged ‘duties’ allegedly ‘breached’ by the city are discretionary functions from which the city is immune.” </p></div>Boca Raton: Environmental board will review second beachfront proposalhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-environmental-board-will-review-second-beachfront-prop2019-04-03T14:34:24.000Z2019-04-03T14:34:24.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960850274,original{{/staticFileLink}}" target="_blank"><img src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960850274,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-center" alt="7960850274?profile=original" /></a></p>
<p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Steve Plunkett</b></span></p>
<p class="p3">Hot on the heels of its January recommendation not to grant permission to build a duplex on the beach, the city’s Environmental Advisory Board this month will consider an application to build an equally controversial mini-mansion two lots south.</p>
<p class="p3">The City Council caused a public outcry in late 2015 when it approved a zoning variance for the proposed four-story home at 2500 N. Ocean Blvd. The state Department of Environmental Protection issued a notice to proceed, certifying that the project would not “weaken, damage or destroy the integrity of the beach and dune system.”</p>
<p class="p3">The EAB review is the last step before a final council vote. The environmental board will meet at 5:30 p.m. April 10 in the council chambers at City Hall. Plans call for a single-family structure with 10,432 square feet of habitable space.</p>
<p class="p3">The EAB recommended Jan. 10 that a variance to build a four-story duplex east of the Coastal Construction Control Line at 2600 N. Ocean be denied.</p>
<p class="p3">“Environmentally the Coastal Control Line is there for a reason, and it was put there for a good reason,” advisory board Chairman Stephen Alley said then.</p>
<p class="p3">Robert Sweetapple, the attorney for the applicant at 2600, asked the Palm Beach County Circuit Court on March 28 to grant a “writ of certiorari” and review the EAB and City Council’s decision and proceedings and determine whether any irregularities occurred.</p>
<p class="p3">Seeking such a writ is a prelude to filing a Bert Harris Act lawsuit for damages resulting from a government taking of private property. Sweetapple said a recent appraisal indirectly requested by Boca Raton valued 2600 N. Ocean at $7.2 million when developed. </p>
<p class="p3">Separately, Sweetapple asked a judge March 15 to order Boca Raton to turn over social media postings, cellphone texts and emails from and to City Council members and EAB members he said the city has unlawfully withheld. <span class="s2">Ú</span></p></div>Boca Raton: New Crocker suit alleges Sunshine Law violationhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-new-crocker-suit-alleges-sunshine-law-violation2019-04-03T14:29:25.000Z2019-04-03T14:29:25.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Mary Hladky</b></span></p>
<p class="p2">A third lawsuit filed by developer and landowner Crocker Partners claims the city made misleading statements in public documents and violated the state’s Sunshine Law to prevent residential development in Midtown.</p>
<p class="p3">Emails and documents Crocker Partners obtained during the discovery process for two previous lawsuits it filed against the city show that city officials, including two or more unidentified Boca Raton City Council members, acted in secret to thwart its plans for Midtown, the lawsuit states.</p>
<p class="p3">“It really is a paper trail that shows this concerted effort to deceive and delay, and it appears to be led by the city attorney and one or more of the council,” said Crocker Partners managing partner Angelo Bianco, referring to City Attorney Diana Grub Frieser.</p>
<p class="p3"><span class="Apple-tab-span"><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960855286,original{{/staticFileLink}}" target="_blank"><img src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960855286,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-left" alt="7960855286?profile=original" /></a></span>City officials declined to comment on the allegations made in Palm Beach County Circuit Court.</p>
<p class="p3">“The city has not been served with this lawsuit,” city spokeswoman Chrissy Gibson said in a March 29 email. “If and when the city is served with the lawsuit, we will review it and prepare an appropriate and timely response.”</p>
<p class="p3">Midtown landowners, including Crocker Partners and Cypress Realty of Florida, joined forces about four years ago in an ambitious plan to redevelop 300 acres west of Interstate 95 and east of the Town Center mall where no residential development is now permitted.</p>
<p class="p3">They envisioned a “live, work, play” project where people would live in as many as 2,500 residential units and walk or take shuttles to their jobs, shopping and restaurants.</p>
<p class="p3">For that to happen, the city would have to approve land development regulations allowing residential development in the area.</p>
<p class="p3">But on Jan. 23, 2018, City Council members indefinitely postponed a vote on proposed regulations that would have allowed residential development if certain conditions were met.</p>
<p class="p3">Instead, the council voted to have city staff develop a “small area plan” for Midtown, an idea proposed by council member Andrea O’Rourke. That work would delay finalizing and enacting the regulations by about a year.</p>
<p class="p3">Frustrated by the delay, Crocker Partners and Cypress Realty filed lawsuits.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners’ third lawsuit, filed on March 27, states that the city misrepresented in a memorandum to the City Council what transpired at a May “public visioning session,” where residents offered their thoughts on how Midtown should be redeveloped.</p>
<p class="p3">The memorandum, first drafted by Development Services Director Brandon Schaad and a consultant, was changed by Deputy City Manager George Brown to make it appear as if many residents opposed any residential development, the lawsuit states.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners contends that residents attending the session generally favored low-density or mid-level-density development.</p>
<p class="p3"><i>The Coastal Star</i> attended the session, where residents were divided into groups that came up with recommendations.</p>
<p class="p3">Of those groups that directly addressed residential development, only one opposed it and another implied opposition. The rest called for low-density development. Two suggested no more than 600 units be allowed, and one proposed no more than 1,250.</p>
<p class="p3">The lawsuit also outlines how the city abruptly halted the creation of the small area plan in November.</p>
<p class="p3">It includes verbatim comments from Deputy Mayor Jeremy Rodgers and Mayor Scott Singer at an Oct. 9 meeting that indicated work on the small area plan was proceeding. A second public session was still being planned and an email from Schaad said the session would be held on Dec. 4.</p>
<p class="p3">But on Nov. 14, the City Council unanimously passed a resolution that states that the small area plan exercise “was concluded” by City Council consensus on Oct. 9 and that the council directed city staff to proceed with drafting land development regulations.</p>
<p class="p3">The lawsuit cites an email sent the next day by Schaad to the consultant handling the public sessions that stated he did not need to do any more work.</p>
<p class="p3">On Dec. 4, instead of holding a public session similar to the one in May, Schaad met with city residents to outline the city’s plans for Midtown, which included gradual improvements to streets, street lighting, landscaping and the like, but did not include any residential development.</p>
<p class="p3">The City Council unanimously approved an ordinance on Jan. 8 that includes the city’s plans for Midtown that Schaad presented to residents the month before. City officials have said they enacted land development regulations for Midtown by adopting the ordinance.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners alleges, without offering proof, that on three occasions two or more City Council members secretly communicated with each other through a city official, who is not named.</p>
