BRADENTON BEACH – City officials acknowledge the city is responsible to pay former city attorney Ricinda Perry $23,782 for services she provided in September and invoiced the city for in October.
However, the mayor and city commissioners do not intend to pay the remainder of the $167,674 in bulk invoices Perry sent the city in October for services she provided dating back to January 2025.
Perry retired as city attorney on Sept. 18.
During the Feb. 19 city commission meeting, City Attorney Erica Augello was authorized to send a letter to Perry regarding the invoices in question. The letter states the recent audit of Perry’s invoices conducted by City Treasurer Shayne Thompson revealed “false or incorrect billing entries.”
According to the letter to be sent to Perry after Thursday’s meeting, her unaudited invoices totaled $167,674, the audited invoices totaled $139,685 and the resulting difference is $27,989.
In a Jan. 9 memo Augello sent Mayor John Chappie and the city commissioners, Augello stated, “The audit revealed that entries were made for services that could not have possibly occurred on the dates as indicated, that time entries for several days exceeded the number of hours in a day, that entries were not billed at the appropriate rate as agreed upon or that time entries were for unapproved non-legal services,”
The commission-authorized letter states, “The billing, as presented, has been audited and has been found to include false or incorrect billing entries. By way of example, there are a multitude of entries for discussions with staff members on weekends or other days when the staff member was not working, entries that exceed the number of hours in a day, entries that were billed for unapproved non-legal work related to permit reviews, plans reviews, etc., entries for storm-related work that were billed at higher than the negotiated $150/hour rate, entries for conversations with outside counsel that were not captured on outside counsel’s invoices, entries for completing assignments where no work product was received or otherwise not completed as billed, as well as other similar type entries.”
Ricinda Perry announced her immediate retirement on Sept. 18. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Augello referred to Perry’s existing engagement agreement with the city, which was drafted by Perry and stated her invoices would be submitted monthly and paid monthly.
“From a legal perspective, I think the city is on good footing with saying you’re not responsible for paying those invoices because she’s in breach of her own contract that she drafted,” Augello told the mayor and commissioners.
Augello added that the city does have the ability to negotiate an agreement, but reiterated, that based on the engagement agreement, the city would be able to defend any challenges from Perry in a court of law.
“I will say, I want you to keep in mind that this is a contract just like you would have with anyone else and I want you to treat it like you would any other contract,” Augello told the commission.
CITIZEN, COMMISSION COMMENTS
Two citizens spoke during public comment and they both supported strict adherence to the contract, as stated in the engagement agreement with Perry.
“My feeling is that the city attorney should stick to legal matters,” Evelyn Stob said.
“If an invoice is supposed to happen monthly, then it should be monthly,” Elayne Armaniaco said. “There’s just too much leeway given and there was certainly too much leeway given with this former city attorney.”
Mayor John Chappie agreed that the city should stick with the contract as written.
“I’m alarmed at the audit,” Commissioner Deborah Scaccianoce said. “It’s disappointing because you put your faith in your city attorney to represent the city and do the right thing and then this happens. This was a breach of trust. We trusted her. She breached that trust.”
“It’s amazing that someone would send an invoice out having spent 26.1 hours in a day. That math never added up,” Commissioner Scott Bear said. “We need to be on record that we have concerns about her invoicing and provide the opportunity to negotiate. She deserves to be paid but pay what’s realistic.”
Bear questioned a contract provision that provided a 12% fee for late payments.
Newly appointed Commissioner Robert Talham questioned the possible legal costs the city might incur if the matter is taken to court.
In response, Augello said, “If this does to go court, there is an attorney’s fee provision. If this has to be enforced in a court of law, and the city is successful, she will be responsible for paying the city’s reasonable attorney’s fees. If we lose, we will be responsible for paying her attorney’s fees.”
Augello then said, “My letter says based on the city’s contract with Ms. Perry, she is in breach because she didn’t get her invoices to the city within 30 days as required. Based on what was presented to the city, the city has the obligation to audit those invoices and make sure they are appropriate.”
BRADENTON BEACH – On Thursday, Feb. 19, the Bradenton Beach City Commission will discuss billing invoices submitted by former city attorney Ricinda Perry.
An internal audit of Perry’s invoices alleges “false or incorrect billing entries” for the period from January 2025 through September 2025.
Included in the Feb. 19 meeting packet is a Jan. 9 memo City Attorney Erica Augello sent to Mayor John Chappie, the city commissioners and City Clerk Terri Sanclemente.
“Upon receipt of the invoices, it was noted by staff that some of the entries could not possibly be correct, so an internal audit of the invoices was conducted,” Augello wrote. “The audit revealed that entries were made for services that could not have possibly occurred on the dates as indicated, that time entries for several days exceeded the number of hours in a day, that entries were not billed at the appropriate rate as agreed upon or that time entries were for unapproved non-legal services.”
Augello will request authorization from the commission on Feb. 19 to send correspondence to Perry regarding the invoices.
In a proposed draft letter to Perry that’s included the meeting packet, Augello wrote, “I have been asked to handle the matter of your invoices for city attorney services that were submitted in bulk to the city on October 23, 2025, for services spanning from January 2025 through September 2025.
“The billing, as presented, has been audited and has been found to include false or incorrect billing entries. By way of example, there are a multitude of entries for discussions with staff members on weekends or other days when the staff member was not working, entries that exceed the number of hours in a day, entries that were billed for unapproved non-legal work related to permit reviews, plans reviews, etc., entries for storm-related work that were billed at higher than the negotiated $150/hour rate, entries for conversations with outside counsel that were not captured on outside counsel’s invoices, entries for completing assignments where no work product was received or otherwise not completed as billed, as well as other similar type entries,” Augello stated in the draft letter to be reviewed by the city commission.
According to Augello’s draft letter, Perry’s unaudited invoices total $167,674 and the audited invoices total $139,685, resulting in a difference of $27,989.
Questions have been raised regarding the accuracy of Ricinda Perry’s billing invoices. City of Bradenton Beach | Submitted
Augello also wrote that according to Perry’s Jan. 25, 2023, engagement agreement, she was required to bill the city monthly.
“As you are in default of the terms of the agreement, the city has no legal obligation to pay invoices that do not conform to the terms of the agreement,” Augello stated in the draft letter. “Pursuant to the engagement agreement, the city is responsible only for the monthly billing that conforms to its terms, or for September’s invoice in the unaudited amount of $24,204.”
Augello added that while the city has concerns regarding the veracity of that September invoice, the city is outside of its 15-day window to challenge those entries.
The Thursday, Feb. 19, meeting will begin at noon in the commission chambers at 107 Gulf Drive N.
BRADENTON BEACH – Five months after former City Attorney Ricinda Perry retired, the city seeks the return of all public records still in her possession.
When Perry retired on Sept. 18, she turned over three binders of city documents, but the city does not believe that represents the full production of all public records in her possession.
“There was the demand to the former city attorney for public records,” City Attorney Erica Augello said during the Feb. 5 city commission meeting. “Under statute, she was required to do it upon resignation. After the demand, she was required to do it within 10 business days.”
City Attorney Erica Augello discussed the demand for the return of public records from former city attorney Ricinda Perry. – Leslie Lake | Sun
Augello said she believes Perry is amenable to returning the public records to the city, but she is apparently working to determine what constitutes a public record.
“She was doing a lot of business from her personal accounts, which does not make them not public record,” Augello said. “I have a phone call scheduled with her tomorrow (Feb. 6). Hopefully, we can come up with a reasonable time. If not, then I will be back before you to see what we need to do next. It might just be we need to file an action in court, which has an attorney’s fees provision in it, to compel the return of those records from a public official because those are rightfully belonging to the city.”
