06-20-2019 Special Commission Meeting City Manager
City Commission Ronald J.Wasson
]Enid Weisman,Mayor
Denise Landman,Vice Mayor = - City Clerk
Dr.Linda Marks,Commissioner �� ]Ellisa L.Horvath,MMC
Gladys Mezrahi,Commissioner � '
Marc Narotsky,Commissioner '. City Attorney
Robert Shelley,Commissioner Weiss Scrota HelFinan
Howard Weinberg,Commissioner p(�Q+� Cole&Bierman
CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
JUNE 209 2019
12:30 p.m.
Aventura Government Center
19200 West Country Club Drive
Aventura, Florida 33180
1. CALL TO ORDER\ROLL CALL
2. MOTION TO APPROVE RETAINING THE LAW FIRM OF TO
SERVE AS SPECIAL LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE CITY OF AVENTURA ON
THE CHAPTER 164, F.S., REFERENDUM REVENUE DISPUTE AND ANY
SUBSEQUENT LITIGATION, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
TAKE ANY ACTION WHICH IS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THIS MOTION.
3. RESOLUTION/PUBLIC HEARING:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF AVENTURA,
FLORIDA,INITIATING CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCEDURES PURSUANT TO
CHAPTER 164, FLORIDA STATUTES, THE FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL
CONFLICT RESOLUTION ACT, REGARDING A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF AVENTURA AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
FLORIDA; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
4. ADJOURNMENT
This meeting is open to the public.In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,all persons who are
disabled and who need special accommodations to participate in this meeting because of that disability should contact
the Office of the City Clerk,305-466-8901,not later than two days prior to such proceeding. One or more members of
the City of Aventura Advisory Boards may be in attendance and may participate at the meeting. Anyone wishing to
appeal any decision made by the Aventura City Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or
hearing will need a record of the proceedings and, for such purpose, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Agenda
items may be viewed at the Office of the City Clerk, City of Aventura Government Center, 19200 W. Country Club
Drive,Aventura,Florida,33180. Anyone wishing to obtain a copy of any agenda item should contact the City Clerk at
305-466-8901.
CITY OF AVENTURA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Ronald J. Wasson, City Manager
DATE: June 14, 2019
SUBJECT: Retention of Special Legal Counsel to Represent the City of Aventura in the
Chapter 164, F.S., Dispute Resolution Process and any Subsequent Litigation Concerning the
Matter of the Equitable Distribution of Revenue from the Miami- Dade County School Board's
(the "School Board's")November 6, 2018 Tax Referendum (the " Referendum Revenue")
June 20,2019 Special City Commission Agenda Item r .
Recommendation
The City Attorney has identified Michael Moskowitz and the law firm of Moskowitz, Mandell,
Salim & Simowitz , P.A., and Jeffrey Wood and the Tripp Scott law firm, and Alan Kluger and
the Kluger, Kaplan,Silverman,Katzen & Levine law firm, as each being very well qualified to
represent the City of Aventura as special legal counsel in the Chapter 164,F.S., dispute resolution
process between the City and the School Board concerning the City's request for an equitable
distribution of Referendum Revenue for the City's Charter Schools, as well as in any subsequent
litigation. As previously disclosed, the City Attorney will not be able to handle the matter for the
City because of a conflict arising from legal services which the City Attorney's law firm provides
to the School Board upon other unrelated matters.
Background
As discussed at the May 16, 2019 Workshop, the Commission will utilize special legal counsel to
pursue the Chapter 164, F.S., process and any subsequent litigation on the matter . Attached is
correspondence of June 1, 2019 from Michael Moskowitz, Esq., which reflects that firm's
proposed rate schedule and qualifications. In lieu of their regular attorney hourly rates, they are
offering a reduced governmental client rate of$300 per hour for attorneys and $75 per hour for
paralegals. Likewise, attached is correspondence of June 7, 2019 from Jeffrey Wood, Esq., which
reflects that firm's proposed reduced governmental hourly rates of$250 and $300 for attorneys
and $75 for paralegals. Finally, attached is correspondence of June 14, 2019 from Alan Kluger,
Esq., which reflects that firm's and Mr. Kluger's reduced governmental hourly rates of$300 for
attorneys and $75 for paralegals.
I recommend that the City Commission select one of these three (3) very well qualified firms to
be appointed as special legal counsel for this matter.
1
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me, Matthew Mandel or David Wolpin.
Respectfully,
Ronald J. Wasson
City Manager
Copy:
Ellisa L. Horvath, City Clerk
City Attorney
2
David M.Wolpin
From: Michael Moskowitz <mmoskowitz@iMMSSLaw.cam>
Sent: Saturday,lune 01,2019 7:05 PM
To: Matthew H. Mandel
Cc David M.Wolpin;An Glazer;William Salim
Subject: RE:City of Aventura - Miami-Dade County School Board
Attachments: Mandel Letter with Firm Bio.doc
Importance: High
Matt/David
Pleasure talking with you last week.
As requested a short Firm Bio is attached.
I understand that the City of Aventura is considering a lawsuit against the Miami-Dade County School Board.The City
may be interested in retaining us to represent them in this endeavor.
Our standard hourly rates are$400-550/hour. My hourly rate Is$550/hour.
Paralegals are charged at$125/hour
However,when representing governmental entities,the firm charges a flat rate of$300/hour for all attorneys and
$75/hour for paralegals. Hopefully,those rates would be acceptable to the City of Aventura.
We are available to meet with the City.
Kindly let us know.
Thank you for considering our Law Firm.
Michael W.Moskowitz, Esq.
Moskowitz,Mandell,Salim&Simowitz, P.A.
i
800 Corporate Drive,Suite 500
Ft.Lauderdale,FL 33334
(954)491-2000(Telephone)
(954)776-9211(Direct)
(954)491-2051(Telefax)
This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed,and may contain
information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient,or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended
recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please delete it and notify us immediately.
CIRCULAR 230 DISCLAIMER:The IRS now requires written advice(including electronic communications)regarding one or
more Federal (i.e., United States)tax issues to meet certain standards.Those standards involve a detailed and careful
analysis of the facts and applicable law which we expect would be time consuming and costly.We have not made and
have not been asked to make that type of analysis in connection with any advice given In this e-mail.As a result,we are
required to advise you that any Federal tax advice rendered in this e-mail is not intended or written to be used and
cannot be used for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be Imposed by the IRS.
In the event you would like us to perform the type of analysis that is necessary for us to provide an opinion that does not
require the above disclaimer,as always,please feel free to contact us directly.
2
LAW OFFICES
MOSKOWITZ, MANDELL, SALIM & SIMOWITZ, P.A.
800 CORPORATE DRIVE • SUITE fi
FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33934
MICHAEL W. MOSKOWITZ° 8 ROWARD (554)451-2000
SCOTT E. SIMOWITZI BOCA RATON (561) 750 7700
CRAIG J. MANDELL TELE DOPIER(964) 491-2061
WILLIAM 0 SALIM, JR." EMAIL mma.Qmmael ay corn
SCOTT M. ZASLAV'
ARI J. GLAZER'
TODD A ABRUSTER
ARTHUR E. LEWIS OF COUNSEL
SHIRLEY U. WEISMAN, P.A.
ALSO ADMITTED IN NY 6 DC'
ALSO ADMITTED 114 MR'
ALSO ADMITTED IN NY P.CT'
ALSO ADMITTED IN NY'
CERTIFIED CIRCUIT COURT MEDIATOR'
June 10,2019
VIA E-MAIL
Matthew Mandel,Esq.
Weiss Serota Hellman Cole Bierman
200 E. Broward Boulevard,#1900
Ft. Lauderdale,FL 33301
Re: City of Aventura—Miami-Dade County School Board
Dear Mr. Mandel:
It was a pleasure talking with you a few days ago in connection with the above reference matter.
As requested,below is a short Firm Bio of the principals of the firm.
The name of the law firm is Moskowitz, Mandell, Salim & Simowitz, P.A. The address and
telephone number of the firm are shown above.
The firm has been in business since 1985 and is a full service commercial law firm. Our
practice includes but is not limited to lender representation; bond underwriting counsel; all
aspects of commercial litigation in both state and federal courts; governmental regulatory work
at the state and local level; commercial and residential real estate transactions; and corporate
finance and transactional representation. Each and every partner and the Firm itself have
received the "AV" designation from Martindale-Hubbell. Such designation is the highest
possible for attorney competency, ethics and professionalism.
The names, experience and qualifications of each attorney who may be assigned to the matter,
including educational background, are as follows:
June 10,2019
Page 2
MICHAEL W. MOSKOWITZ.ESOUIRE
Mr. Moskowitz is a founder and managing partner of the firm, and is the head of its
governmental approval and commercial litigation department. He was admitted to the New York
Bar and Florida Bar in 1978;the District of Columbia Bar in 1979,the United States District Court,
Southern District of Florida including Trial Bar in 1980; U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit in
1981; U.S. Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit, 1981,U.S. Supreme Court, 1985. He attended New
York University where he received his Bachelor of Arts degree and graduated magna cum laude in
1974 and attended Brooklyn Law School where he received his J.D. degree and graduated Cum
Laude in 1977. Mr. Moskowitz was a member of Phi Beta Kappa, Coat of Arms Society, and the
Justinian Society as well as a recipient of the American Jurisprudence Award for Trusts. Mr.
Moskowitz actively practices in all areas of governmental approval,land use, commercial litigation,
and health care law with emphasis on complex commercial litigation. Mr. Moskowitz also provides
counsel to various governmental entities,including on land use,planning and redevelopment issues.
In addition, he is a member of the Florida Bar, Broward County Bar Association,New York State
Bar Association and American Bar Association. Mr. Moskowitz has been active in many civic,
political and community organizations. He served as a member of the Board of Governors for Nova
Southeastern University, Center for Psychological Studies, 1989 - 1999. Mr. Moskowitz currently
serves as a member of the Board of Governors, Nova Southeastern University Law School a/k/a
Shepard Broad School of Law, 1996-present. Mr. Moskowitz served as a member of the Board of
Directors,Homeless Initiative Partnership Advisory Board 1997 -2000. Mr. Moskowitz served by
appointment by Governor Lawton Chiles on the Board of Directors for Community Health
Purchasing Alliance (CHPA) from 1996 - 2000. He served as a Commissioner for the North
Broward Hospital District, 1998-2001. Mr. Moskowitz also served on the Board of Directors for
the Boys and Girls Club of Broward County, 1999 - 2005, and served on the Broward County
Charter Review Commission, 2000 -2002. Mr. Moskowitz presently serves as a Member on the
Board of Directors of Legacy Bank,2006-present and was a Member of the Board of Directors for
the Broward Partnership for the Homeless, 2011 - 2013. Mr.Moskowitz has received the Lifetime
Achievement Award for 2012 from the Broward County Democratic Party and the President's
Award for 2012 from the Broward County Young Democrats. Mr.Moskowitz has been honored in
the publications of Florida Trend's The State's Legal Leader's from 2006 - 2008; Florida Super
Lawyers - The Top Attorneys in Florida from 2006 - 2018 and in the South Florida Business
Journal's Best of the Bar from 2004 - 2014. Mr. Moskowitz is also a certified circuit court
mediator handling select complex matters. He is rated AV by the peer review conducted by
Martindale-Hubbell.
CRAIG J.MANDELL,ESQUIRE
Mr. Mandell is a principal of the firm and the head of its real estate department. He received his
Bachelor of Science degree, Summa Cum Laude, from Boston University in 1975, his Master in
Business Administration, Magna Cum Laude as well as his J.D. degree, Cum Laude, from Florida
State University in 1979 and was a member of Beta Gamma Sigma and Phi Delta Phi. Mr. Mandell
was admitted to the State Bar for the State of Florida, in 1979 and actively practices in all areas of
sophisticated commercial real estate,including land use and planning, property acquisition and sale,
title work,leasing, lender representation and loan closings,corporate transactions, business law and
June 10,2019
Page 3
health care law. Mr. Mandell is an authorized title agent for Chicago Title Insurance Group,
Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company and Attorney Title Insurance Fund. He is a
member of the Florida Bar and American Bar Association of which he is a member of the Real
Property,Probate and Trust Section. AV peer review rated by Martindale-Hubbell.
WILLIAM G.SALIM,JR.ESOUIRE
Mr. Salim is a principal of the firm,and his practice focuses on sophisticated corporate,commercial
real estate, and municipal bond transactions. He also counsels businesses on labor and employment
matters, and related corporate and commercial litigation. He received a Bachelor of Business
Administration degree, Cum Laude, in accounting from the University of Michigan in 1984, and
received his J.D., Cum Laude, in 1987 from Boston University School of Law. While in law
school, Mr. Salim served as a member and editor of the Annual Review of Banking Law. Mr.
Salim also served as co-coordinator of the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Program (VITA),
sponsored by the IRS, while at the University of Michigan. Mr. Salim was admitted to the
Massachusetts Bar in 1987, and became a member of the Florida Bar in 1988. Mr. Salim has also
been admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
(1990); the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (1998); and the United
States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (1996). Mr. Salim actively practices in all areas of
commercial litigation,labor and employment litigation,probate litigation and general corporate and
securities law. Mr. Salim has served as underwriter's counsel and disclosure counsel on bond
transactions totaling over $5 billion over the last fifteen years. Mr. Salim also provides
representation to various governmental agencies on land use, planning and redevelopment issues.
He is a member of the Broward County Bar Association, Massachusetts Bar Association and
American Bar Association, of which he is a member of the Litigation Section. AV peer review
rated by Martindale-Hubbell.
SCOTT E.SIMOWITZ,ESQUIRE
Mr. Simowitz is a principal of the firm, and is the head of the lender representation and foreclosure
department. Ile received his Bachelor of Arts degree in 1977 from Washington University in St.
Louis and attended The University of Miami School of Law where he received his J.D. degree,Cum
Laude, in 1980. Mr. Simowitz was admitted to the Florida Bar, the United States District Court,
Middle and Southern Districts of Florida including Trial Bar, and U.S. Tax Court in 1980 and was
admitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth and Eleventh Circuits in 1981.He was admitted to the
United States District Court, District of Colorado and the United States Court of Appeals, Tenth
Circuit in 2001. Mr. Simowitz actively practices in all areas of lender related litigation, including
foreclosures, reorganizations, bankruptcy and lender liability and is a member of the Broward
County Bar (Trial Lawyers Section) and American Bar Association (Litigation Section). Mr.
Simowitz has served on the Washington University in St. Louis Gold Coast Regional Cabinet since
2003,is a member of the University's Eliot Society and their membership committee and a member
of the Alumni Parents Admissions Program, for which he was Chairman from 2003 through 2005.
He is AV peer review rated by Martindale-Hubbell.
June 10, 2019
Page 4
SCOTT M.ZASLAV,ESQUIRE
Mr. Zaslav is a member of the firm and a member of its commercial litigation department. He
received a Bachelor of Arts degree from State University of New York at Binghamton with honors
in 1991 where he was a member of Law & Society. He received his ID. degree in 1994 from
Brooklyn Law School and was the recipient of the American Jurisprudence Awards in Commercial
Paper/Negotiable Instruments and in Real Estate and the Samuel Kirschenbaum Real Estate award.
Mr.Zaslav was admitted to the Connecticut Bar in 1994,the New York Bar in 1995 and Florida Bar
in 1996. Mr. Zaslav was admitted to the U.S. District Court, Southern and Faster District of New
York in 1996;and Southern District of Florida in 2000. Mr.Zaslav actively practices in all areas of
commercial litigation and insurance litigation.
ARI J.GLAZER ESQUIRE
Mr. Glazer is a member of the firm and a member of its commercial litigation department. He
received his A.B. degree from Brown University in 1994 and received his J.D. degree in 1997 from
New York University. Mr. Glazer was admitted to the New York Bar in 1998 and to the Florida
Bar in 2000. Mr. Glazer was admitted to the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York in
1999 and Southern District of Florida in 2000. He was co-author,"New York Commercial Division
Following Federal Approach to Discovery of Documents of Foreign Affiliates", Metropolitan
Corporate Counsel, March, 1998. Mr. Glazer actively practices in land use and zoning
representation and litigation and all areas of commercial litigation.
TODD A.ARMBRUSTER,ESQUIRE
Mr.Armbruster is a member of the firm and a member of its commercial litigation department. He
received his B.B.A. degree from University of Miami in 1995 and received his J.D., Cum Laude in
1999 from the University of Miami School of Law where he was a member of the University of
Miami Law Review and the Moot Court Board. He authored, "The Proposed Domestic Charity
Exception: An Unwise Addition to the Dormant Commerce Clause Family" at 53 U. Miami L.,
Rev. 333, 1999. Mr. Armbruster was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1999 and the U.S. District
Court, Southern District of Florida in 2000. Mr. Armbruster actively practices in all areas of
commercial litigation.
ARTHUR E.LEWIS,ESQUIRE
Mr. Lewis is an associate of the firm and a member of its lender representation, foreclosure and
bankruptcy departments. Mr. Lewis received his bachelor's degree from Florida Atlantic
University. He received his J.D. from the University of Miami School of Law. Mr. Lewis was
admitted to the Florida Bar in 1999. Mr. Lewis is also licensed to practice in the U.S. District
Courts and Bankruptcy Courts for the Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Florida, Mr,
Lewis is also active in Legal Aid of Broward County and Put Something Back, a joint pro bono
project of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit and the Dade County Bar Association. Mr.Lewis actively
practices in all areas of lender related litigation,reorganizations,bankruptcy and lender liability.
June 10,2019
Page 5
OF COUNSEL
SHIRLEY D.WEISMAN,ESQUIRE
Ms. Weisman is of-counsel to the firm. She graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in 1968
where she received her Bachelor of Arts degree and received her J.D. degree in 1971 from
Villanova University. She is a member of the Broward County Bar Association and Florida Bar.
Ms. Weisman actively practices in estate planning,probate and real estate.
Should you have any questions,please feel free to contact mc.
Very truly yours,
MOSKOWITZ,MANDELL, SALIM&SIMOWITZ,P.A.
By:
Michael W. Moskowitz
Cc: David Wolpin, Esq. (via e-mail)
on
l lil i - -�i�
ATTORNEY_ AT LAW
Jeffrey Wood
Direct Line:954]65 3926
Email:js* frippscoecom
June 7,2019
City of Aventura
c/o Roland J. Wasson,City Manager
19200 West Country Club
Aventura FL 33180
Re: Proposal for Representation for City of Aventura Regarding Referendum Dispute
with Miami-Dade School Board.
Dear Mr. Wasson:
It is our understanding that the City of Aventura is currently seeking proposals for legal
representation regarding its potential claim against the Miami-Dade School Board regarding its
decision not to share funding from the referendum recently passed in November 2018. We were
contacted by Matthew H. Mandel and David M. Wolpin, the city's current legal counsel,
concerning this issue due to their law firms apparent conflict of interest having represented the
Miami-Dade School Board.
We believe Tripp Scott, P.A. is in a unique position to assist the City with this matter
given our collective experience in representing charter schools in these types of claims in both
the administrative and court proceedings. Moreover, I had the privilege of representing four
charter schools in the Indian River Referendum litigation.
Tripp Scott, P.A. serves as general counsel to the two largest Florida charter school
service organizations, The Florida Charter School Alliance and The Florida Consortium of
Public Charter Schools. As a consequence, our firm closely monitors the Florida legislative
session with respect to any and all issues that impact Florida charter schools. We were hopeful
that the legislature would have passed the proposed bill that would have retroactively required
school districts to share voted referendum funds with charter schools. Unfortunately,that did not
happen.
Our law firm has been directly involved with landmark decisions involving charter
schools. Just to name a few: Rule Challenge (Innovation Rubric & Policy): Renaissance
Charter School, Inc. v. School Board of Palm Beach County, (DOAH Case Nos. 16-5126 & 16-
5157RX), 2017 WL 3000491; St. Lucie Transportation: Renaissance Charter School, Inc. and
Renaissance Charter School at Tradition v. The School Board at St. Lucie County, FL DOAH
110 Southeast Sixth Street, Fifteenth Floor • Fort Lauderdale,Florida 33301
Post Office Box 14245 • Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33302
Tel 954.525.7500 • Fax 954.761.8475 • www.trippscott.com
Fort Lauderdale • Tallahassee • Boca Raton
City of Aventura
Re: Representation Letter
June 7, 2019
Page 2
Case No. 14-3267 & 14-4045RU; School Safety Officer: Renaissance Charter School, Inc. v.
School Board of Palm Beach County, DOAN Case No 18-6195; and Indian River Referendum
Case: Indian River Charter High School et. al. v School Board of Indian River, 19th Judicial
Circuit 2016 CA 000431.
We have a very experienced team of lawyers, including Ed Pozzouli, Stephanie
Alexander, and Sherry McCartney who would be part of our team if chosen for this litigation.