<p class="p3">The meetings resulted in Brown’s being instructed to edit the memorandum to the council, the termination of the small area planning exercise, and an agreement to adopt the Midtown ordinance, the lawsuit states.</p>
<p class="p3">Such meetings, if held, would violate the Sunshine Law that requires City Council decisions be made during public meetings.</p>
<p class="p3">“The council was obligated to comply with the Sunshine Law but, instead, circumvented its public meeting requirements,” the lawsuit states. “These meetings were not noticed or open to the public. … Such secret meetings deprived the public of any contemporaneous knowledge of what was going on and appeared to be designed to prevent discussion of any kind as to the merits of the council’s actions.”</p>
<p class="p3">Asked why Crocker Partners provided no proof, Bianco said, “From the evidence we have been able to put together, the change in council members’ public statements from one meeting to the next can’t be explained in any other way. … We have email correspondence that things were happening behind the scenes.”</p>
<p class="p3">Corroborating evidence could be added to the court file as the case proceeds.</p>
<p class="p3">The lawsuit asks a judge to invalidate the Midtown ordinance and city resolution. It also asks for an order that the city hold new meetings where decisions on Midtown redevelopment would be made in public.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners, which owns 67 acres, sued the city in October, seeking $137.6 million in damages on grounds that the delay created an impermissible building moratorium that took away its property rights.</p>
<p class="p3">The company filed a separate legal action in May, asking a judge to compel the city to write the regulations. The city asked the court to dismiss the case in February, saying it is moot because the city has now adopted land development regulations for Midtown.</p>
<p class="p3">Cypress Realty, which owns 10.2 acres, sued in October, asking that the city be required to process its August development application. Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Jeffrey Dana Gillen dismissed the lawsuit on Jan. 15, and Cypress Realty immediately appealed to the 4th District Court of Appeal in West Palm Beach. <span class="s2">Ú</span></p></div>Boca Raton: Blog opens council member to questioning in Crocker lawsuithttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-blog-opens-council-member-to-questioning-in-crocker-la2019-02-27T14:03:17.000Z2019-02-27T14:03:17.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Mary Hladky</b></span></p>
<p class="p2">Palm Beach County Circuit Court Judge Howard K. Coates Jr. has ruled that Boca Raton City Council member Andrea O’Rourke can be questioned by attorneys for Crocker Partners as part of the legal battle between the developer and the city over redevelopment of Midtown.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners also had sought to depose Mayor Scott Singer, Deputy Mayor Jeremy Rodgers and other high-ranking city officials.</p>
<p class="p3">Coates’ Feb. 15 order states that Singer, Rodgers, City Manager Leif Ahnell and Assistant City Manager Michael Woika can’t be deposed for now.</p>
<p class="p3">Deputy City Manager George Brown and Development Services Director Brandon Schaad will be deposed because the city did not object. Schaad was questioned in January, but his deposition is not yet complete.</p>
<p class="p3">It is unusual for elected officials to be questioned as part of litigation because of legislative privilege, which protects them from having to testify about their actions while performing their duties.</p>
<p class="p3">But O’Rourke lost that protection, Coates held, when she wrote on her personal blog that a majority of council members voted in favor of her motion to develop a “small area plan” for Midtown and postponed a vote on proposed land development regulations that set a framework for how Midtown could be redeveloped. Midtown would be built just east of the Town Center at Boca Raton.</p>
<p class="p3">Coates’ order said that O’Rourke “made herself subject to deposition” by writing about the council’s actions on her blog. He allowed her to be asked questions only “with respect to the substance” of her Jan. 29, 2018, blog post.</p>
<p class="p3">“I am happy and proud to announce there was a 4-1 decision made to go forward with a city-generated vision of Midtown Boca …”<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span> she wrote, in part. “This allows us to have city planners establish parameters with a workshop of the overall vision for this area, including community input.”</p>
<p class="p3">A deposition date had not been set as of Feb. 26.</p>
<p class="p3">“Her blog was rather expansive in its treatment of what her vision was for the development of the area,” said attorney Henry Handler, who represents Crocker Partners. “I think I have a right to inquire.”</p>
<p class="p3">Handler said Singer, Rodgers, Ahnell and Woika could be deposed in the future if case discovery reveals they have relevant testimony not covered by legislative privilege.</p>
<p class="p3">In another development in the case, the city filed a motion for summary judgment on Feb. 14 asking that the case be dismissed.</p>
<p class="p3">Handler said that motion would not block O’Rourke’s deposition.</p>
<p class="p3">The Jan. 23, 2018, council decisions on the small area plan and land development regulations prompted Crocker Partners and Cypress Realty of Florida, a landowner that had worked with Crocker Partners on Midtown planning, to sue the city.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners is seeking $137.6 million in damages. Cypress Realty is asking the court to require that the city process its development application.</p>
<p class="p3">Both contended that the city’s failure to adopt land development regulations stifled their ability to redevelop their properties. Crocker Partners said the regulation delay created an impermissible building moratorium that took away its property rights.</p>
<p class="p3">Circuit Court Judge Jeffrey Dana Gillen tossed out Cypress Realty’s lawsuit on Jan. 15, although he left open the possibility that the company could use a different legal method to press its case. Cypress Realty immediately appealed that order to the 4th District Court of Appeal in West Palm Beach.</p>
<p class="p3">Cypress Realty principal Nader Salour did not return calls seeking comment.</p>
<p class="p3">City Council members met in executive session Feb. 11 to discuss Crocker Partners’ lawsuit, including possible settlement. City officials can’t discuss what transpired during that private meeting.</p>
<p class="p3">Three days later, the city asked that the case be dismissed.</p>
<p class="p3">The city contended that the case is moot because it has now adopted land development regulations for Midtown.</p>
<p class="p3">The city concluded work on the small area plan Nov. 14.</p>
<p class="p3">City staff incorporated some of the ideas from the small area plan into an ordinance that includes land development regulations for Midtown.</p>
<p class="p3">The City Council approved the ordinance on Jan. 8.</p>
<p class="p3">While Crocker Partners and Cypress Realty wanted to build residential units in Midtown, the ordinance does not include residential development. It focuses on improvements to streets, street lighting, parking, landscaping and crosswalks and would make the area more walkable. It also addresses building heights, setbacks and facades.</p>
<p class="p3">In its motion, the city contends it has enacted land development regulations by adopting the ordinance.</p>
<p class="p3">“Thus, any controversy between the city and the plaintiffs has been rendered moot, and the court has lost jurisdiction to issue a declaration,” the motion states.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners had not responded to the city’s motion as of Feb. 26. Handler declined to comment, saying he would file his response with the court.</p>
