BRADENTON BEACH – Circuit Court Judge Edward Nicholas has ordered Sunshine Law lawsuit defendant Reed Mapes to pay the city of Bradenton Beach $19,760.
According to the written ruling Nicholas issued on Friday, May 14, that amount represents $17,998 in attorney fees and $1,762 in interest fees. These are to be paid to the city as remaining reimbursement for the attorney fees the city incurred in its successful pursuit of a 2019 ruling from Nicholas that Mapes and five other city advisory board members violated the Florida Sunshine Law.
In July 2019, Nicolas ruled that Mapes and fellow planning and zoning board members John Metz, Patty Shay, Bill Vincent, and Scenic WAVES Committee members Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent, violated the Sunshine Law when discussing matters related to their official public business at a series of non-city-affiliated Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach meetings in 2017.
“The Sunshine Law prohibits discussions of public business. Public business was discussed at every CNOBB meeting. Public business was discussed every time CNOBB met. That was largely the point of the organization,” Nicholas said when issuing his 2019 ruling.
“Do these individuals have a right to assemble? Absolutely. Do these individuals have a right to free speech? Absolutely. Do these individuals have a right to be concerned about their beloved city? Of course. But once you choose to become part of the government by becoming a member of a government advisory board you are no longer just a spectator. Rules apply, laws apply. The defendants simply did not follow those rules. The defendants simply did not follow those laws. This is not a close call,” Nicholas said.
In 2019, Judge Edward Nicholas ruled that Reed Mapes was one of six former advisory board members that violated the Sunshine Law. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
In October 2020, Nicholas ordered Mapes, John Metz, and Tjet Martin to collectively pay the city $369,498. Because of an argument set forth by Shay, Nicholas relieved Shay and the Vincents of that shared financial responsibility for the city’s legal fees. Nicholas reached that conclusion when he learned Shay and the Vincents reached settlement agreements with the city before the 2019 trial began. The city commission rejected those three settlement officers because Mapes, Martin and Metz had not also agreed to similar settlement offers that would have alleviated the need for a trial had all six defendants agreed to settle.
Metz and Martin later paid the city $350,000 and agreed to drop their appeals of Nicholas’ 2019 ruling. Shay and the Vincents then paid the city $500 each, and the Vincents agreed to drop their appeals. Shay was the only defendant who did not appeal the 2019 ruling
In his May 14 ruling regarding the remaining attorney fees sought by the city, Nicholas wrote, “Mapes was an especially active participant in the Sunshine Law violations committed by the members of Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach in the summer of 2017, appeared eager throughout the litigation to force the city to prove its claims despite multiple audio recordings which documented the violations, and appeared to be disinclined to settle on the plaintiff’s terms.”
Attorney Robert Watrous represented the city in this legal matter, with significant assistance provided by paralegal Michael Barfield. City Attorney Ricinda Perry also assisted with this case.
Updated Nov. 29, 2020 – BRADENTON BEACH – The city has received a $350,000 settlement agreement payment from former Sunshine Law lawsuit defendants John Metz and Tjet Martin.
The city has also received $500 settlement payments from co-defendants Patty Shay, Bill Vincent and Rose Vincent.
On Thursday, Nov. 19, the city commission unanimously accepted the Metz-Martin settlement agreement previously discussed during a private shade meeting on Nov. 5.
The $350,000 payment serves as partial reimbursement for the more than $572,000 in attorney fees and legal costs the city incurred as a result of the civil lawsuit the city filed against six former city advisory board members in August 2017.
The lawsuit sought a judge’s ruling as to whether Martin, Metz, Reed Mapes, Shay and the Vincents violated the Sunshine Law when discussing advisory board matters at their Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach meetings in 2017. Those meetings included a discussion about the potential pursuit of a citywide prohibition on the construction of parking garages.
In July 2019, 12th Judicial Circuit Court Judge Edward Nicholas ruled all six defendants violated the Sunshine Law that pertains to government transparency and conducting official public business only at properly noticed public meetings. Minus Shay, the other five defendants appealed Nicholas’ ruling to the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Lakeland.
On Oct. 28, Nicholas ordered Mapes, Martin and Metz to pay the city $369,498. In his written order, Nicholas absolved Shay and the Vincents of any attorney fee-related financial liabilities because they had agreed to settle with the city before the 2019 trial began. The city commission rejected those pre-trial settlement offers because similar agreements were not reached with Mapes, Martin and Metz.
Settlement acceptance
City Attorney Ricinda Perry presented the Martin and Metz settlement offer for commission acceptance during the Nov. 19 meeting. She also presented a new settlement agreement reached with Shay.
The commission accepted the Martin and Metz settlement agreement and received the transferred funds the following day.
Vice Mayor Jake Spooner praised Perry’s efforts.
“Great job. We did what we’re supposed to do with protecting the transparency of the government, and the taxpayers are being reimbursed,” he said.
“I agree totally, and we said that all along about open, fair and transparent government,” Mayor John Chappie said.
Co-defendant agreements
During the Nov. 19 meeting, Perry also presented the settlement agreement with Shay, in which Shay agreed to pay the city $500 despite the judge’s recent order absolving her of financial responsibility.
“It dismisses everything as it relates to her. She is not a party to the appeal,” Perry said.
“Defendant Shay acknowledges she had concerns about the application of the Sunshine Law as it relates to the meetings at issue in this case, and further acknowledges that errors were made as it relates to the Sunshine Law,” Perry said when reading aloud the settlement agreement language.
“That was a very important piece of information the city wanted to make sure was addressed. There was compensation provided for the error, but there was an admission that the Sunshine Law had not been complied with,” Perry said.
The commission unanimously approved Shay’s settlement agreement.
Perry said paralegal Michael Barfield expected a call later from the Vincents later that day regarding individual settlement agreements similar to Shay’s.
“I expect they will execute the same settlement agreement with the same admission that Ms. Shay did. The Vincents are part of the appeal. They would be obligated also to release us and terminate all proceedings in the underlying case,” Perry said.
The commission authorized Chappie to accept and execute the Vincents’ settlement agreements when received.
After the Nov. 19 meeting, Perry was asked about Mapes’ settlement status.
“The city commission has authorized me to make a settlement offer to Mr. Mapes. Communication will be made to Mr. Mapes following the execution of the settlement agreements with John Metz, Tjet Martin, Bill and Rose Vincent and Patty Shay,” Perry said.
When contacted last week, Barfield said the Vincents’ settlement agreements had been finalized.
As of Sunday, Mapes remained the lone defendant still appealing Nicholas’ 2019 ruling.
On Nov. 24, Mapes sent Perry an email saying he would agree to the same settlement terms reached with the Vincents.
“I will dismiss my appeal with prejudice. I will need a response to this by Monday, Nov. 30, so that my attorney has time to file the necessary appellate paperwork,” Mapes wrote in his email.
Mapes’ settlement offer has not yet been presented to the city commission, which meets again on Thursday, Dec. 3.
“It is the commission’s expectation to make the public whole and Reed’s offer fails to do so,” Perry said regarding Mapes’ offer.
“He will remain solely responsible for all future costs to fight the appeal, and for any costs upheld or awarded by the Second DCA,” she noted.
BRADENTON BEACH – Sunshine Law lawsuit defendants John Metz and Tjet Martin have agreed to pay the city of Bradenton Beach $350,000 as partial reimbursement for the attorney’s fees the city has incurred.
According to City Treasurer Shayne Thompson, the city has spent $572,321 to date on the civil lawsuit the city filed against Metz, Martin and four other former city advisory board members in 2017.
The lawsuit sought a judge’s ruling as to whether the six defendants violated the Florida Sunshine Law, which pertains to open government meetings and requires the discussion of official public business to be conducted in properly noticed public meetings.