DEMAND LETTER
On Jan. 12, Augello sent Perry a formal demand letter which stated, in part, “This letter serves as a formal demand for the immediate return and production of all records in your possession, custody or control that constitute public records of the city of Bradenton Beach. As you are aware, Florida’s Public Records Act defines ‘public records’ broadly, including, but not limited to, all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, sound recordings, data processing software or other material regardless of physical form, characteristics or means of transmission made or received in connection with the transaction of official business.”
Augello’s letter further stated the demand includes all public records, whether maintained on personal or professional devices, accounts or platforms, including, but not limited to, emails (including attachments), text messages, messaging applications, voicemails, electronic documents, drafts, memoranda, notes and correspondence, hard copy documents and files, cloud-based storage records, records maintained on personal computers, mobile phones, tablets or external storage devices and communications with city consultants, vendors or members of the public relating to city business.
“Please return all such public records within 15 calendar days, from the date of this letter to the city clerk. Please be advised that failure or refusal to comply with the Public Records Act may subject you to statutory consequences, including but not limited to civil and criminal penalties and potential referral to the Florida Bar and the Florida Commission on Ethics,” Augello’s letter stated.
PERRY’S RESPONSE
“I intend to cooperate in good faith to ensure that any city public records not already in the city’s possession, custody or control are appropriately returned,” Perry stated in her Jan. 21 letter to Augello.
She noted that prior to resigning, she presented three binders of relevant work, communications and draft documents to the city.
“Your demand, as written, presents two threshold issues that must be addressed before any meaningful production can occur: (1) the letter’s arbitrary 15-day deadline and (2) the scope of the request,” Perry wrote.
Perry stated any good faith retrieval and return process requires a reasonable amount of time to identify records, segregate city records from non-city records and ensure records are returned without disclosure of non-responsive or personal materials.
“Accordingly, to the extent the city expects my office to perform extensive search, retrieval, compilation and production efforts responsive to this demand, the city will be assessed a special service charge as authorized by section 119.07(4)(d), Florida Statutes,” Perry wrote. “Before undertaking any unusually time-intensive collection and production work, I will provide a written estimate of the anticipated special service charge and will require written confirmation that the city agrees to pay that charge.”
Perry said she has retained paralegal Michael Barfield, of Denovo Law Services, to assist in the production of materials. She directed future communications be sent to Barfield.
AUGELLO’S RESPONSE
Augello said she reviewed the three binders Perry referenced in her letter and sent the following response to Perry on Jan. 30: “The contents of these binders is not consistent with the breadth of this definition (by statute),” Augello wrote, noting that the binder contents do not include emails, text messages or notes.
Augello’s letter also stated Perry has a statutory obligation to return all public records to the city.
“Under the law, you were required to deliver them to the city within the 10 days allotted in the statute. At this point, you unlawfully possess public records, as you have admitted in your response that you have such public records in your care, custody and control,” Augello wrote. “I would suggest you either seek the advice of counsel on this matter or return the public records in your possession immediately.”
Augello stated Perry is responsible for returning all public records regardless of the scope or burden. She also stated the city will not be paying any records retrieval fees and Perry does not have the authority to charge such fees.
“I think you have misconstrued the demand for the return of public records to the agency to which they belong with a request for public records to an agency which maintains such records,” Augello wrote. “The city is demanding you, as former city attorney, return the records in your possession that belong in its possession as public records, as is required by Florida law.”
Augello closed her letter by stating, “The city demands that you return the public records immediately. Absent such production, the city is prepared to avail itself of all available legal remedies. Please govern yourself accordingly.”
Following her Feb. 6 phone call to Perry, Augello sent The Sun an email that said, “She was very accommodating and reasonable. She indicated she has many records but needs to review them to determine if they are public records.”
BRADENTON BEACH – Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) members discussed hiring a separate CRA attorney at an Oct. 20 meeting after learning that the city could be out of compliance with statutory requirements.
CRA Chair Scott Bear, Police Chief John Cosby and city Treasurer Shayne Thompson attended a Florida Redevelopment Association meeting from Oct. 14-17 in West Palm Beach.
“First and probably foremost, one of the things they told us is it is probably not a good idea, in fact in one session, it was also suggested that it was illegal, to have the city attorney be the CRA attorney,” Bear said. “So, we need to look for a CRA attorney through Trask. My understanding is they do have a CRA attorney who can help us, so we need to engage that person really quickly.”
The CRA board discussed compliance with statutory requirements at the Oct. 20 meeting. – Leslie Lake | Sun
The city has retained the Trask Daignault LLC law firm on an interim basis with Erica Augello as lead attorney. Retired City Attorney Ricinda Perry formerly represented both the city and the CRA.
“We’re finding out that we need specific knowledge attorneys for certain things,” Cosby said. “One size fits all is out the window, so I 100% agree with chairman Scott, we have to get this person on as fast as possible. I asked Terri (City Clerk Terri Sanclemente) while we were there to call the firm, and she spoke with Erica.”
Cosby said the Trask firm has an attorney that specializes in CRAs and expressed an interest in meeting with them once the agreement with the firm is signed, which was scheduled at the Oct. 23 commission meeting.
Bear said that there were two statutory updates, one in 2019 and one in 2024, that impact the CRA board.
“We need to do a couple things,” Bear said. “The update required that as of Dec. 1 this year every CRA must submit a status report. We’re going to need to work with the CRA attorney, once that person is under contract to get on that report, because we’ve got about a month to put it together and then brought back to this board for approval.”
Bear said the 2024 update stipulates there cannot be events in the CRA without a specific plan.
“The other thing is, during an event, you have to have a table set up with a handout that you provide to people that are there explaining how the event helps with the redevelopment of the CRA,” Bear said. “So, we’re going to have to pretty quickly work with someone to get that together and then figure out how we’re going to man a booth and do the handouts and explain it. That’s going to be a big issue for events within the CRA going forward. It could result in some really ugly actions if it were proven not to be consistent with that statute.
“One of the other things that I took away was in 2019 there was legislation that said every CRA will sunset in 2039 regardless of what is in the plan,” Bear said. “So, our current CRA plan has us going into 2046 or 47. That doesn’t matter, the legislation sunsets us in 2039, unless and this was the thing I took away, unless we do a resolution from the CRA to the city commission requesting approval to extend the sunset beyond 2039. So, we’re going to need to get that resolution done quickly.”
Bear said the legislation set a date of March 1, 2026 to have the resolution approved and in place.
“The last thing I took away is, there are very specific things that need to be included in the CRA plan and also on the website,” Bear said. “We do have a CRA page on the city website, so we’re OK there. One of the first things I think we need to do is get the CRA attorney to review our plan and make sure it’s complying with the legislation.”
“I think the three of us have a clear path forward, we just have to get the right people into place and move forward,” Cosby said.
“Some of the presenters have availed themselves to help us,” Thompson said. “One had been the CRA director in Palmetto, and Delray Beach has expressed an interest to help us as we move forward.”
The Bradenton Beach CRA district extends from the south side of the Cortez Bridge to the southernmost property lines along Fifth Street South.
BRADENTON BEACH – The city commission unanimously approved Mayor John Chappie’s recommendation that Erica Augello as lead attorney and the Trask Daigneault LLP law firm be appointed as interim city attorney for up to six months.
Augello, also the city attorney for Holmes Beach, did not attend the Oct. 23 commission meeting.
City officials sought an interim city attorney to serve before they choose a permanent replacement for retired City Attorney Ricinda Perry.