<p class="p3">A court hearing on the motion has been set for Aug. 2.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners managing partner Angelo Bianco did not immediately return a call for comment on Feb. 26. <span class="s2">Ú</span></p></div>Gulf Stream: O’Boyle, town settle final 9 lawsuitshttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/gulf-stream-o-boyle-town-settle-final-9-lawsuits2019-01-02T18:48:06.000Z2019-01-02T18:48:06.000ZThe Coastal Starhttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/TheCoastalStar<div><p style="text-align:center;"><span style="font-size:18pt;">Mayor: $15,000 payment saves untold legal fees</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong></p>
<p>Gulf Stream and Martin O’Boyle have resolved the nine remaining lawsuits between them, with the town admitting that it violated the state’s Public Records Act in four cases and paying its litigious resident $15,000 to drop five others.<br /> Both sides will go to mediation in hopes of deciding how much Gulf Stream will pay O’Boyle’s attorneys in the four cases settled in his favor. Each party will pay its own legal bills in the five dismissed suits.<br /> “This is a business decision, and one that the [Town] Commission believes serves the best interests of the town by capping all legal fees,” Mayor Scott Morgan said as he announced the settlement Dec. 14.<br /> The nine cases in the settlement were all that were left of 44 lawsuits that arose from more than 2,500 requests for public records by O’Boyle and resident Chris O’Hare, Morgan said.<br /> The town and O’Hare signed a settlement in June 2017.<br /> “In fiscal year ’17-18, we secured dismissals or victories in seven public records cases with one case decided adversely to the town,” the mayor said. “Previously, the town prevailed or secured dismissals in another 27 cases.”<br /> O’Boyle and the town will continue to litigate the amount Gulf Stream must pay O’Boyle’s attorneys for the case he won. His lawyers have said they are owed more than $650,000; the town’s attorneys contend their rivals should get no more than $20,000. <br /> Morgan credited Gulf Stream’s aggressive posture in the cases as essential to reaching the settlement and in changing state law on public records requests. Now judges in Florida can rule a request “improper” or “frivolous,” making the requestor liable for an agency’s attorney fees. Before, even if the agency won it still had to pay its own fees in all cases.<br /> <a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960830666,original{{/staticFileLink}}" target="_blank"><img src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960830666,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-left" alt="7960830666?profile=original" /></a>O’Boyle said what he considers biased news coverage of his lawsuits meant it took more time to settle the disputes.<br /> “They would have been [resolved] a long time ago if <em>The Coastal Star</em> hadn’t written all those hit pieces which emboldened the town,” O’Boyle said.<br /> Morgan said the settlement of any suit benefits both sides.<br /> “This resolution hopefully brings an end to the public records abuse and the litigation abuse that this town has been subjected to. In that sense this is a win for the town,” Morgan said. “From Mr. O’Boyle’s standpoint, it brings an end to his emotional involvement, his expenses, and I think it’s a win for him in that sense as well.”<br />O’Boyle disputed the mayor’s characterization of his records requests as abuse.<br />“I don’t know how they can say it’s frivolous when they admitted that they wrongfully withheld documents in violation of the law,” O’Boyle said.<br />The town would have been better off paying someone $35,000 a year to handle such requests rather than spend hundreds of thousands on attorney fees, O’Boyle added. “I’m delighted that they have finally admitted wrongdoing,” he said. <br /> As part of the settlement O’Boyle agreed to pay $250 upfront when he asks for public records in the future, with the money returned to him minus the town’s costs of responding to his request.<br /> This “facilitation fee” was also in Gulf Stream’s settlement with O’Hare. <br /> O’Boyle and O’Hare started flooding the town with requests for public records in 2013, eventually making more than 2,500 requests and filing dozens of lawsuits. The town raised property taxes 40 percent to pay for outside lawyers and additional staff and equipment to handle the requests.</p></div>Gulf Stream: Town, O'Boyle signal end to public records warhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/gulf-stream-town-o-boyle-signal-end-to-public-records-war2018-12-14T19:00:00.000Z2018-12-14T19:00:00.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><div><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong></div>
<div>Gulf Stream and Martin O'Boyle have resolved nine lawsuits between them, with the town admitting that it violated the state's Public Records Act in four cases and paying its litigious resident $15,000 to drop five others.</div>
<div>Both sides will go to a mediator in hopes of deciding how much Gulf Stream will pay O'Boyle's attorneys in the four cases settled in his favor.</div>
<div>"This is a business decision, and one that the [Town] Commission believes serves the best interests of the town by capping all legal fees," Mayor Scott Morgan said as he announced the settlement Dec. 14.</div>
<div>The nine cases in the settlement were all that remained of 44 lawsuits that arose from more than 2,500 requests for public records by O'Boyle and resident Chris O'Hare, Morgan said.</div>
<div>The town and O'Hare signed a settlement in June 2017.</div>
<div>"In fiscal year' 17-18, we secured dismissals or victories in seven public records cases with one case decided adversely to the town," the mayor said. "Previously, the town prevailed or secured dismissals in another 27 cases."</div>
<div>Morgan credited Gulf Stream's aggressive posture in the cases as essential to reaching the settlement with O'Boyle and also in changing state law on public records requests. Now judges have discretion on whether to award attorney’s fees when someone successfully sues a government agency for improperly withholding records. Before, legal fees were automatic.</div>
<div>O'Boyle said what he considers biased news coverage of his lawsuits led to it taking more time to settle the disputes.</div>
<div>"They would have been [resolved] a long time ago if<span> </span><i>The Coastal Star</i><span> </span>hadn't written all those hit pieces which emboldened the town," O'Boyle said.</div></div>Delray Beach: Vote on amended Atlantic Avenue height district postponedhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/delray-beach-vote-on-amended-atlantic-avenue-height-district-post2018-10-03T14:58:20.000Z2018-10-03T14:58:20.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Jane Smith</b></span></p>
<p class="p3">Delray Beach Oct. 2 delayed its controversial vote to settle a lawsuit by carving the contested properties from its reduced height district on East Atlantic Avenue.</p>
<p class="p3">City commissioners voted 3-1 to push the vote to Oct. 16 when all five could be present. Vice Mayor Adam Frankel did not attend the Oct. 2 meeting.</p>
<p class="p3">Mayor Shelly Petrolia voted against the postponement. She prefers getting the lawsuit dismissed to preserve the small-town ambience of the downtown.</p>
<p class="p3">The reduced height district covers Atlantic Avenue between Swinton Avenue east to the Intracoastal Waterway.</p>
<p class="p3">When introducing the ordinance that would change the height district, Development Services Director Tim Stillings said it would be moving the district line to the east and staff recommends approval. The<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span> property owners could then<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span> build 4 stories, or 54 feet.</p>
<p class="p3">Only two people spoke.</p>
<p class="p3">Resident Mitzi Kaitz, who usually talks about the city’s golf courses, said the amendment would set a precedent.</p>
<p class="p3">“The beauty of Atlantic Avenue is the low height,” she said.</p>
<p class="p3">The other speaker was Billy Himmelrich, who filed the lawsuit in June.</p>
<p class="p3">“I’ve done everything in my power to make Delray a great place to be. It always was a tight vote,” he said. “I hate to see a tie vote.”</p>
<p class="p3">The City Attorney agreed.</p>
<p class="p3">“A tie vote would mean no action,” Max Lohman said.</p>
<p class="p3">In June, bakery owner Himmelrich and his business partner sued the city for $6.9 million for value that was lost on their properties.</p>