When the Sunshine Law violations occurred, Reed Mapes, Metz, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent served as Planning and Zoning Board members. Martin and Rose Vincent served as Scenic WAVES Committee members.
In July of 2019, the city prevailed in the four-day trial which resulted in 12th Judicial Circuit Court Judge Edward Nicholas ruling that all six defendants repeatedly violated the Sunshine Law during their non-city-affiliated Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach meetings in 2017.
Metz, Mapes, Martin, Rose Vincent and Bill Vincent then appealed that ruling, with Metz and his attorneys leading that process. As of Monday, those appeals remained pending in the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Lakeland. Shay did not appeal Nicholas’ 2019 ruling.
On Oct. 28, Nicholas issued a written order regarding the amount of attorney’s fees to be recovered by the city and which defendants shared responsibility for that payment.
“It is ordered and adjudged that the plaintiffs (the city) shall have and recover from the remaining defendants John Metz, Reed Mapes and Tjet Martin attorney’s fees in the amount of $369,498,” Nicholas stated in his order.
“It is hereby ordered and adjudged that the attorney’s fee award, as applied to defendants Patricia Shay, William Vincent and Rose Vincent is stricken,” Nicholas stated in his order.
Nicholas struck Shay and the Vincents’ financial liabilities after he learned earlier this year that they signed settlement agreements with the city shortly before the 2019 trial began. The commission then rejected those signed settlement agreements because Mapes, Martin and Metz did not express a similar willingness to settle.
Settlement offer accepted
The settlement agreement proposed by Metz and Martin was presented to the city commission during a shade meeting that took place Thursday evening, Nov. 5, inside the commission chambers.
John and Alice Metz attended the Nov. 5 shade meeting. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Metz and his wife, Alice, attended the public portions of the shade meeting that preceded and followed the private discussion that included only City Attorney Ricinda Perry, the five city commission members and the court reporter/stenographer who will later produce a verbatim transcript of the private discussion that is protected by attorney-client privilege until the case is over. Martin did not attend the shade meeting.
During the public opening of the shade meeting, Perry said, “There has been some development in the case and I would like an opportunity to discuss those developments and seek the advice of the city commission.”
The public and Deputy Clerk Christine Watson were then asked to leave the room. Perry and the commission spent approximately 50 minutes engaged in private discussion before the public was allowed back inside city hall, now joined by lawsuit co-plaintiff Jack Clarke and his wife, Karen.
“I would like a motion to accept the settlement offer from John Metz and Tjet Martin in the amount of $350,000, and to direct the city attorney to prepare the necessary settlement document discussions with the appropriate counsel, and to prepare them for execution by the city,” Perry told the commission.
Commissioner Ralph Cole made the requested motion that passed by a 5-0 vote.
Perry then sought a second motion directing her to prepare a settlement offer to present to Mapes and to finalize settlement offers with Shay and the Vincents.
Perry did not disclose any additional details on the settlement offer made by Metz and Martin or the settlement offers pertaining to Mapes, Shay and the Vincents.
During public comment, Perry was asked what impact the settlement agreements would have on the appeals.
“It will have an impact on an appeal, but I cannot disclose what the impact will be,” Perry said.
As he left the commission chambers, Metz declined comment on the settlement offer.
When contacted Sunday, Perry said she was still unable to disclose any additional information regarding the settlement offers and the appeals process.
BRADENTON BEACH – On behalf of the city of Bradenton Beach, attorney Robert Watrous has filed a motion seeking to impose sanctions on Sunshine Law lawsuit defendant Reed Mapes.
In July, Circuit Court Judge Edward Nicholas ruled Mapes, Tjet Martin, John Metz, Patty Shay, Bill Vincent and his wife Rose Vincent violated the Florida Sunshine Law in 2017. The Sunshine violations occurred when the then-city advisory board members repeatedly discussed advisory board business at their non-city-sanctioned Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach meetings.
In November, Nicholas ruled the city was entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs from the defendants, but he did not issue a ruling at that time as to what the recovery amount would be. Nicholas later ordered the parties to participate in a mandatory mediation session and the parties agreed on Bonnie Marmor as their mediator.
The motion Watrous filed on Friday, Feb. 14. pertains to the court-ordered, closed-door mediation session that took place at the Manatee County Judicial Center in downtown Bradenton on Jan. 13.
The mediation session provided the defendants and the city an opportunity to broker a settlement as to how much the defendants were willing to reimburse the city for the attorney fees and costs the city and its taxpayers incurred in this case.
As of Tuesday, Feb. 18, the city had incurred $477,062 in attorneys’ fees and costs, according to City Treasurer Shayne Thompson.
Watrous’ written motion notes all parties who attended the Jan. 13 mediation session were advised by the mediator to keep the details of that session to themselves. And that any settlement offer proposed would have to be discussed with and either accepted or rejected by the Bradenton Beach City Commission.
Watrous’ motion cites Florida Statute 44.405, which says, “Except as provided in this section, all mediation communications shall be confidential. A mediation participant shall not disclose a mediation communication to a person other than another mediation participant or a participant’s counsel. A violation of this section may be remedied as provided by s. 44.406. If the mediation is court-ordered, a violation of this section may also subject the mediation participant to sanctions by the court, including, but not limited to, costs, attorney’s fees, and mediator’s fees.”
According to the motion, the mediator contacted Watrous on Jan. 14, the day after the mediation session, to facilitate communication of a new settlement offer. Watrous then communicated with Metz’s attorney, Thomas Shults, who in turn relayed mediation-related information to his client and the co-defendants who no longer retain the services of their own attorneys.
Watrous’ motion notes that on Jan. 28, the Bradenton Beach Commission held a closed-door shade meeting that provided city commissioners an opportunity to consider and respond to a settlement offer tendered by Shults.
“On January 29, a media article appeared in the Islander stating that ‘Reed Mapes, one of the six defendants alongside John Metz, Tjet Martin, Patty Shay, Bill Vincent and Rose Vincent, told the Islander that John Metz offered $200,000 to settle with the city after a Jan. 13 closed-door mediation session failed to result in an agreement,’” Watrous’ motion states.
Watrous’ motion states that on Feb. 10, he sent Shults the city’s written response to the settlement offer Shults tendered on Jan. 14. Watrous’s motion does not indicate what the city’s response was.
“At present, the defendants have not responded to that offer,” the motion states.
A fee award hearing has been scheduled before Judge Edward Nicholas on Wednesday, April 29. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
If the parties can’t reach a settlement on their own, Nicholas will eventually be asked to determine how much the defendants must reimburse the city and its taxpayers.
Barring a settlement, the parties are scheduled to see each other in court again on Wednesday, April 29, when they appear before Nicholas at 1:35 p.m. for a three-hour hearing pertaining to award/amount of attorney fees.
BRADENTON – Manatee County 12th Circuit Judge Edward Nicholas ruled Friday that former Planning and Zoning Board members Reed Mapes, John Metz, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent, and former Scenic WAVES Committee members Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent violated the Florida Sunshine Law.
The Sunshine Law violations occurred at Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) meetings in June, July and August of 2017.
The potential Sunshine Law violations were first reported by The Sun on Aug. 2, 2017.
The city of Bradenton Beach and co-plaintiff Jack Clarke filed the civil lawsuit on Aug. 11, 2017. The lawsuit sought a judge’s determination as to whether the advisory board members violated the Sunshine Law by discussing advisory board business at CNOBB meetings.
The non-jury trial took place at the Manatee County Judicial Center in downtown Bradenton and began on Monday, July 15. When the testimony and legal arguments concluded on Thursday, July 18, Nicholas said he’d issue his ruling Friday morning.
The defendants and defense attorneys awaited the judge’s ruling Friday morning. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Attorney Robert Watrous represented the city and Clarke in the case, assisted by paralegal Michael Barfield and City Attorney Ricinda Perry.
