NOVEMBER 29, 2006 UPDATE

In the June 2006 Status Report posted to this web site and a subsequent memorandum from our law firm, we were informed about a hearing on the Motion for Summary Final Judgment filed in the commercial law suit contesting taxation of leasehold improvements on Pensacola Beach. A hearing on this matter was heard by Judge Nicholas P. Geeker of the Escambia County Circuit Court on October 23, 2006. Judge Geeker recently issued an Order Granting Summary Judgment Relief in which he denied Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (commercial leaseholders) and granted the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Chris Jones, Property Appraiser and Janet Holley, Tax Collector).

Counsel for both sides had asserted that there is no genuine issue of disputed material fact so that this action can be resolved as a matter of law on the motions presented. A copy of that order is posted along with this update.

While this is not the outcome that we believe the facts in this case merit, an unfavorable ruling at the Circuit Court level was not totally unexpected. From the onset of this legal action, we have expected an appeal to be filed regardless of who prevailed at this level. Shell, Fleming, Davis & Menge are preparing to file all the paperwork necessary for an appeal in the commercial case. A confidential memorandum to plaintiffs in the residential case is being prepared by our attorneys and will be mailed as soon as possible. This memorandum will provide more detail on the implications of Judge Geeker’s ruling as well as insight into our strategy for moving forward. Such detail is not appropriate for posting to a web site in the public domain or broadcasting via the media. Our attorneys and the residential and commercial liaison committees remain confident in our chances to prevail at the appellate level.

Plaintiffs were also informed in the September 2006 memorandum that it would be necessary to file a complaint contesting taxation of leasehold improvements for the 2006 tax year. The following points describe how plaintiffs will be named in the 2006 complaint:

• All plaintiffs with specific parcels listed in the 2004 and/or 2005 complaint who continued to hold leasehold interests in the same parcels as of January 1, 2006 will be named as plaintiffs in the 2006 lawsuit as long as they are certified on the 2006 tax roll with taxes assessed for improvements on leasehold properties.
• Any plaintiff in 2004 and/or 2005 with a $0 assessment for 2006 will not be named in the 2006 complaint. This does not affect participation in the 2004 or 2005 lawsuit.
• Any plaintiff in the 2004 and/or 2005 complaint who has assigned their leasehold interest to another party prior to January 1, 2006 will not be listed on the 2006 complaint. This does not affect standing in the 2004 or 2005 lawsuit, unless the leaseholder chooses to no longer participate.

The list of plaintiffs to the 2006 Complaint is available on the left side of the web site under the heading of Legal Documents Related to the Tax Suit. Keep in mind the above conditions that apply to being named a plaintiff for a specific tax year. If you believe your name should appear and it does not, contact a member of the liaison committee no later than December 5, 2006. Contact information for liaison committee members and an e-mail contact are listed on the home page of the web site.