<p class="p3">They own the .65-acre site that houses two buildings and two parking lots across from Old School Square. Himmelrich once used the building that faces the historic site for his Old School Bakery. The bakery now sits on Congress Avenue, west of the interstate.</p>
<p class="p3">Restaurants, Tramonti and Cabana El Rey, occupy the ground floor of the buildings with long-term leases. After the leases expire in 2024, Himmelrich said they would like to develop the property.</p>
<p class="p3">In February 2015, a previous city commission passed the reduced height district for East Atlantic Avenue. The height for new buildings is limited to three stories, or 38 feet. Most residents wanted to preserve the quaint look of the downtown.</p>
<p class="p3">Himmelrich, though, spoke against the changes, saying they would hurt his property values.</p>
<p class="p3">When Himmelrich and part-time resident, David Hosokawa, bought the properties the number of stories was not specified, but the height limit was 48 feet.</p>
<p class="p3">They sued under the Bert Harris Act that protects private property rights. It allows local governments to change their land development rules and requires written notice to affected property owners.</p>
<p class="p3">Himmelrich said he never received the notice, meaning the clock had not started ticking for the one-year time frame for the lawsuit to be filed.</p>
<p class="p3">He wondered about the elaborate lengths the city was going through to settle the lawsuit.</p>
<p class="p3">Even so, Himmelrich signed a settlement agreement on the morning of Oct. 2, awaiting city commission approval.</p>
<p class="p3">The city commission first voted 3-2 on Sept. 4 to exclude the contested properties after a closed commissioner-attorney meeting. There was no discussion and no public comments.</p>
<p class="p3">Commissioner Bill Bathurst and Mayor Petrolia, who often speak about preserving the small-town look of Delray, were on the losing side.</p>
<p class="p3">To carve out the properties, the city voted to amend its height ordinance passed in early 2015 after 18 months of community meetings.</p>
<p class="p3">That meant the amended height ordinance had to be shown to the Downtown Development Authority on Sept. 10 and go before the city’s Planning & Zoning advisory board.</p>
<p class="p3">On Sept. 17, P&Z board member Kevin Osborne asked why were two buildings being pulled out of the district? The board attorney, Bradley Boggs, did not mention that the height ordinance was changing to settle a lawsuit. He said, “It’s a city commission recommendation.”</p>
<p class="p3">Two members asked whether they were setting a precedent with the change. Boggs addressed that indirectly by saying, “If the city didn’t notify all property owners, the affected owners could bring a claim.”</p>
<p class="p3">Then, he said, all downtown property owners will be notified of the change.</p>
<p class="p3">Board member Christina Morrison asked, “Isn’t this spot zoning?”</p>
<p class="p3">Boggs said, “No, it’s just moving a district line.”</p>
<p class="p3">The board voted 5-1, with member Osborne dissenting.</p>
<p class="p3">The amended ordinance came before the city commission on Sept. 25 for its first reading.</p>
<p class="p3">The vote was similar to the one they cast after the Sept. 4 meeting, 3-2, with Petrolia and Bathurst voting no.</p>
<p class="p3">Commissioner Ryan Boylston said he wanted to clarify for the public that only the carved-out property owners would be able to build four stories. </p></div>Along the Coast: Municipalities scramble to make live-streamed events ADA complianthttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/along-the-coast-municipalities-scramble-to-make-live-streamed-eve2018-07-04T15:08:51.000Z2018-07-04T15:08:51.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Rich Pollack</b></span></p>
<p class="p2">When Highland Beach residents tuned into their local public access channel or logged on to the town’s website late last month expecting to see live video streaming of the Town Commission workshop, they discovered they were no longer able to watch the meeting in progress.</p>
<p class="p3">A technical glitch maybe?</p>
<p class="p3">Not quite. Instead, the decision by the town to temporarily stop live-streaming meetings turned out to be a precautionary move to avert legal action for not complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act.</p>
<p class="p3">Other affected South Palm Beach County cities include Lake Worth and Delray Beach.</p>
<p class="p3">The act, it turns out, requires governments to ensure that website content and other content provided to the public be accessible to people with disabilities, including those who have trouble hearing.</p>
<p class="p3">“The goal is to make sure there is accessibility to video and audio content for people who are hard of hearing or deaf,” said Miami attorney J. Courtney Cunningham, who has filed more than 30 lawsuits against state, county and local governments in hopes of bringing them into compliance.</p>
<p class="p3">One of the suits Cunningham filed on behalf of a hearing-impaired client was against the city of West Palm Beach. Soon after he filed the suit in April, the attorney said, the city began offering closed captioning on its live stream of meetings as well as on archived recordings.</p>
<p class="p3">That suit, and others like it, including one in St. Lucie County, came to the attention of attorney Glen Torcivia and attorneys in his firm, which represents Highland Beach, Ocean Ridge, South Palm Beach and several other South Florida communities.</p>
<p class="p3">Torcivia said his firm then sent a notice out to clients advising of the possibility of lawsuits if they did not have closed captioning available.</p>
<p class="p3">That led Highland Beach officials, as well as those in Lake Worth, to stop real-time broadcasts of meetings until closed captioning can be added.</p>
<p class="p3">During a recent commission meeting, interim Town Manager William Thrasher said the town is working with its informaton technology firm to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. Live video of meetings could be available as soon as next month or early September. </p>
<p class="p3">Highland Beach residents can view recorded versions of meetings, with closed captioning, on the town’s website usually within two or three days of a meeting.</p>
<p class="p3">Torcivia said he agrees with the reasoning behind making sure everyone has access to public meetings.</p>
<p class="p3">“It’s the right thing to do as long as it’s reasonable to make the accommodations,” he said.</p>
<p class="p3">In South Palm Beach County, some of the municipalities with streaming or video recordings of public meetings are already in compliance with the ADA requirements.</p>
<p class="p3">Small towns, including South Palm Beach, Manalapan, Ocean Ridge and Briny Breezes, do not video-record or live-stream their meetings. Gulf Stream, like Boynton Beach, does not live-stream but does offer video-recorded meetings through its YouTube channel, which has closed captioning available. Lantana posts audio-only recordings of its meetings.</p>
<p class="p3">Delray Beach officials said they are exploring their options after learning about the ADA requirements. Boca Raton recently began offering closed captioning during live streams of its meeting and on recorded meetings.</p>
<p class="p3">Cunningham, who filed his lawsuit against West Palm Beach on behalf of disability rights advocate Eddie Sierra and the National Association of the Deaf, said the U.S. Department of Justice notified local and state governments in 2003 about the ADA requirement to make online content accessible to hearing-impaired people.</p>
<p class="p3">For whatever reason, compliance was sporadic at best. Torcivia speculated that perhaps the cost of adding closed captioning was prohibitive 15 years ago and is now more affordable.</p>
<p class="p3">Cunningham, who has a son with a disability, said he notifies municipalities by mail if it is discovered they are not in compliance before filing a lawsuit.</p>
<p class="p3">Among those the attorney is suing on behalf of the National Association of the Deaf is the state of Florida, which Sierra and the association contend does not provide closed captioning of legislative activity and therefore is violating the ADA. </p></div>Boca Raton: Crocker sues city in bid to save Midtown planhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-crocker-sues-city-in-bid-to-save-midtown-plan2018-05-30T15:45:10.000Z2018-05-30T15:45:10.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p class="p1"><span class="s1"><b>By Mary Hladky</b></span></p>