Following an interview by commissioners at an Oct. 7 emergency special work meeting, Chappie made the recommendation to contract with the Clearwater-based Trask Daigneault LLP law firm with Augello as lead city attorney.
“In going through the proposal material, you have the whole gamut of areas of law that we need help on,” Chappie said. “I think it will be very beneficial not to have just one attorney but to have a team.”
Augello said at that interview that she would be the first point of contact and the person who attends city meetings.
Commissioners questioned Augello and attorney Robert Eschenfelder at the Oct. 7 meeting about topics that included potential conflicts between Holmes Beach and Bradenton Beach, Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) experience, fees and the role of city attorney.
“I’m not entirely comfortable with Erica because of her role in Holmes Beach,” Vice-Mayor Deborah Scaccianoce said at the Oct. 23 meeting. “I do like the law firm, but we do have six months to work through this and make sure everything goes smoothly, so I’m open minded.”
Chappie said he thought there could possibly be some issues at times.
“If any issue arises and you have that concern, I would identify it as soon as you can and bring it up to Miss Augello and I’m sure she will respond appropriately to the concern,” said attorney Robert Lincoln, who has been representing Bradenton Beach since Perry’s retirement.
BRADENTON BEACH – Holmes Beach City Attorney Erica Augello will serve as the Bradenton Beach city attorney on an interim basis for up to six months or until a permanent replacement for retired City Attorney Ricinda Perry is selected.
Following an interview process by commissioners at an Oct. 7 emergency special work meeting, Mayor John Chappie made the recommendation to contract with the Clearwater-based Trask Daignault LLP law firm with Augello as primary city attorney.
“In going through the proposal material, you have the whole gamut of areas of law that we need help on,” Mayor John Chappie said. “I think it will be very beneficial not to have just one attorney but to have a team.”
“The way that our firm works, the city attorney is a charter position, so you would have a named city attorney. In this case the proposal names me as the city attorney,” Augello said. “I’ll be the first point of contact. I will be the person that shows up at all your meetings.”
Commissioners questioned Augello and attorney Robert Eschenfelder about topics that included potential conflicts between Holmes Beach and Bradenton Beach, Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) experience, fees and the role of city attorney.
“In my capacity as city attorney for Holmes Beach, I have worked with the former city attorney, Ricinda (Perry), as well as some of the staff when there are issues that come up to craft interlocal agreements through the hurricanes,” Augello said. “While I do serve as city attorney of Holmes Beach, I’m very much aware that every city is unique.”
Eschenfelder said the law firm serves 14 municipalities, including four beach cities in Pinellas County, and he serves as village attorney for village of Estero and town attorney for the towns of Redington Beach and Redington Shores. He was with the Manatee County Attorney’s office for 16 years.
Commissioners questioned attorneys Erica Augello and Robert Eschenfelder, right. – Leslie Lake | Sun
Commissioner Scott Bear asked how any potential disputes between Bradenton Beach and Holmes Beach would be handled.
“If there comes to pass a time when Bradenton Beach needs to sue one of its neighbors for some reason, there obviously will be a conflict so conflict counsel would need to be picked for that one thing,” Eschenfelder said. “We were the city attorney to Tarpon Springs, they have a CRA. We handle conflict for the city of Bradenton CRA board, so we do have in-house experience.”
Augello said that happens very infrequently.
Bear asked about the attorneys’ familiarity with grant applications.
“If I do get involved with the grant applications, it’s very rare,” Augello said. “Our position is we’re not drafting the grant applications for you, but we can certainly help as much as is necessary until you get to the point where you’re able to do that on your own.”
Commissioner Ralph Cole stated that Bradenton Beach uses department heads to lead projects, which has included Perry.
“Our positions are to advise; we will never be the final decision makers on things. If it’s from a legal point of view, 100%, but if it’s a purely staff issue, I have no problem saying this is not my position, let me point you in the direction of where you may get assistance on that,” Augello said. “Our role as attorneys and charter officials is fairly narrow. If I’m doing more than giving you legal advice, in my opinion, I’m not doing my job properly and I’m doing you a disservice.”
Cole asked about the firm’s fees.
“We have specialized skills that other municipal firms don’t have. We find that our $285 rate is cost effective for the quality of what you’re getting,” Augello said.
“One of the things you had with your previous attorney, very likely she had to do a lot more work to come up with whatever work product she came up with, whereas we share our work product,” Eschenfelder said.
“I do want to say as diplomatically as I can, when you look at the spend that this city has had for a city attorney over the prior years as I understand it, your city attorney became the city manager in many ways, and billed you attorney time for that,” Eschenfelder said. “We are not going to be your city manager. I think it’s a dangerous role for your lawyer to be so involved. Because if a lawsuit happens, that lawyer is going to be potentially named as a defendant, and won’t be able to represent you, so we intend, if you retain us, to draw a real distinction.”
“I bet you next year at this time you will have spent less on lawyer fees because we confine ourselves to what we’re supposed to be doing,” he said.
A Request for Proposal (RFP) for a permanent city attorney will be issued toward the end of the six-month interim period. Augello said her firm will submit a proposal for the permanent city position.
“I think we heard a lot of great things that we needed to hear today, particularly not getting out of your lanes and that’s key because it’s so easy to slip and that’s what’s happened over the decades,” Chappie said.
Augello said one of the first things she would do is schedule meetings with staff and commissioners to learn what issues are facing the city.
“I am all for a firm, I have been asking for this for quite some time, especially over the last couple of years,” Police Chief John Cosby said.
City Clerk Terri Sanclemente said, “We need more input with different specialties and different attorneys. I think it would be beneficial for our city.”
The city charter states that the mayor nominates the city attorney.
“The mayor can make that nomination informally, if it is the consensus of the commission to move forward with that,” said Robert Lincoln, who is temporarily serving as city attorney. “I can prepare a resolution for the meeting on the 16th that will recite the mayor has made the nomination and the resolution is to implement it by the commission’s approval of appointment of the firm as the interim attorneys until such time as the city commission makes an appointment for a permanent city attorney.”
BRADENTON BEACH – City officials are seeking an interim city attorney prior to choosing a permanent replacement for former City Attorney Ricinda Perry, who retired on Sept. 18.
Commissioners discussed options at their Oct. 18 meeting and were advised by attorney Robert Lincoln, who has previously done work for the city.
“Given my scheduled and other commitments, I’m not in a position to take over and give you what you need as interim city attorney,” Lincoln said. “You will end up going to an RFP (Request for Proposal) and do a comprehensive search to get a city attorney and I think you should take your time.”
Lincoln recommended interim support of an experienced attorney as the commission goes through the process of determining a permanent replacement for Perry.
“I got the go-ahead from Mayor Chappie to contact a few people and try to come back with at least two individuals or firms that would be willing to serve as interim city attorney that I knew of personally or by reputation and feel comfortable recommending to you,” he said.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry read aloud her resignation statement on Sept. 18. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Lincoln suggested scheduling a work meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 7 for commissioners to meet with his recommended attorneys.
“Erica Augello, who is currently city attorney of Holmes Beach is one and she’s part of Trask Daigneault Law Firm. They do municipal work, that’s their focus,” Lincoln said. “The other person is Regina Kardash. She’s been the town attorney for Indian Shores and Redington Beach. She’s had a lot of experience with small coastal communities.”
Rates for Trask Daigneault are $280 per hour and Kardash is $250 per hour for regular services and $350 per hour for litigation.
