IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA ~~ UNITED TEACHERS OF DADE, AFT, NEA, PEA, AFL-CIO and KAREN ARONOWITZ, citizen of Florida. ~!.~.-::1 ): -, Plaintiffs, (. 0 vs. CASE NO: ( W c : THE DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY Defendants. ---------------', -( 09-09 23 1 CA 0 9v' PETITION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENT Plaintiffs, the UNITED TEACHERS OF DADE and KAREN ARONOWITZ, petition this Court for Injunctive Relief and a Declaratory Judgment against the DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY (hereinafter "Board"). In support of this petition, Plaintiffs allege:,jurisdiction AND VENUE 1. This is an action for declaratory relief pursuant to Fla. Stat. 86.011 and is within this Court's jurisdiction. 2. The relief Plaintiffs seek includes equitable relief as provided in Fla. Stat. 286.011 ("Government in the Sunshine Law"), the granting of which is within the jurisdiction of this Court. Courthouse News Service 3. Fla. Stat. 286.011 provides on its face that any citizen of Florida has standing to bring a suit for equitable relief to enforce the purposes of that statute. This statutory provision assures the citizens of Miami-Dade County that its elected public officials will operate with full legal transparency and within the public scrutiny. o- -:'"1 I r~rl '--" c"~)
~ 4. UNITED TEACHERS OF DADE, AFr, NEA, FEA, AFL-CIO ("UTD") is the certified bargaining agent for over 30,000 teachers and support staff employed by the Miami- Dade County Public Schools to honorably serve the citizens of Miami-Dade County. UTD takes an active civic role in the community. 5. Karen Aronowitz ("Aronowitz") is the President of UTD, is a citizen of the state of Florida, and a resident of Miami-Dade County. Karen Aronowitz has a direct and specific interest in decisions of the Board and has a clear and certain right to expect the Board and Board members to only take actions that comply with the Florida Constitution and Florida Statutes. waived. 6. The actions complained of herein occurred in Miami-Dade County, Florida. 7. All conditions precedent to bringing this action have been performed, excused or 8. The Board is a political subdivision of the State of Florida headquartered at 1450 NE 2 nd Ave., Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida and is governed by the Government in the Sunshine Law, Fla. Stat. 286.011 (2008). 9. The Board is comprised of nine members elected from individual single member districts. The Board is charged with the responsibility of operating the Miami-Dade County Public Schools which is the fourth largest school district in the country. 10. Venue is appropriate in this Court pursuant to Fla. Stat. 47.011 as the Board is located in Miami-Dade County and the cause of action accrued in Miami-Dade County. 11. The Government in the Sunshine Law, Fla. Stat. 286.011, provides in part: "(1) All meetings of any board or commission of any state agency or authority or of any agency or authority of any county. municipal corporation, or political subdivision, except as otherwise provided in the Constitution, at which official acts are to be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, and no resolution, rule, or formal action shall be considered binding except as taken or made at such 2
# meeting. The board or commission must provide reasonable notice of all such meetings. (2) The minutes of a meeting of any such board or commission of any such state agency or authority shall be promptly recorded, and such records shall be open to public inspection. The circuit courts of this state shall have jurisdiction to issue injunctions to enforce the purposes of this section upon application by any citizen of this state." 12. On Friday, January 30, 2008, the Board met at a closed door meeting where the public was not allowed ("closed door meeting"). 13. The Board justified its alleged right to meet in this closed door session under the pretext that the meeting was related to collective bargaining and exempt from the Government in the Sunshine Law. 14. The Florida Statutes limits the scope of any such exemption to "discussions between the chief executive officer of the public employer, or his or her representative, and the legislative body or public employer relative to collective bargaining..." Fla. Stat. 447.605(1). 15. At the closed door meeting, the Board engaged in impermissible discussions of topics unrelated to collective bargaining and/or otherwise outside of the collective bargaining exemption to the Government in the Sunshine Law and, therefore, violated the Government in the Government in the Sunshine Law. 16. Through information and belief, these impermissible topics included, but were not limited to, discussions of a plan proposed by the School Superintendent "to cut more than $50 million from the [Miami-Dade School] district's current budget by the end of fiscal year." Kathleen McGrory, Article, Teachers Raises May be Put Off, Miami Herald Jan. 31, 2009 at Bl B2. Such budget discussions do not fall within any exemption to the Government in the Sunshine Law. 3
, 17. Other closed door meetings of the Board, where the public has been excluded based upon the Board's claim to an exclusion from the Government in the Sunshine Law, have been held since current Superintendent Alberto M. Carvalho's appointment on or about October 10,2008. 18. Plaintiffs have a reasonable belief that subjects discussed at these additional closed door meetings have also included topics which exceed the boundaries of any exclusion to the Government in the Sunshine Law. 19. Plaintiffs have demonstrated irreparable injury in the form of a violation of the Government in the Sunshine Law. 20. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law. 21. Plaintiffs seek an injunction to enforce the provisions of the Government-in-the Sunshine Law, Fla. Stat. 286.011 (2008). 22. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment adjudicating that: a. Defendant violated the Government in the Sunshine Law when they met behind closed doors on January 30, 2009, b. Any minutes or notes generated during the January 30, 2009 closed door meeting, or generated as a result of the closed door meeting, are public records and should be made available to the public, c. Other closed door meetings held since October 10, 2008 that exceeded the applicable exemptions are also a violation of the Government in the Sunshine Law, and d. Any decisions predicated on any of the improper closed door meetings are void. 4
I, I WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request a Declaratory Judgment against Defendant for unlawfully holding meetings in violation of the Government in the Sunshine Law, including all items requested in Paragraph 22, an injunction to enforce the provisions of Fla. Stat. 286.011, costs, attorney fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. 286.011(4) and all other relief deemed proper by the Court. DATED this 4th day of February, 2009. Respectfully submitted, PHILLIPS & RICHARD, P.A 9360 SW 72 Street, Suite 283 Miami, Florida 33173 Telephone: (305) 412-8322 Facsimile: (305) 412-8299 Email: kpbillips@p~. BY:~ - Kathleen M. Phillips Florida Bar No. 287873 5