FLORIDA – The Weiss Serota law firm has filed two lawsuits challenging the Form 6 financial disclosure requirements now placed on all Florida mayors, city commissioners and city/town/village council members. Both lawsuits were filed on Feb. 15.
In January, Fort Lauderdale-based Weiss Serota attorney Jamie Cole reached out to city attorneys statewide to secure at least 10 Florida cities willing to join the lawsuit and pay a $10,000 flat fee to participate in the legal challenge. None of the three Anna Maria Island cities joined the lawsuit, nor did the town of Longboat Key or any city in Manatee or Sarasota counties.
The Form 6 financial disclosure requirements that include the disclosure of net worth, earnings and tangible assets have long been applied to state legislators, county commissioners and certain government officers at the state and county levels. A new state law enacted last year made mayors, city commissioners and city/town/village council members also subject to the Form 6 disclosure requirements. City officials were previously required to file a less intrusive Form 1 disclosure form.
Before the expanded financial disclosure requirements took effect on Jan. 1, more than 100 Florida mayors, city commissioners and municipal council members resigned rather than subject themselves to the disclosure requirements, including Bradenton Beach City Commissioner Jake Spooner and Longboat Key Town Council member Debbie Murphy.
On Feb. 15, Cole sent an email to city attorneys statewide informing them that the Form 6 lawsuits had been filed.
“Two lawsuits were filed today on behalf of 26 municipalities and 74 municipal elected officials challenging the Form 6 requirement as to municipal elected officials. One in federal court in Miami, based upon it being compelled, content-based, non-commercial speech in violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and one in state circuit court in Leon County, based upon it being an infringement on the right to privacy under the Florida Constitution. If your cities are still interested in joining the lawsuit, it is not too late. We plan to file the appropriate paperwork to add additional plaintiffs in the next couple of weeks,” Cole stated in his email.
LAWSUIT COMPLAINTS
The 74 municipal officials individually named as plaintiffs represent the town of Briny Breezes, Miami Springs, Lighthouse Point, the town of Palm Beach, North Bay Village, the town of Golden Beach, the village of Indian Creek, the village of Bal Harbour, Weston, Delray Beach, Safety Harbor, Cooper City, Coral Springs, St. Augustine, Marco Island, the village of Key Biscayne, Wilton Manors, Margate, Destin, Lauderhill, Deerfield Beach, Aventura, Wellington, the village of Pinecrest, New Smyrna Beach and Sebastian.
The federal and state complaints name as defendants Florida Commission on Ethics Chair Ashley Lukis, Vice-Chair Michelle Anchors and Commission on Ethics members William Cervone, Tina Descovich, Freddie Figgers, Luis Fuste and Wengay Newton Sr. The Commission on Ethics oversees and enforces the financial disclosure requirements imposed by the Florida Legislature and the governor.
The first page of the state lawsuit complaint says, “This is an action by a large number of Florida municipalities and elected municipal officials challenging a recently enacted law (created by Senate Bill 774) that requires municipal elected officials in office as of January 1, 2024, to disclose quintessentially private, highly personal financial information, including, among other things, the exact amount of their net worth and income, the total dollar value of their household goods and the precise value of every asset and amount of every liability in excess of $1,000 on or before July 1, 2024, or otherwise face significant fines, civil penalties, and even potential removal from office.”
The federal lawsuit complaint contains similar language, alleging “The statements required by Fla. Stat. §112.3144, through Form 6, constitute noncommercial, compelled speech from plaintiffs in violation of the First Amendment. Specifically, Fla. Stat. §112.3144 unconstitutionally compels plaintiffs to make invasive, public disclosures about their personal finances through Form 6.”
Regarding the relief sought, the federal complaint says, “Plaintiffs respectfully request that judgment be entered in their favor: Declaring that Fla. Stat. §112.3144 compels plaintiffs to engage in content-based, non-commercial speech in violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and is therefore unconstitutional.
“Enjoining defendants from enforcing Fla. Stat. §112.3144, including the imposition of any fines, penalties or other enforcement, against plaintiffs, arising from the failure of any plaintiffs to file a Form 6 while subject to such requirements. Awarding plaintiffs their costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in bringing in this action,” the federal complaint says.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
When speaking to The Sun in January, Cole said a court-ordered temporary injunction would only benefit those individually named as lawsuit plaintiffs but a permanent injunction or final ruling that declares the current state law unconstitutional could potentially benefit all elected and appointed mayors, city commissioners and city/town/village council members in Florida.
“In the long run, if we win the case and get a declaration that the law’s invalid, I think it will benefit everyone,” he said. “But that’s not going to be for a while, so we’re going to try to get a temporary injunction that would only run in favor of the plaintiffs – the individuals who are actually named in the lawsuit. Just because a city joins, that’s not going to be enough. The individuals who are named plaintiffs are the ones who would benefit from the temporary injunction and the cities would be paying for their fees,” Cole said.
Related coverage: Island cities decline to join financial disclosure lawsuit
