Skip to main content

Tag: Bridge Street coconut palms

Editorial: Signed palm tree agreement better late than never

Written by Sun staff on . Posted in Editorial, Opinion.

The now-signed maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement for the flawed Bridge Street coconut palm tree planting project lists April 1 as the project commencement date, which fittingly coincides with April Fool’s Day.

But Mayor John Chappie and the city’s witness, City Clerk Terri Sanclemente, didn’t sign and fully execute the agreement until May 28 – nearly two months after the listed commencement date.

On May 15, City Attorney Ricinda Perry told The Sun a “signed agreement” existed but a copy couldn’t be provided until Sanclemente returned from vacation on May 28. Local developer and project partner Shawn Kaleta might have signed the agreement on behalf of his Beach to Bay Construction Limited Liability Corporation in mid-May, as Perry’s emails indicate, but the agreement wasn’t legally enforceable until Chappie and Sanclemente signed it.

We appreciate Sanclemente promptly providing a copy of the fully executed agreement upon her return. We thank her for acknowledging that she and Chappie signed the agreement that day and for providing additional project-related documents and answers to our questions. Sanclemente did her job, while others associated with the project failed miserably.

Of the 70 coconut palms planted on and around Bridge Street, one already fell on a Bridge Street sidewalk and 22 others were removed from Gulf Drive South and replanted elsewhere along Bridge Street because FDOT doesn’t allow coconut palms and their falling coconuts and palm fronds along state-owned roads. Bradenton Beach leaders apparently don’t share similar safety concerns about city-owned Bridge Street.

During the month-long gap between the plantings and the mayor’s signature, would the city have been solely responsible for any palm tree-related deaths, injuries or property damage that occurred before the agreement became legally binding?

The Perry-drafted agreement includes indemnification language designed to protect the city from project-related lawsuits. An indemnification clause doesn’t prevent the city from being named in a lawsuit. It simply means the city can try to recoup its lawsuit-related losses from Kaleta and his roster of attorneys. That’s a risky proposition for a city financially desperate enough to sign over control of city-owned assets in exchange for shared project costs.

Perry and her elected accomplices are taking liberties with taxpayer assets that might get them removed by shareholders if they sat on a private sector board of directors. A misguided tree-planting project isn’t the worst sin a local government can commit, but the city attorney shouldn’t be leading the lackadaisical mayor and commissioners by their noses in her efforts to broker questionable public-private partnerships.

This fiasco prompted some Sun readers to call for Perry’s termination and Chappie’s resignation. Neither of those scenarios are likely, but maybe the light shined on this botched affair will cause all involved to think twice before pursuing another partnership with Team Kaleta.

Palm tree landscaper awaiting payment from city

Palm tree landscaper awaiting payment from city

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News.

BRADENTON BEACH – Since April 24, Miguel Mancera’s landscaping crews have been busy laying stone, planting and, in some cases, removing and replanting multiple coconut palm trees on and around Bridge Street.

Mancera, the owner of M&F Lawn Care in Bradenton, sent an invoice to the city on April 19 for a $25,000 down payment toward the $50,000 cost of the trees and landscaping work, and as of May 30, he said he has not received payment.

“I have payroll to meet every week,” Mancera said, adding he has 12 employees. “They haven’t paid me yet. I called Ricinda (City Attorney Ricinda Perry) and she is supposed to talk to Thompson (City Treasurer Shayne Thompson).

Mancera said he paid for the stone and trees out of pocket in anticipation of payment by the city.

“I don’t know the exact amount, but it cost more than half (of the $50,000),” he said. “There was more than 20 yards of rock, so that was $6,000 just for the rock.”

M&F Lawn Care was hired by the city to plant up to 80 coconut palm trees on and around Bridge Street, as well as to lay white river rock.

The tree planting project is a city partnership with developer Shawn Kaleta. According to the city clerk, Kaleta made his agreed-upon donation of $10,000 toward the project on April 10.

Palm tree landscaper awaiting payment from city
Some of the coconut palm trees that were removed from Gulf Drive South were replanted along the approach to the Bradenton Beach Pier. – Leslie Lake | Sun

Mancera, who has done work for both the city and Kaleta, said he had been contacted by Perry and Kaleta for the tree project.

“They called me up and I met them a couple of times on Bridge Street so they could show me where to plant the trees,” he said.

On May 24, Mancera’s crews were back to remove what he said were 22 of the coconut palms that they had planted in the roundabout and traffic islands of Gulf Drive South as part of the project.

