ANNA MARIA – The city’s new online public records portal is an option for those seeking records, not a requirement, according to city officials.
On March 3, City Clerk LeAnne Addy distributed a flyer announcing the launch of the city’s new public records portal, leading some to believe it was the only way to obtain records.
“All records requests will be done through our secure online portal beginning on March 7,” the flyer noted, while also providing information on how to access the new portal through the city’s website.
However, in order to remain compliant with state law, the city and the city clerk’s office must continue to accept public records requests through other means that include emails, phone calls and in-person requests.
During the March 24 city commission meeting, Commission Chair Carol Carter sought clarification on the new public records portal.
“There was some feedback in one of the papers,” Carter said.
“This is just an additional way to get public records,” City Attorney Becky Vose said. “It didn’t get rid of the tried and true ways that everybody’s always done in the past,”
Vose also noted the traditional means of submitting a public records request can sometimes be more difficult to track.
“It didn’t get rid of the existing system?” Commissioner Robert Kingan asked.
“It did not and it cannot,” Vose replied.
“And it hasn’t,” Addy said.
“This was not an attempt to hinder access to public records,” Mayor Dan Murphy said, adding that the intent was to ensure there’s a record of all requests received and that all requests are acknowledged.
Addy said city employees and staff members may not realize they’ve received a public records request.
“I’ve been handling public records requests for many years. The issue I see is several people requesting records from multiple employees and staff throughout the city. My recommendation is to use the portal because you can log in anytime to see where your request is. When it’s complete, you get email notification.”
Addy also addressed the online registration form required of first-time portal users.
“I understand the (state) law says you can’t ask who’s doing the request, but if there’s a payment that’s needed someone has to make a payment. If you need a simple document that I can pull up in two minutes, I’m not going to charge,” Addy said.
She noted the city doesn’t charge for records requests that take less than 30 minutes of staff time to fulfill.
MANATEE COUNTY – Private meeting notes and text messages disclosed in a public records request reveal more about County Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge’s failed efforts to terminate County Administrator Cheri Coryea.
As the newly-elected District 3 commissioner, Van Ostenbridge represents Anna Maria Island, Cortez, west Bradenton and Longboat Key.
During the Manatee County Commission’s Tuesday, Nov. 17 work session, Van Ostenbridge requested a special commission meeting on Thursday, Nov. 19. He said the purpose of that meeting was to discuss the county’s response to a potential COVID-related federal shutdown. When requesting the special meeting, Van Ostenbridge gave no indication that he also intended to propose Coryea’s termination.
With no advance notice given to the public, Van Ostenbridge then made a motion during the Nov. 19 meeting to put Coryea on notice that her termination would be discussed and voted upon on Jan. 6. Commissioners Vanessa Baugh, George Kruse and James Satcher supported the motion.
Text message records obtained as part of a public records request made by paralegal Michael Barfield reveal that Van Ostenbridge discussed the Coryea termination efforts with developer Carlos Beruff and others in advance of the special meeting at which he intended to call for Coryea’s termination.
Van Ostenbridge’s efforts to terminate Coryea came to an unexpected end on Thursday, Dec. 10, when Kruse made a motion to reconsider the Nov. 19 motion and end the Coryea termination efforts. The commission supported Kruse’s motion with a 7-0 vote.
Private meeting notes
Before the Nov. 19 special meeting took place, Van Ostenbridge requested and received a private meeting with Coryea at 7:30 a.m. that morning in Coryea’s office.
Coryea’s notes include a transcript of a voicemail message Van Ostenbridge left her and a printout of the text message exchange they had regarding the requested private meeting.
“I just wanna talk about how things are going so far and a little bit about the (special) meeting before we get there,” Van Ostenbridge said when requesting the private meeting.
According to Coryea’s handwritten notes, Van Ostenbridge began their meeting by saying, “I liked you before, when I met with you during the campaign, but when you closed on that property (Lena Road) I changed my mind. You should have waited for this new board because I had already spoke out against it and you should have stopped it.”
On Oct. 13, the previous county commission approved the $32.5 million purchase of a 161-acre property in east Manatee County at S.R. 64 and Lena Road. The closing for that sale took place on Friday, Nov. 13, four days before Van Ostenbridge, Kruse and Satcher took office.
The Lena Road property was purchased with the intent of creating a Central County Complex that provides a district office for the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office and additional facilities for the county’s Public Works Department and Utilities Department.
According to her notes, Coryea responded to Van Ostenbridge’s comment by saying, “The board (of county commissioners) took two votes on this property, both passing. I’m responsible for carrying out the directives of the board.”