<p class="p2">Developer and landowner Crocker Partners is making another attempt to keep its proposed Midtown development alive, this time by filing a lawsuit that accuses the city of treating Crocker Partners differently from other property owners and not following its normal procedures for project approval.</p>
<p class="p3">The lawsuit, filed May 23, seeks to have a judge compel the city to write land development regulations for Midtown. It also asks a judge to rule that the Boca Raton City Council’s delay in adopting those regulations and its Jan. 23 vote to develop a “small area plan” for Midtown instead are illegal and invalid.</p>
<p class="p3">It takes aim at requirements the city imposed on Midtown, which Crocker Partners has long claimed are unconstitutional and create an impermissible building moratorium.</p>
<p class="p3">They include a mandate that a new Tri-Rail station be built and operational, all street infrastructure be completed, and improvements to Military Trail finalized before the proposed construction of 2,500 residential units would be approved.</p>
<p class="p3">No similar requirements were put in place before the city established regulations for the Northwest planned mobility development in 2015, the lawsuit states. Midtown also is a proposed planned mobility development.</p>
<p class="p3">The lawsuit amounts to asking the city “to do its job” by approving the regulations for Midtown that would allow Crocker Partners to submit development plans to the city, said Crocker Partners managing partner Angelo Bianco.</p>
<p class="p3">“They were supposed to do this in 2011. We are asking a judge to get them to do it,” he said.</p>
<p class="p3">A city spokeswoman said May 24 that the city is reviewing the complaint.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners told the city in April that it planned to file a lawsuit seeking $137 million because the approval delays left it unable to redevelop three properties it owns in Midtown — Boca Center, The Plaza, and One Town Center.</p>
<p class="p3">Bianco said if he prevails on the most recent legal action, he would abandon plans to seek that compensation.</p>
<p class="p3">“The last thing I want to do is hurt the taxpayer,” he said.</p>
<p class="p3">Crocker Partners originally joined with other landowners in the Midtown area in an ambitious plan to redevelop about 300 acres between Interstate 95 and the Town Center mall. They envisioned a “live, work, play” transit-oriented development where people would live in up to 2,500 new residential units and walk or take shuttles to their jobs, shopping and restaurants.</p>
<p class="p3">But delays in the city’s creation of land development regulations caused the group to break up, and some are moving ahead with individual redevelopment plans. They include mall owner Simon Property Group, the now-closed Sears building owner Seritage Growth Properties and Glades Plaza owner Trademark Property Co.</p>
<p class="p3">Even so, Bianco thinks he can create a smaller version of Midtown, with fewer residential units, on about 80 acres that Crocker Partners controls, provided the city sets parameters for what can be built in area.</p>
<p class="p3">The city showed no signs of moving quickly before the lawsuit was filed. In what appears to be a move back to the starting gate on what Midtown should be, it has hired two consultants, Community Marine and Water Resource Planning and LARCH Design Plus, to help it create a small area plan. The contracts total nearly $50,000.</p>
<p class="p3">The city now expects to have a small area plan crafted no later then December, which would then be formally adopted by the City Council, a city spokeswoman said.</p>
<p class="p3">The consultants held a “public visioning session” May 23 to let city residents offer their thoughts about how Midtown could be redeveloped. About 120 residents attended the session at the Spanish River Library.</p>
<p class="p3">They split into groups, and each came up with general ideas on what Midtown should look like. Each plan was different, but they shared many similar ideas, such as low density, low- or mid-rise buildings, pedestrian friendly, lots of green space and improvements to Military Trail. Residential units would number no more than 1,250, and many attendees wanted fewer than that.</p>
<p class="p3">Jim Anaston-Karas, principal of Community Marine and Water Resource Planning, said another public session would be held in September and a final plan would be ready in October. </p></div>Along the Coast: Developer files, drops libel suit against Coastal Starhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/along-the-coast-developer-files-drops-libel-suit-against-coastal-2017-09-29T17:24:58.000Z2017-09-29T17:24:58.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Noreen Marcus</strong></p>
<p></p>
<p> A developer sued <i>The Coastal Star</i> alleging libel and then abruptly dropped the lawsuit a month later.</p>
<p> The suit filed Aug. 30 in Palm Beach Circuit Court by Hudson Holdings and its principal Steven Michael claimed the newspaper defamed both of them through a false connection to criminal activity. Editor Mary Kate Leming and reporter Jane Smith were named as individual defendants.</p>
<p> The suit seeking $40 million in actual damages and $20 million in punitive damages was assigned to Judge David French.</p>
<p> Developer Michael wants to build a 4.4-acre, mixed-use project at Swinton and Atlantic avenues, at the south end of the Old School Square Historic Arts District in Delray Beach.</p>
<p> The project, known as Midtown Delray Beach, is on hold. The city’s Historic Preservation Board rejected the developer’s site plan and Hudson submitted a revised plan on Sept. 6.</p>
<p> On Sept. 28 Michael’s lawyer Scott Weires filed a two-paragraph “notice of voluntary dismissal” that doesn’t give a reason for dropping the lawsuit.</p>
<p> Reached the next day, Michael said, “We just wanted to have accurate reporting and we’re not interested in being in any litigation with the newspaper or anybody. We just wanted honest reporting and we hope in the future that’s what will happen.”</p>
<p> Robert Rivas, attorney for <i>The Coastal Star</i>, denied that his client published false information. He had planned to file a complaint that Michael’s lawsuit violated Florida's anti-SLAPP law. An illegal “strategic lawsuit against public participation” — or SLAPP suit — is one that aims to silence critics engaged in a democratic process.</p>
<p> “Hudson Holdings is trying to intimidate and frighten the opposition,” said Rivas, of Sachs Sax Caplan in Tallahassee, before the suit was withdrawn. “The <i>Coastal Star</i> story was accurate and did not link Hudson Holdings to any criminal activity.”</p>
<p> The crux of the dispute was an Aug. 2 <i>Coastal Star</i> story about Michael’s proposed Midtown project. In addition to reporting on the project’s status, the story included background on Midtown and another Michael project, the Gulfstream Hotel in Lake Worth.</p>
<p> Under the sub-headline “Midtown ensnared in sober home action,” the story states that “Midtown became entangled with the Palm Beach County State Attorney’s Office’s Sober Homes Task Force” last fall. It says that brothers Bryan and Patrick Norquist “were arrested on patient-brokering charges” and states that two addresses were listed on the arrest document — “20 S. Swinton Ave., the headquarters for Hudson Holdings, and 48 SE First Ave.”</p>
<p> The story also had Michael’s response: “Michael said he knew about the sober home on Southeast First Avenue, but denied that any recovery operation was run out of the Hudson Holdings headquarters. He also said he’s losing rental income since the sober home on Southeast First Avenue was forced to close.”</p>
<p> Michael’s attorney Weires, of Murdoch Weires & Neuman in Boca Raton, disputed Rivas’s SLAPP suit characterization.</p>
<p> “The main claim is about the association of a developer of a project in Delray Beach and criminal activity in the area,” he said days before dropping the lawsuit. “I can’t imagine why they would be reporting on criminal activity within the same story about a developer’s efforts to gain approval for a beneficial project.”</p>