We have attached the law firm bios for each of the litigators that would assist with this matter if
we are selected.
Proposal
Understanding that we would be representing a municipal charter school we have agreed
to lower our typical hourly rates. As lead counsel,my hourly rate would be$250 per hour. The
other lawyers participating in the litigation would have similar hourly rates not to exceed$300
per hour. Our paralegal rate for this matter would be$75.00 per hour.
Please feel free to contact me if you need any further clarification regarding our potential
representation. We are very interested in assisting the City of Aventura and the families that
have made a choice to attend your public charter school. These funds are essential to assure they
receive a quality education in a safe environment.
Very truly yours,
Jeffrty S. Wood
Jeffrey S. Wood
For the Firm
JEFFREY S. WOOD
• FINANCE&CORPORATE
• BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS
• REAL ESTATE LITIGATION
• NON-PROFIT PRACTICE
• COMPLEX& GENERAL COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
BAR ADMISSIONS
• The Florida Bar, 1990
it. U.S.District Court,Southern District of Florida, 1991
•8 U.S. District Court,Middle District of Florida, 1991
Jeffrey S. Wood joined May Meacham & Davell, P.A. in 2000 as a director and has been practicing law
in Broward County for more than two decades. Wood devotes his practice to the areas of construction
law,banking law,education law, non-profit law, real estate transactions and representing charter schools
and related businesses. He also handles complex commercial litigation, business law and business
transactions,and occasionally handles adoption matters.
Wood has provided counsel and legal representation to various non-profits in the State of Florida for
many years and has participated and assisted in the formation of several non-profits from their inception.
His experience and understanding of both federal and state regulations provides excellent value to his
clients. Wood has also conducted and administered board member governance training for non-profit
compliance for Florida charter schools,adoption agencies,and other non-profits.
Wood has served as a board member of the Florida Consortium of Public Charter Schools since its
inception and provides legal advice and counsel to that association, which is comprised of over 500
Florida charter schools.Notably, Wood served as a member of the charter school committee charged with
drafting a model agreement for use in Florida, which became a Florida Department of Education rule in
November 2014. Wood has served on the FCPCS Quality Authorizers Task Force since 2012 which helps
set a cooperative legislative agenda with the authorizers and charter school leaders in Florida. Wood is a
frequent presenter at various conferences on multiple non-profit issues. Wood has also been active within
the Florida ice hockey community, and has served as President of the Statewide Amateur Hockey
Association of Florida(SAHOF)from 2008 to present. He also serves as General Counsel to SAHOF and
is a member of the SAHOF Executive Committee.
Wood received his Bachelor degree in Political Science and a Minor in Sociology from State University
at Geneseo, New York in 1987. He then received his Juris Doctor from The Dickinson School of Law
(Penn State)in 1990.Wood lives in Broward County,Wilton Manors,with his wife Gee.
Appellate Decisions:
Stein v. Howell,964 So.2d.825(Ha. 4th DCA 2007)
BankAtlentic v. Murrah Motors,606 So.2d 1288(Fla.4th DCA 1992)
1787230v1600128.0001
STEPHANIE D. ALEXANDER
• APPELLATE PRACTICE
• GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
• HEALTHCARE LAW
• EDUCATION
• BITCOIN&CRYPTOCURRENCIES
• COMPLEX&GENERAL COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
BAR ADMISSIONS
• Florida
• Illinois
• U.S.Court of Appeals 7th Circuit
• U.S.Court of Appeals 11th Circuit
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida
• United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida
•: United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Stephanie Alexander,a director with Tripp Scott, is an experienced litigator who has successfully handled
many high-profile appeals at the state and federal levels. She focuses her practice on civil and appellate
litigation, and has argued numerous cases in the Florida Supreme Court. More specifically, Alexander
recently represented the healthcare industry before the Florida Supreme Court and has been involved in
several other important industry-wide healthcare cases. She also interfaces regularly with Florida
regulators on health care issues. In connection with her extensive healthcare experience, she has also
represented several clients in Florida's burgeoning medical marijuana industry and regularly writes
articles about the proposed changes in Florida medical marijuana law. To keep updated on changes in
Florida medical marijuana law,go to the Florida Medical Marijuana Blog at buyfimarijuana.com.
Alexander also practices in the education area,having handled charter school appeals all the way from the
school board level through to appeal. She also routinely negotiates charter contracts, works with stale
education regulators,and provides regular input into pending charter school legislation and regulation.
Alexander was an adjunct law professor at Nova Southeastern University School of Law for a number of
years, where she taught trial and appellate advocacy to upper-level law students. She has also taught at
the University of Miami.
After law school,Alexander clerked for the Honorable Richard D. Cudahy on the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the 7th Circuit in Chicago, Illinois.
Alexander holds a law degree with honors from University of Chicago Law School, where she was a
published editor of the Law Review. She also won the Joseph Henry Beale Prize for excellence in first-
year research and writing. She holds a bachelor's degree in politics,economics,rhetoric and law from the
University of Chicago. Her college honors thesis at the University of Chicago won the Harold E. Goettler
Political Institutions Prize.
Alexander is also a crypto-currency enthusiast and recently authored the article"How Bitcoin Will Bring
About A Legal Practice Revolution" published in the Law360 legal magazine. She has lectured
internationally on the topic of cryptocurrencies and has also given talks to various state financial
regulators on such matters.
I787230v1 6001280001
SI RI L. MCCARTNEY
• GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
• HEALTHCARE LAW
BAR ADMISSIONS
•• Florida
S U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida
Shari L. McCartney, a director with Tripp Scott,focuses her practice on business and regulatory
issues and government relations. She represents clients in regulated industries such as
healthcare,education, and consumer finance in business, governance and regulatory matters and
as external General Counsel.
She advises public boards of hospitals, community colleges,chatter schools and municipalities in
matters of governance, including public records law, Sunshine Law and ethics.
McCartney's practice also includes election law. She was local counsel during the 2000 recount
and has advised and represented campaigns-- from municipal councils to Congressional seats --
in election issues and election recounts.
McCartney has served as Commissioner and Mayor of the City of Oakland Park;Trustee of the
Municipal Pension Investment Trust;Member of the Broward Metropolitan Planning
Organization,Senior counsel to the Office of Inspector General (OIG)at the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services in Washington,D.C., the Board of Directors of the Children's
Diagnostic and Treatment Center,Inc.,and She is currently a member of the Advisory Council to
Pine Crest School.
McCartney holds a law degree from St. Thomas University,where she was an editor of Opinio
Juris. She holds a bachelor's degree in political science from the University of Horida.
087230x160012&0001
EDWARD POZZUOU
• GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
• HEALTHCARE LAW
• EDUCATION
• COMPLEX&GENERAL COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
BAR ADMISSIONS
} Florida
e U.S. District Court
Edward J.Pozzuoli,a Martindale Hubble-rated AV lawyer, is the chief executive officer of Tripp Scott.
He is an accomplished litigator and negotiator and has extensive experience handling state,county and
local governmental issues.Pozzuoli is nationally recognized as a legal expert in charter and educational
law.
Pozzuoli focuses his practice on educational and commercial litigation,with particular emphasis on
constitutional and government litigation,administrative law,and election law.He is a nationally known
expert on charter school,and he represents the largest charter school management company in the
country.He also works with municipalities and businesses that are impacted by public-policy issues
outside of the charter school arena.Among his notable cases are the 2002 reapportionment voters'rights
litigation, in which he represented the Florida Senate and the 2000 presidential recount litigation,in
which he was a member of the Bush/Cheney legal team.He continues to represent the Republican Party
in key election law cases.His political involvement includes serving as co-chair of Jeb Bush for Governor
Campaign 2002,chair of Charlie Crist Campaign for Governor and the regional chair for the Rudy
Giuliani Presidential Campaign.
Pozzuoli is a regular contributor to Fox News and Forbes, and Florida'trend named him one of its
"Florida 500,"a list of the most influential He has also been named to"Super Lawyers"as one of the top
lawyers in South Florida. In addition,he has received the Multiple Sclerosis Society's Award of
Excellence,the American Diabetes Association's Valor Award,the Republican Party's Spirit of Lincoln
Award and the South Florida Business Journal's Ultimate CEO Award.
A devoted community servant,he was the chairman of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society of South
Florida and is past chairman of the Republican Party of Broward County.He sits on the Board of
Advisors of the Nova Southeastern Law School and was the immediate past vice chair of the board of
trustees for the Pine Crest Preparatory School. He also serves as a member of the Florida Tax Watch
Florida board of trustees.He was a member of the State of Florida Republican Party's executive board,
the steering committee of the Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce and the Fair Campaign and
Practices Committee of Broward County. In addition,he has served as a director of the University of
Miami National Alumni Association.
Pozzuoli holds a law degree and a bachelor's degree from the University of Miami, where he was chief of
the prestigious Iron Arrow Honor Society and received the Outstanding Young Alumni of the Year
award. He has been named to Who's Who in Practicing Attorneys and Outstanding Young Men in
America.
I787?30v1 6001280001
KLUGER KAPLAN
Reply to:
ALAN J.KLUGER,ESQ.
akluger(OAlugerkaplan.com
Tel:305-379-9000
June 14, 2019
VIA E-MAIL
Mr. Ronald Wasson
City of Aventura—City Manager
19200 West Country Club Dr.
Aventura, FL 33180
Email: rwasson@cityofaventura.com
RE: Conflict between City of Aventura and Miami-Dade County School District
Dear Mr. Wasson
I am writing in furtherance of my correspondence with the City of Aventura attorney's
office pertaining to a possible dispute between the City of Aventura (the "City") and the Miami-
Dade County School District (the "School District") relating to issues concerning: (a) the failure
of the School District to transfer a portion of the November 6, 2018 Referendum Revenue to the
City to be utilized at the City's charter schools for enhanced compensation for high quality
teachers and instructional personnel and for enhanced school safety and security, as required by
the Referendum and F.S. §1011.71(9) and 1011.73; and (b) the conflict between the City and the
School District related to proportional share of the Referendum Revenue to be provided to the
City to be based on City's charter schools percentage of student population as compared to the
total student population of the School District.
As you may already know, my law firm and I, have substantial experience in commercial
litigation, including local government law, specializing in Miami-Dade County. We have
represented some of the nation's largest businesses and most prominent individuals and are
familiar with the issues in dispute. In fact, we have previously represented different
municipalities on conflicts similar to the one involving the City and the School Board. We
believe we have the resources and the clout to provide exceptional service to the City.
As a long-time resident of the City, I am particularly interested and concerned about the
foregoing issues, and although my hourly rate is $750 and my partner, Marko Cerenko's, hourly
rate is $450, as an accommodation to the City, we are willing to agree to proceed on the City's
behalf at a flat hourly rate of$300.
KLUGER. KAPLAN. SILVERMAN. KATZEN & LEVINE. P.L.
1111 MIAMI CEN IER.201 SOU1H BISCAYNE. 13OLIL.EYARD. TWENIY-St.VENIII FLOOR. MIAMI, IIORIDA33131 1.305.379.9000 F.305.379.3428
WWW.KLU G E RKAPLAN.COM
June 14, 2019
Page 2
I have attached my short biography, as well as one from my partner, Mr. Cerenko, for
reference purposes. If you have any other questions or would like to discuss further please give
me a call. We look forward to working with you on the City's behalf. Thank you.
Respectfully,
KLUGER,KAPLAN, SILVERMAN, KATZEN
& LEVINE,P.L.
By: ls/ Alan I Kluger
Alan J. Kluger, Esq.
cc: Mr. Marko F. Cerenko, Esq.
Mr. David Wolpin, Esq.
ALAN J. KLUGER
Founding Member
Biography
.11
Founding Member Alan Kluger is a powerhouse trial attorney who
advocates for his clients at all stages of the litigation process.Alan is a ,
veteran courtroom lawyer who represents some of the nation's largest
businesses and most prominent individuals in their most challenging
and complex cases. He acts as a trusted advisor to his clients.
Many of his clients come to him after first facing him as an adversary and determining that Alan's
tough,no-nonsense litigation tactics,and creative,out-of-the-box thinking is what they need for
their own disputes.Alan's practice is guided by three key principles: thorough preparation,
thoughtful strategy and mastery of the facts and the law. These are the reasons he consistently earns
top rankings by peer-reviewed publications such as The Best Lawyers in America,Chambers USA
and Florida Super Lawyers.
As devoted as he is to his clients,Alan is equally passionate about his community. He and his wife,
Retired Judge Amy Dean,created a private charitable foundation,the Dean-Kluger Charitable
Foundation,which supports various local and national charitable organizations.
A devoted patron of the arts,Alan and his wife own an encyclopedic collection of Contemporary
Latin American and emerging mid-career African American art.
Alan is a member of the Board of Overseers of the University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive
Cancer Center;a trustee of the Miami Chamber of Commerce,a board member of the Greater
Miami Jewish Federation,a past president of Florida Hillel Council,and a former member of the
Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board.
Areas of Law
• Real estate disputes
• Construction litigation,arbitration,mediation
• Commercial development,contracts,negotiations,disputes
• Errors&omissions claims,insurance coverage
• Bankruptcy,creditor's rights,insolvency,adversary proceedings,avoidance actions,litigation
• Creditor representation
• Receiverships
• Foreclosures,Replevin of personal property,tax sales,workouts
Education
• University of Miami School of Law,J.D., 1975
• Bryant College,B.S.,magna cum laude, 1972
Bar Admissions and Memberships
• Florida, 1975
• District of Columbia, 1978
• U.S. Supreme Court, 1979
• U.S. District Court,Middle and Southern District of Florida, 1981, 1982
• U.S. Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit, 1975,Eleventh Circuit, 1981,Ninth Circuit, 1982,
Second Circuit, 1985,Third Circuit, 1991,Tenth Circuit, 1996
• New York, 1996
• U.S. Tax Court, 1996
Awards
• America's Leading Lawyers for Business, Chambers USA,2007 -2019
• Best Lawyers in America,U.S. News and World Report, Commercial Litigation, 2005 - 2019
• Best Lawyers in America,U.S. News and World Report,Litigation-Banking&Finance,
2005 - 2019
• Best Lawyers in America,U.S. News and World Report,Litigation-Real Estate,2005 -2019
• Best Lawyers in America,U.S. News and World Report,Intellectual Property,2008
• Distinguished Leader,Daily Business Review,2018
• Most Effective Lawyer, Complex Business Litigation,Daily Business Review,2015
• Legal Leader in Construction Law,American Lawyer Media and Martindale-Hubbell,2015
• Legal Luminaries, Commercial Litigation,Dade County Bar Association, 2016
• South Florida's Top Rated Lawyers - Real Estate,Martindale Hubbell Legal Leaders,2012
• Super Lawyers Business Edition,2008 - 2016
• Super Lawyers,Florida Super Lawyers Magazine,2006 - 2019
• Legal Elite,Florida Trend Magazine,2004-2006,2009, 2011,2012,2014
• Top Lawyers, South Florida Legal Guide,2002-2018
• Best of the Bar, South Florida Business Law Journal
• Martindale-Hubbell AV Rated
• South Florida Business Journal,Top Lawyer 2011
• Law Dragon 500,Leading Plaintiffs' Lawyers in America,2007
Professional Affiliations
• The Florida Bar
• Dade County Bar Association
• American Bar Association
Community Activities
• University of Miami Sylvester Cancer Center, Grand Founder
• Dade County Mental Health Task Force on Child Abuse and Family Life Education,
Chairman,Legislative Sub-Committee
• President,Florida Hillel Council,President, 1996-2001
• Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board
• Dean-Kluger Charitable Foundation,Founder and Director.
.. .. 441
MARKO F. CERENKO
Member
Biography
As a highly experienced commercial litigator, Marko Cerenko handles virtually all types of complex
business disputes and is known for taking on complex cases and crafting creative strategies for tackling
the most complicated legal issues in commercial and real estate litigation, as well as business tort cases.
As a Member of Kluger Kaplan, Marko has extensive experience handling partnership and corporate
breakups, real estate disputes including, but not limited to representing, developers, investors, real
estate brokers, lending institution, buyers and sellers, property managers, and contractors arising out of
commercial real estate projects and transactions, as well as professional liability disputes corporate
finance issues, contract disputes and trust and estate matters.
Marko has also extensively dealt with white collar criminal issues in the civil and criminal context,
including issues related to fraud, perjury, and other sanctionable matters. In addition, Marko has
handled a variety of disputes in the entertainment and sports industries.
Marko's clients look to him as a trusted advisor, coming to see Marko with their most critical and time-
sensitive legal disputes. He is a strong advocate for his clients' interests, whether that includes early
resolution of a dispute or seeing the case go to trial. Marko custom tailors his approach for each client
based upon the client's needs and long and short-term goals.
Prior to becoming a highly successful litigator Marko was a professional tennis player competing on the
ATP Tour, after his graduation from Duke University, where he was ranked as high as #2 in the country
while serving as the team captain.
Education
• University of Miami School of Law,J.D., 2005
I • Duke University, B.A., 2001
Bar Admissions and Memberships
• Florida, 2006
• U.S. District Court, Middle and Southern District of Florida, 2007
• U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida Bankruptcy Court, 2015
Awards
• Rising Star, Florida Super Lawyers Magazine, 2015—2019
• Top 40 Under 40 Lawyers in Miami Dade County,Cystic Fibrosis Foundation (2015)
• Attorney on the Rise, Daily Business Review(2017)
Professional Affiliations
• Florida Bar
• Dade County Bar Association
• American Bar Association
CITY OF AVENTURA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commission
FROM: David M. Wolpin, City Attorney's Office
DATE: June 10, 2019
SUBJECT: Resolution Initiating Chapter 164, F.S., Dispute Resolution Process Concerning
the Matter of the Equitable Distribution of Revenue from Miami- Dade County School Board's
(the "School Board's")November 6, 2018 Tax Referendum (the " Referendum Revenue")
June 20, 2019 Special City Commission Agenda Item 5
Recommendation
In accordance with Chapter 164, F.S., the attached Resolution will serve to initiate the statutory
dispute resolution process between the City and the School Board concerning the City's request
for an equitable distribution of Referendum Revenue from the School Board for the City's Charter
Schools. Documents from the May 16, 2019 City Commission workshop meeting item are
attached hereto.
Background
You will recall that both prior to and after the voters of Miami Dade County (including the voters
of the City of Aventura) approved the November 6, 2018,tax referendum of the School Board for
the provision of a teacher and instructional staff pay supplement and school safety enhancements
for public schools, the City corresponded with the School Board and requested an equitable
distribution of the Referendum Revenue for the benefit of the City's Charter School.As you know,
by letter of February 7, 2019, the School Board (via the Superintendent) responded to the City's
letters, and denied the City's request.
At the Legislature's session which concluded on Saturday, May 4, 2019, the Legislature failed to
adopt a measure to expressly provide the City's municipal charter schools,as public schools, with
access to the Referendum Revenue from the November 6, 2018 Referendum. Instead, the
Legislature adopted an amendment to Section 1011.71, F.S., which provides for the equitable
sharing of tax referendum revenue with charter schools only for a referendum, which is first held
and approved by the voters on or after July 1,2019. Please see Section 17 of CS/HB 7123 (a copy
of an excerpt of that legislation is attached) which specifies the July 1, 2019 date.
1.
Since the results of the legislative process are now known (and the Governor has signed the
legislation), additional options may be pursued by the City, as directed at the May 16, 2019
Workshop meeting. As previously noted. Chapter 164, F.S., requires governmental entities to
attempt to resolve any intergovernmental conflict pursuant to the dispute resolution process which
is provided by that statute, which includes negotiation, joint public meetings and mediation. A
copy of the statute was provided as Exhibit "J" of the May 16, 2019 Commission Workshop
materials.
The first step in that statutory dispute resolution process would be the adoption of the attached
Resolution by the City Commission to initiate the process. Also, as discussed at the May 16, 2019
Workshop, the Commission will utilize special legal counsel to pursue the Chapter 164, F.S.,
process and any subsequent litigation on the matter .
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or Matthew Mandel.