“I went online, and the Trask firm is all municipal. I think they represent about 14 municipalities,” Chappie said. “I’ve talked to the mayor of Holmes Beach and they seem to think the world of Erica and the firm and everything they’ve done in legal issues. I also called the mayor of Anna Maria and the firm that represents them is the Voss law firm. Becky Voss seem very qualified as well.”
The name of attorney Robert Eschenfelder of Trask Daigneault was also mentioned, Chappie said.
“I’m very familiar with members of the Trask law firm, especially Rob Eschenfelder. I worked very closely with him at Manatee County,” Vice Mayor Deborah Scaccianoce said. “He’s outstanding and I know Trask has been very successful in lawsuits that have been lodged against Holmes Beach.”
Lincoln said Augello is the person he spoke to and she is indicating she would be responding for the firm.
“It might make sense for her to take it on,” Lincoln said. “Let’s just say the potential other kinds of issues that would show up are dealing with potentially different responses to the government or legislature on the consolidation issue or negotiating an interlocal agreement.”
Lincoln said the firms that are likely to bid for the city business on a permanent basis would probably include Trask Daigneault, the Dickman firm from Naples and the Voss firm.
“I recommend to come back on the 16th (the next regular city commission meeting) with a resolution to appoint an interim city attorney for a period of six months or until you appoint a complete city attorney,” Lincoln said. “That’s because the city attorney’s job, even if interim, is still a charter position and technically it should be filled by a majority vote of the commission.”
Commissioner Scott Bear questioned who Trask is going to recommend and expressed concern about potential conflicts if Augello, who represents Holmes Beach, is appointed.
Chappie said he and Police Chief John Cosby met with the principal partner at the Trask firm.
“I think at least three of the members of their firm I would be very comfortable with in dealing with city business,” Chappie said.
Lincoln said he would represent the city at the Oct. 16 meeting and would continue to handle city land use and planning and zoning issues for as long as he is needed.
Commissioners reached a consensus to hold a special meeting with Augello and Eschenfelder on Tuesday, Oct. 7 at 10 a.m.
“Then we can plan to set a final decision for the 16th depending on what comes out of that meeting,” Lincoln said.
BRADENTON BEACH – City Attorney Ricinda Perry maintained at a Sept. 16 work meeting that she was not provided proper notice or adequate time to prepare a response to allegations that she had named Drift-In owner Derek Williams as the source of a violation complaint against a neighboring business.
The meeting was called to discuss “City Attorney Performance” based on reports that Perry named Williams as having made a complaint to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) against the Anna Maria Oyster Bar (AMOB) for three over-water tiki structures. Williams subsequently made a public records request to the agency and the response from FDEP was that there was no complaint filed, instead, the violation was seen during a routine inspection for the city’s submerged land lease renewal.
“At the most recent meeting (Sept. 4) I addressed the commission and more specifically Attorney Perry about the accusation that ‘Derek Williams filed a complaint with the Florida DEP about the city pier,’ Williams wrote in a Sept. 9 email to Mayor John Chappie and Police Chief John Cosby.
Williams included the email response from FDEP Public Information Specialist Brian Humphreys, which stated, “I’m in receipt of your request for public records regarding 200 Bridge Street, Bradenton Beach, FL. I checked with our staff who advised we are unaware of any complaints received for that site, so I have no complaint records to share with you.”
That correspondence triggered the Sept. 16 meeting.
The Bradenton Beach City Commission discussed the possibility of dismissing the city attorney. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“I wanted to bring this before the commission to see what kind of direction, to see what your questions are for Mr. Lincoln,” Chappie said. “We have the backup material that has been provided from the meeting on Sept. 4, we have the email from Mr. Williams on Sept. 9 and we will be bringing into the record the public comment from Mr. (John) Horne.”
Attorney Robert Lincoln spoke on behalf of the city at the Sept. 16 meeting. He referenced an email Perry sent to Chappie on Sept. 15.
Serving as special counsel to the city, attorney Robert Lincoln said the city doesn’t need to show cause to dismiss a charter official. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
That email stated in part: “The notice for this meeting was posted on Friday afternoon, Sept. 12, 2025. There is no stated emergency necessitating an expedited meeting.”
She noted that the Sunshine Law requires that meetings of collegial public bodies be open to the public and preceded by reasonable notice.
“Last minute Friday notice for a meeting for two business days later concerning the performance of a charter officer does not satisfy those standards,” Perry wrote, and requested that the meeting be rescheduled with “reasonable advance notice and an agenda that identifies the specific topics to be discussed.”
“Should the meeting proceed as scheduled, I object to proceeding on the current notice and reserve all rights and remedies available under Florida law,” Perry wrote.
Lincoln said there are cases in which 72 hours of weekend notice of a special meeting are sufficient.
“To the extent that you have a workshop today to discuss her performance, I don’t think there is any question that was adequately noticed,” he said.
Lincoln said the notice issue could be subject to challenge and recommended that if the commission chose to take formal action, it might be better done at a later meeting.
“I think it would address the issues Ms. Perry raised not only on the Sunshine Law, but on the question of fairness,” Lincoln said. “The commission by majority vote can terminate her but can make that decision any time. I think that the agenda that the mayor laid out provides for a workshop discussion.”
Perry speaks
“Mayor and commission, I’m not going to regurgitate the correspondence that’s in your file. I have retained Michael Barfield, who is a pre-eminent expert on Sunshine Law and public records. When I generated that correspondence it was after conferring with Mr. Barfield,” Perry said.
She said she and Barfield agreed that it would be improper to proceed at the Sept. 16 meeting.
“What the city has always done is take the strongest position on transparency possible, has always taken the most cautious approach as possible when it comes to public meetings and public records,” Perry said. “I would expect that this proceeding for someone who is in the 21st year of service to the public as a charter official to have that same measure.”
She said it was unreasonable to provide her with just two days to respond to the allegations and work with Barfield to produce an adequate response.
“To parade me in front of the public, in my opinion it’s not just my rights that I’m asking the city to protect, but it’s future department heads and government officials. They’re entitled to more than two business days to have a clear and open discussion that the public is entitled to,” Perry said. “I’m sure everybody wants to hear both sides of what’s going on. In my opinion (the newspapers) saying there is going to be a meeting, that is not sufficient notice.”
Perry said she deserves an opportunity to adequately put together the records that are needed and was not prepared to address the allegations in a substantive fashion.
“I have hired an expert to do that, and I would like an opportunity to make my case,” Perry said. “My notice was the same notice the public received, an agenda packet. How is that reasonable?”
Public comment
A letter in support of Perry from AMOB CEO John Horne was read into the record.
The letter stated in part: “I wish to extend my deepest appreciation for the tireless efforts of our city attorney. Her leadership and commitment during the recovery effort for Bradenton Beach residents and merchants cannot be overstated.”
The positioning of the Anna Maria Oyster Bar’s small tiki structures prompted a FDEP violation letter. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“I just want to say that it’s very discouraging that we’re to this point,” said Helena Williams, co-owner of the Drift-In. “One thing we noticed early on is the uncanny way local business and property owners are pitted against each other.
“Lawyers are to be held to a higher standard,” Williams continued. “Ethics and morals matter. There is a reason we are being dragged into this. We’ve asked some tough questions. We deserve honest answers. Help us remove our doubt and stop the lies.”
Gayle Luper, owner of Bungalow Beach Resort, said Perry continued to be involved in her dispute with the city despite Lincoln being appointed to conduct the hearing for Luper’s petition to allow resort fee-based parking.
“For the city to move forward, Ms. Perry’s role should end. I’m asking you to terminate her,” Luper said.