Van Ostenbridge then asked about the closing date.
“Based on the decision of the board, the closing was to occur anytime between 10/4/20 and 12/16/20 – when the due diligence had been successfully completed. It was completed around Nov. 2 or 3. Property Management Department proceeded with scheduling closing,” Coryea said, according to her notes.
Van Ostenbridge asked who approved the Nov. 13 closing date.
“I did. The previous board approved this action two times and the closing occurred during their terms,” Coryea said, according to her notes.
According to Coryea’s notes, Van Ostenbridge then said, “I am here to ask you for your resignation.”
County Administrator Cheri Coryea took this note during her private meeting with Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge. – Manatee County | Submitted
In response, Coryea said, “You will be disappointed to hear I will not be submitting my resignation. I won’t be resigning.”
According to Coryea’s notes, Van Ostenbridge then shared his intentions for the Lena Road property.
“I intend to parcel out the property into small parcels and will sell them off at a loss and that will embarrass the previous board and you. I might keep a sliver for something. I have the votes,” he said, according to Coryea’s notes.
County Administrator Cheri Coryea took this note during her Nov. 19 meeting with Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge. – Manatee County | Submitted
The Florida Sunshine Law prevents city and county commissioners from privately discussing any matter that could foreseeably come before them for official action or vote.
At that time of his meeting with Coryea, Van Ostenbridge, a Realtor with Boyd Realty, had been in office for less than 48 hours and had participated in one county meeting.
According to her notes, Coryea responded to Van Ostenbridge’s Lena Road comments by saying, “I had offered to provide a full briefing to the new commission on this project and many others that the board wanted. We were instructed in Jan. 2018 by the previous board to begin looking for a large parcel to co-locate needed services closer to population growth. We briefed each board member five times since then.”
In June, the commission received a third-party appraisal that valued the Lena Road property at $18.4 million.
“The board was aware of the appraisal price that was a market appraisal targeted at housing, not public use, ” Coryea wrote in her notes.
After further discussion about the Lena Road purchase, Van Ostenbridge said, “I intend to make a motion at the meeting today to ask for you to be terminated,” according to Coryea’s notes.
County Administrator Cheri Coryea rejected Kevin Van Ostenbridge’s request for her resignation. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
According to her notes, Coryea then questioned the true intent of the private meeting.
“When you asked me for this meeting this morning you said it was about the special meeting agenda item (a federal shutdown). I prepared a motion for it. Did you need it?” Coryea said, according to her notes.
“No, I don’t believe I need anything,” Van Ostenbridge said, according to Coryea’s notes.
“So, this meeting this morning was not to talk about that?” Coryea said, according to her notes.
“I’m all set for the meeting,” Van Ostenbridge said, according to Coryea’s notes, which indicate the meeting ended at 7:48 a.m.
Van Ostenbridge responds
When contacted Friday afternoon, Van Ostenbridge was asked about his meeting with Coryea.
Regarding Coryea’s notes that state he asked her to resign, Van Ostenbridge said, “That captures the spirit of what I was saying. I told her that she knew the incoming board was adamantly against the purchase. We felt that it was a drastic waste of taxpayer money and each of us made that clear during the campaign, including in public comments during meetings.
“I told her I had lost trust and confidence in her and I asked her for her resignation. I then said I scheduled the meeting with her as a courtesy, to alert her of my intention to make the motion to terminate. I was attempting to give her an opportunity to resign and spare her and the county the indignity of the debate which was sure to follow my motion,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Van Ostenbridge was asked if he felt a new commissioner, who had been in office less than 48 hours, had the authority to ask the county administrator to resign without first discussing it with the commission as a whole during a public meeting.
“When I put my hand on the Bible, I became a full commissioner. There’s no orientation period. I was doing it as a courtesy because I had made up my mind I was going to make the motion to terminate. I officially made up my mind on Friday (Nov. 13), when the deal was closed. I had sought the counsel of many business leaders in town, as well as friends of mine, even my parents, leading up to that time. When she closed the deal on Friday, I started letting some people know that I had made up my mind,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Van Ostenbridge was asked if any of those he sought counsel from were sitting county commissioners or future county commissioners who had not yet been sworn in.
“Absolutely not. I have not committed a Sunshine violation,” he said.
When asked about his alleged intentions to sell the Lena Road property at a loss, Van Ostenbridge said, “I said that I felt there was value in the property that abutted the landfill. I told her that was the most valuable to the county and the least valuable to the open market. I wanted to keep that, but I wanted to sell off the rest because I didn’t want to be saddled with the unnecessary improvements that would be needed on the rest of the property. The county overpaid for the property, so obviously when I go to sell it I’m not going to get market value. I told her that if we sold that off it would be at a loss, and the responsibility of that loss would fall on the previous board,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Van Ostenbridge denied telling Coryea he had the votes to sell the Lena Road property, which Coryea wrote in her notes.
