Re: October 26th City of Alachua Press Release:
"Plaintiffs Lose Appeal in Election Lawsuit against City Of Alachua" November 1, 2007 Hon. Mayor and Commissioners: It is certainly appropriate for the City of Alachua to report the recent ruling by the First District Court of Appeals regarding the 2006 election lawsuit on the City`s website. So far as the report correctly states the facts of this case, I have no complaint about it. The press release is accurate in stating that the First DCA "has ruled to uphold the dismissal of the election lawsuit filed by Eileen McCoy, et. al., against the City of Alachua." It is also true that "the appellate court's decision confirms the ruling of Circuit Court Judge Robert E. Roundtree, who dismissed this case last January." However, the statement by City Manager Clovis Watson that "We [the City] have been shown to have followed the law in all regards" is not true and neither is his claim that this ruling "is a complete validation of the City and its actions in the 2006 election." The decision of the First District Court of Appeal affirmed without an explanatory opinion an order entered by Circuit Judge Roundtree on February 7, 2007. Before entering that order, Judge Roundtree conducted a hearing in which he entertained argument on three primary issues. The first was the plaintiffs' argument that the defendants had unlawfully conducted the election as a matter of law. Judge Roundtree denied this motion. The second issue was the City of Alachua's argument that it had done nothing wrong in the conduct of the election. Judge Roundtree explicitly denied this motion. The third issue was the City of Alachua's argument that the plaintiffs' had filed their action too late. On that point and that point only, Judge Roundtree agreed with the City of Alachua. His verbatim statement is as follows: "Since Plaintiffs' complaint was filed 13 days after the Canvassing Board certified the results, it was not timely filed and is barred by the statute of limitations. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' and Defendants' motions for summary judgment on the merits are denied. However, Defendants' motion for summary judgment on the statute of limitations grounds is granted...." On that grounds and only on that grounds Judge Roundtree dismissed the action. Similarly, it was only on the statute of limitations grounds that the First District Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Roundtree's ruling without explanation. City Manager Watson's claim that Judge Roundtree`s decision and the First DCA`s affirmation of it can somehow be interpreted as "a complete validation of the City and its actions in the 2006 election" is patently false. This statement deliberately mischaracterizes the court`s action in this case. The city manager`s misleading and inaccurate statements made in the City`s press release (copy attached below) should be corrected and retracted. Sincerely,
Michael Canney
PS - A court video of the oral arguments that were made before the 1st District Court of Appeal can be viewed here: mms://videoserver.1dca.org/video/07-0766.wmv
City of Alachua Press Release Plaintiffs Lose Appeal in Election Lawsuit against City Of Alachua For further information:
Clovis Watson, Jr.
City Manager
386-418-6100 ex. 135 October 26, 2007 For immediate release: Alachua, FL. -- The First District Court of Appeals has ruled to uphold the dismissal of the election lawsuit filed by Eileen McCoy, et. al., against the City of Alachua. The appellate court's decision confirms the ruling of Circuit Court Judge Robert E. Roundtree, who dismissed this case last January. "We always leave these matters to the courts, and the courts have spoken," commented City Manager Clovis Watson, Jr. "We have always conducted our affairs within the law, and we always shall." "This is a complete validation of the City and its actions in the 2006 election. It is also a validation of the commissioners and administration and the staff. We have been shown to have followed the law in all regards," said Watson. "We ran an open, fair and honest election for our citizens, as we always do. With this behind us, we can continue to attend to the needs of our City and its residents." All three appeals judges concurred in the decision. It was a per curiam affirmed decision, which means it cannot be appealed further. Phone 386.418.6100 fax 386.418.617 Re: October 26th City of Alachua Press Release:
"Plaintiffs Lose Appeal in Election Lawsuit against City Of Alachua" November 1, 2007 Hon. Mayor and Commissioners: It is certainly appropriate for the City of Alachua to report the recent ruling by the First District Court of Appeals regarding the 2006 election lawsuit on the City`s website. So far as the report correctly states the facts of this case, I have no complaint about it. The press release is accurate in stating that the First DCA "has ruled to uphold the dismissal of the election lawsuit filed by Eileen McCoy, et. al., against the City of Alachua." It is also true that "the appellate court's decision confirms the ruling of Circuit Court Judge Robert E. Roundtree, who dismissed this case last January." However, the statement by City Manager Clovis Watson that "We [the City] have been shown to have followed the law in all regards" is not true and neither is his claim that this ruling "is a complete validation of the City and its actions in the 2006 election." The decision of the First District Court of Appeal affirmed without an explanatory opinion an order entered by Circuit Judge Roundtree on February 7, 2007. Before entering that order, Judge Roundtree conducted a hearing in which he entertained argument on three primary issues. The first was the plaintiffs' argument that the defendants had unlawfully conducted the election as a matter of law. Judge Roundtree denied this motion. The second issue was the City of Alachua's argument that it had done nothing wrong in the conduct of the election. Judge Roundtree explicitly denied this motion. The third issue was the City of Alachua's argument that the plaintiffs' had filed their action too late. On that point and that point only, Judge Roundtree agreed with the City of Alachua. His verbatim statement is as follows: "Since Plaintiffs' complaint was filed 13 days after the Canvassing Board certified the results, it was not timely filed and is barred by the statute of limitations. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' and Defendants' motions for summary judgment on the merits are denied. However, Defendants' motion for summary judgment on the statute of limitations grounds is granted...." On that grounds and only on that grounds Judge Roundtree dismissed the action. Similarly, it was only on the statute of limitations grounds that the First District Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Roundtree's ruling without explanation. City Manager Watson's claim that Judge Roundtree`s decision and the First DCA`s affirmation of it can somehow be interpreted as "a complete validation of the City and its actions in the 2006 election" is patently false. This statement deliberately mischaracterizes the court`s action in this case. The city manager`s misleading and inaccurate statements made in the City`s press release (copy attached below) should be corrected and retracted. Sincerely,
Michael Canney
PS - A court video of the oral arguments that were made before the 1st District Court of Appeal can be viewed here: mms://videoserver.1dca.org/video/07-0766.wmv
City of Alachua Press Release Plaintiffs Lose Appeal in Election Lawsuit against City Of Alachua For further information:
Clovis Watson, Jr.
City Manager
386-418-6100 ex. 135 October 26, 2007 For immediate release: Alachua, FL. -- The First District Court of Appeals has ruled to uphold the dismissal of the election lawsuit filed by Eileen McCoy, et. al., against the City of Alachua. The appellate court's decision confirms the ruling of Circuit Court Judge Robert E. Roundtree, who dismissed this case last January. "We always leave these matters to the courts, and the courts have spoken," commented City Manager Clovis Watson, Jr. "We have always conducted our affairs within the law, and we always shall." "This is a complete validation of the City and its actions in the 2006 election. It is also a validation of the commissioners and administration and the staff. We have been shown to have followed the law in all regards," said Watson. "We ran an open, fair and honest election for our citizens, as we always do. With this behind us, we can continue to attend to the needs of our City and its residents." All three appeals judges concurred in the decision. It was a per curiam affirmed decision, which means it cannot be appealed further. Phone 386.418.6100 fax 386.418.617 | 