Respectfully,
David M. Wolpin
City Attorney's Office
Copy:
Ronald J. Wasson, City Manager
Ellisa L. Horvath City Clerk
2
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-
_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
AVENTURA, FLORIDA, INITIATING CONFLICT RESOLUTION
PROCEDURES PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 164, FLORIDA STATUTES,
THE FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION ACT,
REGARDING A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE CITY OF AVENTURA
AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, School Board of Miami-Dade County Florida (the "School Board") as the
governing board of the Miami-Dade County School District (the "School District") placed a
referendum measure before the voters of Miami-Dade County, Florida at the election of
November 6, 2018 (the"Referendum"), pursuant to School Board Resolution 18- 047; and
WHEREAS, the voters of Miami—Dade County, including the electors of the City of
Aventura (the"City")approved the Referendum and authorized taxes levied by the School Board
to be increased for a period of four (4) years in order to fund teacher and instructional staff pay
supplements and school safety enhancements for public schools; and
WHEREAS, the charter schools of the City which are owned by the City and have been
constructed at the expense of the taxpayers of the City constitute public schools; and
WHEREAS, the School Superintendent, acting on behalf of the School Board of the
School District has refused the City Commission's requests that the School District share the
funds raised by the Referendum (the "Referendum Revenue") with the City for the benefit of the
City's municipal charter schools; and
WHERAS, the School Board's refusal to share Referendum Revenue with the City is
contrary to the requirements of Sections 1011.71 (9), and 1011.73, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Florida Government Conflict Resolution Act (the "Act")
is to promote, protect, and improve the health, safety, and welfare and to enhance
intergovernmental coordination efforts by the creation of a governmental conflict resolution
procedure that can provide an equitable, expeditious, effective, and inexpensive method for
resolution of conflicts between and among local and regional governmental entities, such as the
City and the School District; and
WHEREAS, the Act authorizes the City to initiate the conflict resolution provisions of
the Act prior to initiating court proceedings against the School District; and
WHEREAS, the Act sets forth the procedures for notice and conflict dispute resolution
of intergovernmental disputes and authorizes the City Commission of the City to initiate the
conflict resolution procedures through the passage of a resolution by its governing body.
City of Aventura Resolution No. 2019-
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF AVENTURA, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That the foregoing "WHEREAS" clauses are ratified and confirmed as
being true and correct and are made a specific part of this Resolution.
Section 2. That the City of Aventura, Florida has a conflict with the Miami-Dade
County School District, Florida.
Section 3. That the issues in the conflict are: (a) the failure of the School District to
transfer a portion of the Referendum Revenue to the City to be utilized at the City's charter
schools for enhanced compensation for high quality teachers and instructional personnel and for
enhanced school safety and security, as required by the Referendum and Sections 1011.71(9) and
1011.73, Florida Statutes;(b) with the proportional share of the Referendum Revenue to be
provided to the City to be based on City's charter schools percentage of student population as
compared to the total student population of the School District.
Section 4. That the City believes that the School District has failed to respond to the
City's good faith attempts to address and resolve the conflict.
Section 5. That the City Commission hereby states its intention to initiate the conflict
resolution procedures of the Act as set forth in Chapter 164, Florida Statutes, prior to initiating
court proceedings to resolve the conflict between the City and the School District.
Section 6. That the City Manager is authorized and directed to provide a certified
copy of this Resolution and the letter required by Section 164.1052, Florida Statutes, to the
School District Superintendent, within 5 days after adoption of this Resolution, by certified mail,
return receipt requested, to schedule a conflict assessment meeting, and to take all other
appropriate action pursuant to Chapter 164, Florida Statutes.
Section 7. That this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its
adoption.
The foregoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner , who moved its
adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner , and upon being put to a vote,
the vote was as follows:
Commissioner Dr. Linda Marks
Commissioner Gladys Mezrahi
Commissioner Marc Narotsky
Commissioner Robert Shelley
Commissioner Howard Weinberg
Vice Mayor Denise Landman
Mayor Enid Weisman
Page 2 of 3
City of Aventura Resolution No.2019-
PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 20`^day of June, 2019.
ENID WEISMAN, MAYOR
ATTEST:
ELLISA L. HORVATH, MMC
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
CITY ATTORNEY
This Resolution was filed in the Office of the City Clerk this day of June, 2019.
CITY CLERK
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF AVENTURA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commission
FROM: David M. Wolpin, City Attorney's Office
DATE: May 8, 2019
SUBJECT: Update on Matter of the Equitable Distribution of Revenue from Miami- Dade
County School Board's (the"School Board's")November 6, 2018 Tax Referendum(the"
Referendum Revenue")
May 16,2019 City Commission Workshop Item '1
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Commission consider the results of the recently concluded
session of the Florida Legislature in connection with the City's request for an equitable
distribution of Referendum Revenue from the School Board for the City's Charter Schools. This
matter was considered by the Commission at the April 11, 2019 Workshop,while the Legislature
was still in session. Documents from that prior workshop meeting item are attached hereto.
Background
You will recall that both prior to and after the voters of Miami Dade County (including the
voters of the City of Aventura) approved the November 6, 2018, tax referendum of the School
Board for the provision of a teacher and instructional staff pay supplement and school safety
enhancements for public schools, the City corresponded with the School Board and requested an
equitable distribution of the Referendum Revenue for the benefit of the City's Charter School.
As you know, by letter of February 7, 2019, the School Board (via the Superintendent)
responded to the City's letters, and denied the City's request.
At the Legislature's session which concluded on Saturday, May 4, 2019,the Legislature failed to
adopt a measure to expressly provide the City's municipal charter schools , as public schools,
with access to the Referendum Revenue from the November 6, 2018 Referendum. Instead, the
Legislature adopted an amendment to Section 1011.71, F.S., which provides for the equitable
sharing of tax referendum revenue with charter schools only for a referendum, which is first held
and approved by the voters on or after July 1, 2019. Please see Section 17 of CS/HB 7123 (a
copy of an excerpt of that legislation is attached) which specifies the July 1,2019 date.
1
Since the results of the legislative process are now known ( subject to action of the Governor) ,
additional options may be considered, if desired. As pointed out at the April 11, 2019 Workshop
meeting, it should be noted that Chapter 164, F.S., requires governmental entities to attempt to
resolve any intergovernmental conflict pursuant to the dispute resolution process which is
provided by that statute, which includes negotiation,joint public meetings and mediation. A copy
of the statute is provided as Exhibit "J" of the April 11, Workshop materials. The first step in
that statutory dispute resolution process would be the adoption of a Resolution by the City
Commission to initiate that process.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Respectfully,
David M. Wolpin
City Attorney's Office
Copy:
Ronald J. Wasson, City Manager
Ellisa L. Horvath City Clerk
2
FLORIDAEXCIPOitt
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
•
ENROLLED
OSMB7123, Engrossed 2 2019Lagislasrte
1 •
2 An act relating to taxation; amending s. 28.241, F.S. ;
3 requiring that all of the proceeds from filing fees
4 for trial and appellate proceedings be deposited into
5 the State Courts Revenue Trust Fund; creating s.
6 193.4517, F.S. ; defining terms; providing a tangible
7 personal property assessment limitation, during a
8 certain timeframe and in certain counties, for certain
9 agricultural equipment rendered unable to be used due
10 to Hurricane Michael; specifying conditions for
11 applying for and receiving. the assessment limitation;
12 providing procedures for petitioning the value
13 adjustment board if an application is denied;
14 providing retroactive application; amending s.
15 195.096, F.S. ; specifying a requirement for the
16 Department 'of Revenue in reviewing assessment rolls in
17 certain counties in assessment years following a
18 natural disaster; authorizing the department to use
19 the best information available to estimate levels of
20 assessment; providing applicability and retroactive
21 operation; amending s. 201.02, F.S.; removing a
22 limitation on the transfer of homestead property deeds
23 between spouses that are exempt from documentary stamp
24 tax; amending s. 212.031, F.S.; reducing tax rates on
25 rental or licensee fees for the use of real property;
Page 1 of 32
COOING;Words ebioken are deletions;cords underlined are additions.
hb7123-04-er
4
FLORIDA HOUSE O F REPRESENTATIVES
ENROLLED
CSIHB7123, Engrossed 2 2019Legislaturo
426 Section 15. Paragraph (a) of subsection (6) of section
427 337.401, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
428 337 .401 Use of right-of-way for utilities subject to
429 regulation; permit; fees.-
430 (6) (a) As used in this subsection, the following
431 definitions apply:
432 l .a. A "pass-through provider" is any person who places or
433 maintains a communications facility in the roads or rights-of-
434 way of a municipality or county that levies a tax pursuant to
435 chapter 202 and who does not remit taxes imposed by that
436 municipality or county pursuant to chapter 202.
437 b. Notwithstanding sub-subparagraph a. , a person who does
438 not remit taxes imposed by a municipality or county pursuant to
439 chapter 202, but pursuant to s. 202. 16(2) sells communications
440 services for resale to a person who sells such services at
441 retail or who integrates such services into communications
442 services sold at retail in that municipality or county and who
443 remits taxes imposed by that municipality or county pursuant to
444 chapter 202, is not a pass-through provider.
445 2. A "communications facility" is a facility that may be
446 used to provide communications services . Multiple cables,
447 conduits, strands, or fibers located within the same conduit
448 shall be considered one communications facility for purposes of
449 this subsection.
450.....)0Section 16. Subsection (9) of section 1011.71, Florida
Page 18 o132
CODING:Words eblsken are deletions;words underlined are additions.
hb7123-04-er
FLORIDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ENROLLED
CSIH87123, Engrossed 2 2019LegIslatre
is
i
1
451 Statutes, is amended to read;
452 1011.71 District school tax.-
453 (9) In addition to the maximum millage levied under this
454 section and the General Appropriations Act, a school district
455 may levy, by local referendum or in a general election,
456 additional millage for school operational purposes up to an
457 amount that, when combined with nonvoted millage levied under
458 this section, does not exceed the 10-mill limit established in
459 s. 9(b) , Art. VII of the State Constitution. Any such levy shall
460 be for a maximum of 4 years and shall be counted as part of the
461 10-mill limit established in s. 9 (b) , Art. VII of the State
462 Constitution. For the purpose of distributing taxes collected
463 pursuant to this subsection, the term "school operational
464 purposes" includes charter schools sponsored by a school
465 district. Millage elections conducted under the authority
466 granted pursuant to this section are subject to s. 1011.73. -
467 Funds generated by such additional millage do not become a part
468 of the calculation of the Florida Education Finance Program
469 total potential funds in 2001-2002 or any subsequent year and
470 must not be incorporated in the calculation of any hold-harmless
471 or other component of the Florida Education Finance Program
472 formula in any year. If an increase in required local effort,
473 when added to existing millage levied under the 10-mill limit,
474 would result in a combined millage in excess of the 10-mill
475 limit, any millage levied pursuant to this subsection shall be
Page 19 of 32
CODING:Words Waken are deletions;words underlined are additions.
hb7123-04er
9
FLORIDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ENROLLED
CSM87123, Engrossed 2 2019 Leg(SlalUte
476 considered to be required local effort to the extent that the
477 district millage would otherwise exceed the 10-mill limit. Funds
478 levied under this subsection shall be shared with charter
479 schools based on each charter school' s proportionate share of
480 the district's total unweighted full-time equivalent student
481 enrollment and used in a manner consistent with the purposes of
482 the levy. The referendum must contain an explanation of the
483 distribution methodology consistent with the requirements of
—/ 484 this subsection.
11985 Section 17. The provisions of this act relating to s.
486 1011.71, Florida Statutes, amending the use of certain voted
487 discretionary operating millaqes levied by school districts,
4BB apply to such levies authorized by a vote of the electors on or
489 after July 1, 2019.
490 Section 18. Disaster preparedness supplies; sales tax
491 holiday.-
492 (1) The tax levied under chapter 212, Florida Statutes,
493 may not be collected during the period from 12:01 a.m. on May
494 31, 2019, through 11:59 p.m. on June 6, 2019, on the sale of;
495 (a) A portable self-powered light source selling for $20
496 or less.
497 (b) A portable self-powered radio, two-way radio, or
498 weather-band radio selling for $50 or less.
499 (c) A tarpaulin or other flexible waterproof sheeting •
500 selling for $50 or less.
Page 20 of 32
CODING Words Woken are deletions;words underlined are additions.
h.�r er
CITY OF AVENTVRA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Commisnee
FROM: David M. Woniu,City Attorney's Office
DATE: Apri14,2019
SUli3ECT: Egutlabk Di him of Revenue horn Miami-Dade County School Board's(9w
'Whoa Baud's")November 6,2018 Tan Refateadum(the Refer Revemei
Apol ll,2019 City Cameelmital Weebiop iter 3
Salainatikall
Iiia teatinmended its the thy Comminks consider the results of reaeacb in support of the>
City'sago*fir ran equitable distributive'ofR mrReverefowntheStoolBoardforth*
City's Charter Schoole.
liatkormuld
Nor to and der the volas of Miami Dade County(including the votm of the City ofAvmtura)
appmuedtheNovemba6,2O1S,tax r dmaofdreSchotDoardforthegovhmoanrenber
and Inetrunionel stuff pay supplement gad shoot safety nthancemente, the City corresponded
With the WNW Eoardandmgaeatedasegdhbledhdtibutimatm R Ravennofurthe
beret dint C9tr'1 Charter SchooL A copy the City's knees of OSba 22,2018 zed Jaastuy
24,2019aro aWoh4Rhers)asE 'A"and Ir. ByJetta ofF4breaey7,2019,the School
Board(via the fi trade)responded to the City'r Inlets, and darted the City's request A
copy ofS Stryaintendent's letter Is s8ladhed Kano as Exhibit V'.
The(Sty Coomnismnbee regraded that we reuatsharylegal sugntities which may support the.
City'sentlikonent to at mikado dnsnbotim of the Referendum Ravmoe lits the boneat of the
Otos[.better Schools.
Sonic*1011.710),1'.5.,is .1-W oty meting le on for the Reibrmdum.Acopy onto
sate is attached hereto as Exhibits D'.The Refeu ndrim item was planed on the November 6,
2018 ballot paean to School Bond Resolution 18'047.:A copy of that resolution is attaehed
hereto as.Exhild 'E".
We ban fondthat in Indian River County,Florida, thole was a nay favorable(baht Court
ntlbg by Order of lune 13,2017,in the ase ofhemt Rh*Charter High School.Me. ex at It
School Board gffedlmeRime Como, Case No.31-2016-CA-000831 (lune 13.2017).A cent of
1
that Order is attached hereto as Exhibit"F". The Indian River Circuit Court determined that the
charter schools located in that County were entitled to a fair share of the 2012 Indian River County
School District tax referendum revenue, to be allocated based upon the percentage of student
population in the charter schools in that county as calculated in proportion to the School District's
total student population. Following that favorable Circuit Court ruling, the parties there entered
into an agreed upon Final lodgment of September 20, 2017, which equitably distributed
referendums revenue to specific charter schools.A copy of that Final Judgment is attached hereto
as Exhibit"0".Accordingly,the City may want to specifically request the School Board to provide
information and an explanation as to how the School Board may seek to draw any distinction from
the City's current request for an equitable distribution of Referendum Revenue to the court ruling
in Indian River County.
We have also found that Attorney General Opinion 2004-67,as issued by Attorney General Charlie
Crist in 2004 clearly supports the concept that since charter schools are part of the public school
system, they should be funded the same as other public schools in the public school system. A
copy of AGO 2004.67 is attached hereto as Exhibit"W.
Further, we understand that the Florida Legislature will be considering legislation to expressly
provide for charter schools to share in the revenue which is produced by school tax referendums,
such as the November 6,2018 Referendum.We continue to monitor that legislation as it may offer
a resolution of the matter without the need to consider other remedies.Importantly,Speaker of the
House,Jose R.Oliva,by letter of February 26,2019,has expressed strong support for the equitable
distribution of the Referendum Revenue to Charter Schools within Miami-Dade County.A copy
of that letter is attached hereto as Exhibit"F'. Moreover,Attorneys working with Charter Schools
USA have taken an active and important role in the legislative process and will keep the City
updated.
Further information will be provided as the legislative process unfolds. Once the results of the
legislative process are known, additional options may be considered, if necessary. It should be
noted that Chapter 164, F.S., requires governmental entities to attempt to resolve any
intergovernmental conflict pursuant to the dispute resolution process which is provided by that
statute,which includes negotiation,joint public meetings and mediation.A copy of the statute is
attached hereto as Exhibit"P".
If you have any questions,please feel free to contact me.
Respec ye
David M. Wolpin
City Attorney's Office
Copy
Ronald J.Wasson,City Manager
Ellisa L. Horvath City Clerk
2
Pxtrsrbt qAt)
City of / r/ A
zt
t i Aventura
Government Center
'Fee,¢co. 19200 West Country Club Drive
Aventura,Florida 33180
ENm WEISMAN
October 22, 2018 MAYOR
COMMISSIONERS
Ms. Perla Tabares Hantman DENISE DRRUNDA MAUSS
DYSMEZRAHI
Chair of the Board oLA CHARORMH
Miami-Dade County School Board "'A�NAROr
ROBERT SHELLEY
School Board Administration Building HOWARD WEINBERG
1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, 71" Floor JOANNE CARR
Miami, FL 33132 INTERIM CITY MANAGER
RE: Referendum for Teacher and Instructional Staff Pay Supplement and School •
Safety(the Referendum'
Dear Chair Tabares Hantman:
The City Commission of the City of Aventura (the "City) has requested that I write to
you to advise that the City Commission supports the School Referendum. However, that
support is expressly subject to the condition that H the Referendum is approved by the
electors, the Miami- Dade County School Board (the "School Board')shall take prompt
action to assure that municipal Charter Schools, such as the City's Aventura City of
Excellence School CAGES') will receive an equitable distribution of the additional tax
revenues which are produced by the approval of the Referendum. As you know, ACES
and all other charter schools are public schools, just as the traditional public schools
operated by the School Board aro public schools. The parents of the children attending
charter schools are taxpayers and are entitled to equal treatment and respect.
Since approval of the Referendum will enable the compensation of high quality teachers
and instructional personnel to be enhanced, and wilt provide additional necessary
funding for school safety, including assistance in funding school resource officers, it is
essential that access to such funds not be limited to those schools which are operated •
by the School Board, but also be provided to municipal Charter Schools, such as ACES.
Access to the Referendum funding source for improvements in compensation for high
quality teachers and Instructional personnel is of paramount importance, so that teacher
and Instructional staff parity of compensation may be assured for the dedicated
professionals serving in pubic schools,without regard to whether they serve in a public
school operated by the School Board or a public school which is a municipal Charter
School. Each constitutes a public school which ably serves the residents and
taxpayers.
PHONE: 705-466-8910 • FAx: 305-466.8919
W ww.cityofaventura.com
ft d 61-47‘ •
Moreover, since each year Aventura taxpayers provide In excess of$66 Million Dollars
in tax funds to the School Board, basic fairness requires that the new revenue which is
produced by the Referendum be equitably shared with the City for the benefit of the
parents and students of ACES. Please remember that for the last several weeks of last
year's school year, the City Commission stepped up to the plate and provided City of
Aventura police protection for the School Board's Waterways school located outside of
the boundary of the City of Aventura, M order to protect all staff and children at that
public school. That was done at no cost to the School Board. The City Commission
determined that it was simply the right thing to do. The taxpayers of the City absorbed
that cost. It is time for the School Board to step up now, do the right thing, and honor the
City's request for fair treatment concerning the equitable distribution of the Referendum
revenue.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions concerning this matter. The
City welcomes the opportunity to work with the School Board on this and other issues of
mutual concern. Accordingly, kindly advise us of the date and time of the School Board
meeting at which the implementation of the Referendum, if approved by the electors,
will appear on the School Board Agenda for discussion.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours truly,
rr
\ ielAd
Joanne Can, AICP
Interim City Manager
Copy: Superintendent Alberto Carvalho
Mayor Welaman and City Commission •
City Clerk
« n
City of fr I q-a
- Aventura
Coves:meat Center
£ 19200 west Country Club Drive
Aventurs,Florida 33180
O6ice of the City Manager
January 24, 2019
Ms. Perla Tabares Hartman
Chair of the Board
Miaml-Dade County School Board
School Board Administration Building ':
1450 N.E.2"d Avenue, 7"' Floor
Miami, FL 33132
Re: Equitable Distribution of Revenue from Referendum for Teachers and
Instructional Staff Pay Supplement and School Safety(the Referendum")
Dear Chair Tabares Hartman:
•
You will recall that by letter of October 22, 2019 (the • Letter), the City Commission of the
City of Aventura (the "City') wised you that the City Commission supports the School
Referendum, subject to the condition that if the Referendum was approved by the electors,
the Miami- Dade County School Board (the 'School Boar') would take prompt adios to
assure that municipal Charter Schools, such as the City's Aventura City of Excellence School
(-ACES" will receive an equitable distribution of the additional tax revenues which are
produced by the approval of the Referendum.
The Letter explained that since approval of the Referendum will enable the compensation of
high quay teachers and instructional personnel to be enhanced, and will provide additional
necessary funding for school safety, including assistance in funding school resource officers,
it was essential that access to such funds not be limited to those schools which are operated
by the School Boar, but also be provided to municipal Charter Schools, such as ACES.