<p> The complaint stated that the Delray Beach Preservation Trust is trying to block the Midtown project by winning a National Register of Historic Places designation for the district that includes the project site. The “frustrated” trust enlisted the media “to influence public opinion against Hudson and its Midtown project,” according to the complaint.</p>
<p> Rivas said Michael couldn’t sue the trust directly so he sued the newspaper, apparently thinking, “Here’s somebody we can SLAPP and the existence of this lawsuit will intimidate everybody.”</p>
<p> JoAnn Peart, president of the trust, said she doesn’t know enough about the law to comment on whether Michael filed a SLAPP suit. “But I hope that they are not just trying to intimidate preservation groups and the media from covering our point of view because they have certainly used local media almost as advertising for their project.”</p>
<p> “I think <i>The Coastal Star</i> was acting responsibly in printing all the information about the history of Hudson Holdings because it’s asking for waivers and variances and being allowed to do things you’re not normally allowed to do in historic districts,” Peart said. “It’s important that the public be aware of this.”</p></div>Along the Coast: Manalapan vows to fight South Palm Beach sand retention planhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/along-the-coast-manalapan-vows-to-fight-south-palm-beach-sand-ret2017-08-02T14:30:00.000Z2017-08-02T14:30:00.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738284,original{{/staticFileLink}}"><img width="750" src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738284,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-center" alt="7960738284?profile=original" /></a></strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738680,original{{/staticFileLink}}"><img width="750" src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738680,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-center" alt="7960738680?profile=original" /></a></strong></p>
<p style="text-align:center;"><strong>Related Story: Will our next beach renourishment use <a href="http://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/along-the-coast-will-our-next-beach-renourishment-use-bahamian-sa">Bahamian sand</a>?</strong></p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>By Dan Moffett</strong><br /> <br /> Manalapan is stepping up efforts to block a proposed beach stabilization project that would install concrete groins to capture sand in South Palm Beach.<br /> On July 18, Manalapan Mayor Keith Waters and Town Manager Linda Stumpf met with Palm Beach County Commissioner Steven Abrams to outline the town’s opposition to the project.<br /> Waters told Abrams what he’s been telling his residents: The town is prepared to do “whatever it takes” to prevent the installation of groins that will “steal” sand from Manalapan.<br /> The project, which county environmental managers hope to begin in November 2018, is going through a complicated permitting phase now that requires approvals from federal and state agencies. Waters said the town intends to intervene in that process and argue against granting the permits.<br /> After the meeting, Abrams sent an email to Rob Robbins, director of the county’s Environmental Resources Management department, which oversees the project. Abrams’ remarks reflect the conflicted positions officials find themselves in as neighbors turn against neighbors in disputes over sand for their beaches.<br /> “I am in the middle of this as the district commissioner for both them and South Palm Beach, as well as my responsibility to protect county interests,” Abrams wrote. “It would certainly be in everyone’s interest to resolve this matter without resort(ing) to any adversarial proceedings.”<br /> Robbins responded to Abrams with a call for patience:<br /> “Our applications are not yet complete and we have at least many months to go before they will be complete,” Robbins wrote in an email. “What I’m trying to convey is that the town should not feel rushed to intervene.”<br /> Robbins said, “We hate to see the town spend money defending themselves from the county.”<br /> Manalapan’s opposition is based largely on what the county and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers don’t know about what the groins’ impact would be on the beaches south of South Palm Beach.</p>
<p><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738899,original{{/staticFileLink}}"><img src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738899,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-center" width="274" alt="7960738899?profile=original" /></a><br /> The fear is the concrete devices would greatly disrupt the natural north-to-south flow of sand, capturing so much that there’s not enough left to replenish the beaches in Manalapan and its southern neighbors. Waters points to Broward County, where Hillsboro Beach is dealing with severe erosion and is suing northern neighbor Deerfield for using groins to trap sand.<br /> Stumpf says South Palm Beach has concern about the sand transfer station at the Boynton Beach Inlet, technically known as the Lake Worth Inlet. The man-made entry to the Intracoastal Waterway interrupts the natural flow of sand south. The purpose of the transfer station is to mechanically pick up sand from the north side of the inlet and pump it to Ocean Ridge on the south side.<br /> “If we don’t get sand in Manalapan,” Stumpf says, “then we don’t have anything to transfer to Ocean Ridge.”<br /> Manalapan officials warn of a cascading effect in which sand flow dies at the inlet, starving beaches not only in Ocean Ridge, but in Briny Breezes, Gulf Stream and Delray Beach.<br /> Army engineers have offered little to allay this concern. In June 2016, the Corps released a 481-page Environmental Impact Study, detailing the plan and examining its potential effects. Manalapan was mentioned only 27 times, with nearly all of the references historical or perfunctory.<br /> “We’re willing to pay for our own study to show the damage this project could do,” Stumpf said.</p>
<p></p>
<p style="text-align:center;"><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738293,original{{/staticFileLink}}"><img src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960738293,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-center" width="473" alt="7960738293?profile=original" /></a><em>ABOVE LEFT: Beach sand naturally follows the predominant tidal action ‘littoral drift’ south along our coast. Physical barriers like groins and inlet jetties slow that drift, depriving the neighbors to the south. Manalapan is required by a judge’s ruling to allow the county to pump sand across the Boynton Beach Inlet to prevent sand starvation in Ocean Ridge. Ocean Ridge also benefited from a 2015 renourishment project to widen the beach on the south side of the inlet. </em><br /> <em>ABOVE RIGHT: The town of Hillsboro Beach is suing the city of Deerfield Beach over the installation of groins along the Deerfield coast that are slowing the littoral drift and holding the sand captive. <strong>Google Earth photos</strong></em></p>
