I've been following the Yankeetown v. DCA
(37 2011 CA 002036) litigation. So far, I've written on Yankeetown's complaint
alleging that the Community Planning Act is unconstitutional and on St. Pete Beach's motion
to intervene in the litigation against Yankeetown.
The Department of Community Affairs was recently substituted in the litigation
by its new administrative iteration, the Department of Economic Opportunity. Just before that, DCA filed a motion to dismiss
Yankeetown's complaint. DCA argues that officers of the state and state agencies must presume that laws affecting their duties are valid. Because the validity of the law must be assumed, the public officer is not given standing to challenge the law. That is, public officers are expected to uphold their office, not fight about it. Because this line of case law has been applied previously to both local governments and to growth management law, DCA argues, it should applied in this case.
If Yankeetown responds to the motion in writing before the hearing, I will post a summary here.