The Letter further pointed out that access to the Referendum funding source for
Improvements In compensation for high quatdy teachers and Instructional personnel is of
paramount importance, so that teacher and instructional staff parity of compensation may be
assured for the dedicated professionals serving In public schools, without regard to whether
they serve hi a public school operated by the School Board or a public school which is a
PHONE: 305466-8910 • FAX' 305-466-8919
www.cilyofaventura.aam
ifr
January 24,2019
Ms. Perla Tabares Hantman
Page Two •
municipal Charter School. Each constitute public schools which ably serve the residents and •
taxpayers.
However, despite the fact that the Referendum was approved by the electors, the City has
not received any distribution from the Referendum revenue and has not even recehved a reply
to our Letter.
Moreover, since each year, Aventura taxpayers provide more than $66 Million Dollars In tax
funds to the School Board, basic fairness requires that the new revenue which is produced by
the Referendum be equitably shared with the City for the benefit of the parents and students
of ACES.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions concerning this matter. The City
welcomes the opportunity to work with the School Board on this and other issues of mutual
concern. Accordingly, kindty advise us of the date and time of the School Board meeting at
which the equitable distribution of our municipal Charter School's share of revenue from the
Referendum may be considered. In the interim, we have invited Dr. Karp to provide a status
update to us.
Thank you for your consideration.
• Sincerely,
1 Ronald J.Wasson
City Manager
cc: School Board Members
Superintendent Alberto Carvalho
Mayor Weisman and City Commission
City Clerk
1 CM03073.19
P14ONE: 305-4664910 • FAX: 3054664919
www.cityoftventum.com
1
& A;L+tc•
n _
Miami-Dade County Public Schools
giving our students tho world
•
Superfibndont&Schools 1flhml,Dade Comity School Board
Aisle At Carvalho Peds Tatiana Here,Chair
Dr.Alm*Karp We Chair
Or.Dormtlyaenthvn- fang#
February 7, 2019 Susie Y. CasMo
Dr.Laurence S.Feldman
Ga
Mr. Ronald J.Wasson, City Manager DrSieve, Uon al
City of Aventura ticCLlV�il LaDo Marta ar
Govemmerd Center Marl ism Rohs
19200 West Country Club Drive FEB 1 4 2019
Aventura, FL 33180
Dear Mr. Wasson: errv:¢r eTur
Please accept this correspondence as confirmation that Miami-Dade County Public
• Schools(M-DCPS) is in receipt of two letters dated October 22, 2018, addressed to the
Chair and Vice Chair of the Scheel Board respectfully, and your more recent letter of
January 24, 2019, addressed to the Chair of the School Board. These letters regarding
• the referendum for teacher and Instructional personnel and school safety have been
referred to me fora response.
As you maybe aware, the referendum language specifically indicated:
• SHALL THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
LEVY 0.75 MILLS OF AD VALOREM TAXES FOR OPERATIONAL
FUNDS (1) TO IMPROVE COMPENSATION FOR HIGH QUALITY
TEACHERS . AND INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL, AND (2) TO
INCREASE SCHOOL SAFETY AND SECURITY PERSONNEL, WITH
OVERSIGHT BY A CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BEGINNING
JULY 1, 2019, AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2023?
The funds generated from the passage of this referendum were clearly intended for the
exclusive benefit of M-DCPS. United Teachers of Dade (UTD) represents teachers and
Instiuc onal personnel who are public employees of the.School Board of MlamI-Dade
County, Florida. Similarly, the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) represents Miami-Dade
Schools Poke Officers. As the voters of Miami-Dade authorized the School Board to
levy ad valorem taxes for its operational funds, those funds have been committed via
duly adopted and ratified ccNective bargaining agreements with both UTD and FOP.
However, I believe there is a collective moral obligation for the safety and security of all
students. To that end, as has been previously Indicated at various public meetings and
through the media, consideration may be given to providing charter schools with an
increased sham of the Safe Schools allocation provided by the Florida Legislature,
Shortly after the conclusion of the legislative appropriations process, recommendations
regarding expanded access to Safe Schools funding for FY 2019-2020 will be proffered.
School Board Administration&drdlna• 1450 N.E 2nd Avenue•Adana,Florida 33132
305-995-1000•umw.dadeschools,net
We greatly appreciate the long-term support of Miami-Dade County Public Schools and
consider the City of Aventura to be a valuable partner in the education of our
community's children. We look forward to working closely with the City as we continue
to advocate for increased educational funding at the state and federal levels.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Ms. Iraida Mendez-Cartaya,
Associate Superintendent, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, Grants Administration,
and Community Engagement, at W5 995-1497.
Sincerely,
Alberto M. Carvalho
Superintendent of Schools
AMC:mja
L768
cc: School Board Members
School Board Attorney
Ms. Iraida R. Mendez-Cartaya
Page 2 of 2
Statutes& Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 1 of 3
. s1s rid �_( I) )"
/I1 C T
Select Year: 2018 V Go
The 2018 Florida Statutes
Title XLVIII Chatter 1011 View Entire Chapter
K-20 EDUCATION CODE PLANNING AND BUDGETING
1011.71 District school tax.—
(1) If the district school tax is not provided in the General Appropriations Act or the substantive bill
implementing the General Appropriations Act,each district school board desiring to participate In the
state allocation of funds for current operation as prescribed by 1s 1011.62(18)shall levy on the taxable
value for school purposes of the district, exclusive of mintage voted under s.9(b)or s. 12,Art. VII of the
State Constitution, a millage rate not to exceed the amount certified by the commissioner as the
minimum mglage rate necessary to provide the district required local effort for the current year,
pursuant to s. 1011.62(4)(a)1. In addition to the required local effort millage levy, each district school
board may levy a nonvoted current operating discretionary millage. The Legislature shalt prescribe
annually in the appropriations act the maximum amount of rattrap a district may levy.
2(2) In addition to the maximum millage levy as provided in subsection (1), each school board may
levy not more than 1.5 mills against the taxable value for school purposes for charter schools pursuant
to s. 1013.62(1) and (3)and for district schools to fund;
(a) New construction and remodeling projects,as set forth in s. 1013.64(6)(b)and Included in the
district's educational plant survey pursuant to s. 1013.31 without regard to prioritization, sites and site
Improvement or expansion to new sites, existing sites, auxiliary facilities, athletic facilities, or ancillary
facilites.
(by Maintenance, renovation, and repair of existing school plants or of teased facilities to correct
deficiencies pursuant to s. 1013.15(2).
(c) The purchase, lease-purchase,or lease of school buses.
(d) The purchase, lease-purchase, or lease of new and replacement equipment; computer and
device hardware and operating system software necessary for gaining access to or enhancing the use of
electronic and digital instructional content and resources; and enterprise resource software applications
that are classified as capital assets kis accordance with definitions of the Governmental Accounting
Standards Board,have a useful life of at least 5 years, and are used to support distr(ctwide
administration or state-mandated reporting requirements. Enterprise resource software may be acquired
by annual license fees, 'maintenance fees, or tease agreements.
(e) Payments for educational facilities and sites due under a lease-purchase agreement entered into
by a district school board pursuant to s. 1003.02(1)(f)or s. 1013.15(2), not exceeding, in the aggregate,
an amount equal to three-fourths of the proceeds from the millage levied by a district school board
pursuant to this subsection.The three-fourths limit is waived for lease-purchase agreements entered
into before June 30, 2009, by a district school board pursuant to this paragraph. If payments under
lease-purchase agreements In the aggregate, Including lease-purchase agreements entered into before
June 30, 2009, exceed three-fourths of the proceeds from the millage levied pursuant to this subsection,
http:!/www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTF.S/iindex.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut.. 2/4/2019
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 2 of 3
the district school board may not withhold the administrative fees authorized by s. 1002.33(20)from any
charter school operating M the school district.
(f) Payment of loans approved pursuant toss, 1011.14 and 1011,15.
(g) Payment of costs directly related to complying with state and federal environmental statutes,
rules, and regulations governing school facilities.
(h) Payment of costs of leasing relocatable educational facilities, of renting or leasing educational
facilities and sites pursuant to s. 1013,15(2), or of renting or leasing buildings or space within existing
buildings pursuant to s. 1013.15(4).
(I) Payment of the cost of school buses when a school district contracts with a private entity to
provide student transportation services if the district meets the requirements of this paragraph.
1. The district's contract must require that the private entity purchase, (ease-purchase, or lease,
and operate and maintain, one or more school buses of a specific type and size that meet the
requirements of s.J006.25.
2. Each such school bus must be used for the daily transportation of public school students in the
manner required by the school district
3. Annual payment for each such school bus may not exceed 10 percent of the purchase price of the
state pool bid.
4. The proposed expenditure of the funds for this purpose must have been Included in the district
school board's notice of proposed tax for school capital outlay as provided in s. 200.065(10).
0) Payment of the cost of the opening day collection for the library media center of a new school.
(k) Payout of sick leave and annual leave accrued as of June 30, 2017, by individuals who are no
longer employed by a school district that transfers to a charter school operator all day-to-day classroom
Instruction responsibility for all full-time equivalent students funded under s. 1011.62. This paragraph
expires July 1, 2018.
(3) Notwithstanding subsection (2), if the revenue from 1.5 mills is insufficient to meet the
payments due under a lease-purchase agreement entered into before June 30, 2009, by a district school
board pursuant to paragraph(2)(e), or to meet other critical district fixed capital outlay needs,the
board, in addition to the 1.5 mills, may levy up to 0.25 mills for fixed capital outlay in lieu of levying an
equivalent amount of the discretionary mills for operations as provided in the General Appropriations
Act.Millage levied pursuant to this subsection is subject to the provisions of s. 200.Q65 and,combined
with the 1.5 mills authorized In subsection(2), may not exceed 1.75 mills. If the district chooses to use
up to 0.25 mitts for fixed capital outlay, the compression adjustment pursuant to s- 1011,62(5)shalt be
calculated for the standard discretionary millage that Is not eligible for transfer to capital outlay.
(4) If the revenue from the millage authorized In subsection (2)is insufficient to make payments due
under a lease-purchase agreement entered Into prior to June 30, 2008, by a district school board
pursuant to paragraph (2)(e), an amount up to D,5 mills of the taxable value for school purposes within
the school district shall be legally available for such payments, notwithstanding other restrictions on the
use of such revenues imposed by law.
(5) A school district may expend, subject to s.210,065, up to$150 per unweighted full-time
equivalent student from the revenue generated by the millage levy authorized by subsection (2) to fund,
in addition to expenditures authorized in paragraphs (2)(a)-(j), expenses for the following:
(a) The purchase, lease-purchase, or lease of driver's education vehicles; motor vehicles used for
the maintenance or operation of plants and equipment; security vehicles; or vehicles used in staring or
distributing materials and equipment.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfn?App mode=Display_Statirt... 2/4/2019
Statutes& Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 3 of 3
•
ib) Payment of the cost of premiums, as defined in s. 627.403 for property and casualty insurance
necessary to insure school district educational and ancillary plants. As used in this paragraph, casualty
insurance has the same meaning as M s. 624.605(1)(d), (f), (g), (h),and(m). Operating revenues that
are made available through the payment of property and casualty insurance premiums from revenues
generated under this subsection may be expended only for nonrecurring operational expenditures of the
school district.
(6) Violations of the expenditure provisions in subsection (2)or subsection (5)shalt result in an equal
dollar reduction in the Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP)funds for the violating district in the
fiscal year following the audit citation.
(7) These taxes shall be certified, assessed, and collected as prescribed in s. 1011.04 and shall be
expended as provided by taw.
(8) Nothing in s. 1011.62(4)(a)1.shall In any way be construed to increase the maximum school
millage levies as provided for to subsection (1).
(9) In addition to the maximum malage levied under this section and the General Appropriations Act,
a school district may levy, by local referendum or in a general election, additional millage for school
operational purposes up to an amount that, when combined with nonvoted mluage levied under this
section,does not exceed the 10-mill limit established in s. 9(b), Art. Vii of the State Constitution.Any
such levy shall be for a maximum of 4 years and shall be counted as part of the 1 Pmgl limit established
in s. 9(b), Art. VII of the State Constitution. Millage elections conducted under the authority granted
pursuant to this section are subject to s. 1011.73. Funds generated by such additional millage do not
become a part of the calculation of the Florida Education Finance Program total potential finds in 2001-
2002 or any subsequent year and must not be incorporated in the calculation of any hold-harmless or
other component of the Florida Education Finance Program formula in any year. If an increase in
required local effort, when added to existing mitlage levied under the 10-mill(knit, would result in a
combined millage in excess of the 10-mill limit, any millage levied pursuant to this subsection shall be
considered to be required local effort to the extent that the district millage would otherwise exceed the
10-mill limit.
History.-s.21,cit.2002-296;s.663,ch.2002-387;ss.17,18,ch.2003.399;s. 1,cn.2004-346;s.7,di.2006.27;s. 54,ch
2006-74,s.9,ch.2006-190;s. 178,ch.2007.5;s.4,ch.2007-59;s.4,dt.2007-194;a.7,33,ch.2%7-321;ss.4,5,ch.
2007-328;ss.6,7,dr.2008.2;s.10,11,ch.2008.142;s. 1,2,ch.2008.213;ss. 12,13,ch.2009-3;s.33,di.2009-59;S.
129,ch.2010-5;s.30,di.2010.154;s.36,ch.2011-55;s.98,dn.2012-5;s.17,ch.2012-133;s.B8,di. 2014-39;s.28,di.
2014-56;s. 8,9,ch.2015.222;a.22,23, 126,ch.201632;s.29,ch.2016-237;s.29,ch.2017-116;s. 32,ch.2018.8 s.
Ho,ch.2018110;s.53,ch.2018-118.
!note.-S.stltuted by the editors fora reference to s. 1011.6206),as amended by s. 110,ch.2018-110.to conform to
the addition of a new subsection(16)by s.29,di.2018-3, and a new subsection(16),redesignated by the editors as
submction 117),by s.4,ch.2018.10.
sNote.-Section 49,ch.2018-6,provides that
'(1) The Department of Revenue is authorized, and all conditions are deemed to be met, to adopt emergency rules
pursuant to s.120.54(4),Florida Statutes,for the purpose of admloistedng the provisions of this act.
^(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,emergency rules adopted pursuant to subsection (1)are effective for 6
months after adoption and may be renewed during the pendency of procedures to adopt permanent roles addressing the
subject of the emergency roles.
13) This section shall take effect upon this act becoming a law and shall aspire January 1,2022.'
Copyright 0 1995-2019 The Florida Legislature• Privacy Statement•Contact Us
httpi/www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statrt... 2/4/2019
RESOLUTION 18-047
A RESOLUTION OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-
DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CALLING FOR A
REFERENDUM TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 6, 2018
FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING TO THE DULY
QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
FLORIDA A QUESTION REGARDING A LEVY OF AD
VALOREM TAXES FOR OPERATING EXPENSES TO
IMPROVE COMPENSATION FOR HIGH QUALITY
TEACHERS, INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL, AND TO
INCREASE SCHOOL SAFETY AND SECURITY
PERSONNEL, WITH OVERSIGHT BY A CITIZEN
ADVISORY COMMPCPEE; PROVIDING FOR PROPER
NOTICE OF SUCH REFERENDUM{ AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, for the first time in the history of Florida School Performance Grades,the
School District of Miami-Dade County, Florida ("the District") has achieved a district wide
grade of an "A,"and for the second year in a row,there are no "F"-rated traditional schools in
the District;and
WHEREAS, higher percentages of Miami-Dade schools received "A" grades in 2018
than statewide across all schools and in all other large Florida Districts;and
WHEREAS, the District's graduation rate rose to 84.2 percent for the 2016-2017
academie year, the highest rate the District has achieved since the Florida Departmentof
Education began tracking graduation statistics with modern methods in the late 1990s;and
WHEREAS, the District has deatonstrated outstanding results on statewide assessments,
NAEP-TURA results,impressive third-grade assessment results and regularly leads the nation In
both Advanced Placement(AP)participation and performance among minority students;and
WHEREAS, for the seventh straight year, the District received mote national magnet
merit awards than any other District, and for 2017-1S award cycle, the District received 54
magnet merit awards,an increase of 12 additional awards;and
WHEREAS,the School Board must maintain sufficient revenues to maintain high quality
instruction in schools;and
WHEREAS,the District has experienced a severe shortfall in the funding provided by the
Florida Legislature for the Districts normal operating expenses during the current and prior
fiscal years, and such shortfall negatively affects the District's ability to attract and retain high
quality teachers and other instructional personnel;and
WHEREAS, the State categorical fixating allocation for more School Resource Officers
and security personnel and other safety and security requirements is insufficient to meet the
statutory tequirontents and needs of the District and
Ana tsannem
WHEREAS,under the State of Florida budget approved for the 2018-2019 school year,
the maltase the District is required to levy will be the lowest total.millage assessed for school
purposes in decades; and
WHEREAS, the State's funding formula docs not permit the use of capital Hinds for
operating expenses except for limited purposes pursuant to Section 1011.71(5),Florida Statutes
(2018);and
WHEitEAS, Section 1011,71(9)and Section 1011.73, Florida Statutes (2018),authorize
the imposition by school boards of a levy of ad valorem taxes for up to four (4) years for
operating expenses,subject to approval by the electors of the county voting in a refa'endtun;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-
DADE COUNTY,FLORIDA:
Section L Levv of Ad Valorem Taxes for Operating Bemuses, Pursuant to the
provisions of'Section 1011.71(9), Florida Statutes (2018), there is hereby levied and imposed
0.75 mills of ad valorem taxes to fund operating expenses to improve compensation for high
quality teachers and other instructional personnel and to increase school safety and security
personnel,with oversight by a citizen advisory committee.
Section 2. Tem; of Levy The 0.75 mill levy of ad valorem taxes for operating
expenses shall commence July 1, 2019 and shall remain in MI force and effect for up to four
years ending June 30, 2023, unless repealed or reduced prior to that time by resolution of the
School Board,which repeal or reduction may be effectuated without referendum.
Section 3. Referendum The School Board hereby requests a referendum to be held
throughout Miami-Dade County, Florida, on the second Tuesday after the first Monday in
November, vdhich is November 6, 2018, for the purpose of submitting to the duly qualified
electors of Mtmni•Dade County the question or questions set forth herein. The School Board
hereby requests the Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners Cl)to approve the date
for the referendum and(it)to direct the Miami-Dade County Supervisor of Elections to place on
the ballot the statement contained In the"Notice of Election"set forth in section 4,below,and to
conduct said election pursuant to the provisions of the election laws of the State of Florida. The
vote at said referendum shalt be by the voting device provided by the Supervisor of Elections for
the general election, as approved by the Florida Department of State pursuant to Chapter 101,
Florida Statutes,and in each polling place there shall be at least one such device.
Section 4. Nctioe of Election. Notice of said election shall be given by publication
both in English and Spanish in a newspaper of general circulation throughout the County. Such
publication shall be made at least twice,once in the fifth week and once in the third week prior to
the week of November 6, 2018,the first publication to be not less than 30 days prior to the date
of the referendum. Such notice shall be substantially In the following form together with such
additional information as the Supervisor of Elections of Miami-Dade County, Florida shall
require:
2
NOTICE OF ELECTION
TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 6,2018
IN
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,FLORIDA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT AN ELECTION HAS BEEN CALLED
BY THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA FROM
7:00 A.M. UNTIL 7:00 P.M. ON TUESDAY,THE 6m DAY OF NOVEMBER,
2018, AT WHICH TIME THERE SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE DULY
QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA THE
FOLLOWING QUESTION:
REFERENDUM TO APPROVE AD VALOREM
LEVY FOR TEACHERS, INSTRUCTIONAL
PERSONNEL,SCHOOL SAFETY AND SECURITY
SHALL THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, LEVY 0.75 MILLS OF AD
VALOREM TAXES FOR OPERATIONAL FUNDS (1)
TO IMPROVE COMPENSATION FOR HIGH QUALITY
TEACHERS AND INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL,
AND (2) TO INCREASE SCHOOL SAFETY AND
SECURITY PERSONNEL, WITH OVERSIGHT BY A
CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BEGINNING
JULY I,2019,AND ENDING JUNE 30,20237
YES NO
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTION AND THE EJECTION
{ LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ALL DULY QUALIFIED ELECTORS
OF MIAMI-DADS COUNTY,FLORIDA SHALL BE ENTITLED TO VOTE IN
THE ELECTION TO WHICH THIS NOTICE PERTAINS.
IF THE QUESTION SHALL BB APPROVED BY VOTE OF A MAJORITY OF
THE DULY QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
FLORIDA VOTING THEREON,THE SCHOOL BOARD SHALL LEVY 0.75
MILLS OF AD VALOREM TAXES FOR OPERATIONAL FUNDS TO BE
USED TO IMPROVE COMPENSATION FOR HIGH QUALITY TEACHERS
AND INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL AND TO INCREASE SCHOOL
SAFETY AND SECURITY PERSONNEL, WITH OVERSIGHT BY A
CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE,FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS.