Attorneys Thomas Shults and Jodi Ruberg represented Metz – and to a lesser degree the five pro se defendants who previously discontinued the services of their shared attorney.
“I am hoping to some extent the conclusion of this trial may help close the wound that has been so open and so raw out in Bradenton Beach for so long,” Nicholas said before issuing his ruling.
Judge’s ruling
When issuing his detailed ruling, Nicholas first cited the Florida Constitution and the Sunshine Law contained within it.
“We begin with Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution that reads: ‘All meetings of any collegial body of the executive branch of the state government, or of any collegial body of any county, municipality, school district or special district at which official acts are to be taken, or at which public business of such body is to be transacted or discussed shall be open and noticed to the public,’” Nicholas said.
Judge Edward Nicholas ruled all six former advisory board members violated the Florida Sunshine Law. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Nicholas noted the defendants were all duly sworn advisory board members who acknowledged participating in Sunshine Law training.
During the trial, Watrous established that each defendant took an oath of office as an advisory board member and swore to protect the United States Constitution and the Florida Constitution. Watrous said those oaths followed the advisory board members wherever they went, including CNOBB meetings.
“The Sunshine Law prohibits discussions of public business. Public business was discussed at every CNOBB meeting.” – Edward Nicholas, Manatee County 12th Circuit Court Judge
In their testimony and/or pre-trial depositions, Metz, Mapes, Shay and Bill Vincent expressed their beliefs that CNOBB’s parking garage discussions did not violate the Sunshine Law because the city’s comprehensive plan prohibited parking garages and it was not reasonably foreseeable that one could ever be built.
Nicholas noted City Planner Alan Garrett testified the comp plan only prohibited parking garages in two of the city’s 11 zone district designations in 2017.
“A parking garage could theoretically be built in nine designated areas within the city,” Nicholas said of the comp plan as it existed in 2017.
Compliance concerns
Nicholas noted Perry sent an email to the Planning and Zoning board members on July 25, 2017, notifying them of the potential Sunshine Law implications of their CNOBB meetings and email exchanges.
Nicholas noted Perry also emailed then-Mayor Bill Shearon two days later, and Shearon forwarded that email to the planning board members. That email also expressed concerns about advisory board members attending CNOBB meetings in violation of the Sunshine Law.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry, paralegal Michael Barfield and attorney Robert Watrous successfully presented the city’s case.
The trial included extensive discussion about the 2017 correspondence Bill Vincent had with the Florida Commission on Ethics and the Florida Office of the Attorney General regarding advisory board members participating in CNOBB meetings.
The Commission on Ethics response advised Vincent to review the Sunshine Law manual at the Attorney General’s website and possibly consult with private counsel. The Attorney General Office’s response advised Vincent to consult with the city attorney.
“The defendants never got answers to those questions. The defendants continued to meet despite their concerns, despite not getting answers to these very important questions. Had they contacted Ricinda Perry, she would have answered: ‘Yes, the Sunshine Law applies.’ Had they contacted any attorney in the state of Florida they would have said, ‘Yes, the Sunshine Law applies,’ ” Nicholas said.
Constitutional rights
During the trial, Shults, Metz, Mapes and Vincent expressed their opinions that state law allowed the advisory board members to discuss city issues that pertained to the possible pursuit of citizens’ initiatives.
Attorney Thomas Shults, left, was unsuccessful in his defense of John Metz and the five pro se defendants. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The defendants attempt to characterize these violative meetings as ballot initiative meetings pursuant to Section 166.031 (Florida Statute) is simply not persuasive. This ballot initiative defense strikes this court as an after-the-fact attempt to justify or otherwise rationalize what were otherwise clear and unequivocal violations of the Sunshine Law. It is a clever explanation for such violations, but it is not a compelling or persuasive one,” Nicholas said.
“The efforts to characterize their violative meetings as the right to assemble and speak freely as guaranteed by the First Amendment also is not persuasive. Every citizen has the right to assemble and has the right to free speech. However, when an individual joins a government advisory board the Sunshine Law still applies. If that were not the case, every county commission, every city council, every advisory board could hold secret meetings and simply say I have a First Amendment right to do so. That would largely make the Sunshine Law meaningless and void,” Nicholas said.
Meeting recordings
During the trial, Nicholas heard audio recordings of entire CNOBB meetings and audio excerpts from CNOBB meetings.
“It’s certainly unusual that we have tapes of at least some of the meetings that took place outside of the Sunshine,” Nicholas said.
He then recited some of the statements made at CNOBB meetings:
“I have concerns about how the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) is functioning;”
“We need to prohibit the construction of a parking garage in the city of Bradenton Beach;”
“It is on the CRA list;”
“Parking garage could easily come before Planning and Zoning;”
“That whole strip over there would be a parking garage;”
“We need to specify a municipal parking garage;”
“It would be a huge building;”
“We need to prohibit construction of a parking garage in Bradenton Beach, it doesn’t matter if it’s by a municipality or a huge corporation;”
“Horrendous traffic problems with a parking garage.”
Nicholas then said, “Those were all quotes. That is the very definition of a discussion about public business. And it wasn’t just parking garage discussions: CNOBB discussed ropes and bollards, sidewalks, parking issues, the Bridge Tender (Inn) land swap, Bridge Street planters – all issues that had come before Planning and Zoning or Scenic WAVES.”
The judge ruled that former Planning and Zoning Board members Reed Mapes and Bill Vincent violated the Sunshine Law. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The Sunshine Law prohibits discussions of public business. Public business was discussed at every CNOBB meeting. Public business was discussed every time CNOBB met. That was largely the point of the organization,” Nicholas said.
“Also, there were at least four CNOBB meetings that were not recorded early on as the group was becoming organized. What was discussed at those meetings? Who attended those meetings? These questions point to the obvious need for Sunshine Law compliance,” Nicholas said.
Nicholas said the defendants’ passionate and firmly held beliefs regarding city issues caused them to abdicate their obligation to follow the law.
“My finding that all the defendants clearly and unequivocally violated the Sunshine Law does not in any way suggest that they are bad people. I do not agree with the suggestion that the defendants attempted to form a secret government or a shadow government, or that their meetings were surreptitious or clandestine in any way,” Nicholas said.
The judge ruled that former advisory board members Rose Vincent, Patty Shay and Tjet Martin violated the Sunshine Law. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“Do these individuals have a right to assemble? Absolutely. Do these individuals have a right to free speech? Absolutely. Do these individuals have a right to be concerned about their beloved city? Of course. But once you choose to become part of the government by becoming a member of a government advisory board you are no longer just a spectator. Rules apply, laws apply. The defendants simply did not follow those rules. The defendants simply did not follow those laws. This is not a close call,” Nicholas said.
“Judgment is in favor of the city. The court finds that all the defendants, as members of Planning and Zoning and members of the Scenic WAVES Partnership Committee were subject to Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution and Section 286.011 of Florida Statute,” Nicholas ruled.
Additional comments
Nicholas said a post-trial hearing will be scheduled to address potential sanctions. These include the city’s request to be reimbursed for a portion of its legal fees that now exceed $250,000.
“We agree with everything the judge said,” Watrous said after he left the courtroom.
“The Sunshine Law has been vindicated,” Barfield said.
“We agree with the judgment and look forward to the city moving forward and healing. The city does not wish to sue any of its board members, and it’s unfortunate this wasn’t settled earlier, but the Sunshine Law is important. It provides the city and its citizens with an open government,” Perry said,
“Obviously, I’m pleased with the verdict,” Clarke said.
“Government in the sunshine is why we are here. It’s as simple as that, it’s as important as that. It’s the foundation of what good government is built on; openness, transparency and accountability. Anything less is just not acceptable and now’s the time to heal,” Mayor John Chappie said.