The trees were removed after the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) informed the city that coconut palms were not allowed on state roads due to safety concerns about sight lines along with falling palm fronds and coconuts. That section of Gulf Drive South falls under the jurisdiction of the FDOT.

“We took out 22 trees and we replanted 18,” Mancera said. “Some were replanted on Bridge Street, some in front of the parking lot at the Pines Trailer Park and some along the pier across from the oyster restaurant (Anna Maria Oyster Bar). I don’t know about the other four.”

The city clerk sent The Sun a copy of the April 19 M&F Lawn Care invoice which showed a total cost of $50,000 for the landscaping and planting of the palm trees. M&F had requested a $25,000 down payment which was due within 30 days or subject to a 1.5% late charge.

The invoice was marked with a handwritten: “OK to pay. JRC (Mayor John Chappie’s initials).” The city clerk confirmed by email on May 30 that payment had not been made.

Editorial: Signed palm tree agreement better late than never

City releases signed coconut palms agreement

Editorial: Palm trees and other shady endeavors

FDOT: Wrong trees, wrong place

Expert outlines optimum coconut palm maintenance

Signed palm tree agreement remains elusive

City releases signed coconut palms agreement

City releases signed coconut palms agreement

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News, Featured.

BRADENTON BEACH – The fully signed agreement between the city and developer Shawn Kaleta for the maintenance of the coconut palm trees on and around Bridge Street was signed by Mayor John Chappie on May 28 and placed into the public record that day.

That comes more than a month after the trees were planted the week of April 24 in a public-private partnership between the city and Kaleta.

On May 29, City Clerk Terri Sanclemente provided The Sun with a copy of the agreement signed by Chappie, Kaleta – as Beach to Bay Construction LLC manager – and Sanclemente as witness. The Sun made multiple requests for the document beginning on May 6.

The maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement in a public-private partnership between the City of Bradenton Beach and Kaleta, through his LLC, designates responsibility for the tree maintenance to Kaleta and indemnifies the city in the event of injury or damage from the trees.

Public-private partnerships between cities and developers are unique to Bradenton Beach among the three Anna Maria Island cities.

Both Mayor Dan Murphy of Anna Maria and Mayor Judy Titsworth of Holmes Beach responded to The Sun’s email asking if either city had partnered with a private entity for city projects.

“If you define a public-private partnership as a “capital improvement project with the city getting dollar funding from a developer” the answer is no, we have had none that I can recall during my tenure of 10 years as mayor. I don’t think we’ve ever had a developer give us any money for a project,” Murphy wrote.

Titsworth wrote, “We have not, to my recollection.”

The partnership with Kaleta for the palm trees’ maintenance and indemnification was approved unanimously on April 3 by the Bradenton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA).

At that meeting, City Attorney Ricinda Perry assured CRA members that the agreement would be signed by Kaleta prior to the trees being planted.

CRA member Jan Vosburgh expressed concern about the trees’ safety and maintenance.

“I believe everything the city does should be as maintenance-free as possible,” Vosburgh said. “It sounds to me like we’re making a nightmare for the city and the businesses.”

Ultimately, following assurances by Perry that a signed agreement would be in place, Vosburgh voted to approve the agreement, making it a unanimous vote.

In addition to Chappie and Vosburgh, Deborah Scaccianoce, Marilyn Maro, Ed Chiles and Chair Ralph Cole make up the CRA.

OUT OF ORDER

It is unclear when Kaleta signed the agreement.

The city clerk provided The Sun a copy of the receipt for the April 10 $10,000 payment from Kaleta, but based on correspondence between City Attorney Ricinda Perry and Kaleta’s attorneys, it does not appear that he signed the agreement prior to the planting of the palm trees the week of April 24.

On April 25, Kaleta attorney Sean Kelly sent an email to Perry that said, “Shawn asked me to finalize this agreement for the coconut palms on Bridge Street. Will you please send me the Exhibit A site plan and the dollar amount for the CRA’s contribution? Then I can update the document and have Shawn sign. Thanks!”

On May 9, Perry sent an email to Kelly copied to Kaleta that said, “Good morning. It took me a bit to find a way to document in a ‘site plan’ the palms and to make sure we knew exactly where Miguel was planting everything. I ended up flying my drone and then inserting stars where palms are located with a description for areas that have multiple palms at or near an address.” “Miguel” refers to Miguel Mancera, the owner of M&F Lawn Care, Inc., the company that planted the palm trees, who has not yet been paid for his work (see story, page 9).

On May 14, Kaleta attorney, Rainier Altiere, sent Perry an email that said, “Here is the completed maintenance agreement. The only thing missing is the start date. Please provide me with that and let me know if this is OK for us to have Shawn sign.”

