While Not Officially Ordered Yet, Look For More Than Harms And Graham On The August Ballot For The Group 2 At-Large Seat

While I was unable to attend the hearing today on Bob Harms' motion to join the Brown v. City Council of Jacksonville case, someone close to the hearings gave me the two minute summary.

The short of it is that, despite Paul Harden’s request that the judge allow the parties to intervene only, Judge Nachman granted the motion for joinder as to both Harms and Graham. This, though, at least to the judge, was a difference without distinction as the true issue for the judge was that there is really no factual dispute regarding the underlying pleadings and that the entire matter can be ruled upon legally.

Meaning, even without discovery, Judge Nachman believes he has enough information, or at least he will once all responsive pleadings and motions for summary judgment are in, to rule on the Brown/Harden complaint for declaratory relief.

It appears Judge Nachman is standing corrected on his original order, in fact clarifying his position that he never intended for the new election to be confined to just Harms and Graham.

Let me repeat, the judge was adamant that he never intended his ruling to be read to mean that the race would only be open to Harms and Graham.

However, as this issue was not properly in front of the court today, there has not yet been a ruling on the complaint/summary judgment. That will come on May 28 when all summary judgment motions, oppositions, etc., are heard. If the judge is inclined to deny the motions, then an evidentiary hearing (i.e., a mini-trial) will be held, possibly as early as May 30.

Are you as confused as I was when this was explained to me? Good.

The gist of it is, most likely, there will be more than Harms and Graham on the ballot in August. Simple. Again, the election was never meant to be closed. Not by Nachman.

The election will be open to all who qualify. Which raises a final interesting issue. Harms’ attorney sought clarification on a standing argument that Brown’s attempt to seek declaratory relief is improper if he has no intention of actual running for the Group 2 At-large seat.

Harden apparently confirmed that Brown does intend to run, but pointed out that there is no standing issue as anyone who has an interest in running, and is in fact qualified to run, would have standing to seek relief to get on the ballot.

So I’m sure my friend missed a few things. But, again, I think the main points have been hit. Anyone who wants to get the actual order can wait until it's been submitted and signed.

Don't try to order the transcript as, oddly, there was no court reporter present in chambers during the hearing.