“I’m very pleased with the judge’s ruling and I would like to thank everyone involved for presenting a clear case to the court. This was an unfortunate circumstance the city commission was put in to uphold our oaths to protect the laws of the state and to protect the city from litigation. I wish this would’ve been resolved through our previous settlement offers for a less expensive and earlier conclusion,” Vice Mayor Jake Spooner said.
Co-plaintiff Jack Clarke, Vice Mayor Jake Spooner (second row), Mayor John Chappie, City Attorney Ricinda Perry, paralegal Michael Barfield and attorney Robert Watrous await the judge’s arrival Friday morning. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
In March, all six defendants rejected a settlement offer from the city that proposed a collective admission that mistakes were made regarding Sunshine Law compliance and a $500 payment from each defendant. The defendants rejected the settlement offer that required them to acknowledge non-compliance with the Sunshine Law.
In May, Metz and the other defendants submitted counter proposals that sought significant financial reimbursement from the city. Metz’s offer also expressed a willingness to subject the city to a future appeals process.
BRADENTON – The Sunshine Law lawsuit involving the city of Bradenton Beach and six former city advisory board members is underway.
The civil trial began today. The suit was filed in 2017 on behalf of the city and co-plaintiff Jack Clarke. It alleges that former Planning and Zoning Board members Reed Mapes, John Metz, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent violated the Florida Sunshine Law by discussing past, present and potential board business at Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) meetings in July and August of 2017. The lawsuit alleges similar Sunshine Law violations were committed by Scenic WAVES Committee members Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent.
The trial is expected to last all week and possibly conclude on Friday.
Attorney Robert Watrous is representing the city and Clarke in this case, assisted by City Attorney Ricinda Perry and paralegal Michael Barfield. Attorney Thomas Shults is representing Metz, assisted by attorney Jodi Ruberg. The other five defendants are representing themselves.
Defendants Reed Mapes, Bill Vincent, Rose Vincent (obscured), Patty Shay, Tjet Martin, attorney Jodi Ruberg (obscured), attorney Thomas Shults and defendant John Metz sat side by side as the trial began. – Media Pool Photo | Submitted
Twelfth Judicial Circuit Court Judge Edward Nicholas is presiding over the bench trial and he alone will determine the innocence or guilt of the six defendants. The trial is taking place at the Manatee County Judicial Center in downtown Bradenton.
The trial began with Watrous and Shults seeking rulings on pretrial motions and other legal housekeeping matters.
When seeking a motion regarding the alleged spoliation of evidence, Watrous accused the defendants of intentionally withholding information during the pre-trial discovery process – included a recording of the July 14 CNOBB meeting that Shults did not provide Watrous until the day after Metz’s July 2 deposition. During that CNOBB meeting, Mapes initiated discussion on a quasi-judicial land use issue that was currently before the Planning and Zoning Board regarding the Bridge Tender Inn’s Dockside Bar seating capacity.
Nicholas denied the preliminary motions and said he would take them under advisement individually as the trial moves along.
Opening statements
During his opening statements, Watrous said the city’s legal team has compiled a large amount of information that he believes supports the allegations. The evidence includes email exchanges, audio recordings of CNOBB meetings, city meeting minutes, newspaper articles and more.
City resident Jack Clarke, Mayor John Chappie, City 0Attorney Ricinda Perry, paralegal Michael Barfield and Attorney Robert Watrous sat together at the plaintiffs’ table. – Media Pool Photo | Submitted
Watrous said the evidence would show that CNOBB consisted of extremely zealous individuals that formed their own shadow government because they did not feel their voices were being heard by the city commission.
Watrous said the defendants have claimed they are the victims in this case, portraying themselves as innocent retirees who volunteered their time to serve on city advisory boards.
Watrous said that all six defendants received Sunshine Law training while serving as city advisory board members but chose to “turn a blind eye” when moving forward with their CNOBB activities.
He also noted the defendants never sought the advice of the Manatee County attorney’s office or outside counsel regarding whether their participation in CNOBB meeting discussions were Sunshine Law-compliant.
“This an intentional act on their parts. I’m not saying they’re bad people, but they exercised bad judgment,” Watrous said.
During his opening statements, Shults said this case is really the story of six citizens who volunteered to serve on city boards without compensation. He also said this is the story of six citizens and their constitutional rights to petition their city government for changes to the city charter.
Shults said the defendants should be commended for their service to the city and halting their July 25, 2017 discussion about prohibiting parking garages after only six minutes of discussion.
Shults said no Sunshine Law violations occurred, but if they had they would have been cured by the resignations of all six defendants before or after the lawsuit was filed in August 2017.
“That should have been the end of this matter,” Shults said. “They should have been saluted instead of being sued. Here we are two years later.”
After the lunch break, Watrous and Barfield read aloud excerpts from the printed transcript of Bill Vincent’s December 2018 deposition. Barfield read Vincent’s responses to questions Watrous posed late last year about his city-mandated Sunshine Law training, the April 2017 Planning and Zoning Board discussions he participated in regarding parking garages and his role in creating and chairing CNOBB.
BRADENTON BEACH – The trial for the Sunshine Law lawsuit filed against six former city advisory board members has been rescheduled for July 15. The trial was previously scheduled to take place in mid-March.
A pretrial conference has been scheduled for July 8.
The depositions for City Planner Alan Garrett, City Attorney Ricinda Perry and defendant John Metz also have been rescheduled. Perry is now scheduled to be deposed by Metz’s attorney, Thomas Shults, on Wednesday, March 20.
On behalf of the city of Bradenton Beach and co-plaintiff Jack Clarke, attorney Robert Watrous is now scheduled to depose Metz on Thursday, May 30. Garrett’s recently-postponed deposition has not yet been rescheduled.
The attorneys also have submitted the lists of witnesses they will or may call upon to testify during the trial.
Paralegal Michael Barfield is assisting Watrous and said the trial was pushed back due to temporary health issues experienced by some witnesses and Shults’ plans to soon take a long vacation out of the country.
The court-ordered mediation session previously scheduled for Monday, Feb. 25 is expected to take place as planned. The mediation will provide all parties involved an opportunity to discuss a potential settlement, but Perry previously told the city commission she doesn’t believe a settlement is likely.
The only known settlement offer to date occurred in September 2017, when the defendants, minus Metz, offered to pay their own legal fees and pay $100 each toward the legal fees incurred by the city and Clarke. That settlement offer included no admission or denial of liability or fault and noted that all six defendants had resigned from their positions as city advisory board members. The city rejected that settlement offer.
Additional actions
During the Feb. 7 city commission meeting, Perry said Shults now plans to depose Mayor John Chappie, commissioners Ralph Cole and Jake Spooner and Building Official Steve Gilbert as well.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry provided city commissioners with a lawsuit update on Feb. 7. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Perry also said former Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) webmaster Michael Harrington may be deposed a second time due to discoveries made during his first deposition in January.
During his deposition, Harrington testified under oath that he thought he had deleted all of his email correspondence pertaining to CNOBB. He later realized that was not the case and turned those and other emails over to Barfield and Watrous.
Harrington also testified under oath that he asked for the hard drive in his malfunctioning computer to be destroyed and he confirmed that former Planning and Zoning Board and CNOBB member Reed Mapes asked him to delete two CNOBB-related emails.
While deposing Clarke in January, Shults laid the groundwork for a potential line of defense based on the legal argument that the city and Clarke filed the lawsuit in bad faith due to contentious relationships between Metz and Clarke and Metz and the city.
In 2015, Metz filed an unsuccessful lawsuit against Clarke. In 2016, Metz filed a still-pending lawsuit against the city and Gilbert. In 2017, Metz was unsuccessful in his efforts to prevent Cole from continuing to operate his Coastal Watersports rental business on beachfront property leased from the Silver Surf resort.