Drift-In owner Derek Williams mentioned the city attorney’s recent comments about a FDEP violation letter. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“I don’t understand why I’ve been treated the way I’ve been,” Derek Williams said. “This is damaging and defaming to me and my family and the things we’re trying to do.”
Longtime Bradenton Beach resident Jim Hassett expressed his support and appreciation for the city attorney. – Joe Hendricks.
Ryan Davis and Jim Hassett spoke in support of Perry and her efforts following the hurricanes.
Commission comments
“What she’s done for the businesses and the city I would give her an A+,” Commissioner Jan Vosburgh said.
“She has the right to defend herself or to clear her name,” Vice-Mayor Deborah Scaccianoce said. “Any decision we make should be an informed decision, not a one-sided decision. I don’t have any documentation to negate or support anything. It’s not fair to Derek and what he’s told us and it’s certainly not fair to Miss Perry.”
Commissioner Scott Bear said Perry has done great work for the city after the hurricanes.
“We have information that was provided that looks pretty damning, but I honestly don’t think providing two days’ notice for Ricinda to properly provide a response is enough, so I don’t think we should be making any decisions today,” Bear said. “What I’d like to understand is who Ricinda talked to at DEP. I’d like to talk to those people to find out what the conversations were. I’d prefer that she be given time to provide a response.”
Commissioner Ralph Cole said more information is needed.
“I have no information for the reason for being here, other than one letter and the minutes of the meeting, which don’t accuse one particular person of anything,” Cole said. “The minutes say somebody or someone, there’s no name mentioned. I think everybody has the right to defend themselves, one side or the other and to see exactly why someone wants me to fire the city attorney. I would agree we need to prolong this.”
Chappie said he agreed with the commissioners and said individual rights need to be protected.
“I agree we need to give her more time,” Chappie said. “It’s tough. I know it’s tearing Ricinda apart and it’s tearing the city apart. We can set a time for the next meeting.”
No meeting date has yet been set.
The meeting video can be viewed in its entirety here.
BRADENTON BEACH – After Drift-In bar owner Derek Williams was named by City Attorney Ricinda Perry as the source of a Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) violation complaint against the Anna Maria Oyster Bar (AMOB), he made a public records request to the agency to clear his name.
In response to Williams’ request for information, an FDEP spokesperson confirmed there were no complaints on record and that the violation had been discovered during a routine inspection for the renewal of the city’s submerged land lease at the Bradenton Beach Pier, adjacent to the city-owned building at 200 Bridge St. that AMOB leases from the city.
The Sept. 9 email to Williams from FDEP Public Information Specialist Brian Humphreys stated, “I’m in receipt of your request for public records regarding 200 Bridge Street, Bradenton Beach, FL. I checked with our staff who advised we are unaware of any complaints received for that site, so I have no complaint records to share with you.
“Our staff conducted a compliance inspection for the state lands lease renewal as it was due to expire. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is required to inspect leased sites as part of the renewal process. During the inspection non-compliance was observed.”
On June 16, FDEP had sent a letter to the city which read in part, “FDEP compliance team conducted an inspection on 5/27/2025 for a (sovereign submerged land) lease renewal. It was noted that added over-water structures were seen at that inspection. Tiki hut structures were added on the docking structures, and the roof structures appear to hang beyond the docking structure footprint.”
FDEP requested the city remove the three tiki structures located on the south side of the AMOB outdoor dining area.
During public comment at a Sept. 4 Bradenton Beach City Commission meeting, Williams criticized Perry for allegedly telling the owner and manager of AMOB that he filed the FDEP complaint.
“I had a local merchant come to me in the last week and tell me Ms. Perry had spoken directly to the owner and the manager of the business and informed them that I had personally reported them for certain legal issues, which I’m 1,000% sure I did not do,” Williams said on Sept. 4. “I got direct phone calls from those people; they doubled down and verified it was Ricinda.”
“I was advised that a complaint was filed with the DEP by an individual from Drift-In because of the tiki roof (at AMOB) and they wondered if the city had gone through everything they were forced to go through,” Perry said at the Sept. 4 meeting.
With the results of the FDEP public records request in hand, Williams sent the following email to Mayor John Chappie and Police Chief John Cosby: “Below is the response I got back from Florida DEP in regards to the accusations made. As you can see from public records, I did not and have not reported anyone despite the accusations from City Attorney Perry. Due to recent events I chose to address her at the most recent City Commission meeting in the public forum. Otherwise, it seems I will continue to find my good name being smeared.”
“At the most recent meeting I addressed the commission and more specifically Attorney Perry about the accusation that ‘Derek Williams filed a complaint with the Florida DEP about the city pier.’ Perry immediately reacted and almost jumped out of her seat to defend her position and supposed ‘proof’ that I made the alleged call to Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Clearly the response below from DEP shows that no complaint ever existed per state/public records,” Williams’ email stated.
Williams stated in his email to the city that he also reached out to the West Bradenton fire marshal as they had previously spoken about the Drift-In AMI Tiki Bar. Williams stated the fire marshal confirmed their conversation was a “nonevent” and he had never reported anything about their conversations to the state.
“That leaves me once again bewildered and frustrated that this small local government contracted representative (Perry) continues to be unable to communicate in a civil manner. All signs point towards a different agenda for the businesses and property owners in Bradenton Beach. We deserve to know why,” Williams’ email stated.
Williams asked Chappie and Cosby to share the email with Bradenton Beach commissioners.
“They deserve a better understanding of the person that they are relying on for legal guidance and city affairs,” Williams stated.
Chappie did not respond to The Sun’s Sept. 10 request for comment.
“City Attorney Performance” will be the topic of a Bradenton Beach City Commission work meeting discussion on Tuesday, Sept. 16 at 10:30 a.m. The meeting packet that references the single agenda item pertains to the FDEP violation letter that Perry alleged was the result of a complaint made by Williams.
Open to the public, the meeting will be held in the Katie Pierola Commission Chambers at 107 Gulf Drive.
BRADENTON BEACH – Drift-In bar owner Derek Williams denied filing a complaint with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) about the Anna Maria Oyster Bar’s (AMOB) outdoor tiki structures.
During public comment at the Sept. 4 Bradenton Beach City Commission meeting, Williams criticized City Attorney Ricinda Perry for allegedly telling someone he filed the FDEP complaint.
“I had a local merchant come to me in the last week and tell me Ms. Perry had spoken directly to the owner and the manager of the business and informed them that I had personally reported them for certain legal issues, which I’m 1,000% sure I did not do,” Williams said. “I’m a small business owner trying to do business, trying to rally businesses and be positive in this community. I really don’t appreciate it. I got direct phone calls from those people; they doubled down and verified it was Ricinda. I’m sure she won’t look me in the eye.”
“I’m absolutely happy to look you in the eye,” Perry said.
Drift-In owner Derek Williams denied the city attorney’s claim that he filed a complaint about a neighboring business. – Leslie Lake | Sun
“It’s unfortunate; and it still feels to me that big business wants to come in and push out small business. These people are all trying to do the right thing, as am I, so feel free to respond to me,” Williams said.
“This is not a back and forth. This is public comment,” Mayor John Chappie said.
“You tell me the appropriate venue for us to have a conversation,” Williams answered. “I’m used to having conversations, not having these ridiculous spats and pointing fingers back and forth. That’s unsettling to me.”
Williams left the meeting prior to the agenda item discussion about the city’s sovereign submerged land lease for the state-owned land under and around the Bradenton Beach Pier, which is adjacent to the city-owned building at 200 Bridge Street AMOB leases from the city. Earlier this year, three small tiki structures were constructed over the outdoor dining tables along the south side of AMOB’s outdoor dining area.
