It looks like Bob Harms will be taking Jabour's seat on the council.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/101707/met_209376080.shtml (http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/101707/met_209376080.shtml)
QuoteJabour's election win ruled invalid
By Mary Kelli Palka,
The Times-Union
Jacksonville City Councilman Jay Jabour's May 15 election was invalidated and set aside because he didn't live in the proper residence area prior to qualifying for the election, a circuit judge ruled Wednesday.
Jabour, a Republican whose term began July 1, has 10 days to request a rehearing. Judge Bernard Nachman's ruling becomes final if no request is filed or when the court rules on any request that is filed, city Deputy General Counsel Tracey Arpen said.
Jabour is an at-large councilman from Group 2, which includes the Beaches and parts of Arlington. The city charter requires candidates for the office to live in the area. Jabour has a condominium in Jacksonville Beach as well as a home in the San Jose area, which is not in Group 2.
While Jabour listed the beach condominium as his primary residence on election papers, he testified in court that he lived in his San Jose house most of the days leading up to qualifying, according to Nachman's ruling. The ruling also cited that one of Jabour's children goes to school near his San Jose house, the family attends church in the area and belongs to a San Jose country club.
Jabour has a homestead exemption on the condominium. Since the judge has ruled that it wasn't his primary residence - a requirement for a homestead exemption - when he qualified for office in January, he could now face financial penalties, Duval County Property Appraiser Jim Overton said.
In addition, it's a third-degree felony to submit false voter registration information, according to state statutes. State Attorney Harry Shorstein couldn't be reached for comment Wednesday evening.
Jabour said in a written statement that he disagrees with the ruling and that he's talking with his attorneys about what to do next.
"I plan to explore and exhaust every possible option available to me to ensure that I can continue to work hard for the voters who elected me to represent them on the Jacksonville City Council," Jabour wrote.
Democratic candidate Robert Harms filed the lawsuit May 31 challenging the election, saying Jabour violated the city charter's requirement that he must reside in the Group 2 area for at least 183 consecutive days prior to qualifying for the race. Harms said he was happy that Nachman ruled in his favor.
In 2003, Jabour ran for the council District 5 seat, where his San Jose house is located, and narrowly lost to fellow Republican Art Shad. The next year Jabour moved his homestead exemption to his beach condominium. Instead of challenging Shad in District 5, he ran for the vacant Group 2 at-large seat.
Overton said that based on the ruling, Jabour's homestead exemption for this year will be denied and he will lose any tax benefits from the 3 percent Save Our Homes assessment cap. Jabour also could face fines, liens and back taxes, Overton said.
"It'll be expensive for him," Overton said.
Arpen said the General Counsel's Office, which represented the Supervisor of Elections Office and Duval County Canvassing Board, did not take a position in the lawsuit. But the judge did previously rule in agreement with city attorneys that if Jabour is removed from office, a new election should be held between Harms and Theresa Graham, a Republican candidate who came in third during the first city election on March 20, Arpen said.
Graham said Wednesday she hasn't decided whether she would be interested in running. She said she wants to wait to see the final legal outcome.
If Jabour requests a rehearing to ask Nachman to reconsider his ruling and the judge maintains his position, then Jabour could file an appeal with the First District Court of Appeal and ask for a stay. That would allow him to remain in office during the process, Arpen said.
Arpen said the Circuit Court ruling isn't likely to have much implication statewide. That could change if the First District Court of Appeal ultimately ruled in the case. Arpen said appellate decisions on residency requirements are rare.
Jabour isn't the first local politician accused of breaking residency requirements.
Duval County School Board member Brenda Priestly Jackson admits she lives most of the time in her childhood home outside her district. But she said she also rents a home in her voting district. Former Superintendent Joseph Wise asked Jackson to resign, in part because of residency issues. She has not, but the School Board voted Wednesday to fire Wise.
And during his first race for mayor in 2003, John Peyton was accused of living outside of Duval County. He denied the allegations, which never ended up in court.
Arpen said if Jabour is ultimately removed from office, a new election would likely be during the January presidential primary, if all of the legal issues are resolved in time.