The lawsuit
The 2017 lawsuit seeks a ruling from 12th Circuit Court Judge Ed Nicholas as to whether four former Planning and Zoning Board members (Metz, Mapes, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent) and former Scenic WAVES Committee members Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent violated the Florida Sunshine Law by discussing past, present and potential board and committee matters during CNOBB meetings that occurred that summer at the Annie Silver Community Center and the Pines Trailer Park. Under the law, official board and committee member business is only supposed to be discussed at properly-noticed city meetings, most of which take place at city hall.
The CNOBB members discussed the potential pursuit of a citywide prohibition on parking garages. They also discussed the updated Community Redevelopment Agency that references parking and other potential CRA projects. Email exchanges obtained from the defendants and others during the pretrial discovery process also include several references to parking garages, the CRA plan and other city business.
While deposing Mapes, Shay and Bill Vincent, Watrous established that these matters were previously reviewed by the advisory board members and he asserted they could have foreseeably come before them again.
BRADENTON BEACH – Bradenton Beach voters re-elected incumbent Bradenton Beach City Commissioners Ralph Cole and Marilyn Maro, choosing them over challengers Tjet Martin and John Metz.
Bradenton Beach voters supported a return to geographically-based City Commission wards as one of seven proposed charter amendments recommended by the Charter Review Committee and supported by city voters.
Running unopposed, Anna Maria Mayor Dan Murphy and commissioners Amy Tripp and Brian Seymour retain their seats and will serve additional two-year terms in office.
Bradenton Beach commission races
In the Bradenton Beach race for the two seats currently held by Cole and Maro, Cole received 282 votes (32.12 percent), Maro received 242 votes (27.56 percent), Metz received 189 votes (21.53 percent) and Martin received 165 votes (18.79 percent).
Maro and Cole will serve additional two-year terms on the City Commission and be sworn in on Monday, Dec. 19. Their victories will maintain for another year a commission that also includes Mayor John Chappie and commissioners Jake Spooner and Randy White.
Charter amendments
Bradenton Beach voters also decided the fate of seven proposed amendments to the city charter and one park rezoning request.
Voters adopted Amendment 1. This means geographically-based City Commission wards will be reinstated beginning with next year’s elections: 295 voters (58.65 percent) supported the amendment and 208 voters (41.35 percent) opposed it.
Despite this sign of opposition, Bradenton Beach voters adopted several charter amendments proposed by the Charter Review Committee. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Voters adopted Amendment 2. This means City Commission candidates will now have to be registered city voters and will have to provide addition proof of residency when seeking office: 413 voters (79.73 percent) supported the amendment and 105 voters (20.27 percent) opposed it.
Voters adopted Amendment 3. This means the city charter will expressly state Bradenton Beach has a balanced form of city government in which all five members, including the mayor, have the same legislative and executive powers: 308 voters (61.48 percent) supported the amendment and 193 voters (38.52 percent) opposed it.
Voters adopted Amendment 4. This means the City Commission will retain the sole authority to hire and fire charter officials and departments heads, even if a city manager was to be hired in the future: 290 voters (58.23 percent) supported the amendment and 208 voters (41.77 percent) opposed it.
Voters adopted rejected Amendment 5. This means Article II and Article III of the city charter will be renumbered and reorganized (merely an administrative housekeeping matter): 306 voters (62.58 percent) supported the amendment and 183 voters (37.42 percent) opposed it.
Voters adopted Amendment 6. This means the commission will retain the ability to fill vacant City Commission seats by commission appointment: 328 voters (64.57 percent) supported the amendment and 180 voters (35.43 percent) opposed it.
Voters adopted Amendment 7. This means the charter requirements and processes that already apply to citizen-led, petition-initiated city ordinances and resolutions will also apply to citizen-led, petition-initiated efforts to amend the city charter: 320 voters (65.04 percent) supported the amendment and 172 voters (34.96 percent) opposed it.
City voters also supported the city’s request to rezone Katie Pierola Park from its current R-3 Multi-Family Dwelling District zoning designation to a Parks/Recreation/Open Space zoning designation. The vote was 460 votes (89.15 percent) in favor of the rezoning and 56 votes (10.85 percent) opposed to the rezoning request.
BRADENTON BEACH – Incumbent Bradenton Beach City Commissioner Ralph Cole is the leading campaign fundraiser in the four-person race for the two commission seats to be decided in the upcoming city elections.
According to his campaign treasurer’s reports, Cole raised $3,100 and spent $1,122 on his campaign as of Sept. 14. In addition to loaning his own campaign $1,100, Cole received $500 from Bridgewalk Partners LLC and $500 from the Silver Surf resort, which are both owned by Angela Rodocker. He also received $1,000 from the Local 2546 Suncoast Professional Firefighters and Paramedics labor union.
Former Scenic WAVES chair Tjet Martin seeks a City Commission seat. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Cole paid Speed King in Palmetto $674 for yard signs and flyers and Steam Design Services in Holmes Beach $400 for campaign marketing services. He also paid the $48 qualifying fee.
As of Sept. 14, former Scenic WAVES Committee chair Tjet Martin raised $1,800, including $1,100 in loans to her own campaign.
Martin received $300 from former Bradenton Beach resident Mary Mapes, $100 each from Bradenton Beach residents Bill and Rose Vincent, $100 from James Srackangast, who lists a North Carolina address, $50 from Roger Fultz, who lists a Michigan address and $50 from former deputy clerk Tammy Johnson.
Commissioner Marilyn Maro seeks a second term in office. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Martin paid Signs on the Cheap in Texas $200 and paid the $48 qualifying fee.
As of Sept. 14, Marilyn Maro, also an incumbent, raised $1,175, including $150 she loaned to her own campaign. Like Cole, Maro received $1,000 from the Suncoast Professional Firefighters and Paramedics. She also received $25 from Bradenton Beach resident Lynne Budzinski.
Maro’s only listed campaign expenditures were a $17 service fee for her campaign account, $16.50 for data obtained from the Manatee County Board of Commissioners and the $48 qualifying fee.
Former Planning and Zoning Board member John Metz now seeks a commission seat. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Former Planning and Zoning Board member John Metz loaned his own campaign $140, received $100 from Rose Vincent and made a $377 in-kind contribution to himself for lawn signs.
As of Sept. 14, Metz spent $6 on bank statements and paid the $48 qualifying fee.
Vote by mail ballots will be mailed out the first week of October and the elections will conclude on Tuesday, Nov. 6.
BRADENTON BEACH – Former Planning and Zoning Board member Bill Vincent says he’s withdrawing from the Bradenton Beach City Commission race.
On Thursday, June 28, Vincent distributed an email that said in its entirety: “Greetings. I have withdrawn my candidacy for commissioner of Bradenton Beach without advance announcement or public comment.”
Vincent announced his withdrawal a week after he and four other candidates qualified to run for the two at-large commission seats currently held by Marilyn Maro and Ralph Cole. Maro and Cole are seeking reelection and being challenged by former Scenic WAVES chair Tjet Martin and former Planning and Zoning Board member John Metz.
In 2016, John Chappie defeated Vincent in the Ward 4 commission race by a 378-234 vote margin. In 2014, Commissioner Jan Vosburgh defeated Martin in the Ward 4 race by a 347-143 vote margin. This is Metz’s first pursuit of a Bradenton Beach commission seat.
Vincent, Martin and Metz are among six former city advisory board members who resigned from their volunteer city positions last summer amidst allegations of Sunshine Law violations that are now the subject of a pending civil lawsuit initiated by the city and a city resident.
Metz is also the plaintiff in the stalled, but still pending, lawsuit he filed against the city and Building Official Steve Gilbert in 2016 in an attempt to have a neighbor’s property declared ineligible for continued use as a vacation rental.