“I was advised that a complaint was filed with the DEP by an individual from Drift-In because of the tiki roof (at AMOB) and they wondered if the city had gone through everything they were forced to go through,” Perry said.
On June 16, FDEP sent a letter to the city which read in part: “FDEP compliance team conducted an inspection on 5/27/2025 for a (sovereign submerged land) lease renewal. It was noted that added over-water structures were seen at that inspection. Tiki hut structures were added on the docking structures and the roof structures appear to hang beyond the docking structure footprint. These structures are non-water dependent and modified without authorization. Over-water dining is demonstrated on the lease survey in a specific location as ‘Covered Eating Area.’ At the time of the inspection, over-water dining appears to be occurring outside of that area.”
FDEP requested the city remove the added structures: “Remove modifications and return to pre-existing authorized conditions and footprint. If you would like to keep modifications, you would need to apply. Please note, the activities may not be permissible due to grandfathered activities,” the letter says.
The FDEP letter also stated, “As this new structure is not within the original survey that was previously authorized, the 2020 State Lands Lease is attached for your convenience. Once it is removed, provide photo documentation of the removal and move forward with the State Lands Lease renewal. If you would like to keep modifications, you would need to apply.”
Regarding the city’s response, Perry said “We had to pay for a submerged land survey, we have to go through the application process and we have to go through a temporary use permit through the FDEP and then go to the board of trustees to resolve the little thatched roofs that Mr. (John) Horne put on the railing. I relayed that information to Mr. Horne and I just wanted you to know I have that nearly resolved. They are planning in December to take our sovereign submerged land lease before the board of trustees to get it approved. “
Perry said she will make sure the county’s Gulf Islands Ferry water taxi operations are included in the submerged land lease too: “I’ve already had these discussions to have the ability to regulate vessels that come up and use the floating dock so we have some teeth behind what we say people can and cannot do in that area. That’s all going into the application.”
Perry said a previous city commission determined that if AMOB wanted to make the improvements and something was found that violated state or local law, AMOB would incur the cost of defending that.
“Mr. Horne has made a number of calls to FDEP in Tallahassee to assist me in trying to get this moving forward, however the city is going to be out the cost of the survey, which is required,” Perry said.
Perry said AMOB should pay for the survey, or reimburse the city for those costs, according to the conditions included in the city commission’s original approval.
Regarding the submerged land lease, Commissioner Ralph Cole asked if the city would have control over commercial boats using the city docks and using that as their business address.
“I don’t think the DEP would have an issue with that because the city of Bradenton Beach would own the submerged land lease,” Perry said. “Without an individual having some kind of lease on that property, they can’t claim that as their business address.”
Vice-Mayor Deborah Scaccianoce asked for clarification on the source of the complaint to FDEP.
“Someone complained to DEP about AMOB’s tikis to see if they had to go through the same hoops that the Drift-In had to go through?” Scaccianoce asked.
Scaccianoce was referring to the Drift-In tiki hut replacement approved by former Building Official Darin Cushing after the 2024 hurricanes. That project was placed on hold on Jan. 16 when Perry told city commissioners the permit approval should not have been issued based on factors that included city-owned easements on the property and the larger size of the new tiki structure.
“That’s what started this whole adventure with the submerged land leases?” Scaccianoce asked.
“John Horne asked me how did the DEP know and where did this come from? So, I asked the question and that’s what I was told,” Perry said.
Cole said the complaint could have come from anyone.
“They specifically referenced somebody from the Drift-In,” Perry said.
“There were a lot of customers and employees of the Drift that were very upset so it could have been anyone,” Scaccianoce said.
BRADENTON BEACH – Mayor John Chappie, city commissioners and Police Chief John Cosby responded to criticism of post-hurricane invoices submitted by City Attorney Ricinda Perry at an Aug. 21 commission meeting, defending both the expenditures and Perry herself.
Cosby, serving as director of public works after Hurricane Helene hit the city in September 2024, asked Perry to assist with emergency operations at a FEMA-reimbursable rate of $150 per hour in addition to Perry’s FEMA-reimbursable hurricane-related legal rate of $220 per hour.
The city was flooded with up to 4 feet o f water after Helene swept past Anna Maria Island in the Gulf of Mexico. Damage included Gulf Drive being left covered in sand and impassable, with many ground-floor buildings filled with several feet of sand, no electricity and debris preventing access to many structures.
“I’m sure you’re aware of the recent media concerns and issues that had been brought forward,” Mayor John Chappie said, referring to an editorial in the Aug. 20 issue of The Islander newspaper criticizing Perry’s invoices for November and December 2024 totaling $91,050 for post-hurricane work.
Perry said her obligation is to the city.
“You (the city) are my client. I answer to you. I don’t answer to anybody else,” she said. “You hold me accountable. I have nothing to hide and I’m proud of the work that we did and I stand behind everything I’ve billed to the city.”
Perry said she did what Cosby asked her to do and fully documented her invoices.
“I worked with our contractor that submits these costs to FEMA,” Perry said. “Hopefully FEMA will approve all but 12.5% of these charges that are in front of you for my hurricane work, so the taxpayers are not exposed to this bill.”
Perry said there are many layers of oversight to the FEMA-related billing.
“It goes through the FEMA review process, and I think even the county or state has some review and oversight for our expenditures that go in for FEMA reimbursement,” Perry said. “Then on top of that it goes on a public agenda to be vetted by the public and vetted by you, the client, the elected officials. Staff looks at all of this.
“You were operating under a state of emergency and in a lot of respects the media has come out and said they have a vote of no confidence in the services that were rendered on behalf of the city by me,” she said.
“You can see the detail I put in my invoices. I don’t simply say ‘showed up at work.’ ” Perry said. “There were days I slept in my car at the police department to keep things going. Chief was charged in this instance with assembling a team to respond and get the community back in working order. And the question that largely needs to be answered is, did we succeed? Did Chief succeed in getting the city back open and running? You got the results that were needed.”
Perry’s invoice runs from Nov. 1 through Dec. 19 2024 and covers such items as attending daily briefings; meetings with staff, neighborhood and business owners and fire district personnel; conducting site visits to affected infrastructure; meeting with building owners regarding rebuilding requirements and FEMA compliance; drafting contracts for debris removal; building department reorganization and managing public outreach, to name a few.
Chappie said all contract invoices over $2,000 must be submitted to the commission for review and are public record.
“As you are aware, I lost my right-hand man,” Cosby said. “With him being gone and not having another public works director to assist in this I reached out to Ricinda. I needed somebody that quick on their feet, educated, able to read contracts, RFPs, everything else that I knew was going to have to be put together to move this forward.”
Cosby said he was left with two choices – to ask Perry to help or hire a consulting firm at the cost of roughly $350 per hour per person for up to five people.
“The average consultant fee for what I was going to have her do for FEMA guidelines is $150,” Cosby said. “That’s why I came to the commission and said whatever she’s doing that’s not attorney-related I need you to approve the cost of $150 an hour. We ran that through FEMA, and they were comfortable with that and that is still moving forward.”
Cosby noted that Bradenton Beach was the hardest-hit government entity in Manatee County after Hurricane Helene.
“We had not just damage to our buildings, we have infrastructure damage that’s being repaired, there was no other way to do it, there was no one else to do it,” Cosby said. “There’s two of us, myself and Terri (City Clerk Terri Sanclemente.) She was handling all the insurance issues, and you have to remember we still had to do our regular jobs. I still had to do payroll; scheduling and I had to guide the public works department.”