Section 5. Official Ballot, The official ballot to be used in the election to be held on
November 6, 2018, shall be in English, Spanish and Haidan-Creole shall be in full compliance
with the laws of the State of Florida and shall be substantially in the following form:
3
OFFICIAL BALLOT
REFERENDUM TO APPROVE AD VALOREM
LEVY FOR TEACHERS, INSTRUCTIONAL
PERSONNEL,SCHOOL SAFETY AND SECURITY
SHALL THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, LEVY 0.75 MILLS OF Al)
VALOREM TAXES FOR OPERATIONAL FUNDS (1)
TO IMPROVE COMPENSATION FOR HIGH QUALITY
TEACHERS AND INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL,
AND (2) TO INCREASE SCHOOL SAFETY AND
SECURITY PERSONNEL, WITH OVERSIGHT BY A
CIT ZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BEGINNING
JULY I,2019,AND ENDING JUNE 30,20237
_ YES NO
If the question shall be approved by vote of a majority of the duly qualified electors of
Miami-Dade County, Florida, voting thereon, the School Board shall levy 0.75 mills of ad
valorem taxes for operational funds to improve compensation for high quality teachers and
instructional personnel and to increase school safety and security personnel,with oversight by a
citizen advisory committee for a period of four years.
Section 6. Time and Place of Referendum. The polls will be open at the voting
places on the date of such iju.eadum from 7:00 A.M. until 7:00 P.M. Ali qualified electors
residing within the County shall be entitled and permitted to vote at such referendum on the
proposition provided above. The mferendtun shall be held at the polling places provided for
general elections in Miami-Dade County, Florida and the inspectors and clerks shall be those
appointed and qualified for general elections in Miami-Dade County, Florida by the Supervisor
IIIE of Elections. The inspectors and clerks at each polling place and the Supervisor of Elections
shall canvass the vote and make due rattans of same without delay to the Board. Such returns
shall show, separately, the number of qualified electors who voted at such election on such
question and the number of votes cast respectively for and against approval of Such question.
The returns of the Inspectors and clerks shall,as soon as practicable after the close of the polls,
be canvassed by the Supervisor of Elections,which shall declare and certify the results of such
referendum.
Section 7. Absentee Voting. Absentee electors participating in said referendum shall
be entitled to cast their ballots in accordance with the provisions of the laws of the Stene of
Florida with respect to absentee voting, which shall have printed thereon the question
hereinabove set forth, with proper place for voting either "YES" or "NO" following the
statement of the question aforesaid.
Section 8. Voter Registration Books The Supervisor of Elections is hereby
authorized and requested to furnish to the inspectors and clerks at each place where the votes are
to be cast in such referendum, applicable portions of the registration books or certified copies
thereof showing the names of the qualified electors residing in the County.
4
Section 9. Statutory Refe ences. All statutory references herein shall be to said
statutes as they exist on the date of adoption of this Resolution and as they may be from time to
time amended or renumbered, except to the extant contractual commitments would preclude
application of a subsequent statutory revision or repeal.
Section 10. Severability. It is declared to be the intent of the School Board that,if any
section,subsection, sentence,clause,phrase,or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent Jurisdiction,such portion shall be deemed a
separate,distinct and independent provision,and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions hereof.
Section 11. C nD kt, Any resolution or part thereof In conflict with this Resolution or
any part hereof is hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict.
Section 12. Bffective Date, Sections 1 through 2 of this Resolution shall be effective
upon approval by a majority of votes cast by qualified electors in the referendum provided for
herdn and the remaining sections of this Resolution shall be effective Immediately upon its
adoption.
Approved by The School Board of Miami-Dade County. Florida this /1 day of July,
20(8.
/ l�z,� glattitIA)
By JA a 4/114Qait,The School Board of
Miami-Dade County,Florida
[SEAL]
ATTEST: .-71.1Pc
_
tea.. The School Board of
, ',Inde County,Florida
Approved as to form and legality.
Homey
5
C
312017034137 WOMB IN TIMRECORDS OF JEFFREY R.SMITH,CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT INDIAN RIVER CO Pl.
Me 3032 PG: 1080,0/144017 7:44 AM
Filing N 57667590 E-Filed 06/13!201710:33:28 AM
Di THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,FLORIDA
INDIAN RIVER CHARTER HGH CASE NO. 31-2016CA-000431
SCHOOL,INC.,a florid.Not For
Profit Corporation;IMAGINE SCHOOL
AT SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,LLC,
Whitt IMAOINE SCHOOLS AT SOUTH
VERO,a Florida Not For Profit Limited
Liability Co°Reny:NORTH COUNTY
CHARTER.SCHOOL,INC.,aFloridaNot Far
Profit Corpomtion;SEBASTIAN CHARTER
JUNIOR HIDE,INC.,.Florida Not For Profit
Corporation;and ST.PETER'S ACADEMY,INC.,
a Florida Not For Profit Corporation,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SCHOOL BOARD OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY,FLORIDA,
Defendant.
/
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR
DECLARATORY RELIEF
This matte' came on to be heard on February 28, 2017, on the motions for summary
judgment filed by both the plaintiffs and die defendant and the court having reviewed the
summary judgment evidence,heard argument of counsel, and meting the following findings of
act and conclusions of law;
1. The plahrtiffi are five charter schools operating within Indian River County and
the defendant is their sponsor.
2. On May 8, 2012, the School Board approved a tesolotioa placing the following
referendum on the August 14,2012 elution ballot;
•
Page 1 of 7
Rx: 3402 PG 1031
•
Shall the School District 0.60 ad valorem miller be continued for
essential operating needs such as teachers,instruction manual,and
technology in order to provide all stadenta with high quality
educational oppotdmitiea beginning July 1,2013 and ending four
(4) years lana on June 30, 2017, with anneal reporting to the
citizenry?
This referendum was passed by the voters.
3. In duly noticed public meetings held on March 27,201Z April 10,2012,and May
22,2012,the School Board discussed school district needs,uses,and ellocatone for the proceeds
of the 2012 Referendmn4 if approved. During the April 10, 2012 meeting, the School Board
determined that they would allocate five(5)percent of to 2012 Referendum proceeds to charier
schools.
4. The patties agree that the 2012 Referendum was authorized by Florida Statutes
Q41011.71(9)and 1011.73(2).
5. Following the pussy of the referendum, the defendant has distributed five (5)
percent of the 0.60 yearly millege to the charier schools despite the Ohet that the five charter
schools comprise approximately 12%of the total student population of the district.
6. The dispute between the partes is whether the charter schools are entitled to a
proportional share of the Ponds from the 2012 referendum or whether the district hes the
discretion to determine how molt, if any, of the revenue the charter schools are entitled to
receive.
7. The chatter schools objected to the district's decision and when mediation
between the parties failed and the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings determined it
lacked juisdiota' to deride the issues raised by the dispute, the plaintiff's filed the instant
complaint seeking declaratory and b unctive relict In the alternative,they have alleged That the
Page 2 of7
BK: 303E PG: 1082.
district breached the respective charge school contrails. The district has asserted the affirmative
defenses of the statute of limitation,ladies,Waiver,estoppel,and unclean hands.
8. (Letter schools in Florida aro governed by
section 100233,Florida Statutes,and
receive funding as set forth in section 100233(17). Section 1002.33(17)as well as other statute
are quoted below with different forts of emphasis supplied by the court to reflect the parties'
reliance on different parts of the statute for their respective positions in this math. The charter
schools'text is nadta't the district's text is italicized. Section 100233 provides in pertinent
Pat .1t hunt raaerdlrse of the
(17) Funding,
i •1$l fi tied as if they are in a basic programa a special
aehunl
progra s�.s -- 11 d ht a 1hi' . sohmta
Program.
(b)The basis for the agreement for leading students smiled in a chatterschol
shall be the sum of the school district's °pent g s. Ands
from Ms and the Florida
EducationpproprtohsFinAct, Program as provided local finds, discretionary.. lottery
,tpproprtadonsmclu&t dints Hera ..
funds, .x ..e,t ooere
�l t 1lvaIent _
nggl.Charter schools whose students err programa meet the eligibilitytiels criteria
law are entitled to their proportionate share of categorical program
in the total funds available In the Florida Education Finance Program by
the
Legislature, hisluding nanspordiico, the research-based reading allocation, and
the Florida digital classrooms allocation. 'Dotal funding for each charter school
shall be recalculated during the year to inflect the revised calculations under the
Florida Education Finance Program by the state and the actual weighted fall-
time equivalent students reported by the charter school during the full-time
equivalent student survey periods designated by the Commiseiona ofEducation.
§1002.33(37)(6),Fla.Stat.(emphasis added).
Another part of the Florida Stillness,section 1011.71,addresses additional finding that is
available to all public schools by mesas of discretionary levies. In addition to the"required local
Page 3 of
BIC: 3033 PG: 1093
effort"tax levy,school districts may levy,nonvoted and voted discretionary millage. Subsection
(1) of the statute provides for a nonvoted operating discretionary mifage• mon (2)
provides that, in addition to the nonvoted operating millage of subsection(1), a school district
forcapital for district schools, "including charter schools at the
may levy mdaga expenses
discretion of the school board..". It is'undisputed that the millage levied as a result of the 2012
Refasndwn der operational expense was Iniad pursuant to subsection(9) of section 1011.71,
which provides in pertinent part
�� '12. 1 '«t .i 0rl a tpnn sed ffi�
41Itiani dlllilli 1 1 '.Mut L by Innal ter •�• a
grind Orient. additional mina, for adenl nnmadaad pumOpC4 up to an
amount that whoa combined with nonvoted range levied under this scction,
does not exceed the 10-mill limit established in s. 9(b), Mt VII of the State
Constitution. Any each levy shall be for a maximum of 4 yeas and shall be
camted se part of the 10-mill limit established in s. 9(b),Mt. VII of the State
Constitution.Millage elections conducted neer the authority granted pursuant to
this section are subject to a 1011.73.Funds generated by such additional manage
do not become a parr of the calculation of the Florida Education Finance
Program total potentialfunds...
1011.71,Fla Stat.(amphasia added).
The plaintiffs focus on the above underscored language of section 1002.3307) and
101131(9) to support their position that the Legislature intended a charter school to receive
fining equal to other clic schools hi the charter's district. The parties agree that a charier
school receives a pro rata share of the revenue based on the number of each district's fall-time
equivalent (FCB)studeoa as provided in section 1002.33(17)00 but the plaintiffs assert that,
under the statute, charter schools' proponent,pro rata share includes "fonds fry the school
district's current operating discretionarymillage levy,"i.e.,the 2012 Referendum.
The district meanwhile maintains the italicized language of sections 1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9) dearly demonstrates that the legislature intended that charter schools share equally
Page4 of7
BK: 3832PG: BM
only in those federal,state,and local operating finds allocated by the Florida Education Finance
• Program(Fritts). It is the district's position that, pursuant to section 100233(17)(b), the only
local funding available to charter schools as a matter of law would be local finding winch is
required by, or included in FRP. Because the finds for operating expenses derived from the
2012 Referendum am expressly excluded from REP pursuant to the italicized language in
section 1011.71(9) above, the funds, according to the district, are expressly denied to shatter
schools"ase matter of right." In the district's view,any local fording for operating expenses of
the district—such as that derived from the 2012 Referendum rvhidi is not included in FBF'—is
available to a chatter school only at the discretion of the district.
The omit finds that the language of section 1002.33(l7)(b),relied upon by the district,is
not restrictive In nature. The statute does not,as argued by the district,unequivocally state that
the only local funds to which charter schools are entitled or in which they proportionately share
are limited to those funds required by or included in the Fr. Rather,the plain language of the
statute affirmatively states that chatter schools shall be funded from the arum of a school district's
operating thuds(Omit)available in the FEFT as set forth under section 1011.62 and the Genual
Appropriations Act,as well as the other sources named in the statute,including"funds Prom the
school district's current operating discretionary mirage levy.."
Nor does the court agree with the district's argument that section 10023307)0)operates
with section 1011.71(9)to deny chatter schools the local funds generated pursuant to the latter
statute. Section 1011.71(9) expressly directs that funds generated for a school district's
operational purposes from a discretionary millage levy shall not become part of the calculus of
the FBFP. Accordingly, such fords droved from a local referendum pursuant to section
1011.71(9) would not be distributed through the FEFP's tamales to aye school in a school
Page 5 of7
BB: 3032 PG: 1085
district, Beyond ibis singular prohibition,subsection(9) of the statute is silent as to how such
local funds for operating purposes are to be distributed.
The 2012 Referendum finds have been and are being distributed by the district to the
public schools, including charter schools, through some method other than through beeP. The
district has concluded that the 2012 Referendum funds may be distributed to the charter schools
in its discretion because,according to the State Board of Felur+Hon,millage levied under section
1011.71(9) for operational purposes should be treated the same as millage levied under section
1011.71(2) kr capital expense. Section 1011.71(2)permits a school district to levy additional
outage for capital expenses "fie district schools, Sinding charter schools at the discretion of
the school board ,.." However,section 1011.71(9)contains no equivalent language it respect
b a levy of additional millage for operational expenses, and the court cannot add wards that
were not placed there by the Legislature. Stam v.Little,104 So.3d 1263.1265-66(Fla 4th DCA
2013); Erpostto v. State, 891 So. 2d 525, 529 (Fla 2004). Consequently,the court finds the
disaiot's argument for discretionary distribution pursuant to section 1011.71(9) to be
unsupported by the law.
The only other statutory language that supports distribution of the 2012 Referendum
funds is, as the plaintiffs maintain, contained in section 1002.33(17)(6), providing that charter
schools are entitled to. In addition to a proportional, pro rata share of FEFP funds, funds
generated Rom a school district's current operating disaetlonary Mage levy — the operating
funds were generated by the 2012 Referendum pursuant to section 1011.71(9), Section
100233(17x6)is not silent as to how those funds are to be distributed;they arts to be"divided by
total fimded weighted Rill-tae equivalent etadents m the school district multiplied by the
weighted full-time equivalent students for the charter school ...".
Page 6 of 7
RM 3102 Pfr. 1086
9. The court finds that the plain language of the statute supports the plaintiffs'
position and they are entitled to summary judgment on their claim for declaratory relief. The
plaintiffs are therefore entitled to received finding from the 2012 referendum pursuant to the
formula set forth in section 1002.33(17)(6)and not die 5%previously determined by the school
board The defendant's motion for summary judgment is hereby denied.
11. The court finds that the affirmative defenses raised by the det'endant of statute of
limitation,lathers,wdver,estoppel,and unclean bands are not support by the facts or law.
10. The court hereby retains jurisdiction to determine, as to each of the individual
plaintiffs, the amount of Omding they should have received under the 2012 referendum and to
enter an appropridejudgement the amount they ere due.
Done and Ordered at Vero Beach, Indian Riva County, Florida, this 13th day of June,
2017.
PAUL B.KANARBIC
Circuit Judge
co: Debra S.Babb-Mather,Bvq.,Arehb(alorlaodolnw.mt tiftWagktiallIktia1151
Shawn A.Arnold,Btu, , no, 0,,ldlawfm1locan‘
keel S.Wood,Esq.,ilEMS10111040041401
Page 7 of 7
(A47J-49
3120179055077 RECORDED IN THE RECORDS OF JEFFREY R SMITH,CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT'INDIAN RIVER CO FL
3057 PC: 1820,9r1612A17 SOS AM
Filing# 61924994 E-Filed 09/25/2017 11:03:09 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,FLORIDA
INDIAN RIVER CHARTER HIGH CASE NO. 31-2016-CA-000431
SCHOOL INC,oFlorida Not For
Profit Corporation;IMAGINE SCHOOL
AT SOUTH INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,LLC,
d/b/a IMAGING SCHOOLS AT SOUTH
VERO,a Florida Not For Profit Limited
Liability Company;NORTH COUNTY
CHARTER SCHOOL,INC.,a Florida Not Fot
Profit Corporation;SEBASTIAN CHARTER
JUNIOR HIGH,INC.,a Florida Not For Profit
Cotperalion;and ST.PMER'S ACADEMY,INC.,
a Florida Not For Profit Corporation,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SCHOOL BOARD OF INDIAN RIVER
COUNTY,FLORIDA,
Defendant.
/
? FINAL JUDGMENT
This matter came before this Court on the parties' Stipulated Motion for Entry of Final
Judgment Tore Court, after entering an Order Chanting Plaintiffs' Motion far Summary
fulgmeot for Declaratory Relief and retaining jurisdiction to determine the amount of funding
each Plaintiff should receive,and being otherwise Hilly apprised,ORDERS AND ADJUDGES:
1. Final Judgment It entered in favor of the Plaintiffs,INDIAN RIVER CHARTER
HIGH SCHOOL,INC.,a Florida Not For Profit Corporation;IMAGINE SCHOOL AT SOUTH
INOTAN RIVER COUNTY, LLC, ditria IMAGINE SCHOOLS AT SOUTH VERO, a Florida
Not For Profit Limited Liability Company;, NORTH COUNTY CHARTER SCHOOL, INC., a
Florida Not For Profit Corporation; SEBASTIAN CHARTER JUNIOR HIGH, INC., a Florida •
Not For Profit Corporation; and ST. PETER'S ACADEMY, INC., a Florida Not For Profit
Corporation, and against Defendant, SCHOOL BOARD OP INDIAN RIVER COUNTY,
FLORIDA.
BR: 3037 PO: 1821
2. The parties have entered into a separate Release and Settlement Agreement
regaling the amounts Defendant shall pay to each individual Plaintiff in fill and final settlement
of all monies owed,which amounts ate set forth as follows;
a. Indian River Charter High School,Inc. $731,737.64
6055 College Lane
Vero Beach,FL 32966
b. Imagine School at South Indian River County, LLC 81,039,784.02
d/b/a Imagine Schools at South Vero
6000 4th Street
Veen Beach,FL 32968
c. North Canary Charter School,Inc. $356,31252
6640 Old Dixie Highway
Vero Heady,FL 32967
d. Sebastian Charier Junior High,Inc. $296,906.66
782 Wave Street
Sebastian,FL 32958
a St Peter's Academy,Inc. $148,281.42
4250 38th Avenue
Veen Beach,FL 32967
which shall bear interest at the rate of 5.17%per auwm.
3. Payment of the above amount'shall be made in accordance with the payment terms and
schedule set forth in the parties'Release and Settlement Ageamwt
4. Each party shall bear its own cats,expert foes,and attomey's fes.
5. This Court retains jurisdiction to enforce ibis Judgment
Done and Ordered at Vero Beach, Indian River County, Florida this 20th day of
September,2017. /, fpr '
PAUL B.KANARBK _
Circuit Judge
2
H1C 3e37PGI 1822
Copia to:
Shawn A.Arnold,Esquire
Melissa Gross-Arnold,Esquire
The Amoldl aw Firm
6279 Dupont Station Ct
Jacksonville,FL 32217
gagsglighernoldkotfimilla.corn
$e1isse@Iemoldlawfuumllc.ctgH
Jeffrey S.Wood,Esquire
One Financial Plaza,Ste.2602
Ft Lauderdale,FL 33394
jwood6mwdnacom
Suzanne D'Agresta,Esquire
Debra S.Babb-Nutcher,Esquire
Gargancse,Weiss&D'Agresta,PA
111 N.Orange Avenue,Suite 2000 ,
Orlando,FL 32801
dbabb(alorlandoiawaet
jun..-0o, ,..• , .net
3
Advisory Legal Opinion- Charter schools, fimding Page 1 of 4
Florida Attorney General
Advisory Legal Opinion
Number: AGO 200447
Date: December 17, 2004
Subject Charter schools, funding
Mr. Al Cardenas
Tew-Cardenas LLP
Four Seasons Tower
15th Floor
1441 Brickell Avenue
Miami, Florida 33131-3407
Mr. Ed Pozzuoli
110 Southeast 6th Street
15th Floor
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
RE: SCHOOLS - CHARTER SCHOOLS - funding of charter schools. e.
1002.33, Florida Statutes .
Dear Mr. Cardenas and Mr. Pozzuoli:
You have asked whether the language of section 1002 .33, Florida
Statutes , requires that charter schools be funded "the same as"
other schools in the}public school system. As one of the
sponsors of the companion Senate bill creating the original
charter school legislation in 1996, this is a subject of
particular concern to a. [1] In my opinion, for the reasons
discussed below, the answer is yes.