In 2012, Martin, Bill Shearon and Jo Ann Meilner filed a lawsuit against the city in objection to a beachfront parking allowance given to Ed Chiles’ BeachHouse restaurant. The lawsuit was later settled in a manner that preserved Chiles’ parking rights but also allowed for the creation of a small beachfront park.
According to City Attorney Ricinda Perry, there’s nothing in the city charter that prevents someone involved in an active lawsuit with the city from running for a commission seat or serving as a commissioner if elected.
BRADENTON BEACH – Bradenton Beach Commissioners have rejected four charter amendment initiatives pursued by the Keep Our Residential Neighborhoods (KORN) political action committee.
Barring a court order or a new petition initiative done according to the city charter, KORN’s proposed charter amendment questions will not appear on the city ballot this fall.
KORN’s charter initiatives propose a citywide prohibition on multi-level parking garages, hiring a full-time city manager, increasing setback restrictions and prohibiting vacant commission seats from being filled by commission appointment.
The commission based its decision on KORN not following the charter’s referendum procedures and on insufficiencies and concerns cited by City Clerk Terri Sanclemente, City Attorney Ricinda Perry and City Engineer Lynn Burnett.
After nearly two hours of debate on Thursday, June 21, the commission adopted three motions. The first was for the commission to uphold Sanclemente’s decision to reject the proposed amendments according article 4 of the city charter. The second stated KORN’s initiatives do not comply with Florida Statutes 166.031 and 101.161. A third motion directed city staff to defend the city charter and represent the city in any litigation arising from the KORN petitions.
All three motions were approved by 4-1 votes, with Commissioner Randy White in opposition.
As he left city hall, KORN chairman Reed Mapes said, “I’m calling my lawyer.”
As of mid-day Monday, a lawsuit had not been filed.
Petition insufficiencies
On June 4, KORN treasurer John Metz submitted the signed petitions to the clerk’s office with a note citing 88 signatures for the parking garage petition, 87 for the vacancies petition, 83 for the setbacks petition and 76 for the city manager petition.
The referendum requirements in the city charter and state law require verified signatures from at least 10 percent of the registered electors in the preceding general election. According to the Manatee County Supervisor of Elections Office website, Bradenton Beach had 744 registered in November 2017.
“Now you put us in a position where we either don’t follow our city charter or we go to litigation.”
– Jake Spooner, Bradenton Beach Commissioner
On June 11, Sanclemente sent Metz a letter stating KORN didn’t form a five-member petition circulating committee, didn’t use the city’s required forms and didn’t provide accompanying affidavits stating each petition was signed in the presence of a committee member.
“This office has testimony that petitions were mailed to residents and were not signed in the presence of a committee member,” Sanclemente wrote. “Accordingly, your petitions are deemed insufficient pursuant to the city charter.”
KORN was given 10 days to file amended petitions. Sanclemente recapped these insufficiencies for the commission and said Metz refused to accept the petitions mailed back to him.
During that morning’s Charter Review Committee meeting, the city engineer said KORN’s setback amendment could negatively impact stormwater retention. She recommended revising the amendment language or addressing those concerns in city code instead. Perry said the amendment could expose the city to Bert Harris claims.
KORN treasurer John Metz tells city commissioners KORN’s charter initiatives were conducted according to state law and not the city charter. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Commission discussion
“We’re using the same process that was used last year, a state process under 166.031,” Metz told the commission.
He was referencing charter initiatives pursued by the Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) in 2017. Perry said those voter-adopted charter amendments still contain unresolved conflicts.
“The city is a conduit through which we operate. There’s nothing the city’s to do except to follow statute. I’m here to ask you to send these petitions on. I think there’s enough litigation going on that we don’t need more,” Metz said.
“Did you follow the procedure in our charter?” Cole asked.
“It’s not appropriate,” Metz responded.
“You don’t find it appropriate, but our job is to follow our city charter. Now you put us in a position where we either don’t follow our city charter or we go to litigation. Why didn’t you follow our charter?” Commissioner Jake Spooner said.
“We’re not required to,” Metz said.
Perry said the Elections Office only determines whether enough verified petition signatures were obtained and it’s up to the commission to review referendums for compliance with the charter and state law.
“You were sworn in to uphold this city’s constitution, which is its charter, and state law,” Perry told the commission.
Perry said state law limits ballot summaries to 75 words and ballot titles to 15 words. The ballot summary for the vacancies amendment contains 102 words and the setbacks summary contains 89. According to Perry, all four ballot titles exceed 15 words.
The word “outrageous” appears in the parking garage summary and “cronyism” appears in the vacancies summary. Perry’s June 19 memo to the commission referenced a Florida Supreme Court ruling that says, “The ballot summary should tell the voter the legal effect of the amendment and no more. The political motivation behind a given change must be propounded outside the voting booth.”
Perry said state law no longer allows land-use referendums and Cole noted the charter’s building height restrictions predate the change in state law.
Chappie said the first question to be answered was, “Does the charter apply or not?”
Perry said the charter was created according to state law and works in tandem with Florida statues.
“It’s not specific to KORN. Our charter has to be followed,” Spooner said.
“This is an attempt to stop these KORN initiatives,” White said.
White said the state process provides citizens with another option if they feel they’re not being heard at the local level.
“Had the city been willing to work with us, we’d probably been able to work all those items out. We’ve found that very much impossible,” KORN chair Reed Mapes said regarding last year’s referendum efforts.
“That’s not true. The city was clearly pleading to work with CNOBB to set up a charter review committee to get it done correctly. CNOBB said no,” Chappie responded.
“What is the problem with following a simple procedure?” Cole said of this year’s efforts. “If you would have done that, it would have allowed us to say yes, let’s put it to the voters without breaking our own city charter.”
BRADENTON BEACH – Sunshine Law lawsuit defendants Reed Mapes and Tjet Martin have been deposed by attorney Robert Watrous.
Defendant Patty Shay is scheduled for deposition this week. Defendants Bill and Rose Vincent were scheduled for depositions on Monday, June 4, but they were postponed in part due to Bill Vincent being legally blind and requiring special equipment and computer software to assist him when reading evidentiary exhibits presented to him. Defendant John Metz’s May 23 deposition was previously postponed.
First Place
First Amendment Defense
Jon A. Roosenraad Award
2019
Watrous deposed Mapes on Wednesday, May 30, and Martin on Friday, June 1. They were given under oath with a court reporter transcribing what was said. The depositions took place at the Vincent M. Lucente & Associates office in Bradenton.
Watrous represents the city of Bradenton Beach and co-plaintiff Jack Clarke in the civil lawsuit filed against the defendants in August. Paralegal Michael Barfield is assisting Watrous.
Mapes was represented by attorney Jim Dye and Metz brought attorney Tom Shults, even though he wasn’t being deposed. Martin represented herself, but Dye and another Metz attorney, Jodi Ruberg, provided occasional assistance.
All six defendants attended Mapes’s deposition and all but Shay attended Martin’s deposition. Martin’s significant other, Bill Shearon, attended both depositions. Clarke attended the morning sessions of both depositions.
The defendants are accused of violating the Florida Sunshine Law by discussing city matters that could have foreseeably come before them in their official capacities as city advisory board members. The alleged violations pertain to Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) meetings and email exchanges between members who at the time served together on the Planning and Zoning Board or the Scenic WAVES Committee.
Some of those discussions and email exchanges referenced parking garage prohibitions, the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) plan, the comprehensive plan and future land use maps.
The six defendants helped form CNOBB while serving as appointed city board members. They resigned from their city positions last summer and CNOBB was disbanded last fall.
Mapes deposition
When Mapes’ deposition began, Shults and Dye objected to the presence of two newspaper reporters but didn’t demand their removal.