Cosby said he was working 16-18 hour days after the hurricane, sometimes being called back in the middle of the night for emergencies such as a diesel fuel spill.
“It’s individuals mouthing off that are not residents of Bradenton Beach that are not here and did not go through this,” Cosby said. “They have no clue what they’re talking about.”
“Things were happening so fast, and our team was on top of it and I think you’re going to see the result of the expertise that our team has had when our FEMA reimbursement checks start coming back in and how well we have done our job,” Chappie said, adding the editorial was uncalled for.
Commissioner Ralph Cole said, “When we were under emergency management, they needed their space to do what they needed to do, and we got it done a lot cheaper and a lot faster than the other communities.”
“I just marvel at Ricinda’s ability and we’re so lucky to have her,” Commissioner Jan Vosburgh said.
Vice-Mayor Deborah Scaccianoce addressed criticism of city oversight and Perry’s invoices.
“We pass our audits with flying colors. There is so much oversight in our spending,” she said. “The lawyers for the other cities weren’t slinging mud, wearing boots, carrying cases of water and going out in the public. Not one of those attorneys took the time that Ms. Perry did to shlep around in mud and muck in that disaster that we lived through. But this attorney did do that. She is a member of this community, and she is not replaceable as a result of that.”
Scaccianoce said the city suffered 95% damage, according to Gov. Ron DeSantis.
“Anna Maria was marginal, Holmes Beach by comparison was marginal,” Scaccianoce said. “She (Perry) was here every day during recovery. The Chief was wearing a lot of hats, he had other stuff to do. Ricinda took responsibilities away from him so he could concentrate on getting done what he needed to do. What Ricinda contributed went above and beyond.”
“Bridge Street brought a sense of normalcy and hope back to this city and it was Ricinda who made sure that happened,” Scaccianoce said. “The idea that any of this is inappropriate or not acceptable is outrageous. I challenge anyone to have put as much time and effort that Ms. Perry did as our city attorney during this catastrophe. And questioning her billing or our auditing processes or any of that is absolute nonsense. And I challenge any of those people – the writer of the editorial – where were you? I know where Ricinda was because I was on this Island and I watched her do it. She was bringing boots for people so they could navigate through the muck and mud. It’s really easy to sling mud at people when you’re sitting behind your computer. If you’re not boots on the ground, you have no right to open your mouth to discredit anyone. I am furious this is even put in question.”
Commissioner Scott Bear said he was disappointed that the Islander editorial made it personal about Perry.
“They didn’t come in and ask us why she was doing the work,” Bear said. “We were short-staffed, that’s why. To say the attorneys in those two cities (Anna Maria and Holmes Beach) didn’t charge anything, well, I can guarantee you, if they had been asked to do it, it wouldn’t have been done under their flat rate. To make a statement in a paper that they didn’t have additional cost, well no kidding, they also didn’t have 95% damage.”
“This malfeasance and fraud that are supposedly going on in the city, not just us, but the other two cities, were stripped naked by OPPAGA,” Cosby said, referring to a recent study by the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability. “They went through everything. If there were issues, we would have known about it and we came out of this well. It’s people that don’t know running their mouth. After what we went through it’s disheartening to have to deal with this.”
BRADENTON BEACH – Pines Trailer Park residents came to an April 17 city commission meeting well-prepared and represented to discuss their lack of parking at the park.
At issue was the parking lot at 201 First Street, which had historically been used for free by Pines residents and was converted to paid parking in January by park ownership Pines Park Investors LLC. Nearly half of the 86 Pines residents who do not have parking at their units relied on the parking lot.
The lot was free to residents until Jan. 1, 2024 but Pines owners shut it down on Dec. 31, 2024, giving Pines residents the option to pay $750 a year for a single space.
Many Pines Trailer Park homes have no space for parking, with residents depending on the nearby parking lot. – Leslie Lake | Sun
Park owners’ attorney Stephen Thompson requested more time to make a presentation to the commission. Commissioners granted that request but also heard public comment from Pines residents, then decided to have the city planner and building official review the parking lot.
“At a minimum we would like to have a more comprehensive meeting where we get some time to make a full presentation about this parking, the history and why we feel we’re entitled to it,” Thompson said.
That request drew protests from Pines residents, and Mayor John Chappie asked for quiet in the chambers.
“If we’re going to do that, it needs to be by May 1. Otherwise, we’re waiting a whole month and that’s not fair to the Pines,” Commissioner Scott Bear said.
“I just think like Scott said we can’t wait too long,” Commissioner Debbie Scaccianoce said. “They’ve been waiting long enough. It’s a constant battle for these people and they’ve gone through a lot already and I would like to get this resolved.”
“You give us a date and we’ll be here,” Thompson said.
“Today was the day,” people called out.
Chappie read six emails into the record from Pines residents before opening the meeting to public comment. Residents asked commissioners to look at the city codes including for M-1 zoning, which requires a parking space for each mobile homeowner.
“I purchased in April 2024 with the understanding from both the seller and the park manager that I was guaranteed a parking spot. I wouldn’t have purchased my unit if I’d been informed the parking situation would be questionable. The uncertainty around the park’s timeline and this disastrous parking situation left me with no choice but to walk away from the investment of $200,000 I poured my heart into,” one resident wrote.
Prior to public comment, City Attorney Ricinda Perry left the meeting for an appointment but said she would listen to the recording.
Pines homeowner Mary Mox talks to commissioners about the parking lot formerly used by Pines Trailer Park residents. – Leslie Lake | Sun
Mary Mox said, “My husband and I bought our place in the park and were assigned a parking space. When we purchased our mobile home and were told to park in the lot.”
Mox showed commissioners her prior years’ parking passes.
“These say Pines Parking lot,” Mox said. “We would receive memorandums saying, when you arrive this fall make sure you see the manager and obtain a parking permit and any people without a parking permit will be subject to being towed away. We were allowed one vehicle per mobile home.”
“I’ve been prepared for two weeks because that’s what you told me to do,” Pines homeowner Elayne Armaniaco said. “That’s what you told all of us to do. They didn’t prepare and yet somehow or another they’re being time allowed for extra preparation.”
She said that it’s commonly known that the parking lot was assigned for Pines Trailer Park resident use.
“Everyone in this room knows that this parking lot for five decades was assigned for Pines Trailer Park for owners who don’t have parking in their units,” Armaniaco said. “Even Mr. Kaleta and all associated with the Pines Park Investors know this.”
She produced a real estate listing prior to the Pines Park Investors’ 2023 purchase that described the parking lot as part of the sale.
“That parking lot is necessary for the park owners to comply with your code, and yet there has been no code enforcement,” she said. “City Attorney Perry would have you think because this lot has historically been used for parking, that it’s OK to just disregard the tenants who were using it.
“If that’s not enough for you to recognize that a paid lot at this location is improper, then let’s ask other questions like, does it comply with code? Is it a parking facility? Does it change from ownership assigning parking to its residents to ownership making a profit as a public lot increase the intensity of its use? Of course it does,” Armaniaco said. “You don’t need two weeks to make a presentation to make that point. This is literally forcing Pines Trailer Park residents out of their homes. If the terms of the agreement between the (former owners) Jacksons and the LLC had been honored, this park would be thriving by now.
“Taking away parking is not just unjust, it’s against your own city code,” she said. “Will this governing body really vote to push out the tenants and homeowners of Pines Trailer Park? You have the opportunity and the authority to right a wrong.”
Sarasota-based attorney Nathan Reneau, who is representing the Pines Park Homeowners Association, read a letter from the HOA president.