In order to supplement the educational opportunities of
children, the Florida Legislature in 1996 authorized the
creation of charter schools. [2] The statute, now codified at
section 1002. 33, Florida Statutes, allows for both the creation
of new charter schools and the conversion of existing public
schools to charter status. [3] Section 1002.33 provides for the
creation of such charter schools as part of the state' s program
of public education. [4]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/ago ncflprintview/51 FED38FF23EFD158525... 2/6/2019
AdvisoryLegal Opinion - Charter schools, funding Page 2 of 4
Section 1002 .33 (17) , Florida Statutes, makes provision for the
funding of charter schools. The statute states:
"Students enrolled in a charter school, regardless of the
sponsorship, shall be funded as if they are in a basic program
or a special program, the same as students enrolled in other
public schools in the school district. Funding for a charter
lab school shall be as provided in s. 1002.32. "
Charter schools are required to report their student enrollment
to the district school board and the school board must include
each charter school' s enrollment in the district' s report of
student enrollment. [5]
The statute provides the basis for funding students enrolled in
a charter school.
Section 1002.33 (17) (b) , provides:
"The basis for the agreement for funding students enrolled in a
charter school shall be the sum of the school district's
operating funds from the Florida Education Finance Program as
provided in s. 1011. 62 and the General Appropriations Act,
including gross state and local funds, discretionary lottery
funds, and funds from the school district's current operating
discretionary tillage levy; divided by total funded weighted
full-time equivalent students in the school district;
multiplied by the weighted full-time equivalent students for
the charter school. Charter schools whose students or programs
meet the eligibility criteria in law shall be entitled to their
proportionate share of categorical program funds included in
the total funds available in the Florida Education Finance
Program by the Legislature, including transportation. Total
funding for each charter school shall be recalculated during
the year to reflect the revised calculations under the Florida
Education Finance Program by the state and the actual weighted
full-time equivalent students reported by the charter school
during the full-time equivalent student survey periods
designated by the Commissioner of Education. "
A district school board that is providing student programs or
services funded by federal funds must provide federal funds for
the same level of service to any eligible students enrolled in
charter schools in the district. [6] In addition, the statute
http i/www.myfloridalegal.com/ago.nsf/printview/51 FED38FF23EFD158525... 2/6/2019
!Advisory Jgal Opinion- Charter schools, funding Page 3 of 4
requires that " (plursuant to provisions of 20 O.S.C. 8061 a.
40306.j +�11 charter schools shall receive all federal funding
:au
. the school is otherwise eligible, including Title 1
!moi " (7] The statute also requires the timely and
efficient reimbursement of charter schools by district school
boards. (S)
It is a general rule of statutory construction that the intent
of the Legislature is to be determined initially from the
language of the statute itself. (9) Thus, where the language of
a statute is plain and definite in meaning without ambiguity,
it fixes the legislative intention such that interpretation and
construction are not needed. (10]
Section 1002.33 (17) , Florida Statutes, provides that "students
enrolled in a charter school . . . shall be funded as if they
are in a basic program or a special program, the same as
students enrolled in other public schools in the school
district." The language of the statute appears to be plain and
definite and the intention of the Legislature is conveyed
clearly and must be followed.
I would note that section 1002. 33 (6) (h) , Florida Statutes,
creates a process for mediation by the Department of Education
"for any dispute regarding this section subsequent to the
approval of a charter application and for any dispute relating
to the approved charter, except disputes regarding charter
school application denials. " In fact, the statute recognises
that certain disputes may not be capable of resolution through
mediation and specifically allows the appeal of such a dispute
to an administrative law judge who "may rule on issues of
equitable treatment of the charter school as a public school
(. ]" Thus, an administrative procedure is established for the
resolution of issues of disparate treatment of charter schools.
In light of this statutory language, you may wish to consider
working with the Department of Education to mediate any dispute
regarding disparate funding of charter schools or to request
appointment of an administrative law judge to consider such
allegations.
Sincerely,
Charlie Crist
Attorney General
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/ago.nsflprintview/51 FED38FF23EFD 158525... 2/6/2019
Advisory Legal Opinion- Charter schools, funding Page 4 of 4
CC/tgh
[1] See CS/CS/SB 334, Journal of the Senate, State of Florida,
1996.
[2] See s. 1, Ch. 96-186, Laws of Fla.
[3] Section 1002.33(3) , Fla. Stat.
[4] Section 1002.33(1) , Fla. Stat.
[5] Section 1002 .33 (17) (a) , Fla. Stat.
[6] Section 1002.33(17) (c) , Fla. Stat.
[7] Id.
[8] Section 1002 .33 (17) (d) , Fla. Stat.
[9] See, e.g. , X.N. v. Davis, 756 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 2000) (when
language of statute is clear and unambiguous and conveys a
clear and definite meaning, there is no occasion for resorting
to rules of statutory interpretation and construction as
statute must be given its plain and obvious meaning) ;
McLaughlin v. State, 721 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 1998) ; Osborne v.
Simpson, 114 So. 543 (Fla. 1927) (where statute' s language is
plain, without ambiguity, it fixes legislative intention and
interpretation end construction are not needed) ; Holly v. Auld,
450 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1984) .
[10] See Ops. Att'y Gen. Fla. 00-46 (2000) , 99-44 (1999) , 97-81
(1997) .
http i/www.myfloridalegal.coin/ago.nsf/printview/5 I FED3 8FF23EFD 15 85 25... 2/6/2019
rsAibstf
!It' T^
The Florida House of Representatives
Office of the Speaker
Jose IL Oliva
Speaker
February 26,20)9
Ms.Perla Tabares Hantman,Chair
Mr.Alberto M. Carvalho,Superintendent
Miami-Dade County Public Schools
1450 NE 2o4 Avenue
Miami,FL 33132
Dear Chair Hantman and Superintendent Carvalho:
When the voters of Miami-Dade County voted overwhelmingly last November to tax themselves
in order to"improve compensation for high quality teachers,"they probably did not know that
more than 1800 teachers responsible for educating 68,000 students would be automatically
excluded from receiving higher salaries. Excluded—not because they are not high quality
teachers,but because they work for charter schools.
Charter schools are public schools. They are supported by tax dollars distributed by the school
district. They educate students whose taxpaying parents chose those charter schools as the best
educational opportunity for their children. The school board's refusal to share new revenue
places charter school students in a separate category--separate and unequal. High quality
teachers of charter school students(almost 20%of all Miami-Dade students)do not deserve any
improvement in compensation according to the Miami-Dade School Board.
Before the vote in November and before district officials went behind closed doors to negotiate
with the union,an illusion was created that the additional taxes would be used to benefit all
schools. "We're doing this for everybody", Superintendent Alberto Carvalho asserted. Nothing
in the ballot language dispelled this illusion or clarified the real intent of the referendum
sponsors. Such deception by elected officials is simply intolerable,
But it is not too late to rectify the problem. The school board can and should reassess the
planned distribution of new revenue. Including charter schools in the use of these funds would
420 The Capitol,402 South Monroe Sheet,TALLAHASSEE,FL 32399-1300
(830)717-5000
del A
provide an allocation that is fair to all Miami-Dade students and consistent with the plain
language that the voters approved. I urge you to take immediate action on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Jose R.Oliva,Speaker
CC:
Richard Corcoran,Commissioner of Education
Oscar Beynon III, State Senator
Manny Diaz Jr.,State Senator
Jose Javier Rodriguez,State Senator
Jason Pizzo,State Senator
Anitere Flores,State Senator
Annette Taddeo,State Senator
Joseph Geller,State Representative
Sharon Pritchett,State Representative
Cindy Polo,State Representative
Ma Maria Rodriguez,State Representative
Barbara Watson,State Representative
Dotie Joseph,State Representative
James Bush,State Representative
Bryan Avila,State Representative
Nicholas Duran,State Representative
Michael Grieco,State Representative
Javier Fernandez, State Representative
Vance Aloupis,State Representative
Daniel Perez,State Representative
Kionne McGhee,State Representative
Anthony Rodriguez,State Representative
Juan Fernandez Barquin, State Representative
Holly Raschein,State Representative
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes :Online Sunshine Page 1 of 6
.l-�/J1 ( 1
G� L t 3-`13-
YJ
Select Year. 2018 V Go
The 2018 Florida Statutes
Title XI Chapter 164 View Entire
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNMENTAL Chanter
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS DISPUTES
CHAFFER 164
GOVERNMENTAL DISPUTES
164.101 Short title.
164.102 Purpose and intent.
164.1031 Definitions.
164.1041 Duty to negotiate.
164.1051 Scope.
164.1052 Initiation of conflict resolution procedure; duty to give notice.
164.1053 Conflict assessment phase.
164.1055 Joint public meeting.
164.1056 Final resolution.
164.1057 Execution of resolution of conflict.
164.1058 Penalty.
164.1061 Time extensions.
164.1065 Applicability of ch. 99-279.
164.101 Short tile.—Sections 164.101-164.1061 may be cited as the"Florida Governmental
Conflict Resolution Act."
History.—s. 1,ch.87.346;s. 1,ch.99-279.
t64.102 Purpose and intent.—The purpose and intent of this act is to promote, protect, and
improve the public health, safety, and welfare and to enhance intergovernmental coordination efforts
by the creation of a governmental conflict resolution procedure that can provide an equitable,
expeditious, effective, and Inexpensive method for resolution of conflicts between and among local and
regional governmental entitles, It Is the intent of the Legislature that conflicts between governmental
entities be resolved to the greatest extent possible without litigation.
Hhtory._s.2,ch.87-346;s.2,ch. 99-279.
164.1031 Definitions.—For purposes of this act:
(1) "Local governmental entities"includes municipalities, counties, school boards, special districts,
and other local entities within the jurisdiction of one county created by general or special law or local
ordinance.
(2) "Regional governmental entities"Includes regional planning councils, metropolitan planning
organizations, water supply authorities that include more than one county, local health councils,water
http://wwwleg.state.flus/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut.. 4/4/2019
Statutes& Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 2 of 6
management districts, and other regional entitles that are authorized and created by general or special
law that have duties or responsibilities extending beyond the jurisdiction of a single county.
(3) "Governmental entity"includes local and regional governmental entitles.
(4) "Local government resolution"has the same meaning as provided in s. 166.041.
(5) "Governing body"means the council, commission, or other board or body in which the general
legislative powers of a local or regional governmental entity are vested.
(6) "Designee" means a representative with full authority to negotiate on behalf of a governmental
entity and to recommend settlement to the appropriate decisionmaking body or authority of the
governmental entity.
(7) "Noticed public meeting" means a public meeting in which notice is given at least 10 days prior
to the meeting by publication In the newspaper of widest circulation in the jurisdictions of the primary
conflicting governmental entities. Each primary conflicting governmental entity shall provide notice
within its jurisdiction.
(8) "Primary conflicting governmental entities" means the governmental entity initiating the conflict
• resolution process provided for in this act, together with the governmental enttty or entities with when
the initiating governmental entity has a conflict. The term does not include other governmental entities
which may have a rote In approving or Implementing a particular element or aspect of any settlement of
the conflict, or which may receive notice or intervene in the conflict resolution process provided for in
this act.
(9) "Mediation"means a process whereby a neutral third person called a mediator acts to encourage
and facilitate the resolution of a conflict between two or more parties. The role of the mediator
includes, but is not limited to, assisting the parties in identifying issues and exploring settlement
alternatives.
tnstay.—s.3,ch. 99-279.
164.1041 Duty to negotiate.—
(1) If a governmental entity files suit against another governmental entity,court proceedings on the
suit shall be abated, by order of the court, until the procedural options of this act have been exhausted.
The governing body of a governmental entity initiating conflict resolution procedures pursuant to this
act shall, by motion, request the court to Issue an order abating the case pursuant to this section. All
governmental entities are encouraged to use the procedures In this act to resolve conflicts that may
occur at any time between gwemmental entities, but shall use these procedures before court
proceedings, consistent with the provisions of this section. The provisions of this act do not apply to
administrative proceedings pursuant to chapter 120 or any appeal from any administrative or trial court
judgment or decision. Nothing in this act shall limit a governmental entity from initiating and
prosecuting eminent domain, foreclosure, or other court proceedings where, as a function of the nature
of the suit, other governmental entitles are necessary parties, if there are no materially disputed issues
with regard to such joinder. Nothing in this act shall limit a governmental entity from filing any
counterclaim or cross-claim in any litigation in which it is a defendant. Nothing in this act is intended to
abrogate other provisions of law which provide procedures for challenges to specific governmental
actions, Including, but not limited to, comprehensive plan amendments and tax assessment Challenges.
The provisions of this act shall not apply to conflicts between governmental entities if an alternative
dispute resolution process, such as mediation or arbitration, is specifically required by general taw or
agreed to by contract, interlocal agreement,or other written instrument, or if the governmental
entitles have reached an impasse during an alternative dispute resolution process engaged in prior to the
initiation of court action. Further, nothing in this act shall preclude a governmental entity from filing a
httpJ/www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/mdex.cfmTApp_mode=Display_Statut... 4/4/2019
Statutes&Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 3 of 6
suit without resort to the provisions of this act against any federal or other governmental entity not
governed by state law. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to toll or waive jurisdictional time Limits
on specific pleadings or motions set forth in statute or court rules unless modified pursuant to s.
164.1061.
(2) If a governmental entity, by a three-fourths vote of Its governing body, finds that an immediate
danger to the health, safety, or welfare of the public requires immediate action, or that significant Legal
rights wilt be compromised if a court proceeding does not take place before the provisions of this act are
complied with, no notice or public meeting or other proceeding as provided by this act shall be required
before such a court proceeding. if a water management district, by three-fourths vote of its governing
body,finds that an immediate danger to the natural resources, water resources, and wildlife requires
immediate declaratory relief, or that significant legal rights will be compromised if a court proceeding
does not take place before the provisions of this act are complied with, no notice or public meeting or
other proceeding as provided by this act shall be required before such a court proceeding. However, the
court, upon motion, may review the justification for failure to comply with the provisions of this act and
make a determination as to whether the provision of this act should be complied with prior to action by
the court. If the court determines that the provisions of this act should be complied with prior to court
action and that following the provisions of this act will not result in the compromise of significant legal
rights, the court shall abate the suit uritf the provisions of this act are complied with.
Hletory.-5.4,di.99279.
164.1051 Scope.—It is not the intent of this act to limit the conflicts that may be considered
under this act, except that any administrative proceeding pursuant to chapter 120 shall not be subject
to this act. Pursuant to s. 164.1041, this act shall apply, at a minimum, to governmental conflicts arising
from any of the following issues or processes, including, but not limited to:
(1) Any issue relating to local comprehensive plans or plan amendments prepared pursuant to part II
of chapter 163, including, but not limited to,conflicts involving levels of service for public facilities and
natural resource protection.
(2) Municipal annexation,
(3) Service provision areas.
(4). Allocation of resources, including water, land, or other natural resources.
(5) Siting of hazardous waste facilities, land fills, garbage collection facilities, silt disposal sites, or
any other locally unwanted land uses.
(6) Governmental entity permitting processes.
(7) Siting of elementary and secondary schools.
HIstary.—• 5,chi.99279.
164.1052 Initiation of conflict resolution procedure; duty to give notice.—
(1) The governing body of a governmental entity shall initiate the conflict resolution procedures
provided by this act through passage of a resolution by its members. The resolution shall state that it is
the intention of the governing body to Initiate the conflict resolution procedures provided by this act
prior to initiating court proceedings or prosecuting action on a previously filed court proceeding to
resole the conflict and shall specify the issues of conflict and the governmental entity or entities with
which the governing body has a conflict. Within 5 days after the passage of the resolution, a letter and a
certified copy of the resolution shall be provided to the chief administrator of the governmental entity
or entities with which the governing body has a conflict by certified mail, return receipt requested. The
letter shall state, at a minimum, the conflict, other governmental entities in conflict with the initiating
httpi/www.leg.state.ff us/STATUTESrmdex.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut... 4/4/2019
Statutes& Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 4 of 6
governmental entity, the Justification for initiating the conflict resolution process, the proposed date
and location for the conflict assessment meeting to be held pursuant to s. 164.1053, and suggestions
regarding the officials who should be present at the conflict assessment meeting. The initiating
governmental entity also shall mail a copy of the letter and resolution to any state, regional, or local
governmental entities which, in the determination of the initiating governmental entity, may have a role
to approving or implementing a particular element or aspect of any settlement of the conflict or whose
substantial interests may be affected by the resolution of the conflict,and any other governmental
entity deemed appropriate by the initiating governmental entity.
(2) Within 10 days after receiving a copy of a certified letter noticing the initiation of the conflict
resolution procedure, other governmental entitles receiving the notice may elect to participate in the
conflict resolution process, but are not entitled by virtue of that participation to control the timing or
progress of the conflict resolution process, which at all times shall remain in the discretion of the
primary conflicting governmental entities. However, a governmental entity which receives notice of a
conflict may, by passage of its own resolution and by otherwise following the procedures set forth in
subsection (1), join the conflict resolution process as a primary conflicting governmental entity.The
intent of a governmental entity to join to the conflict resolution process shall be communicated to the
initiating governmental entity by certified mail.The joining governmental entity also shall mail a copy
of the letter to any state, regional, or local governmental entitles which, in the determination of the
joining governmental entity, may have a role In approving or implementing a particular element or
aspect of any settlement of the conflict or whose substantial Interests may be affected by the resolution
of the conflict, and any other governmental entity deemed appropriate by the joining governmental
entity.
(3) For purposes of this act, the date of initiation of the conflict resolution procedure shall be the
date of the passage of a resolution by a governmental entity.
HIstory.—s.6,ca.99-779.
164.1053 Conflict assessment phase.—
(1) After the Initiation of the conflict resolution procedure, and after proper notice by certified
letter has been given, a conflict assessment meeting shall occur. The meeting shall be scheduled to
occur within 30 days of the receipt of the letter initiating the conflict resolution procedure. Public
notice shall be given for this meeting In accordance with s. 164.1031(7). The conflict assessment
meeting shall be scheduled to allow the attendance by the appropriate personnel from each primary
conflicting governmental entity. The chief administrator, or his cr her designee, for each governmental
entity that t a primary conflicting governmental entity in the conflict resolution procedure shall be
present at this meeting. If the entitles in conflict agree, the assistance of a facilitator may be enlisted
for the conflict assessment meeting. During the conflict assessment meeting,the governmental entities
shall discuss the issues pertaining to the conflict and an assessment of the conflict from the perspective
of each governmental entity involved.
(2) If a tentative resolution to the conflict can be agreed upon by the representatives of the primary
conflicting governmental entities at the conflict assessment meeting, the primary conflicting
governmental entitles may proceed with whatever steps they deem appropriate to fully resolve the
conflict, Including, but not limited to, the scheduling of additional meetings for Informal negotiations or
proposing a resolution to the governing bodies of the primary conflicting governmental entitles.
(3) In the event that no tentative resolution can be agreed upon,the primary conflicting
governmental entities shalt schedule a joint public meeting as described Ins. 164.1055, which meeting
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTESImdex.cfm7App_mode=Display Stall... 4/4/2019
Statutes& Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 5 of 6
shall occur within 50 days of the receipt of the first letter initiating the conflict resolution process from
the initiating governmental entity.
(4) After the conclusion of the conflict assessment meeting, any primary conflicting governmental
entity may request mediation as provided ins. 164.105512).
History.—s,7,ch.99279.
164.1055 Joint public meeting.—
(1) Failure to resolve a conflict after following authorized procedtres as specified in s. 164.1053
stall require the scheduling of a joint public meeting between the primary conflicting governmental
entities. The governmental entity first initiating the conflict resolution process shall have the
responsibility to schedule the joint public meeting and arrange a location. If the entitles in conflict
agree, the assistance of a facilitator may be enlisted to assist them In conducting the meeting. In this
meeting, the governing bodies of the prknary conflicting governmental entities shall:
(a) Consider the statement of issues prepared in the conflict assessment phase.
(b) Seek an agreement.
(c) Schedule additional meetings of the entitles in conflict, or of their designees, to continue to seek
resolution of the conflict.
(2) If no agreement is reached, the primary conflicting governmental entities shall participate in
mediation, the costs of which shall be equally divided between the primary conflicting governmental
entities. The primary conflicting governmental entitles shall endeavor in good faith to select a mutually
acceptable mediator. If the primary conflicting governmental entities are unable to mutually agree on a
mediator within 14 days after the joint public meeting,the primary conflicting governmental entities
shall arrange for a mediator to be selected or recommended by an independent conflict resolution
organization, such as the Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium, and shall agree to accept the
recommendation of that independent organization, or shall agree upon an alternate method for
selection of a mediator, within 7 business days after the close of that 14-day period. Upon the selection
of a mediator, the conflicting governmental entities shall schedule mediation to occur within 14 days,
and shall issue a written agreement on the Issues in conflict within 10 days of the conclusion of the
mediation proceeding. The written agreement shall not be admissbie in any court proceeding
concerning the conflict, except for proceedings to award attorney's fees under s. 164.1058, where the
agreement may be used to demonstrate an entity's refusal to participate in the process in good faith.
History.—s.8,ch.99-279.
164.1056 Final resolution.—If there is failure to resolve a conflict between governmental entities
through the procedures provided by ss. 164.1053 and 164.1055, the entities participating in the dispute
resolution process may avail themselves of any otherwise available legal rights.
