[NFBF-Tampa] Friday's Hearing concerning Referendum Law Suit

[tampa President]

> 
>  
>             The summary judgement hearing concerning the law suit filed by Stacy white will be held on Friday, May 3 at 801 E. Twigg Street, Courtroom 501 before the honorable Rex Barbas at 1:30 p.m. we are urging as many blind people with their white canes and guide dogs to show up for this hearing to let Judge Barbas know this issue is important to us. Please dress in business casual or better for this hearing. We will meet at Crystal Bay Café located at 800 E. Twigg Street, 2nd floor for lunch at 11:30 AM and then proceed to the courtroom for the hearing.
>  
> A motion for summary judgment (sometimes called an “MSJ”) is a request for the court to rule that the other party has no case, because there are no facts at issue. The party making the motion is claiming that either the case should not go before a jury at all, or a jury could only rule in favor of the moving party. In order to win an MSJ, the moving party must show that:
> 1.      there are no facts which can reasonably be disputed; or
> 2.      anyone looking at the facts and applying law would rule in favor of the moving party.
> In effect, should Judge Barbas grant a summary judgement, the case is decided in favor of the prevailing party.
>  
> On November 6, 2018 voters approved a 1% sales tax to fund certain transportation enhancements in Hillsborough County. Of this 1% tax, the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit (HART) would receive 45%. The current budget of HART is $79 million; the additional sales tax revenue would add approximately $125 million to the HART revenue which must be used for specific enhancements. The referendum created a citizens oversight committee (COC) charged with ensuring the funds are used for their stated purpose. At issue in this case is whether or not voters have the right to impose a tax upon themselves and the authority to create a citizens’ oversight committee. Commissioner White contends voters do not have the legal right to impose a tax upon themselves; that power is reserved to elected officials. In Addition, Comissioner White asserts voters do not have the authority to create a COC; the authority to oversee the spending of tax revenue is reserved to elected officials. Should the judge rule in favor of Comissioner White, the tax would effectively be repealed and HART would remain at the current funding level. Should the judge rule in favor of the respondents, HART could potentially begin receiving the additional revenue and we would realize the transportation enhancements the tax revenue was meant to create.
>  
>             Please join us for our informational gathering at Crystal Bay Café and bring your questions. You may also post questions to this list and we will do our best to answer them.

Best,
Miranda Kilby
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbf-tampa_nfbnet.org/attachments/20190429/6741ad3f/attachment.html>