BOCA RATON, FL (Boca Post) (Copyright © 2025) — A new round of court filings submitted Monday has sharpened the legal fight over whether two “Save Boca” land measures can appear on the January 13 special election ballot. The documents — a detailed memorandum from plaintiff Ned Kimmelman and a stipulation filed on behalf of the City of Boca Raton — mark the most extensive statements yet from both sides as the case advances.
Kimmelman, who filed suit on October 31, argues the measures are unlawful on several grounds and should be blocked before ballots are finalized. His Memorandum of Law, filed November 24, expands on earlier claims by challenging the timing of the initiative, the constitutionality of its language, and the clarity of the proposed ballot text.
A key portion of the memorandum focuses on the city charter’s timing requirements. Kimmelman says the charter amendment petition was certified by the City Clerk on October 2, 2025, which — under Article VII, Section 7.01 — requires any vote on the amendment to take place within three months. According to the filing, that deadline would fall no later than early January, meaning the January 13 election date does not satisfy the charter’s cutoff.
He also argues the charter amendment conflicts with state law because it would create mandatory referendums for future land transactions without statutory authority. The memorandum cites the Florida Constitution, the Municipal Home Rule Powers Act, and past appellate decisions to support the claim that voters cannot, by charter amendment, force the city to hold referendums on every sale, lease, or other “alienation” of land larger than one-half acre — or any portion of that land — unless the Legislature has expressly allowed it.
Beyond those structural challenges, the filing attacks the wording proposed for voters. Kimmelman calls the ballot title and text unclear, pointing to phrases such as “certain lands,” “alienate from the public,” and “or part thereof,” and says the absence of a separate ballot summary violates state requirements for clarity. He also highlights recitals within the proposed charter ordinance stating that a “majority of registered voters” already find the amendment necessary, calling those statements unsupported and misleading.
While Kimmelman’s memorandum lays out the plaintiff’s legal theory, the City of Boca Raton’s filing the same day adopts a different approach. The Stipulation, submitted November 24, places a series of statements from Mayor Scott Singer and Councilmember Mark Wigder into the court record. These quotations come from media reports and from the October 28 City Council meeting, where both officials discussed potential impacts of the proposed measures.
The stipulation recounts Singer’s comments that the proposed language could deter nonprofits, private partners, and even future City Councils from moving forward with routine projects because any land transaction over one-half acre — or any portion of that parcel — might require an expensive referendum. It also captures his public remarks describing the wording as vague and potentially opening the door to litigation over issues as small as park permits or pavilion rentals.
Wigder’s remarks, also included in the filing, outline scenarios he said could be affected, including renewals of leases for longstanding nonprofits such as the Florence Fuller Center or the Boca Raton Historical Society. He noted that the cost of holding a referendum could exceed the city’s annual financial support to some of these groups. The stipulation emphasizes his concern that the “any part thereof” language could also sweep in easements, utilities, and short-term uses of public property.
The City’s filing additionally confirms that the Supervisor of Elections provided an estimated cost of $385,966.20 to administer the special election scheduled for January 13.
Procedurally, the case has continued to narrow. Earlier this month, Kimmelman voluntarily dismissed his claims against Save Boca, Inc. and its president Jonathan Pearlman, leaving the City and Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections Wendy Link as the remaining defendants. Supervisor Link, in her earlier Answer, told the court she takes no position on the merits and will comply with any lawful order.
As of the latest filings on November 24, no ruling has been entered, and no further orders have been posted to the docket. The memorandum and stipulation now stand as the most recent official statements from both sides while the court weighs the issues.
The most recent court files can be seen below:
DEFENDANT SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS’S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT, filed on 11/14
DEFENDANT, CITY OF BOCA RATON’S, STIPULATION, filed on 11/24
PLANTIFF’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY INJUNCTION, filed on 11/24
0 Comments