History.—s.9,ch.99-279.
164.1057 Execution of resolution of conflict.—Resolution of a conflict at any phase shall require
passage of an ordinance, resolution, or Interlocal agreement that reflects the terms or conditions of the
resolution to the conflict.
Hbtory.—s. 10, ch.99-279.
•
164.1058 Penalty.—If a primary conflicting governmental entity fails to participate in good faith
in the conflict assessment meeting, mediation, or other remedies provided for in this act, the primary
disputing governmental entity that failed to participate in good faith shall be required to pay the
attorney's fees and costs in that proceeding of the prevailing primary conflicting governmental entity.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_Lnode=Display_Statut... 4/4/2019
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine Page 6 of 6
History.—s.4,di.87-346;s. 11,ch.99-279;s.7,ch.2006-218.
note.—Formers. 164.104.
164.1061 Time extensions.—Any of the time requirements set forth in this act may be extended
to a date certain by mutuel agreement, in writing, of the primary conflicting governmental entities. To
the extent such agreement would cause any Jurisdictional tone requirements to run with regard to a
particular claim, the agreement shall have the effect of extending any Jurisdictional time requirements
with regard to that claim for the period set forth in the agreement.
mstory.—s.12,ch.99-279.
164.1065 Applicability of ch. 99-279.—This act shalt take effect upon becoming a law, but shall
not be construed to abrogate any otherwise applicable agreements or requirements of any contracts,
interlocal agreements, or other written instruments which are in existence as of the effective date of
this act.To the extent that any contractual or other agreement provisions in existence on the effective
date of this act conflict with the provisions of this act,the provisions in the written agreement shalt
control.
katery.—s. 14,ch.99-279.
Copyright 01995-2019 The Florida Legislature •prNacv Statement• Contart U7
httpi/www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/ndeic.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut... 4/4/2019
Ellisa Horvath
From: David M.Wolpin <DWolpin@wsh-law.com>
Sent: Tuesday,April 9, 2019 10:49 AM
To: Ronald 1 Wasson
Cc: Ellisa Horvath; David M.Wolpin
Subject: Supplemental Information for April 11, 2019 Workshop Item#3
Attachments: GT-B Gang Op-Millage Levy Referendum-12-2018.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Ron-good morning.
Please include and distribute the attached December 12, 2018 letter of Greenberg Traurig(the School Board's Bond
Counsel),as supplemental material for Item#3 on the Commission Workshop.
I received a copy the letter from School Board Attorney Luis Garcia .
Thank you.
David Wolpin
Member
'= WEISS SEROTA HELFMAN
COLE & BIERMAN
Ar THE CROSSROADS or BOSINISS.GOv€ nMDn& Hit LAW YEARS
200 East Broward Blvd.,Suite 1900 Fort Lauderdale,FL 33301
P (954)763-4242 F (954)764-7770 0,h-l:m co n I
C1 ® fl
THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT
This message,together with any attachments,is intended only for the addressee.It may contain information which is legally privileged,confidential
and exempt from disclosure.If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any disclosure,copying,distribution,use,or any action
or reliance on this communication is strictly prohibited If you have received this e-mail in error,please notify the sender immediately by telephone
(954)763-4242 or by return e-mail and delete the message,along with any attachments.
1
•
Pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act,this communication is from a debt collector Any information obtained will be used for the
purpose of collecting a debt.
2
GT GreenbergTraurig
Elliot H.Scherker
Tel 305.579.0579
Fax 305.579.0717
scherkere@gtlaw.cam
December 12,2018
VIA EMAIL
Walter J. Harvey
School Board Attorney
The School Board of Miami-Dade County
1450 N.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 430
Miami, Florida 33132
Dear Mr.Harvey:
We have been engaged by The School Board of Miami-Dade County (the `Board") to
furnish our opinion on legal questions arising from the Board's approval of a referendum that
authorizes the Board to levy 0.75 mills of ad valorem taxes, for a four-year period, to fund
operational expenses with a stated goal to "improve compensation for high quality teachers and
instructional personnel"and"increase school safety and security personnel." The referendum was
submitted to and approved by qualified electors of Miami-Dade County on November 6, 2018.
Specifically,we have been requested to furnish our opinion as to whether, under Florida law, the
Board: (1) is obligated to share with charter schools located within the School District of Miami-
Dade County(the"District")proceeds from the ad valorem millage levy;and(2)has discretion on
how proceeds from the ad valorem millage levy are allocated.
We are licensed to practice law in the State of Florida. Any opinion expressed herein is
limited in all respects to the laws of the State of Florida,and no opinion is expressed or implied as
to the effect that the law of any other jurisdiction might have upon the subject matter of the opinion
expressed herein. Except as expressly set forth herein,we render no opinion and no opinion shall
be implied.
I. BACKGROUND AND ASSUMPTIONS
Our opinion is based upon the assumptions that will be hereinafter set forth and upon our
analysis of Florida law. We have not undertaken any independent investigation to determine the
accuracy of such facts, and no inference as to our knowledge of such facts should be drawn from
this letter or from the fact that we have been engaged in this matter by the Board.
A. The Resolution.
On July 18, 2018, the Board approved Resolution 18-047 (the "Resolution"), which
directed the Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners to, in turn, direct the Supervisor of
Elections to place on the November 6,2018 ballot a referendum(the"Referendum")to levy 0.75
Greenberg Traurig,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
333 SE 2nd Avenue I Suite 4400 I Miami,FL 33131 I T+1305.579.0500 I F+1305.579.0717
____ www.9tlaw.cor
December 12,2018
Page 2
mills of ad valorem taxes, for a four-year period, "to fund operating expenses to improve
compensation for high quality teachers and other instructional personnel and to increase school
safety and security personnel, with oversight by a citizen advisory committee." S. I, Resolution
No. 18-047, School Board of Miami-Dade County,effective July 18, 2018.
In support of the Resolution, the School Board found, among other things, that (i) "the
School Board must maintain sufficient revenues to maintain high quality instruction in schools";
(ii) "the District has experienced a severe shortfall in the funding provided by the Florida
Legislature for the District's normal operating expenses during the current and prior fiscal years,
and such shortfall negatively affects the District's ability to attract and retain high quality teachers
and other instructional personnel"; and (iii) "the State categorical funding allocation for more
School Resource Officers and security personnel and other safety and security requirements is
insufficient to meet the statutory requirements and needs of the District." Whereas Clauses,
Resolution No. 18-047, School Board of Miami-Dade County,effective July 18,2018.
The language of the Referendum approved by the Resolution for placement on the ballot
states in full:
REFERENDUM TO APPROVE AD VALOREM LEVY FOR TEACHERS,
INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL,SCHOOL SAFETY AND SECURITY
SHALL THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
LEVY 0.75 MILLS OF AD VALOREM TAXES FOR OPERATIONAL FUNDS
(I)TO IMPROVE COMPENSATION FOR HIGH QUALITY TEACHERS AND
INSTRUCTIONAL PERSONNEL,AND(2)TO INCREASE SCHOOL SAFETY
AND SECURITY PERSONNEL, WITH OVERSIGHT BY A CITIZEN
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BEGINNING JULY 1, 2019,AND ENDING JUNE
30, 2023?
Notice of Election, Resolution No. 18-047, School Board of Miami-Dade County, effective July
18,2018.
As authority for the increased ad valorem millage levy, the Resolution invokes Section
1011.71(9), Florida Statutes. Whereas Clause & S. 1, Resolution No. 18-047, School Board of
Miami-Dade County, effective July 18, 2018. Section 1011.71(9), which is discussed in greater
detail in Sections II and III below, authorizes the Board to `levy, by local referendum or in a
general election, additional millage for school operational purposes up to an amount that, when
combined with non-voted millage under [Section 1011.71], does not exceed the 10-mill limit
established in s. 9(b),Art. VII of the State Constitution." § 1011.71(9), Fla. Stat. (2018).
The Referendum was approved by the voters in the November 6, 2018 election.
Greenberg Traurig,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
www.gaaw.ram
December 12, 2018
Page 3
B. Potential Objections by Miami-Dade County Charter Schools.
Miami-Dade County charter schools may potentially object to any effort by the Board to
limit or restrict, in the Board's discretion, the use of all or specific proceeds generated by the ad
valorem millage levy to non-charter public schools.
C. Assumptions.
For purposes of our opinion,we assume the following:
• The Board's voter-approved, increased millage levy is for school operational purposes,
and,when combined with other non-voted millage the Board has levied pursuant to Section
1011.71, Florida Statutes, does not exceed the 10-mill limit established in Article VII,
Section 9(b), of the Florida Constitution.
• The funds generated by the 0.75 mill ad valorem levy will only be used for those purposes
stated in the Referendum.
• All monetary allocations by the Board are fully compliant with all operating budget and
general fund requirements under Florida law. E.g., § 1003.02(1)(g)2., Fla. Stat. (2018)
("[D]istrict school boards must ... [p]repare, adopt, and timely submit to the Department
of Education, as required by law and by rules of the State Board of Education, the annual
school budget, so as to promote the improvement of the district school system."); §
1011.05, Fla. Stat. (2018) ("The official budget shall give the appropriations and reserves
therein the force and effect of fixed appropriations and reserves, and the same shall not be
altered, amended, or exceeded except as authorized."); § 1011.06(1), Ha. Stat. (2018)
("Expenditures shall be limited to the amount budgeted under the classification of accounts
provided for each fund and to the total amount of the budget after the same have been
amended as prescribed by law and rules of the State Board of Education.").
• The Board has complied with all salary schedule and evaluation requirements under Florida
law. E.g., § 1012.22(1)(c)4. & 5., Fla. Stat (2018) (outlining "[g]randfathered salary
schedule"and"[p]erformance salary schedule"requirements); § 1012.34,Fla. Stat. (2018)
(setting forth criteria for personnel evaluation).
• A "charter school," as discussed herein, is not a "charter lab school" or "virtual charter
school," both of which have statutory funding mechanisms that are different from a
"charter school." See § 1002.33(17), Fla. Stat. (2018) ("Funding for a charter lab school
shall be as provided in s. 1002.32"); §1002.33(17)(0, Fla. Stat. (2018) ("Funding for a
virtual charter school shall be as provided in s. 1002.45(7)."); § 1002.45(7)(a), Fla. Stat.
(2018) ("Students enrolled in a virtual instruction program or a virtual charter school shall
be funded through the Florida Education Finance Program as provided in the General
Appropriations Act."); § 1002.32(9), Fla. Stat. (2018) (discussing the method by which a
"charter lab school"shall be funded).
Greenberg Travrig,PA.I Attorneys at Law
wwwgttaw.rem
December 12, 2018
Page 4
IL RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS
A. Charter Schools Are "Public Schools"–Section 1002.33(1),Florida Statutes.
Section 1002.33(1), Florida Statutes (2018), authorizes the creation of charter schools.
That provision states:
(1)Authorization– All charter schools in Florida are public schools and shall be
part of the state's program of public education. A charter school may be formed by
creating a new school or converting an existing public school to charter status. A
charter school may operate a virtual charter school pursuant to s. 1002.45(1)(d)to
provide full-time online instruction to students, pursuant to s. 1002.455, in
kindergarten through grade 12. The school district in which the student enrolls in
the virtual charter school shall report the student for funding pursuant to s.
1011.61(1)(c)1.b.(VI), and the home school district shall not report the student for
funding. An existing charter school that is seeking to become a virtual charter
school must amend its charter or submit a new application pursuant to subsection
(6) to become a virtual charter school. A virtual charter school is subject to the
requirements of this section; however, a virtual charter school is exempt from
subsections(18) and(19), paragraph(20)(c), and s. 1003.03. A public school may
not use the term charter in its name unless it has been approved under this section.
§ 1002.33(1), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).
The emphasized portion of this provision makes clear that"charter schools"are considered
"public schools." School boards are required by the Florida Constitution to"operate, control and
supervise all free public schools within the school district and determine the rate of school district
taxes." § 4(b),art. IX, Fla. Const.
B. Charter School Funding–Section 1002.33(17)(6),Florida Statutes.
Section 1002.33(17)(6), Florida Statutes (2018), of Florida's K-20 Education Code
establishes the various sources of funding for"charter schools"in Florida. That provision states,
in relevant part:
1002.33 Charter Schools.—
(17) FUNDING -- Students enrolled in a charter school, regardless of the
sponsorship, shall be funded as if they are in a basic program or a special program,
the same as students enrolled in other public schools in the school district. ....
Greenberg Traurig,P.A.I Attorneys at law
www gtlaw.tom
December 12, 2018
Page 5
(b) The basis for the agreement for funding students enrolled in a charter school
shall be the sum of the school district's operating funds from the Florida Education
Finance Program as provided in s. 1011.62 and the General Appropriations Act,
including gross state and local funds, discretionary lottery funds, and funds from
the school district's current operating discretionary millage levy, divided by total
funded weighted full-time equivalent students in the school district multiplied by
the weighted full-time equivalent students for the charter school. Charter schools
whose students or programs meet the eligibility criteria in law are entitled to their
proportionate share of categorical program funds included in the total funds
available in the Florida Education Finance Program by the Legislature, including
transportation, the research-based reading allocation, and the Florida digital
classrooms allocation. Total funding for each charter school shall be recalculated
during the year to reflect the revised calculations under the Florida Education
Finance Program by the state and the actual weighted full-time equivalent students
reported by the charter school during the full-time equivalent student survey periods
designated by the Commissioner of Education. For charter schools operated by a
not-for-profit or municipal entity, any unrestricted current and capital assets
identified in the charter school's annual financial audit may be used for other
charter schools operated by the not-for-profit or municipal entity within the school
district, Unrestricted current assets shall be used in accordance with s. 1011.62,
and any unrestricted capital assets shall be used in accordance with s. 1013.62(2).
§ 1002.33(17)(b), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). As the underscored portion of Section
1002.33(17)(b) demonstrates, the Florida Legislature expressly limits the funding of students
enrolled in a charter school to the following sources:
(1) "the school district's operating funds from the Florida Education Finance Program as
provided in s. 1011.62 and the General Appropriations Act, including gross state and local
funds";
(2) "discretionary lottery funds"; and
(3) "funds from the school district's current operating discretionary millage levy."
The phase "current operating discretionary millage levy"is undefined.
'In addition to state-contributed funds,each school district must provide a"required local effort"(an`RLE")towards
the cost of the Florida Education Finance Program(the"FEFP"). See 1011.62(4),Fla.Stat.(2018)("The Legislature
shall prescribe the aggregate required local effort for all school districts collectively as an item in the General
Appropriations Act for each fiscal year."); § 1011.60(6), Fla. Stat. (2018)("Each district which participates in the
state appropriations for the [FEFP] shall provide evidence of its effort to maintain an adequate school program
throughout the district and shall ... [m]ake the minimum financial effort required for the support of the[FEED] as
prescribed in the current year's General Appropriations Act"). School districts generate their RLE(or local funds)to
contribute to the FEFP by levying a mandatory,state-approved millage rate on ad valorem property within the district,
pursuant to Section 1011.71(1),Florida Statutes,as discussed infra.
Greenberg Traurig,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
_ _ __ wwwgtbw.com
December 12, 2018
Page 6
To arrive at a funding figure under Section 1002.33(17)(b), the sum of these sources is first
"divided by total funded weighted full-time equivalent students in the school district." That
number is then"multiplied by the weighted full-time equivalent students for the charter school."
§ 1002.33(17)(b), Fla. Stat.
C. District School Tax—Section 1011.71,Florida Statutes.
Section 1011.71,Florida Statutes(2018),of Florida's K-20 Education Code,titled"District
school tax,"establishes different categories of ad valorem millage that school boards may levy on
property owners in the district to raise operational and capital outlay funds.
Subsection(1)of Section 1011.71 establishes the first two categories of ad valorem millage
that school boards may levy. That provision states, in full:
(I) If the district school tax is not provided in the General Appropriations Act or
the substantive bill implementing the General Appropriations Act, each district
school board desiring to participate in the state allocation of funds for current
operation as prescribed by s. 1011.62(18)shall levy on the taxable value for school
purposes of the district, exclusive of millage voted under s. 9(b) or s. 12, Art. VII
of the State Constitution, a millage rate not to exceed the amount certified by the
commissioner as the minimum millage rate necessary to provide the district
required local effort for the current year pursuant to s. 1011.62(4)(a)1. In addition
to the required local effort millage levy,each district school board may levy a non-
voted current operating discretionary millage. The Legislature shall prescribe
annually in the appropriations act the maximum amount of millage a district may
levy.
§ 1011.71(1), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). As the underscored portions demonstrate, Section
1011.71(1) authorizes school boards to impose: (1) a non-voted "required local effort millage
•
levy"; and (2) a "non-voted current operating discretionary millage" levy. The non-voted
"required local effort millage levy"in category one is used by school boards to fund their"required
local effort," which represents the local funds that each school district must contribute annually
toward the cost of the Florida Education Finance Program ("FEFP") to be eligible to receive
finding from the FEFP. See § 1011.62(4), Fla. Stat. (2018). The "non-voted current operating
discretionary millage"in category two is left undefined, but plainly pertains to "operati[ons]." §
1011.71(1). Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).2
Subsection(9)of Section 1011.71 establishes another category of ad valorem millage that
school boards may levy for"school operational purposes." That provision states,in full:
(9) In addition to the maximum millage levied under this section and the General
2 Subsection(2)of Section 1011.71 establishes a third category of non-voted ad valorem millage that school boards
may levy for capital outlay needs. § 1011,71(2),Fla,Stat. That category of ad valorem millage is not relevant to this
analysis of the Board's millage levy for school operational purposes.
Greenberg ataurig,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
www.gdaw.com
December 12, 2018
Page 7
Appropriations Act,a school district may levy. by local referendum or in a general
election, additional millage for school operational purposes up to an amount that,
when combined withnon-voted millage levied under this section,does not exceed
the I 0-mill limit established ins. 9(b),Art. VII of the State Constitution. Any such
levy shall be for a maximum of 4 years and shall be counted as part of the 10-mill
limit established in s. 9(b), Art. VII of the State Constitution. Millage elections
conducted under the authority granted pyrsuant to this section are subject to s.
1011.73. Funds generated by such additional millage do not become a Dart of the
calculation of the Florida Education Finance Program total potential funds in 2001-
2002 or any subsequent year and must not be incorporated in the calculation of any
hold-harmless or other component of the Florida Education Finance Program
formula in any year. If an increase in required local effort,when added to existing
millage levied under the 10-mill limit,would result in a combined millage in excess
of the 10-mill limit, any millage levied pursuant to this subsection shall be
considered to be required local effort to the extent that the district millage would
otherwise exceed the 10-mill limit.
§ 1011.71(9), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). As the underscored portions demonstrate, Section
1011.71(9) authorizes school boards "to levy, by local referendum or in a general election,
additional millage for school operational purposes." Id Moreover,the"[f]unds generated by such
additional millage do not become a part of the calculation of the Florida Education Finance
Program." Id.
D. School Millage Rates—Section 200.001,Florida Statutes.
Section 200.001, Florida Statutes (2018), which defines the categories of Florida millage
rates, highlights the differences between school boards' ad valorem millage levies. Specifically,
Section 200.001(3) draws a distinction between "[n]on-voted discretionary school operating
millage," on the one hand, and "[v]oted district school 'operating millage," on the other. That
provision states, in pertinent part:
(3) School millages shall be composed of five categories of millage rates, as
follows:
(a) Non-voted required school operating millage, which shall be that non-voted
millage rate set by the county school board for current operating purposes and
imposed pursuant to s. 1011.60(6).
(b) Non-voted discretionary school operating millage which shall be that non-
voted millage rate set by the county school board for operating purposes other than
the rate imposed pursuant to s. 1011.60(6) and other than the rate authorized in s.
- 1011.71(2).
(c) Voted district school operating millage which shall be that millage rate set by
the district school board for current school operating purposes as authorized by the
Greenberg Traarlg,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
www.gtlawwcom
December 12, 2018
Page 8
electors pursuant to s. 9(b), Art,VII of the State Constitution.
(d) Non-voted district school capital improvement millage, which shall be that
millage rate set by the district school board for capital improvements as authorized
in s. 1011.71(2).
(e) Voted district school debt service millage,which shall be that millage rate set
by the district school board as authorized by a vote of the electors pursuant to s. 12,
Art. VII of the State Constitution.
§ 200.001(3),Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).
III. DISCUSSION
The questions to be addressed are whether,under Florida law, the Board: (1)is obligated
toshare with charter schools located within the District proceeds from the ad valorem millage levy,
pursuant to Section 1011.71(9), Florida Statutes (2018); and (2) has discretion on how proceeds
from the ad valorem millage levy are spent.
A. The Board Has No Obligation to Share with Charter Schools Proceeds from a
Voted "Additional Millage for School Operational Purposes."