<p style="text-align:center;"></p></div>Delray Beach: City leaders going after drug makers related to opioid crisishttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/delray-beach-city-leaders-going-after-drug-makers-related-to-opio2017-08-02T13:51:12.000Z2017-08-02T13:51:12.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Jane Smith</strong><br /><br /> Beleaguered by increasing overdoses in the city and receiving little help from state and federal agencies, Delray Beach leaders plan to sue big drug makers. They want to offset the financial drain on their public safety budget of responding to overdoses.<br /> In the first six months of 2017, drug overdoses rose 36.4 percent to 412 when compared with the first six months of 2016, according to the Delray Beach Police Department. Fatal overdoses were up by 27.6 percent to 37 in the same period, the data showed.<br /><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}7960730872,original{{/staticFileLink}}"><img src="{{#staticFileLink}}7960730872,original{{/staticFileLink}}" class="align-left" width="99" alt="7960730872?profile=original" /></a>“Our city, indeed our state and country, struggle with an unprecedented crisis of people addicted to heroin and synthetic opioids,” Mayor Cary Glickstein said at the mid-July commission meeting. “No pathogen, virus, or war on this country’s soil has caused the death and destruction as the scourge of opioid addiction.” <br /> Commissioners unanimously voted to work with the Boca Raton office of the Robbins Geller Rudman & Heller law firm. The agreement, which calls for no up-front tax dollars from Delray Beach and the law firm to share a portion of the proceeds if the city wins, was to be reviewed Aug. 2, a day after press time. The law firm’s proposed contingency agreement calls for a 23 percent share of the recovery, plus costs and expenses, for filing a lawsuit through a motion for summary judgment. Anything after that filing, the firm wants a 26.5 percent share.<br /> Robbins Geller will represent the city against leading drug makers, distributors and possibly insurance companies. Delray Beach may be the first city in Florida to take such action. Palm Beach County is considering whether to file such a lawsuit.<br /> At least four states and 12 cities have sued the pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors of narcotic pain relievers with claims similar to the tobacco litigation. Even Mike Moore, former Mississippi attorney general, has become involved in the opioid lawsuits, representing the state of Ohio. <br /> As Mississippi attorney general in 1994, Moore filed the first state lawsuit against tobacco companies, claiming they harmed the public health by misrepresenting the dangers of smoking. He spearheaded national efforts that led to a $240 billion settlement. <br /> Many public health officials think heroin users started when they were prescribed prescription pain relievers for injuries. When people become addicted to the prescription pain killers but can no longer get them legitimately, they often turn to street drugs such as heroin. The street drugs are often much cheaper. <br /> Pharmaceutical company Purdue Pharma was said to have made billions of dollars in profits from selling OxyContin, “a highly addictive and dangerous painkiller originally designed only for end-stage cancer pain where addiction didn’t matter, but marketed as nonaddictive,” Glickstein said.<br /> In Florida, prescription pain killers in 2015 were written at the rate of 72 to 82 per 100 people, meaning that number of people were taking them at a given time, said Mark Dearman, a Boca Raton partner in the Robbins Geller law firm.<br /> Dearman touted the firm’s big wins: $17 billion against Volkswagen, a $7.2 billion settlement against Enron Corp. and a $1.57 billion settlement against HSBC, a banking and financial services company.<br /> Glickstein also railed against insurance companies for “paying billions in insurance claims” for counseling and urine tests “as if these were established medical procedures, which they are not, and which have, in fact, provided little in the way of sustained recovery for suffering addicts and desperate families.”<br /> Nearby Boynton Beach has seen a more shocking rise in the numbers of overdoses and fatalities. For the first six months of 2017, overdoses more than doubled to 331 from the same period the year before, according to the Boynton Beach Police Department. Fatalities increased about 2.5 times, with 32 deaths, the data showed.<br /> Mayor Steven Grant plans to talk to the city attorney so Boynton Beach doesn’t miss an opportunity to offset its costs of dealing with the opioid crisis.<br /> “I want to talk with the city attorney and my commission colleagues about whether it makes more sense to pursue a case on our own or go to an outside counsel on a contingency basis,” he said. <br /> The claims of negligence and deceptive marketing seem “like milquetoast when people are dying,” Delray Beach Vice Mayor Jim Chard said.<br /> Dearman said, “We don’t have the ability to go after them criminally; we have the ability to go after them civilly.”</p></div>Gulf Stream: O’Hare may face sanctions over public records requestshttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/o-hare-may-face-sanctions-over-public-records-requests2017-05-11T00:00:00.000Z2017-05-11T00:00:00.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong></p>
<p><br /> Gulf Stream resident Chris O’Hare’s “bad faith conduct” in seeking hundreds of public records may leave him liable for the town’s hefty legal bill and even sanctions, a circuit judge decided.</p>
<p>In a case O’Hare filed against the town, Judge Thomas Barkdull III said Gulf Stream did not unjustifiably delay its response to a public records request from O’Hare and his conduct bars the relief he sought, namely his own attorney’s fees and costs.</p>
<p>O’Hare’s conduct “was clearly intended to inappropriately manufacture public records requests in order to generate public records litigation and attorney’s fees,” Barkdull wrote in a final judgment Monday.</p>
<p>What’s more, Barkdull wrote, “Having had the opportunity to observe O’Hare at trial, the Court further concludes that O’Hare intended to harass and intimidate the Town’s employees to generate litigation and fees with ‘gotcha’ type requests.”</p>
<p>At issue was O’Hare’s request made after Town Hall closed for the day May 14, 2014, for “all records in any way related to any correspondence between Jones-Foster on behalf of the town and Martin O’Boyle and created or received during the period of time from March 1, 2014, through to the moment you receive this request.”</p>
<p>Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs PA is Town Attorney John “Skip” Randolph’s firm, with about 40 lawyers in its West Palm Beach office.</p>
<p>Gulf Stream answered O’Hare within two days, saying it was “working on a large number of incoming public records requests” and would use “its very best efforts to respond to you in a reasonable amount of time.”</p>
<p>O’Hare filed suit 46 days after he made his request, a day longer than the statutory requirement, asking Barkdull to declare the town was making an “illegal withholding” of the records and seeking attorney fees.</p>
<p>In January, after a four-day non-jury trial, Robert Sweetapple, Gulf Stream’s outside counsel, told town commissioners the judge sided with them. In his final order, Barkdull invited Gulf Stream to ask that O’Hare pay its legal bill and also be sanctioned.</p>
<p>At the same meeting, O’Hare told commissioners he disagreed with the ruling. “So do my attorneys, and of course we’ll appeal that,” he said.</p>
<p>Before Barkdull’s ruling, a municipality that successfully defended itself against a public records dispute still had to pay its own legal bill.</p>
<p>O’Hare began asking Gulf Stream for public records in 2013. From late August through December that year, he made more than 400 requests, Sweetapple said. Together, he and fellow resident Martin O’Boyle have filed more than 2,000 requests and dozens of lawsuits.</p>
<p>The May 14, 2014, request was one of 10 O’Hare made that day that led to seven lawsuits, Sweetapple said.</p></div>Boca Raton: Chabad starts legal fight to get land it says it was promisedhttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-chabad-starts-legal-fight-to-get-land-it-says-it-was-p2017-03-03T16:11:29.000Z2017-03-03T16:11:29.000ZMary Kate Leminghttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/MaryKateLeming769<div><p><strong>By Steve Plunkett</strong> <br /> <br />The Jewish congregation that caused a stir when it received City Council approval to build a towering synagogue and an Israel museum on Palmetto Park Road east of the Intracoastal Waterway fears it may not get title to the land.<br /> In papers filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court in February, the Chabad of East Boca Raton says it was promised the 0.84 acres at 770 E. Palmetto Park Road by Irving Litwak, a devoted congregant who set up a land trust that acquired the parcel in 2009 for $2.7 million.<br /> But Litwak died Nov. 25 before transferring the land to the Chabad, and officially the property’s owners remain the co-trustees of Litwak’s TJCV Land Trust. Already, Litwak’s son, Harris Litwak, described in the lawsuit as an agent of the trust, has emailed Boca Raton officials to see if the city would like to lease the parcel for a parking lot.<br /> The trustees “are fully aware of Harris Litwak’s activities” and have “refused to withdraw or repudiate the lease offer,” the Chabad’s suit says.