Ordinance 5356 Handouts and Election Information


This article, originally published by Al Zucaro on BocaWatch.org, is preserved for historical purposes by Massive Impressions Online Marketing in Boca Raton.
If there are questions or concerns with the content please e-mail info@4boca.com.

Two handouts were created to provide information on Boca Raton’s proposed Ordinance 5356. One provides answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs) and the other shows the possible recreation-oriented uses of Boca’s City-owned Intracoastal Waterway Lands (IMAGINE). Following are the handouts.

5356 FAQ'S

5356 FAQ'S

Please read the two pages to become better informed about Ordinance 5356 in preparation for the upcoming presidential election where you will have the opportunity to vote for the ordinance. The language that will be on the ballot is as follows:

City Owned Intracoastal Lands; providing that city-owned parcels adjacent to the Intracoastal Waterway shall only be used for public recreation, public boating access, public streets, and city storm water uses only.

The election schedule begins with absentee ballots being mailed and ends with precinct voting. Following are the key milestone dates.

  • September 24 – absentee ballot mailing starts
  • October 24 – early voting begins
  • November 8 – precinct voting

It is important that Boca voters who participate in each voting phase be encouraged to vote YES for Ordinance 5356. Please forward this article or just the above handouts to all of your contacts that are eligible to vote in Boca and ask them to do the same. We need this to go viral so the message gets to as many Boca voters as possible. The urgency is to act before the absentee voters complete their ballots.

Previous articleLetter to the Publisher – Proposed Wildflower Property Lease
Next articleBocaWatch Interviews Dennis Frisch


  1. Once again this site is trying to imply that the City Attorney approved the ordinance language so it must be appropriate by claiming she updated the language. In another article it is claimed that she reviewed the language for appropriateness. The fact is she did nothing more than insert the exact language written by the petitioner’s attorney into a standard city ordinance template. . .


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here