-
INTHECIRCUITCOURTOFTHEELEVENTHJUDICIALCIRCUITINANDFORMIAMIDADECOUNTY,FLORIDAAPPELLATEDIVISION
CASENO.14492AP
Resolution/File1301030iia
JACOBPFEFFER,Et.Al.
Petitioners,v.CITYOFMIAMI,FLORIDA,andWALMARTSTORESEAST,LP,aDelawareLP,
Respondents.
MOTIONFORLEAVETOFILEAMICUSCURAEBRIEFINRESPONSETOWALMARTSTORESEASTLPSMOTIONTOEXPEDITEDECISIONONPETITIONFOR
WRITOFCERTIORARI
Pursuant to the Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.370(a),
comes now Grant
Stern, Pro Se respectfully requesting leave to file a brief
Amicus Curae support of
the Petitioners attached as Exhibit A to this motion and its
Appendix as Exhibit
B.
Issues
-
Movantsbriefshouldproveenlighteningtothecourtandmaypotentiallyassist
inthemorehonorableandimpartiallyfairconclusionofthiscourtsconsideration
ofthePetitionersrequestforCertiorariwithamorecompleteenumerationofthe
factsandCitizensRightstrampledintheHearingandthebasisforhearing
substantivemattersofthecaseincontraventionofthisHonorableCourts
MandateinPfefferI.
Movantsargumentsarenewandhavenotbeenproposedbyeitherside,but
reflectprimarilyapurelylegalexplanationofthenumeroustranscripts,hearings
andbothPetitionersandRespondentsbriefsinclusiveandothermattersalready
partofthepublicrecordinthecontroversiesathand.
Movantcanfurtherassistthecourtsunderstandingfromwhenceanyclaimed
substantialdelaysinRespondentsWalmartprojectarise,andwhythosedelays
shouldnotentitleRespondentstoskipPetitionersnecessaryandrequestedoral
argumentsonmattersofProcedureorDueProcess,orentitlementtoany
expeditedrulingbythisincrediblybusycourt,asthecourtdidruleonthematter
posedtoschedulingofOralArgumentsbutfellsilentonthematterofan
expeditedopinionasrequestedbyRespondentWalmartStoresEast,LP.
2
-
MovantsInterestasAmicusCurae
Movants interest in the matters at hand before this honorable
court is as resident
of Miami's nearby Edgewater neighborhood whose offices are Mile
from the
proposed location of Walmart at 3055 NMiami Avenue and whose
residence lies
of one mile from same location. Over 3 and years of Movants
involvement
fact checking Walmarts application has developed in the Movant a
certain level
of expertise regarding the zoning rules and regulations at
question in this case
worthsharingasAmicusCurae.
In the Feburary 20th, 2013 Public Meeting in front of the City
of Miami Urban
Design Review Board, Movant beat Walmart in 4 minutes and 10
seconds of
allottedpublicspeakingtime.
Movants further interest lies in his frequent public hearing
testimony to the City
of Miami Commission on this matter, and in particular on
November 21st, 2014
which was included in Petitioners Amended Brief at Pages 1819
whereupon
Petitioners counsel noted that Movant was an interested party, a
claim to which
3
-
neither Respondent disputed in their separate Responses to
Petitioners Writ for
Ceriorari.
Furthermore, Movant has attended and/or commented on the record
when
allowed at each public hearing listed in Respondents Motion to
Expedite
Decision at Page 2 as well as attended oral arguments in Pfeffer
I and has
reviewedallbriefsandmotionssubmittedinthematterathand.
Lastly, Movant is a licensed Mortgage Broker, has over 12 years
experience in
both residential and commercial real estate lending, and as a
developer of
subdivisions, as a condominium termination trustee and has
testified as an expert
witness in other State and Federal matters related to real
estate of which land use
is a portion of the rights imbued in any piece of real property
for which a
Mortgage Broker. Furthermore, Movant has been a media source for
real estate
and land use stories frequently in this matter locally, and
nationally within
journals such as the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, CNBC,
Bloomberg
News, Investors Business Daily and other journals of record on
topics ranging
fromlandusetofinancingtocondominiumsubdivisionstandardsandmore.
4
-
SUMMARYOFARGUMENTS
The City of Miami Commission violated Petitioners Citizens
Rights as
Enumerated in the Citizens Bill of Rights contained within the
MiamiDade
County Home Rule Charter (A)(8)Right to a Public Hearing and
(A)(2)Truth In
Government in the course of their Hearing of the matter at hand
on November
20th,2014.
The City of Miami Commissions review was not De Novo in nature,
but rather
expressly limited or narrow contrary to the Mandate of this
court in Pfeffer I.
The Citys failure to follow Due Process and provide Equal
Protection falls under
the United States Constitutions legal doctrine of substantive
due process under
the 5th and 14th Amendment which has erected a situation whereby
an appeal
washeardtoapermitbeforetherequiredPublicHearingtoobtainsaidpermit.
The firmly established doctrine of administrative res judicata
should have 1
prevented Walmart Stores East, LP from submitting a
substantially similar plan
1MetropolitanDadeCountyBoardofCountyCommissionersv.RockmattCorporation,231So.2d41(Fla.3dDCA1970)
5
-
for quasijudicial review (Exhibit C), a substantially same plan
to that rejected 2
by the Mandate of Pfeffer I, which by their counsels admission
didnt even
move a light switch. Respondents caused their own current timing
problems
cited in their Motion to Expedite Findings by fighting the
dictionary definition
ofthewordTotalfor11solidmonths.
Lastly, Respondents submitted and approved a plan containing a
very explicit
Variance contrary to published ordinance, in direct
contravention of the only
competent substantial evidence submitted, and without following
established
parameters for evaluation of a Variance zoning application
enumerated in Pfeffer
I at page 7 by this court. In doing so, Petitioners rights under
the MiamiDade
County Home Rule Charter Citizens Bill of Rights (A)(8) to a
finding based on
thefactspresented.
Consent
I communicated with counsel for Petitioners, Paul C. Savage,
Esq., and I am
authorizedtostatethatPetitionersdonotobjecttothereliefrequestedherein.
2CoralReefNurseries,Inc.v.BabcockCo.,410So.2d648Fla:Dist.CourtofAppeals,(Fla.3dDCA1982)
6
-
I communicated with counsel for Respondents Walmart Stores East
L.P. Joan
Carlos Wetzel and counsel John A. Greco of the City of Miami
both of whom did
declineinwritingprovideleavetofile,necessitatingthismotiontothecourt.
Respectfullysubmitted,
GrantSternProSeTHELABMIAMI400NW26thStreetMiami,Florida33127Telephone:(305)2190326Facsimile:(305)6753392PrimaryService:[email protected]
By:____________________________
GrantStern,ProSe
7
-
CERTIFICATEOFSERVICE
I certify that a copy of this request was served by email on
March 23rd,
2015 to: Assistant City Attorney, John A. Greco, Esq., 44 S.W.
2nd Avenue, Suite
945, Miami, Florida 33130 ([email protected]
[email protected]) and
Richard J. Lydecker, Esq. and Joan Carlos Wizel, Esq., 1221
Brickell Avenue,
Floor 19, Miami, Florida 33131 ([email protected]
[email protected],
[email protected]).
______________________________
GrantStern,ProSe
CERTIFICATEOFCOMPLIANCE
ThisbriefcomplieswiththefontrequirementsofFloridaRulesofAppellate
Procedure.ItwastypedusingTimesNewRoman14pointfont.
________________________________
GrantStern,ProSe
8
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]