Mapes served on the Planning Board for about a year and he acknowledged receiving mandatory Sunshine Law training that included attendance at a seminar conducted by County Attorney Mickey Palmer.
Watrous posed several questions regarding communications between planning board members and the overlap between CRA and planning board matters.
He also asked several questions about CNOBB’s formation and intent. Mapes said the intent was to educate citizens on city issues. CNOBB pursued three charter amendment initiatives and later registered as a political action committee.
During a July 25 CNOBB meeting, Mapes suggested a charter amendment that prohibited parking garages citywide. A recording of that meeting was played during his deposition.
Watrous referenced a June 12 email Mapes sent to Bill Vincent regarding Metz’s concerns about Sunshine Law compliance and a June 13 email Mapes sent to Vincent about the creation of a CNOBB website that could be public, semi-public or private.
“Here again is the issue of Sunshine violations,” Mapes wrote in that email.
When asked if he discussed Sunshine Law concerns with Metz in person, Mapes said he presumed he did, but couldn’t recall.
Watrous noted that Vincent received an opinion from the Florida Commission on Ethics that advised CNOBB to consult an attorney if they had concerns about their meetings being Sunshine Law compliant.
Watrous cited email exchanges Mapes had with his attorney Bob Hendrickson about CNOBB matters and asked if he ever sought Hendrickson’s advice on Sunshine compliance. Mapes said he did not.
“I pushed for the parking garage. It might have been on my street and I didn’t want a parking garage,” Mapes said, noting the parking garage prohibition was not pursued by CNOBB.
“Our first meeting, which was back in June, we discussed dropping it. I kept bringing it up,” Mapes said regarding parking garages.
He said he did not feel the parking garage discussions violated the Sunshine Law.
“Why not make the effort and be more certain?” Watrous asked.
“Sometimes we decide what we want, the way we want it,” Mapes said.
“Did it occur to you what CNOBB was doing was negotiating in back room deals?” Watrous said at one point.
“Not at all,” Mapes responded.
Martin deposition
Martin formerly chaired the Scenic WAVES Committee that advises the City Commission and CRA on landscaping and beautification projects. Several questions pertained to projects discussed and/or pursued by the CRA, the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Committee or the City Commission.
These included the Bridge Street planters and plants, benches, park signs, trolley stops, Chickee huts and more. Watrous noted all these items had been or could foreseeably need to be reviewed by Scenic WAVES.
Martin said she did not feel the CNOBB discussions violated the Sunshine Law and she acknowledged participation in several Sunshine Law training sessions.
Near the end of her deposition, Martin was asked if she discussed the Sunshine lawsuit with Metz, a former attorney. Martin claimed she didn’t have to answer that question and Watrous told her she did.
She said she would “rant” to Metz, but he didn’t say much in response that she could recall.
“Normally, he sat and listened to me,” she said.
Martin said her lawsuit conversations with Bill Vincent were of a more technical nature pertaining to emails requested from her as part of the lawsuit.
When Watrous asked Martin if she discussed the lawsuit with anybody, Martin said, “Mr. Shearon.”
“And what have you two discussed?” Watrous asked.
Martin tried to hold back her tears as she said, “Just my disappointment with the city. My disappointment in how they treated us.”
Through her tears she said she dedicated a lot of her time to the city and then she got up and left the conference room. She returned a short time later and answered the few remaining questions Watrous had.
BRADENTON BEACH – Paralegal Michael Barfield says Sunshine Law violations that former city board members are accused of committing were not innocent mistakes made by uninformed volunteers.
He also accused the now-defunct Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) group of operating as a “shadow government.”
Accompanied by Mayor John Chappie and City Attorney Ricinda Perry, Barfield held a press conference that directly preceded the City Commission’s Thursday, May 17 meeting. Barfield, a Sunshine law expert from Sarasota, is assisting attorneys Robert Watrous and Perry in the case.
First Place
First Amendment Defense
Jon A. Roosenraad Award
2019
“Anything less than government in the sunshine is just not acceptable and that’s why we’re here today,” Chappie said.
“We don’t view these violations as an accident or technical. They were serious, substantive violations,” Barfield said.
He later noted past Sunshine violations cost Venice taxpayers $1.6 million and recent violations cost Martin County taxpayers more than $12 million.
Enacted in 1995, the Florida Sunshine Law requires local governments and advisory boards to conduct business in properly noticed public meetings, with all related documents and correspondence made available to the public.
The lawsuit filed last August by the city and resident Jack Clarke names as defendants former Planning and Zoning Board members John Metz, Reed Mapes, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent and former Scenic WAVES Committee members Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent. The lawsuit alleges they violated the Sunshine Law by discussing past and potential board and committee business during CNOBB meetings and in private emails.
Lawsuit update
While providing an update on the lawsuit, Barfield referenced “the efforts the city has undertaken to bring transparency and sunshine to the acts of the few who have attempted to hijack city government.”
“Last year, several members of advisory boards planned the creation of a shadow form of government called CNOBB under the guise of an association. Much of the business they were doing mirrored what you would expect your local government to be doing, including discussions about parking garages and the Community Redevelopment Agency.
“The reason the Sunshine Law exists is to ensure transparency and the avoidance of backroom deals. Our goal was to find out what happened, bring awareness to the public of those violations, cure them and send a clear message that no one is above the law,” Barfield said.
“In our view, Mr. Metz is clearly the ringleader of this group. He’s a retired, wealthy attorney from California and he’s sued the city multiple times over the past few years. He is yet to prevail in any legal action against the city. The only thing Mr. Metz has done successful is deplete the treasury. By our calculations, Mr. Metz has cost the citizens of Bradenton Beach more than $150,000 through his legal actions against the city,” Barfield said.
The Sunshine suit has cost the city more than $56,000 so far. If the city prevails, the court will be asked to order the defendants to reimburse a portion of the city’s legal expenses.
Questionable intent?
“An email John Metz wrote on June 24 best summarizes the intent of these folks to operate in the shadows to change the form of government,” Barfield said. “In that email, Mr. Metz noted, ‘Changing the form of government would be better, but that will take too much time.’ Mr. Metz advocated for granting strong powers to the former mayor (Bill Shearon) and said that would ‘allow us to get rid of the lawyer (Perry) and then change the form of government.’
“There’s also an email exchange on July 21 between Reed Mapes and Tjet Martin that illustrates the intent of these individuals: ‘You are evil. It will be fun to see the panic when some begin to read what we’ve planned,’ ” Barfield said, quoting Mapes’ email to Martin.
The emails referenced CNOBB’s efforts to place three charter amendment questions on the November 2017 ballot. According to the Sunshine Law, discussing the city’s form of government is not a Sunshine violation, because that’s not something advisory boards would review. Discussions and emails about parking garages and the CRA constitute the alleged Sunshine violations.
“Other email exchanges we’ve discovered show that this is not a case where volunteer citizens stumbled upon a Sunshine violation innocently,” Barfield said.
He noted all the defendants previously received mandatory Sunshine Law training.
Sunshine lawsuit defendant Reed Mapes listens in on Thursday’s press conference. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Barfield referenced a June 12 email Mapes sent to Vincent regarding Metz’s concerns about Sunshine issues. He also referenced a July letter Vincent sent to the Florida Commission on Ethics asking if CNOBB was subject to Sunshine Law compliance.
“The Ethics Commission wrote back and said you need to consult with an attorney. They also called upon the Attorney General’s Office in Tallahassee and were told to check with their city attorney. Did they do that? No,” Barfield said.
“Mr. Metz seeks to have the Sunshine Law removed from the books to justify, after the fact, his conduct,” Barfield said of the motion Metz’s attorney filed challenging the state law’s constitutionality.
He also referenced the recent hearing in which Circuit Court Judge Lon Arend ruled against the defense’s requests to sequester witnesses and deposition transcripts. Defendant depositions begin May 23 and the city seeks a trial in late summer or early fall.