<br /> “Such completely inconsistent action is an anticipatory repudiation of the Land Trust’s agreement to convey the property to the Chabad,” it says.<br /> Rabbi Ruvi New, the Chabad’s spiritual leader, was out of town and could not be reached for comment on the lawsuit.<br /> In 2008, Irving Litwak executed a “direction of beneficiary” to the trustees ordering them “to transfer the property for no consideration, as a charitable donation” to the Chabad for the establishment of a synagogue. “Such transfer shall occur no later than five (5) days following issuance of a permit by the city for the construction of a Chabad shul upon the property,” the document said.<br /> The 4th District Court of Appeal in West Palm Beach decided in November not to review a Circuit Court decision that overturned the City Council’s approval of the synagogue/museum. The lower court had ruled that a museum was not a permitted use on that part of Palmetto Park Road after real estate broker David Roberts, whose offices are across the street, objected to the plan.<br />Since then, Chabad officials have had several meetings with Derek Vander Ploeg, the project architect, to prepare a revised site plan for construction of the synagogue without the museum component, the lawsuit says.<br />The Chabad alleges breach of contract and asks a judge to order the trust to turn over the property. <br />“The Chabad spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in architectural fees, legal fees, and other professional fees (as well as costs for maintaining the property), in the good faith belief that the trust was holding the property for the benefit of the Chabad and would complete the transfer of the property to the Chabad once the city of Boca Raton approved the use of the property for a synagogue,” the suit states.<br />The Palm Beach County property appraiser says the land has a market value of $1.5 million.<br />Harris Litwak’s email to the city, dated Jan. 2, says the parcel “has sat for way too long.”<br />“We would like to lease it to the city as a parking lot/park setting for the benefit of local business, beachgoers and any others situated to take advantage of what has become inadequate parking in east Boca Raton,” it said. “We are under new management and are eager to both do business and assist with the parking situation at this location.”<br />The site originally held the 1927 Giles House, home for three decades to La Vieille Maison restaurant. The home was bulldozed in 2011 after Irving Litwak fought an attempt to give it a historic preservation label.</p></div>Delray Beach: Atlantic Crossing developer appeals dismissed claimshttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/delray-beach-atlantic-crossing-developer-appeals-dismissed-claims2016-08-31T14:58:00.000Z2016-08-31T14:58:00.000ZThe Coastal Starhttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/TheCoastalStar<div><p><strong>By Jane Smith</strong><br /> <br />The proposed Atlantic Crossing project sits in two courts.<br /> Edwards Cos. of Ohio is appealing the two monetary claims against Delray Beach that the federal court dismissed in July. The developer also will litigate the remaining claims that were sent back to the state court.<br /> “We are committed to keep Atlantic Crossing moving forward, and to reach final resolution of all litigation to preserve our property rights,” said Don DeVere, Edwards’ vice president. <br /> The appeal was filed on Aug. 24. <br /> The developers were seeking more than $25 million from the city to cover their costs for the 9.2-acre project.<br /> “The dismissal was comprehensive and well-reasoned by a highly respected judge,” said Delray Beach Mayor Cary Glickstein. “It’s unfortunate the developer prefers spending on multiple lawyers rather than working with the city and creative planners to produce a safe and functional development plan that could move forward.” <br />The proposed Atlantic Crossing project sits at the main intersection in the city’s downtown — the northeast corner of Federal Highway and Atlantic Avenue. <br /> The $200 million mixed-use project was proposed by a partnership between Edwards Cos. and Ocean Ridge resident Carl DeSantis. Edwards bought DeSantis’ share in June for $38.5 million. But both would share in the proceeds if the federal case is decided in favor of the developers.<br /> The development team sued Delray Beach in June 2015, claiming the city has not certified its site plan that was approved in November 2013 and affirmed by a previous City Commission in January 2014. Last October, the lawsuit was moved to federal court. <br /><br /></p></div>Boca Raton: Suit against Chabad project returns to federal courthttps://thecoastalstar.com/profiles/blogs/boca-raton-suit-against-chabad-project-returns-to-federal-court2016-08-31T14:17:08.000Z2016-08-31T14:17:08.000ZThe Coastal Starhttps://thecoastalstar.com/members/TheCoastalStar<div><p><strong>By Sallie James</strong><br /><br /> It’s “game on” once more in the on-again, off-again legal wrangling surrounding a proposal to build an Orthodox synagogue and Israel museum east of the Intracoastal Waterway.<br /> Local activists Gerald Gagliardi and Kathleen MacDougall filed an amended complaint in federal court in August in their effort to prove that Boca Raton created unconstitutional legal classifications through “corrupt dealings,” and then wrongly approved a zoning classification specifically tailored to allow construction of Chabad of East Boca on 0.81 acres at 770 E. Palmetto Park Road.<br /> The lawsuit seeks costs, attorney fees and compensatory and punitive damages.<br />City officials typically do not comment on pending litigation. <br /> Gagliardi and MacDougall live within walking distance of the proposed synagogue and claim the project will snarl traffic in an already congested area and create parking issues. The lawsuit also claims the project’s height of 40 feet, 8 inches — the area limit is 30 feet — will mar the ambiance of a neighborhood characterized by low-rise development.<br /> The Boca Raton City Council approved plans for the 18,000-square-foot Chabad of East Boca synagogue and Israel museum in May 2015 and controversy has swirled since.<br /> Plans for the project are on hold due to pending lawsuits. The synagogue’s spiritual leader, Rabbi Ruvi New, continues to keep the faith despite repeated setbacks.<br /> “We look forward to moving beyond the litigation and on to construction, God willing,” New said.<br /> Gagliardi and MacDougall filed an initial complaint against the Chabad project in February. <br />However, a federal judge dismissed that complaint in late July, claiming the duo failed to prove they had suffered injury as a result of the city action.<br /> Chabad has been trying to find a location to build for years. <br />In 2008, the congregation wanted to move into a 23,000-square-foot building near Mizner Park, but was not able to meet parking requirements. <br /> “The amended complaint shines the spotlight on a shell game of city corruption …,” MacDougall wrote in an email. “Thousands of residents, of every race, creed and color depend on a mere 1,393 feet of road to gain access to the Palmetto Park Bridge and the mainland. A ‘make it so’ managerial style of city governance is not acceptable when it comes to public safety.”<br /> The new four-count complaint, filed on Aug. 12, accuses the city of initiating a change in city code to “unconstitutionally advance and create special privilege” for Chabad. <br />The complaint alleges the city approved “an increased height of the building” as well as “deviations, variances and knowingly erroneous interpretations of city rules, regulations, laws and ordinances, all conducted to advance the religious purposes of the Chabad.”<br /> The plaintiffs claim they will be harmed by the influx of additional traffic that will be funneled into their neighborhood as a result of the proposed synagogue, and that emergency services will be adversely affected. <br /> “Completion of the Chabad further will alter the beach-oriented, relaxed and low-intensity character of [their neighborhood],” the lawsuit states.<br /> Supporters of the project say the Chabad is perfect for the area and will increase property values. They disagree the project will snarl traffic even more because Chabad members walk to services per their religion.</p></div>