On May 15, Perry sent Kaleta, Kelly and Altiere an email that referenced an unnamed limited liability corporation (LLC) Kaleta intended to use as the CRA’s project partner and the party responsible for maintaining the coconut palms for the next 30 years.

“This corp (corporation) named in the document was set up at the end of last month. Is it just a ‘shell company’ with no assets or insurance to cover the harm/damage caused by a falling coconut? At a minimum, the company will need an insurance policy naming the city that actually covers damage caused by the coconuts. I can’t just have a piece of open (missing word) with no actual protection for the public. Ideas?” Perry wrote.

On May 15, The Sun emailed Perry requesting a copy of the fully signed and fully executed agreement. In her May 15 response, Perry wrote, “There is a signed agreement. The clerk is out of the office and can provide further documents upon her return.”

On May 29, Perry sent an email to Sanclemente and Chappie that addressed the date Sanclemente and Chappie signed the agreement.

“Contracts have counterpart signatures that most always have differing dates – hence the reason contracts ALWAYS state an effective date. The effective date controls contracts. In this instance, I always stated that the effective date would be when the date trees were being delivered. The city did not pick nor write the date but found the effective date to be acceptable and within the approval of the CRA. Standard contract law. Feel free to forward to anyone needing legal contract law information,” Perry wrote.

The effective date of the agreement is April 1, which is two days before its approval by the CRA at its April 3 meeting. The city did not respond to The Sun’s request for an explanation of the earlier effective date.

“The city of Bradenton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) has approved a CRA beautification project on Bridge Street to be installed at a cost not to exceed forty thousand and no/dollars ($40,000) to be paid for by the CRA and ten thousand and no/dollars ($10,000) to be paid for by the Sponsor (Kaleta). All trees installed in this beautification project shall be maintained at the sole cost of Sponsor,” the agreement states.

The agreement will be in place for 30 years with options to renew every 10 years.

According to the signed agreement, “Sponsor shall at its sole cost and expense maintain the permitted installation in good condition. The city makes no warranties or representation of any kind regarding the suitability of this public property/right-of-way location for the proposed installation.”

The signed agreement includes indemnification language that states, “As consideration for use of the city’s public property to install coconut palm trees, the Sponsor (Kaleta) shall at all times, at its expense, hold harmless and indemnify the city, its officers, employees, agents, elected and appointed officials, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, fees, judgments, losses and damages whether or not a lawsuit is filed, including, but not limited to claims for damage to property or bodily or personal injuries, including death.”

The indemnification language also states that Kaleta is responsible for any costs, expenses and attorney fees associated with a claim or lawsuit associated with the coconut palm trees.

According to the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute, “To indemnify, also known as indemnity or indemnification, means compensating a person for damages or losses they have incurred or will incur related to a specified accident, incident or event. Typically, parties make a written agreement in which one party promises to indemnify the other party for future specified losses.”

On May 31, The Sun received a copy of Kaleta’s proof of insurance with $1 million in liability per occurrence for personal injury, $5,000 for medical expenses per person, $100,000 damage to rented premises and $2 million general aggregate coverage. The policy expires on Sept. 9.

The insured is listed as Beach to Bay Investments, 102 48th St., Holmes Beach and the producer of the policy is Gulf Insurance, LLC, 301 Manatee Ave. in Holmes Beach.

The Sun has requested an updated site plan since the location of some of the trees has changed due to their FDOT-mandated May 24 removal from Gulf Drive South, a state road.

As of May 31, that site plan has not been received.

According to the maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement Exhibit B, Kaleta’s company is responsible for: “Removing fronds, fruit, seedpods and fruit stalks carefully without damaging the trunk or fronds that are to be retained. All coconut fruit must be removed once it produces on the tree.”

The guidelines continue, “Pruning will be required a minimum of two times a year on municipal property and rights-of-way to manage the hazards of falling coconuts and fronds and to minimize the risk to persons and property within the fall zone.”

People on the Anna Maria Island Sun Facebook page had plenty of comments about the palm trees and the agreement.

Wendy Holcomb wrote, “Not a good idea EVER to put coconut trees where pedestrians walk and vehicles drive.”

Richard Becker wrote, “All this over a palm tree. It’s not about the palm tree, it’s about the politics.”

“Indemnify means to ‘make right again’ not ‘protect,’ so if the city lost a case, Team K would have to pay them back, the settlement ck (check) has to come from the defendant,” Susan Paxton wrote.