“I never said that. At the end of the conversation, I said maybe you have the votes, maybe I have the votes and we’ll see in a couple hours,” Van Ostenbridge said, referring to his intent to pursue Coryea’s termination.
Van Ostenbridge’s statement contrasts with Coryea’s notes, in which the alleged comment about having the votes appears in conjunction with the discussion about selling the Lena Road property.
Van Ostenbridge confirmed that he told Coryea he would seek her termination.
“I said I’d be giving her notice of a hearing for termination at the special meeting,” he said.
Van Ostenbridge texts
Late Friday afternoon, in response to his public records request, Barfield received copies of Van Ostenbridge’s text message exchanges from Nov. 3 to Nov. 20.
Barfield confirmed that developer Carlos Beruff is the “Carlos” and “CB” that appears in some of the text message exchanges Van Ostenbridge produced.
Paralegal Michael Barfield, who serves as the president of the Florida chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, is independently investigating the actions of county commissioners Kevin Van Ostenbridge, Vanessa Baugh, George Kruse and James Satcher. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
According to those records, Beruff sent Van Ostenbridge a text message at 6:51 a.m., less than an hour before his Nov. 19 private meeting with Coryea.
“Good morning you all set,” Beruff wrote.
“All set. Meeting with Cheri at 7:30,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
This is one of several text message exchanges Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge had with developer Carlos Beruff. – Michael Barfield | Submitted
On Sunday, Nov. 15, Beruff sent Van Ostenbridge a link to a Bradenton Times story that included the headline: “Are special interests gunning for County Administrator?”
That story notes Beruff and other members of the development community pushed for Lakewood Ranch Business Alliance President Dom Dimaio to succeed retiring County Administrator Ed Hunzeker in 2019, rather than Coryea.
“We have a leaker,” Van Ostenbridge wrote in response to Beruff’s text about that story.
On Tuesday, Nov. 17, as part of the same text message exchange with Beruff, Van Ostenbridge wrote, “We have a special meeting on Thursday, after the port meeting. Carol took the bait.”
That message appears to refer to acting Commission Chair Carol Whitmore supporting Van Ostenbridge’s request for a special meeting discussion about a potential federal shutdown.
On Saturday, Nov. 14, Beruff initiated a text message exchange with Van Ostenbridge that began with a link to an East County Observer story about the county’s plans to build a solid waste transfer station on the Lena Road property.
“You may have missed this last week, but it basically says that they bought something they don’t need for 17-20 years,” Beruff wrote.
“They did all they could to saddle us with this (expletive) we don’t want. At least they’re done. Nothing left for them to do,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
On Thursday, Nov. 5, Beruff sent Van Ostenbridge a text message that said, “Good morning, take a look at this and see what you think. Call me when you get a chance.”
Attached to Beruff’s message was a Microsoft Word document titled “ManCo BOCC (Board of County Commissioners).docx.” The contents of that document are not known and Barfield said he has not received it.
“That looks good. I only want to drop the mention of masks. That is too much of a 50/50 issue. Call you in a few,” Van Ostenbridge wrote in his response to Beruff.
Van Ostenbridge’s text records also include an exchange he had with someone named Bob, whose initials are BS.
“We have a special meeting on Thursday after the port meeting. Carol took the bait,” Van Ostenbridge wrote.
“I watched you. Smooth baby,” Bob replied.
“Acted like I was stumbling through it, ha-ha,” Van Ostenbridge wrote.
Barfield said he did not yet know Bob’s identity.
On the evening of Nov. 19, Van Ostenbridge received a group text message from Chad Choate, a financial advisor at the Edward Jones office in Bradenton. Choate is Facebook friends with Van Ostenbridge and has posted county commission-related comments at Van Ostenbridge’s Facebook page.
“How long has she been county admin,” Choate wrote in his text message to Van Ostenbridge.
“2 years. She’s been a county employee for over 30 years. A 30-year bureaucrat. It’s time to put a private sector person in charge,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
“Yeah, who replaces her,” Choate wrote.
“Put your name in when the spot opens up,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
Updated Nov. 23, 2020 – BRADENTON – Thursday’s Manatee County Commission discussion about potentially terminating County Administrator Cheri Coryea has triggered a public records request from Florida Sunshine Law expert Michael Barfield.