After the press conference, Barfield made a similar presentation to city commissioners.
BRADENTON – 12th Judicial Circuit Court Judge Lon Arend has rejected defendant John Metz’s request to sequester non-party witnesses in a Sunshine Law lawsuit.
“I don’t find that I have the authority to sequester the witnesses, so I deny the motion,” Arend said, as the 40-minute hearing concluded on Wednesday, May 9. Arend also denied the defense’s last-minute, verbal request to sequester the transcripts of depositions given by non-party witnesses.
During depositions, defendants, plaintiffs and witnesses give individual testimony under oath in a non-courtroom setting with a court reporter transcribing what’s said. The written transcripts can then be used in court to support or contradict additional testimony given, or used if a witness can’t be present.
In some cases, witnesses are sequestered from hearing the testimony of others to prevent them from being influenced by that testimony or trying to match it.
“We want this to be open to the public, why don’t they? Who are they trying to keep out? They don’t want the press to attend these depositions,” attorney Robert Watrous successfully argued for the co-plaintiffs, the City of Bradenton Beach and Jack Clarke.
“It’s not the general public, it’s not the citizens, it’s not even the media that we’re concerned about. It truly is non-party witnesses, somebody who would potentially be a witness,” said attorney Jodi Ruberg, representing defendant Metz.
The co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against Metz and five other members of two Bradenton Beach boards last August, alleging they violated the Florida Sunshine Law. Metz and three other defendants – Reed Mapes, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent – are former Bradenton Beach Planning and Zoning Board members. Defendants Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent are former members of the city’s Scenic WAVES Committee. All six defendants resigned after the lawsuit was filed.
The lawsuit alleges the defendants discussed past and potential future board and committee business outside of a city meeting publicly noticed by the city clerk’s office. The alleged Sunshine violations stem from a Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach meeting in July and additional email exchanges discovered later.
On April 13, Metz’s attorneys filed a motion asking the court to sequester the depositions of non-party witnesses. Non-party witnesses are those not directly named as defendants or plaintiffs.
Judge Lon Arend rejected the defense’s request to sequester witnesses. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Arend said he has some concerns about how the deposition proceedings would be handled and he noted he has the authority to limit who’s in attendance. It is not yet known if the press or public can attend the defendant depositions scheduled to begin with Metz on May 23. Arend said that question may require another ruling from him if the parties can’t agree.
Attorney’s arguments
Metz and Martin attended Wednesday’s hearing accompanied by former mayor Bill Shearon and former City Commissioner Janie Robertson. Clarke also attended the hearing.
Attorney Jim Dye represented Mapes, with Ruberg representing Metz. The other four defendants have withdrawn their legal counsel and will represent themselves.
Paralegal Michael Barfield was on hand to assist Watrous, with City Attorney Ricinda Perry serving as co-counsel.
Watrous successfully argued the defense didn’t meet the burden of proof needed to support the request to sequester, and he noted that neither he nor the defense has yet named any non-party witnesses.
Perry suggested the non-party witnesses might include herself, the city clerk and the city planner. She said as co-counsel, sequestering her from the testimony of others would prevent her from protecting her client, the city.
“The can of worms we’re opening here is daunting.”
– Robert Watrous, Attorney
Citing past cases, Arend expressed concerns about hundreds of people wanting to attend depositions and showing up in T-shirts that express support or opposition for the parties involved.
In response, Perry pointed out the four non-party attendees present: Shearon, Robertson and two newspaper reporters.
Watrous said the limited space inside the court reporters’ offices would automatically limit attendance.
Attorney Robert Watrous, paralegal Michael Barfield and City Attorney Ricinda Perry are serving as the city’s legal team. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Arend said that even if sequestered, witnesses could still be given written transcripts of others’ depositions, which are also later made public at the Manatee County Clerk of Circuit Court website.
“Are you asking that as part of my order as well?” Arend asked.
“We actually are,” Ruberg said.
Arend said he’s never had anyone come before him expressing concerns about non-party witnesses attending depositions. He asked if there was anything particular that made the defense think this was going to happen.
Ruberg said Watrous had already filed affidavits for non-party witnesses. Watrous filed affidavits on Aug. 11, the day the lawsuit was filed; the parties mentioned were the clerk, the planner and the city attorney who has since joined as co-counsel.
Watrous said he did not know who he planned to call as non-party witnesses and he’s never heard of a request like this.
“Are they going to move to exclude witnesses when nobody knows if they are or aren’t going to be witnesses? The can of worms we’re opening here is daunting,” he said.
Due to time constraints, a second hearing pertaining to the defense’s motion to compel Clarke to provide additional documents was postponed to a later date.
BRADENTON BEACH – City Commissioners want to prohibit parking garages citywide, but they don’t feel amending the city charter is the way to do it.
In other charter-related business, the commission plans to appoint a Charter Review Committee (CRC) that among other things will debate the need to hire a full-time city manager.
Parking garage
At its April 19 meeting, the commission supported Commissioner Ralph Cole’s suggestion that the land development code (LDC) and comprehensive plan need to be amended to ensure that multi-level parking garages cannot be built anywhere in Bradenton Beach. Cole said the language currently contained in the land development code and the comp plan do not mirror one another when it comes to parking garages.
City Planner Alan Garrett told commissioners the comp plan currently allows for parking garages in two of the city’s dozen or so comprehensive plan zone designations. The commission wants to change that to ensure that no multi-level parking garages can be built in the city.
The commission discussion was partly inspired by the Keep Our Residential Neighborhoods (KORN) political action committee’s efforts to place a parking garage prohibition charter amendment question on the November ballot.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry said she does not think state law allows the city charter to be used as the means to address land use issues like a parking garage. She agreed these concerns should be addressed as commission-enacted amendments to the land development code and comp plan.
City Manager?
During the April 19 meeting, some commissioners shared their thoughts on hiring a full-time city manager – another charter amendment proposed by KORN.
Cole said previous CRCs have discussed hiring a city manager but never recommended it.
“It always comes down to the budget and you’d have to fund another position. Can we afford it? Would we have to raise taxes for the manager’s position?” Cole said.
Mayor John Chappie said he prefers the city’s current weak mayor form of government because it provides equal decision-making authority for all five commission members. He feels this prevents a strong mayor or city manager from having too much influence on the decision-making process.
During public input, KORN founder and treasurer John Metz expressed support for a city manager. He feels a city with a $3 million annual budget needs a professional manager.
He suggested a city manager trained in the execution and fulfillment of contracts could have prevented the delays the city’s experiencing with getting a floating day dock installed alongside the Bridge Street Pier.
Chappie, Perry and Cole disagreed with Metz’s opinion that a city manager could have prevented the delays the city has been subjected to by its dock contractor, Technomarine.
“I think it’s running very well the way it is,” Commissioner Marilyn Maro said of the city’s current form of government.
Maro praised the monthly department head meetings that provide commissioners with updates from staff regarding their efforts to carry out the commission’s directives and she encouraged residents to attend these meetings.
Charter review committee
The city clerk’s office will accept applications for CRC members through May 7. Chappie will then nominate members for the commission’s approval. Commissioners can also recommend committee members.
The appointed committee will conduct a comprehensive review of the city charter – the legally binding document that determines how the city is governed and operated.
The CRC will be asked to review and clarify three charter amendments adopted by city voters last fall. The committee also will be asked to help better define the residency requirements placed on city commissioners and commission candidates.
The committee will have the ability to review, but not alter, the four charter amendments proposed by KORN. The committee could then propose its own amendments to address concerns raised by the KORN amendments.
The committee can also propose for commission consideration any other charter amendment the committee feels would be beneficial to the city and its citizens if supported by city voters in November.