According to recent city Scenic WAVES committee meeting agendas, the CRA board did not request a preliminary project review from the city commission-appointed committee

The Scenic WAVES committee acts as the commission’s advisory board on proposed landscaping and beautification projects.

Related coverage:

Editorial: Signed palm tree agreement better late than never

Palm tree landscaper awaiting payment from city

Editorial: Palm trees and other shady endeavors

FDOT: Wrong trees, wrong place

Expert outlines optimum coconut palm maintenance

Signed palm tree agreement remains elusive

 

Editorial: Palm trees and other shady endeavors

Written by Sun staff on . Posted in Editorial, Opinion.

Someone once posed the question: “If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?”

The Sun poses a similar question: If the city attorney says there’s a signed agreement for the ill-fated Bridge Street palm tree planting project but nobody has seen it, does the agreement really exist?

In early April, the Bradenton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) that includes the mayor and city commissioners approved planting 80 coconut palm trees along Bridge Street. According to City Attorney Ricinda Perry, the CRA was to contribute $40,000 toward the project and developer Shawn Kaleta and/or one of his LLCs would kick in another $10,000.

Perry told the CRA members there would be a signed maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement in place before the trees were planted. The trees were planted in late April with no signed agreement in place.

A couple of weeks ago, one of the new palms toppled onto a Bridge Street sidewalk and had to be replanted.

Last week, FDOT told the city to remove the new palms planted in the Gulf Drive-Bridge Street roundabout.

Gulf Drive is a state road and FDOT doesn’t allow coconut palms to be planted along state-owned roads because they limit visibility and contain large falling objects like coconuts and palm fronds.

You’d think someone with the city or the city’s often-contracted landscaper would have known about this pesky little state rule – or at least checked to see if there was such a pesky little state rule. But that kind of foresight doesn’t mesh with the city’s “You can do it right when you do it over” approach to project management.

So now we know that coconut palms aren’t cool along a state road but they’re still OK standing alongside the highly-traveled, highly-populated city-owned Bridge Street.

To date, Perry and the city have not provided The Sun with a copy of the signed agreement, despite the multiple public records requests made during a two-week period. Perry told us we had to wait until the city clerk returns from her vacation on May 28 before we can see the elusive signed document.

The Florida Public Records Act says the city has to promptly acknowledge public records requests, respond in good faith and make “reasonable efforts” to figure out who has the requested document and where it’s stashed. City officials who break the state law can be fined $500 or removed from office if they try really hard to hide or withhold the requested document.

Perry and Mayor John Chappie were copied on our multiple and still ongoing requests for a signed agreement. Perry gave us an incomplete and unsigned draft version of the agreement that didn’t mention the project partner’s name. She also sent us some emails that showed us how hard she tried to collaborate with Team Kaleta’s lawyers to make this deal happen.

According to the unsigned version of the agreement, Team Kaleta is supposed to maintain the palm trees at their expense for the next 30 years. The unsigned agreement doesn’t specifically mention coconuts or palm fronds and it doesn’t specifically require Team Kaleta to pluck those pesky buggers from the trees before they drop on some unlucky person’s head, child or 1962 Corvette.

The unsigned agreement does however require Team Kaleta to comply with reference Exhibit A – a blank space that calls for a yet-to-be-seen site plan that shows specifically where each new tree was planted – and Exhibit B: “Guidelines for the Management of Coconut Palms.”

The “Guidelines” inform us that coconut palms can grow to be over 100 feet tall, may live 100 years and “regularly shed coconuts and large fronds, which may expose people and property to injury and damage.”

The all-knowing ‘Guidelines” also say, “To minimize this risk, coconuts and fronds must be regularly removed prior to their fall. In certain instances, coconut palms may possess structural defects that increase the risk of failure of a portion or all of the palm.”

Thank you, wise city leaders. What could go wrong?

The “Guidelines” say any coconut palms that show serious defects, conditions or weather damage must be removed (by Team Kaleta) within 14 days of being told to do so. Given that one tree already toppled onto a Bridge Street sidewalk on a sunny day, what’s the over/under on how many palms are going down during our upcoming “more active than usual” hurricane season?

In the absence of the signed agreement, it appears the first tree likely fell before the agreement was signed and dated by Chappie and Team Kaleta. If that first falling tree injured a person, place or thing with no signed agreement yet in place, who would have been liable – the city, Kaleta or both?

The unsigned agreement is also supposed to indemnify (lawyer-speak for “protect”) the city and the CRA against any future liabilities and lawsuits associated with the troublesome palm trees. If someone or something gets clocked by a falling tree, frond or coconut, that unfortunate soul gets to do battle with Team Kaleta’s army of lawyers, while the city sits on the sideline screaming, “Leave us alone, we’re indemnified!”