1. Statutory Interpretation.
a. Principles of Statutory Interpretation.
"The object of statutory interpretation is to determine legislative intent." Crews v. State,
183 So. 3d 329, 332 (Fla. 2015). Discerning legislative intent requires a court to look first to the
plain language of the statute. Hess v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 175 So. 3d 687, 692 (Fla 2015).
"When the statute is clear and unambiguous, courts will not look behind the statute's plain
language for legislative intent or resort to rules of statutory construction to ascertain intent."
Daniels v. Fla. Dept. of Health, 898 So. 2d 61, 64(Fla. 2005).
Nonetheless, "statutes cannot be read in isolation." Charles v. S. Baptist Hosp. of Fla.,
Inc., 209 So. 3d 1199, 1207 (Fla. 2017). "Every statute must be read as a whole with meaning
ascribed to every portion and due regard given to the semantic and contextual interrelationship
between its parts." Fla. Dept of Env. Pro. v. ContractPoint Fla. Parks, LLC, 986 So. 2d 1260,
1265 (Fla. 2008) (quoting Fleischman v. Dep't of Profl, Reg., 441 So. 2d 1121, 1123 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1983)). Consistent with this principle,the doctrine of in pari materia requires that statutes
relating to the same subject matter be read together,to give effect to all statutory provisions. See
Fla Dept of State v. Martin, 916 So.2d 763, 768 (Fla. 2005) ("The doctrine of in pari materia is
a principle of statutory construction that requires that statutes relating to the same subject or object
be construed together to harmonize the statutes and to give effect to the Legislature's intent.");
accord Fla. Dep't of Revenue v. New Sea Escape Cruises, Ltd., 894 So. 2d 954, 957 (Na. 2005)
("In ascertaining the legislative intent,a court must consider the plain language of the statute,give
Greenberg Traurig,PA.I Attorneys at Law
www gtlaw.com
December 12, 2018
Page 9
effect to all statutory provisions, and construe related provisions in harmony with one another."
(quoting Hechtman v. Nations Title Ins. of New York, 840 So. 2d 993, 996(Fla. 2003))).
b. The Interplay Between Sections 1002.33(17)(6) and 1011.71.
i. The plain language.
Section 1002.33(17)(b) of the K-20 Education Code establishes the various funding
sources for Florida's charter schools. One source of funding, set forth in Section 1002.33(17)(6),
is "funds from the school district's current operating discretionary millage levy." §
1002.330 7)(b), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). The phrase"current operating discretionary millage
levy"plainly contemplates a single"levy,"as opposed to multiple"levies,"but it is not defined in
the body of Section 1002.33.
Section 1011.71, titled"District school tax," is the provision of the K-20 Education Code
that grants school boards authority to levy millage for operational purposes and expressly
references the phrase "current operating discretionary millage." Accordingly, it is appropriate to
consider Section 1011.71, which deals with the same subject to which the charter-funding-
provision refers, to determine the meaning of the phrase"current operating discretionary millage
levy,"as used in Section 1002.33(17)(6). Beckett v. Dep't of Fin. Servs.,982 So. 2d 94, 100(Fla.
1st DCA 2008) ("[I]t is appropriate to consider other statutory provisions and relevant case law to
give a statutory term its proper meaning." (citing DuFresne v. State, 826 So. 2d 272, 275 (Fla.
2002))).
Section 1011.71 establishes two categories of a non-required (or discretionary) millage
levy for operational purposes:
Category One. The first category is codified in Section 1011.71(1), which provides that
"each district school board may levy a non-voted current operating discretionary millage." §
1011.71(1),Fla. Stat.(emphasis added). This underscored language parallels the undefined phrase
found in Section 1002.33(17)(b). Like the provision in Section 1002.3307)(b),this provision also
only contemplates a single "levy," as opposed to multiple"levies."
Category Two. The second category is codified in Section 1011.71(9),which provides that
"a school district may levy, by local referendum or in a general election, additional millage for
school operational purposes up to an amount that,when combined with non-voted millage levied
under this section does not exceed the 10-mill limit established in s. 9(b), Art. VII of the State
Constitution." § 1011.71(9), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). Unlike Section 1011.71(1), Section
1011.71(9) does not use the same, undefined phrase found in Section 1002.33(17)(b) — i.e.,
"current operating discretionary millage." Instead, the underscored language plainly establishes
that a voter-approved millage levy for"school operational purposes" constitutes an "additional,"
or distinct, type of"millage" that "a school district may levy" and is different from other "non-
voted millage levied under [the] section," such as the"non-voted current operating discretionary
millage" levy found in Section 1011.71(1).
Greenberg Traurig,P.A.1 Attorneys at Law
www.gtaw.com
December 12,2018
Page 10
When Section 1002.33(17)(b) is construed together with both provisions of Section
1011.71,it becomes clear that a charter school's funding source"from the school district's current
operating discretionary millage levy,"as set forth in Section 1002.33(17)(b), can only refer to the
same"non-voted current operating discretionary millage" levy authorized by Section 1011.71(1)
— and not to any "additional" and distinct voter-approved millage levy for operational school
purposes under Section 1011.71(9).3
This is because undefined"[t]erms of special legal significance"—like the phrase"current
operating discretionary millage," as used in both Section 1002.33(17)(b) and Section 1011.71(1)
—"are presumed to have been used by the legislature according to their legal meanings." City of
Tampa v. Thatcher Glass Corp., 445 So. 2d 578, 579 n.2 (Fla. 1984); accord Crews v. Fla. Pub.
Emp'rs Council 79, AFSCME, 113 So. 3d 1063, 1069(Fla. 1st DCA 2013) ("[c]ourts should give
words in a statute their ordinary and everyday meaning unless the context reveals that a technical
meaning applies" (citing State v. Brown, 412 So. 2d 426, 428 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982))). The legal
meaning of`current operating discretionary millage levy," as used in Section I002.33(17)(b), is
clearly provided by the identical term in Section 1011.71(1). Identical terms of special legal
significance used in different statutes on the same subject should be read "in harmony with one
another." New Sea Escape Cruises, Ltd, 894 So. 2d at 957 (quoting Hechbnan, 840 So. 2d at
996).
Moreover, the "current one-rating discretionary millage levy" in Section 1002.33(17)(b)
does not contemplate multiple, or even "all," discretionary levies for operational purposes. If it
did, the Legislature would not have used the word "levy" in the singular or echoed the specific
language in Section 1011.71(1) that authorizes a"current operating discretionary millage"levy.
Indeed,Section 200.001(3),Florida Statutes(2018),which sets forth different"categories"
of millage rates for"[s]chools," clarifies this point by drawing a distinction between the category
of"[n]onvoted discretionary school operating millage" as authorized by Section 1011.71(1),and
the category of"[v]oted district school operating millage," as authorized by Section 1011.71(9).
§ 200.001(3)(b), (c), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). If the Legislature had intended to include the
"additional"voter-approved levy set forth in Section 1011.71(9) as another source of funding for
charter schools, it could have expressly done so. But the courts cannot "add words to the statute
that were not placed there by the Legislature." D.MT. v. T.MH, 129 So. 3d 320, 334 (Fla. 2013)
'Notably, Section 4 of the Florida Standard Charter Contract promulgated by the Florida Department of Education
("FDEC"),titled"Financial Accountability,"includes a provision that requires a school board to fund charter schools
from"funds from the[djistrict's current operating discretionary millage levy,"but gives the school board complete
"discretion" to "provide additional funding to the [charter school via any applicable capital outlay or operating
millage levied by the" school board. Foran IEPC-SC, Florida Standard Charter Contract,Fla. Dep't of Educ., §4,
A.l.iv & A.2, (effective Dec. 2016), available al htto://www.fldoe.or&core/fileparse.ehd7700/urlt/IEPC-SC.odf
(last visited Dec.9,2018)(emphasis added);see also Fla.Admin.Code R.6A-6.0786(3)(2018)("Upon approval of
a charter school application,the sponsor shall have thirty(30)days to propose an initial proposed charter contract to
the charter school. The sponsor shall use Form IEPC-SC, Florida Standard Charter Contract, effective December
2016, ... as the basis for the initial draft contract."). On October 30,2018,FDEC issued a Notice of Development of
Rulemaking "[t]o revise the Florida Standard Charter Contract (Form IEPC-SC) to align with recent legislative
changes." 44 Fla. Admin. W. 4991-92 (Oct. 30, 2018). A revised Florida Standard Charter Contract has not yet
issued.
Greenberg Traurig,PA.I Attorneys at Law
www.9naw.com
December 12, 2018
Page 11
(quoting Lawnwood Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Seeger, 990 So. 2d 503, 512 (Fla. 2008)).
ii. The history of Section 1002.33(17)(b)'s enactment.
These provisions, when read together, do not appear to be ambiguous. If, however, the
provisions were to be considered ambiguous in any respect, a court would then "[e]xamin[e] the
history of the legislation [as) a helpful tool in determining legislative intent" Raymond James
Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Phillips, 126 So. 3d 186, 192 (Fla 2013). The history of Section
1002.33(17)(b)'s enactment confirms that which the plain language already establishes.
The Legislature authorized the creation of charter schools in 1996. § 1, ch. 96-186, Laws
of Fla.; § 228.056, Fla. Stat. (1997). As part of this enactment, the Legislature authorized as a
source of finding for charter schools, "funds from the school district's current operating
discretionary millage levy." § 228.056(13)(b),Fla. Stat. (1997). This is identical to the source of
funding discussed above and currently set forth in Section 1002.33(17)(b).
At the time the charter-school legislation was passed, the provision for an "additional"
voter-approved millage levy for operational school purposes, as set forth in Section 1011.71(9),
did not exist. See § 236.25, Fla. Stat. (1997).4 Instead, only the analog to Section 1011.71(1)
existed and authorized"a non-voted current operating discretionary millage"levy identical to the
one currently found in Section 1011.710). See § 236.25(1), Fla. Stat. (1997).
The Legislature first added the analog to Section 1011.71(9) in 2001, using language that
is identical to the current language of Section 1011.71(9). § 1, ch. 2001-220, Laws of Fla.
(originally enacted as§ 236.25(6),Fla. Stat.,relocated to § 1011.71,Ha. Stat.,effective 2003,see
§§ 663, 1065, ch. 2002-387, Laws of Fla., and renumbered as subsection (9), effective 2009,see
§§ 33, 43, ch. 2009-59, Laws of Fla.). When the Legislature enacted this provision, however, it
did not simultaneously amend or modify the list of charter-school funding sources currently found
in Section 1002.33(17)(b).
Based on this history, it is obvious that, when the Legislature created the list of a charter
school's source of funding to include "funds from the school district's current operating
discretionary millage levy" in 1996, it was referring to the only "current operating discretionary
millage levy" codified at the time: the analog to Section 1011.710), which authorized "a non-
voted current operating discretionary millage"levy identical to the one currently found in Section
1011.71(1). By the same token, the Legislature could not have predicted a future change in the
law or have intended to include as part of the then-existing"current operating discretionary millage
levy"an"additional"category of levy that did not become a part of the law until years later.
There was then,and is now,a statutory provision authorizing school boards to"call an election at which the electors
within the school districts may approve an ad valorem tax millage as authorized in s. 9, Art. VII of the State
Constitution," with any millage levied under this provision limited to a two-year period. See §236.31; Fla. Stat.
(1997);§ 1011.73,Fla.Stat.(2018)(same). Because the Board did not invoke this provision as part of its Resolution,
and the voter-approved referendum approves a four-year millage levy under a different statutory provision,the two-
year ad valorem provision should have no application here.
Greenberg 9taurig,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
_.___. .. ... www.anaw com
December 12,2018
Page 12
2. The Indian River Case.
In June 2017, Judge Kanarek of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Indian River
County addressed whether, under Florida law, a school board is obligated to share with district
charter schools proceeds from a millage levy approved by voter referendum for school operational
purposes pursuant to Section 1011.71(9). Judge Kanarek ruled, on summary judgment, that
Section 1002.33(17)(b) required the board to do so. See Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for
Summary Judgment for Declaratory Relief,Indian River Charter High School,Inc., et at. v. School
Board of Indian River County, Fla., Case No. 31-2016-CA-000432 (Ma. 19th Jud. Cir. Ct. June
13,2017).
The summary judgment order in Indian River offers limited guidance or persuasive force
for at least three reasons. First,the order focuses primarily upon the school board's legal argument
that the charter school funding sources listed in Section 1002.33(17)(6) are limited to those funds
required by or included in the FEFP,to which funds generated pursuant to Section 1011.71(9) do
not apply. Second, the order does not engage in the statutory construction analysis discussed
above,completely ignores the history of Section 1002.33(17)(b)'s enactment,and assumes without
any analysis that the"additional,"voter-approved millage"a school district may levy"for"school
operational purposes"under Section 1011.71(9)is the same thing as the"[n]onvoted discretionary
school operating millage" levy authorized by Section 1011.71(1). Third, the order was never
appealed,and no Florida appellate court has issued a decision on this precise legal question.
3. Conclusion.
The summary judgment order in Indian River aside, the plain language of Section
1002.33(17)(6),Florida Statutes,obligates the Board to share with District charter schools"finds
from the school district's current operating discretionary millage levy." The "additional"voter-
approved millage levy authorized by Section 1011.71(9), Florida Statutes, to generate funds for
"school operational purposes" is a different category of millage levy than the "current operating
discretionary millage levy," from which charter schools are funded pursuant to Section
1002.33(17)(6). Because the "additional" voter-approved millage levy described in Section
1011.79(9) is not listed as a source of funding for charter schools in Section 1002.33(17)(b), the
Board does not have an obligation to share with District charter schools—in a proportional amount
or otherwise—proceeds from such a millage levy.5
B. The Board's Discretion in Spending the Operational Funds.
Based on the language of the voter-approved Referendum,operational funds generated by
a Notably, in the recently enacted Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act (the "Act"), the
Legislature expressly included"charter schools"as being entitled to a proportional share of district school funding for
the mental health assistance allocation provided by the Legislature. See ch. 18-3, §29,Laws of Fla.(providing that
"[ejligible charter schools are entitled to a proportionate share of district funding" relating to the "mental health
assistance allocation"). The Act also specifically permits a"charter school"to apply for a grant that will"provide
awards to schools to fund, in whole or in part,the fixed capital outlay costs associated with improving the physical
security of school buildings." Ch. 18-3,§44,Laws of Fla.
Greenberg Traurig,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
www Atlawcom
December 12,2018
Page 13
the levy of 0.75 mills must be used for two stated purposes: (1) "to improve compensation for
high quality teachers and instructional personnel"; and(2)"to increase school safety and security
personnel, with oversight by a citizen advisory committee." Under Florida law, the Board is
obligated to use these funds, over the course of the levy, for no purpose other than the purposes
stated in the Referendum. E.g., Dickinson v. Stone, 251 So. 2d 268, 273 (Fla. 1971) ("It is a
violation of an elemental principle in the administration of public funds for one who is charged
with the trust of their proper expenditure not to apply those funds [t]o the purposes for which they
are raised."); Taylor v. Williams, 196 So. 214, 217 (Fla. 1940)("Ad valorem taxes levied for, and
taxes allocated to, county and road and bridge district bond payments, cannot legally be used for
refunding bond expenses,or commingled with revenues raised to pay refunding bond expenses.");
Supreme Forest Woodmen Circle v. Hobe Sound Co., 189 So. 249, 250 (Fla. 1939) ("It is
fundamental that funds raised by taxation for one purpose cannot be diverted to another without
legislative authority."); Oven v. Ausley, 143 So. 588, 589 (Fla. 1932) ("When funds are raised by
taxation for one purpose they cannot be diverted to some other purpose without out legislative
authority.").
Although funds generated by the levy of 0.75 mills cannot be diverted for uses other than
"improv[ing] compensation for high quality teachers and instructional personnel" and
"increas[ing] school safety and security personnel," the voter-approved Referendum does not
prescribe or mandate a specific method by which the Board is required to accomplish these stated
goals. So long as these dual goals are accomplished, the Board should have discretion in how
money generated by the millage levy and dedicated to those goals is allocated.
For example, in Opinion 08-08, the Attorney General was asked to decide whether the
School Board of Orange County had discretion in how to use proceeds of a sales surtax,where the
ballot provided a general description of the projects to be funded by the surtax revenues,and the
plan adopted by the Board accompanying the ballot proposal line-itemed several generic projects
for which the funds would be dedicated. The Attorney General concluded that"the ballot language
and the plan for using these surtax proceeds [did] not mandate the accomplishment of these
projects in any particular order and the school board [had] flexibility to work within the terms of
the plan as it prioritizes the use of these funds." Op. Att'y Gen. Fla. 08-08 (2008);see also Op.
Att'y Gen.Fla.06-38(2006)(recognizing that"relatively general"ballot language"would provide
the school board with some flexibility" in using capital outlay surtax proceeds).
In the absence of any specific guidelines within the body of the Referendum itself, the
Board should have flexibility to accomplish the goals stated therein.6
IV. OPINION
We have considered such questions of law as we have deemed necessary for the purpose
As stated on page 3,supra,this assumes the Board has otherwise complied with all salary schedule and evaluation
requirements under Florida law. E.g., § 101222(1)(c)4. & 5, Fla. Stat. (2018) (outlining "[g]randfathered salary
schedule"and"[p]erformance salary schedule"requirements); § 1012.34, Fla. Stat.(2018)(setting forth criteria for
personnel evaluation).
Greenberg Traurlg,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
www.gtlaw.com
December 12,2018
Page 14
of rendering the opinion set forth herein, as qualified by any assumptions or limitations expressly
stated. Based upon and subject to the considerations reflected above, we are of the opinion that:
(1) The plain language of Section 1002.33(17)(b),Florida Statutes,obligates the Board
to share with District charter schools "funds from the school district's current operating
discretionary millage levy."
(2) The "additional" voter-approved millage levy authorized by Section 1011.71(9),
Florida Statutes, to generate funds for "school operational purposes" is a different category of
millage levy than the"current operating discretionary millage levy," from which charter schools
are funded pursuant to Section 1002.33(17)(6).
(3) Because the "additional" voter-approved millage levy described in Section
1011.71(9) is not listed as a source of funding for charter schools in Section 1002.33(17)(6), the
Board does not have an obligation to share with District charter schools proceeds from such a
millage levy, in a proportional amount or otherwise.
(4) So long the Board uses the funds generated by the levy of 0.75 mills to "improve
compensation for high quality teachers and instructional personnel" and "increase school safety
and security personnel," the Board should have discretion in how money dedicated to those goals
is allocated.
We express no opinion as to matters governed by any laws other than the substantive law
of Florida, which are in effect on the date hereof.
This opinion is furnished solely for your benefit, pertaining to the Board's obligation and
discretion to share with District charter schools proceeds from the levy of 0.75 mills of ad valorem
taxes approved by voter referendum for operational funds, as described in this Opinion, and may
not be circulated to, or relied upon by, any other person or entity.
Respectfully,
Greenberg Traurig,P.A.I Attorneys at Law
www.gnawmm
w, WEISS SEROTA HELFMAN
COLE & BIERMAN
AT THE CROSSROADS OF BUSINESS, GOVERNMENT & THE LAW
April 12, 2019
Mr. Luis M. Garcia,Esquire
Deputy Assistant School Board Attorney
1450 N.E. Second Avenue, Suite 400
Miami,Florida 33132
Re: City of Aventura's Request for Equitable Distribution of November 6,2018
Referendum Revenue
Dear Mr. Garcia:
At the City of Aventura(the"City")Commission workshop meeting on the morning of April 11,
2019, the City Commission examined, discussed and debated the above referenced item. The
Commission carefully considered our agenda Memo and Exhibits attached thereto(as previously
furnished to you), and also considered the Greenberg Traurig letter of December 12, 2018 (the
"GT Letter")which you had kindly provided to me for inclusion in the item.
The City Commission requested that I write to you to advise that the Commission is not at all
persuaded by the GT Letter, and remains passionately committed to securing a fair share and
equitable distribution of the Referendum Revenue for the benefit of the City's municipal charter
schools. The City Commission expressed that it has a duty to its taxpaying constituents to obtain
the approximate Eight Hundred Thousand ($800,000) Dollars of annual revenue which the City
believes that it should receive from the Referendum Revenue for the further enhancement of
education and security at its charter schools.
The City Commission requested us to advise you that the City is examining all available options
and remedies to secure access to the Referendum Revenue. In the interim, the City Commission
authorized Commissioner Shelley to arrange a meeting with Dr. Karp,the Superintendent,and the
City Manager to discuss the matter.
We will be in touch further. //''��
Yours
.���-- C �\l /
1pDavid o
City Attorney's Office
200 East Broward Blvd.,Suite 1900,Fort Lauderdale,Florida 33301 1954.763.4242 1 www.wsh-law.com