Times-Union writer Beth Kormanik contributed to this report.
mary.palka@jacksonville.com, (904) 359-4104
This story can be found on Jacksonville.com at http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/101807/met_209428788.shtml.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 17, 2007, 10:34:29 PM
It looks like Bob Harms will be taking Jabour's seat on the council.
Actually no, there would be a special election during the Presidential Primary (then another one if nobody in that gets 50% + 1).
This was a mess. to be hones, I don't know much about the case, but assuming the judge made the right decision, what a bad decision by Jabour. Screwing around with residency is a bad move, and putting aside the legal ramifications, it would be tough to get re-elected again.
It will be interesting to see if Priestly Jackson is treated the same way or if she gets a pass.
If you are interested in hearing this address read into the record at City Council, be there Tuesday, 11/13 at 5:00pm during the public comment portion of the City Council meeting. Thank You and here is the text:
Fraud Is Not Nice November 12, 2007
I met Councilman Jay Jabour many times during the local campaign this Spring.
Jay Jabour is a nice guy. This Councilman is a nice guy who committed
fraud on the voters and on the taxpayers. He is a perpetrator but he is also a
victim. He is a victim of a culture of permissiveness created by the powerful
establishment who convinced him that he could get away with this fraud.
As an average voter, if I lied about my address to the SOE office and cast a
ballot based on that lie, I would be guilty of a felony and I would lose my right to
vote. The Councilman in question has three times the right to vote than I do, and
I did not commit fraud. He can vote in the elections where we all vote. He can
vote as a Councilman and he can vote as the Chair of the Rules Committee.
If there is a question about a police officer’s conduct on duty, usually he is sus-
pended with pay until an investigation is complete. In the case of the Rules
Committee Chair, there has been an investigation and a court decision, yet he
remains the Chair of the Rules Committee.
Why should a Councilman who broke the Law be held to a lower ethical
standard than an average voter or the police who protect us?
Why should the Councilman who broke the Law be the Chair of this Council’s Rules Committee?
Why should this Council be complicit with this fraud?
The answer to all three is: It shouldn’t happen, it shouldn’t happen, it should not happen!
It is a shame that a defrauded voter has to appeal to the Council on this
matter when the advice should come from the General Counsel whom we pay to
to advise government. [This City Council is currently considering
Ethics Legislation and changing Election Laws. All are bills considered through
the Rules Committee. With the vote of the Rules Committee Chair in question,
all of the Legislation that this Council passes is exposed to legal challenge,
including the Ethics Legislation.](under legal review)
Please, do not implicate this entire Council in one man’s fraud to the voters.
The Council can either hope and pray for a successful appeal, or it can act
responsibly today. Mr. President, I ask you to act within your power and replace
the Rules Committee Chair. If not, I appeal to the other Council members to
sponsor a resolution to replace the Chair of the Rules Committee for the sake of
your own integrity. You don’t have to act on your own. You have now been asked
by a defrauded voter. Thank You, Jim Minionâ€"2525 Forbes Street, 32204.
Well done, Jim - I hope they listen and act. But I'm not expecting much from them.
Quote from: Springfield Girl on October 22, 2007, 05:39:35 PM
It will be interesting to see if Priestly Jackson is treated the same way or if she gets a pass.
The thing is...Priestly Jackson was living in the other home when elected, and she told the school board members about her situation...so I really don't see anything coming of that...it'll be curious though, should she want to run for re-election when her term is up...what she'll do then.
I agree we should revisit the issue, Stephen. Unfortunately, until the residency requirements are changed/clarified, one must follow what is out there on the books.
Actually, I think we really need to revisit the number of city council persons we have. IMO, that number needs to be reduced....it's too unwieldy a group at 19 members.
Actually, I only know what I read in the newspapers or on the blogs about the residency and literacy issues....but there's lots of rumors abounding in both of those areas, to be sure.
I agree with your analogy to the house and senate.....the senate usually is the more reasoned body, while the house....well, they can just be downright scary sometimes. ;)