Mayor Chappie frequently laments the negative impacts that super-sized short-term vacation rental homes, aka “party houses,” have on Bradenton Beach’s residential neighborhoods, but he’s OK taking project money from the Island’s biggest developer of “party houses.”

Instead of sharpening their pencils and wisely managing CRA and city funds for future projects, the mayor and city commissioners are taking the lazy and easy way out by enabling Perry to pursue funding partnerships with Team Kaleta.

In the past year or so, Perry proposed the CRA or city partner with Team Kaleta to improve the city-owned parking lot near the Team Kaleta-owned marina. She also suggested the city partner with Team Kaleta for a Team Kaleta-controlled mooring field near the pier.

In early April – the same day she proposed the ill-advised, poorly-executed palm tree project – Perry proposed the CRA partner with Team Kaleta to install a waterfront pedestrian path that runs from Team Kaleta’s marina, past Team Kaleta’s mobile home park and ends at the city-owned pier.

Who is Perry working for? The city or Team Kaleta? When proposing these public-private partnerships, she sings the praises of a developer good-hearted enough to help fund CRA and city projects, but what she, the mayor and the city commission are really doing is selling the city down the Intracoastal Waterway.

Somehow, the sister cities of Anna Maria and Holmes Beach manage to fund their capital projects without financial aid from Team Kaleta. And in both those cities, the city attorneys focus on the basics – providing legal advice and legal services to their respective city leaders and city staff.

In most cities, a city attorney’s sole job is to dispense legal knowledge. City attorneys don’t usually serve as de facto city managers, project managers and project initiators. But in Perry’s defense, she’s just filling the leadership void created by Bradenton Beach’s weak mayor form of city government, and the weak mayor and weak commission gladly let her do it.

With the threat of state-imposed consolidation looming over the three AMI cities, there’s chatter in local political circles that Chappie wants to serve as the Island-wide mayor if that happens. That leadership scenario might scare some folks, but Island Mayor Chappie and Island Attorney Perry could then partner with Team Kaleta to plant coconut palms and other seeds of dissent throughout the rest of the consolidation fiefdom.

Bradenton Beach logo

Irrigation system to be installed on Bridge Street

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News.

BRADENTON BEACH – The 80 newly-planted palm trees on Bridge Street will need a regular watering schedule, and on May 2, the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) unanimously approved the expenditure of up to $7,500 to have an irrigation system installed along both sides of the road.

CRA members discussed the cost of the irrigation system versus the $3,500 three-week rental cost of a water truck.

“The CRA has looked at installing more landscape irrigation on Bridge Street. There’s been a lot of trees installed and some additional bushes,” Perry said. “It’s always become an irrigation issue when we come into that dry spell when we’re not getting rain.”

Water trucks come at a high cost, she said, adding that some water meters already exist on Bridge Street.

“And now we’ve invested the funds for trees which we can continue to water and they should be fine once they take,” Perry said. “In the event we come into a dry streak, I would hate to come into the expense of a water truck when we could get an irrigation system for close to what we would pay for a one-time water truck use.”

Irrigation system to be installed on Bridge Street
A rental water truck operator waters the newly-planted coconut palm trees along Bridge Street early Sunday morning. – Leslie Lake | Sun

Perry said she received an estimate of about $5,000 from M&F Lawn Care for the installation of an irrigation system.

“To me that’s a no-brainer to get that infrastructure in place and we know that we’re investing in the pergola and we will probably be doing some plantings in there,” she said. “I’m looking for an opportunity to strengthen and protect what we’ve invested and I saw this as an opportunity.”

Eighty coconut palm trees were planted in late April along Bridge Street and the Gulf Drive roundabouts in a city partnership with developer Shawn Kaleta. Kaleta agreed to accept responsibility for the maintenance of the trees as well as donate $10,000 toward the $50,000 cost of the palms and white river rock. The balance came from CRA funds.

Mayor John Chappie said that one of the things he looked at was doing the irrigation in the most efficient and cost-effective way.

“We can remove the pavers and dig down in the paver row and then put in the irrigation without cutting into any asphalt,” Mayor John Chappie said. “I would really recommend we do this; it will make a big difference and save us some money.”

CRA member Deborah Scaccianoce said it made sense from a financial perspective to install the irrigation system.

CRA member Ed Chiles made a motion with a second by member Jan Vosburgh to approve the installation of an irrigation system by M&F Lawn at a cost not to exceed $7,500.

There was no public comment and the motion passed unanimously among board members.