On Friday afternoon, Barfield, a paralegal, submitted individual written public records requests to county commissioners Vanessa Baugh, George Kruse, James Satcher and Kevin Van Ostenbridge. County Attorney Mickey Palmer was copied on each of the requests Barfield submitted on behalf of Sarasota-based Denovo Law Services.
The records requests seek the public records in the individual possession of Baugh, Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge. A subsequent request seeks records from former Commissioner Steve Jonsson.
On Nov. 3, Baugh was re-elected as the county’s District 5 commissioner. Kruse was elected as the at-large District 7 commissioner. Satcher was elected as the District 1 commissioner. Van Ostenbridge was elected as the District 3 commissioner, a district that encompasses Anna Maria Island, Cortez and west Bradenton.
County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh is the subject of the public records request. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The four commissioners were sworn into office on Tuesday, Nov. 17. Two days later, Van Ostenbridge initiated, with no advance public notice, a preliminary discussion seeking the termination of Coryea without cause.
At the conclusion of Thursday’s discussion, the newly-reconfigured county commission voted 4-3 in favor of putting Coryea on notice that her potential termination would be discussed at a special county commission meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 6. Baugh, Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge supported that action. Commissioners Reggie Bellamy, Misty Servia and Carol Whitmore opposed that action.
Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge initiated Thursday’s termination discussion with no advance public notice. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
During Thursday’s discussion, Bellamy said the efforts to oust Coryea appeared to be “premeditated.” Whitmore said the efforts appeared to be “orchestrated.” Servia called the Van Ostenbridge-led efforts “reckless” and “dangerous.”
Records requests
According to the public records requests: “This is a request for records pursuant to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, otherwise known as the Public Records Act of the Florida Constitution. We understand that a citizen is not required to make a written request to obtain public records under the act, but we want to be clear what we are seeking from you.”
The records requests pertain to the following records made, sent or received in connection with the transaction of official business, or the rendition of services on behalf of each of the four request recipients:
All emails sent or received from Nov. 3, 2020 to Nov. 20, 2020.
All text messages sent or received from November 3 to November 20.
All messages sent or received via any digital app or social media platform from Nov. 3 to Nov. 20.
A detailed phone log of all calls made or received between the period Nov. 3 and Nov. 20.
Commissioner James Satcher is the recipient of a public records request. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
According to the records requests, the term “record” or “public records” also includes responsive records in both digital and hard copy formats, including email, text, SMS, MMS, .doc and voicemail.
According to the requests, “This request for records further includes any responsive records sent or received by any individual or entity via any private, nongovernmental account, as well as those records maintained, stored or archived in the cloud, on a shared drive, on the Internet, via social media accounts or any other electronic device such as a cell phone, tablet, flash drive, that is capable of sending, receiving or storing digital information.”
The records requests are also directed to any individual or entity – including any other public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation or business entity – acting on their behalf of any of the records request recipients.
“If you contend that any record, or portion thereof, is exempt from inspection, please state in writing the basis for the exemption and include the applicable statutory exemption,” the records requests note.
The records requests state the requested records shall not be disposed of for a period of 30 days after the written records requests were submitted on Friday.
Commissioner George Kruse has received a public records request. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Citing Florida Statutes, the records requests state: “If a civil action is instituted within the 30-day period to enforce the provisions of this section with respect to the requested record, the custodian of public records may not dispose of the record except by order of a court of competent jurisdiction after notice to all affected parties.
“The absence of a civil action instituted does not relieve the custodian of public records of the duty to maintain the record as a public record if the record is in fact a public record subject to public inspection and copying and does not otherwise excuse or exonerate the custodian of public records from any unauthorized or unlawful disposition of such record.
“We are requesting that you notify each and every individual and entity in possession of records responsive to this request, and that all such records be preserved on an immediate basis.
“Please produce all records responsive to this request as provided by 119.12(1)(b), Fla. Statute,” the public records requests say in conclusion.
According to Barfield, the three new commissioners – Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge – became subject to the Public Records Act and the Florida Sunshine Law at the conclusion of the Nov. 3 elections.
According to Barfield, the four commissioners have until early December to fulfill the public records requests.
Recent Sunshine case
While assisting the attorneys representing the city of Bradenton Beach, Barfield recently played a significant role in the city prevailing in a Sunshine Law lawsuit that resulted in two of the six defendants paying the city $350,000 on Friday.
The $350,00 payment was partial reimbursement for the attorney fees the city incurred as a result of a civil lawsuit the city filed against six former city advisory board members in 2017.
An extensive number of emails and other records and documents Barfield obtained from the defendants and others in that case factored into the judge’s 2019 ruling that Sunshine Law violations occurred.
