BRADENTON BEACH – Bradenton Beach voters will likely see two parking garage questions on their general election ballots this fall.
Both parking garage questions are expected to be presented to city voters as proposed amendments to the city charter, but the Bradenton Beach Commission will simultaneously seek a judge’s ruling on the legality of the first parking garage ballot question.
The first parking garage ballot question addresses the city-wide parking garage prohibition first sought in 2018 by the Keep Our Residential Neighborhoods (KORN) political action committee formed by Reed Mapes and John Metz. The second ballot question will ask city voters if they want to allow one parking garage to be built in Bradenton Beach.
There are currently no proposals to build a parking garage in Bradenton Beach and the construction of a stand-alone, multi-level parking garage is currently prohibited by the city’s comprehensive plan and land development code (LDC). However, the comp plan and LDC prohibitions adopted by the commission in 2018 could be reversed by a future commission. A parking garage prohibition or parking garage allowance added to the city charter could only be reversed by city voters.
Both parking garage questions were formalized with the adoption of City Ordinance 20-518 during Monday morning’s special city commission meeting.
When presenting the ordinance on first reading on Thursday, Aug. 6, City Attorney Ricinda Perry said she made slight modifications to the KORN question that now reads as follows: “Should the charter of Bradenton Beach be amended to prohibit the building of any multi-level parking garages within the city of Bradenton Beach? All other parking garages, facilities and structures are allowed as permitted by local law.”
The second charter amendment question – suggested by Perry and first discussed by the commission in June – reads as follows: “Should the city amend its charter to: (1) Prohibit the approval, development and building of any stand-alone parking garage structures in all residential zoning districts; (2) Prohibit any multi-level parking garage, structure, or facility exceeding a total density of one multi-level parking garage within the entire municipal limits; and, (3) Establish a mandatory city-wide voter referendum to increase the multi-level parking garage density?”
When discussing the second question Thursday evening, Perry said, “County commission has now been asking for solutions to parking and I know that Carol Whitmore was one of the commissioners suggesting a parking garage. The (city) commission has made it very clear that they don’t want to see a parking garage in the city. Nonetheless, the city is putting it out there to see what the voters are wanting to do.”
According to Perry, if voters approve both amendments, neither would be enacted because they would be in conflict.
According to Perry, Monday was the final day to submit ballot items to the Manatee County Supervisor of Elections Office for inclusion on the fall ballot.
Monday morning, the commission, minus Commissioner Jan Vosburgh, adopted by a 4-0 vote the following motion: “A motion to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance 20-518 to the extent of preserving a timely placement of ballot language on the 2020 general election, with a directive to Ricinda Perry to coordinate with Chuck Johnson and schedule a hearing in front of Judge Nicholas to argue that land use matters do not belong in a city charter.”
Commission actions
The city now seeks a ruling from Circuit Court Judge Edward Nicholas regarding the legality of the KORN amendment first sought in 2018. When the city commission refused to place on the 2018 ballot the parking garage question and three additional charter amendment questions proposed by KORN, KORN filed a lawsuit against the city.
In March, Nicholas ruled the city did not have to place KORN’s charter amendment questions on a future ballot. Nicholas felt the city addressed most of KORN’s concerns via the alternative charter amendments recommended by the Charter Review Committee and approved by city voters. When issuing his ruling, Nicholas said he would consider future arguments regarding the parking garage question that had not been posed to city voters.
Johnson represented the city in that case. On June 18, Perry told the commission KORN attorney Robert Hendrickson emailed Johnson regarding the lingering parking garage issue.
“It’s not been ordered by the judge to put it on the ballot, but Mr. Hendrickson has indicated KORN will continue to take this to court and try to force the city to put it on the ballot. Do you want to put it on the ballot and kill that argument or do you want to fight it in court?” Perry said that day.
After much debate that day regarding the legalities of addressing a land-use issue in the city charter in contrast to current state law, and the legal precedent that might establish, the commission voted 3-2 to move forward with two parking garage ballot questions.
On Monday, Mayor John Chappie asked Perry if the commission could place both parking garage initiatives on the ballot but still seek a ruling from Nicholas.
“If the city feels strongly that a parking garage, as a land-use regulation, doesn’t belong in the charter, you could still appeal this ordinance to the judge as a new cause of action,” Perry said of the city appealing its own ordinance.
“As it relates to the current lawsuit by KORN, he could issue a mandate that this be taken off the ballot and not voted on. He could direct that to the supervisor of elections. I believe we could still go to Judge Nicholas and say we did this in good faith moving it forward, but we still strongly object to it and feel it should not be put in front of voters,” Perry said.
She expressed confidence that a hearing could be held before November and it was noted mail voting begins in October.
“On Nov. 3, if it all got voted on and it all got passed, it could still be thrown out by the judge. He could basically nullify the votes that came in,” Perry said.