“Many residents have transferred their deeds to the Urban Group that Pines Trailer Park investors have retained to manage eviction processes. Why have they done this? Because they have nowhere to park their vehicles. And they have stated to us, their HOA, they have no choice but to surrender their deeds,” Reneau read.
“Historically and traditionally the parking lot at Pines Trailer Park has been part of the residential parking,” Reneau said. “The code for trailer parks is M-1, which requires one parking spot per trailer. Without the parking lot across the street, the trailer park itself is outside of code.”
Reneau said it appears that the current strategy of Pines Park Investors is to drive out residents by removing their parking.
“Pines Trailer Park is not closed yet and there is an active lawsuit against Pines Park Investors,” Reneau said. “If it’s successful, the parking lot will continue to be needed as part of the park. Currently it is zoned as C-1, which does not allow for a standalone parking lot, but it does allow for residential use and trailer park. Without this being made available for use by the trailer park residents, it’s a code compliance issue for the park, and the owner needs to be made to shut down the paid parking use and make it available for use by the park to meet those M-1 zoning requirements.”
Pines Park Investors LLC representative Sam Negrin defends the conversion to paid parking in the lot that was formerly used by Pines Trailer Park residents. – Leslie Lake | Sun
Sam Negrin, a representative for Pines Park Investors, said, “Upon our acquisition of the trailer park we were told from the sellers, the agents and park manager that every single trailer lot came with parking. The ones who do not have parking because they, I don’t want to say the word, but illegally built lanais.”
Pines residents reacted in protest to Negrin’s comments.
“I’m not standing here saying that’s 100% accurate, from that reaction, but that is always the impression we’ve been under,” Negrin said.
Negrin said the park is governed by state statute and the park prospectus.
“The lot in the sale was addressed to us as an additional selling point, it comes with a parking lot, but is not required by the prospectus for the residents,” Negrin said. “The parking lot is not anything that’s entitled to the residents.”
“With those storms came the assumption from the residents that they don’t have to pay us anymore. Our sellers who we have the note with on the property, we still have to pay them in full every month,” Negrin said. “At the end of the day we’re a business just like any other business; we need our income to continue running it. That is why we had to change the parking. This is a business. We aren’t a charity.”
“Let them rebuild so they can pay you,” Danielle Armaniaco said during her public comment.
“The evidence shows in fact that it was Pines parking, but aside from that, I don’t understand how we’re allowing that paid parking to operate today,” Bear said. “I’d like to understand how we’re not enforcing the code violation.”
Scaccianoce characterized Negrin’s claim that the parking lot was unrelated to the trailer park a “failed argument.”
“As professional as all these investors are, I find it extremely difficult that they never saw the sign that said Pines Trailer Park parking on that lot when they were deciding to buy the property and they took the word of the Jacksons saying, ‘Oh, that’s just an ancillary lot, it has nothing to do with the trailer park’, when it was obviously marked before they bought it,” she said. “That should have been a red flag to Mr. Kaleta and his investment group to at least question what they had been told. I don’t remember when that parking lot wasn’t for the Pines.”
Chappie suggested a review of the parking lot by the city planner and code enforcement officer.
“Time’s running out for the Pines people and that’s not fair,” Chappie said, asking if the commission would like to wait until May 1 or take a stance right now.
“I think we should take a stance right now,” Commissioner Jan Vosburgh said.
Bear said he would like to advance it to code enforcement for a review and to make a decision about the current use of the parcel as a paid parking lot.
“There’s a pretty strong abundance of information that was never paid parking and shouldn’t be paid parking now,” Bear said. “This is a paid lot that was not approved.”
Commissioners unanimously approved a review by the city planner and building official about the use of paid parking on the site. The discussion will be continued at the May 1 commission meeting.
A GoFundMe page has been established for the Pines’ residents.
BRADENTON BEACH – Proposed state legislative bills that would prohibit new projects for Community Redevelopment Agencies (CRAs) after Oct. 1 prompted Bradenton Beach CRA members to identify several new potential projects to begin before the deadline.
“Ricinda (City Attorney Ricinda Perry) has an update about what’s going on in Tallahassee with regard to CRAs,” Mayor John Chappie said at the April 17 meeting. “That’s going to affect us big time.”
Senate Bill 1242 and House Bill 991 propose that:
A community redevelopment agency may not initiate any new projects or issue any new debt on or after Oct. 1;
A community redevelopment agency in existence on July 1 shall terminate on the expiration date provided in the agency’s charter or on Sept. 30, 2045, whichever is earlier; and
A community redevelopment agency operating on or after Sept. 30, 2045 may not extend the maturity date of any outstanding bonds.
“We’ve got the CRA money for 20 years and if they pass this law we have to quit using the money?” CRA member Ralph Cole asked.
“Correct, no new projects,” Perry said.
“You had authorized me to prepare a letter,” Perry told the CRA. “I have that letter ready for the execution of the chairman stating that we oppose this and see where it goes.”
Perry said the proposed bills are a real threat to the future of CRA districts.
“It springboards me into the next discussion I wanted to have,” she said. “I’ve alluded to this in past meetings that we may just want to go ahead and move forward on all of our projects that we have discussed previously in the CRA and anything in the future that you might be interested in.”
Perry suggested scheduling a special meeting to discuss and commit to possible projects in the CRA district.
“I think it would be appropriate for us to reevaluate where we are on things,” Perry said.
One possible project would be to make paver improvements around the CRA district. Another was to have signs redone in a black and white theme, she said.
“I think revisiting the (eastern) roundabout on Bridge Street and redesigning the roadway system there would be a worthwhile project to look at,” Perry said.
She also suggested revisiting a discussion about a walking trail.
“We talked about doing a trail and scenic routes for bikes and walking that goes to Fifth Street and after you come off of Gulf Drive, all down there it meets up with Bay and then we talked about continuing that forward somehow and connecting going under the city bridge,” Perry said.
She also suggested irrigation estimates along with landscaping projects.
“Some of the areas we talked about landscaping were the two roundabouts and down Bridge Street,” Perry said.
She said seating and lighting could be added to the new gazebo area as a potential project.
“We’ve also looked at parking on First Street North,” Perry said.
She said she is getting pricing from Steve Porter of Duncan Seawall to install a viewer on the pier.
“We had approved and discussed another lift or some dockage for the county’s water taxi on the north side of the pier,” Perry said. “Those waters are more protected with the waves and current action. We had originally talked about putting things in there, but the owners for the Pines Trailer Park, the Jackson brothers, were opposed to riparian access for those slips in there, and I believe that the current property owner is more favorable at granting the city the rights to get in and use that side.”
Chappie spoke in favor of the CRA helping Bradenton Beach merchants to promote Bridge Street.
“I think with the marina (Cortez Marina) coming in across the way, especially a public marina, it’s hard to compete,” Cole said. “It is going to be competition.”
“I think we should start prioritizing the projects we want to put money into and figuring out which ones really are important to the board and for improvement in the CRA,” CRA chair Scott Bear said.
A work meeting to brainstorm and prioritize potential projects was tentatively scheduled for May 8 pending confirmation by the city clerk.
BRADENTON BEACH – Due to audio difficulties at the April 3 city commission meeting, a Special Emergency City Commission meeting was held on April 8 to place into the record items previously discussed.
One of the topics that was revisited was a discussion of the former Pines Trailer Park parking lot at 201 First St. N. That parking lot was converted to paid public parking in January by the Pines owners.
Commissioners discussed the conversion and its non-conformity with the city’s Land Development Code, its historical use as a parking lot and whether the commercial lot created an increase in density and intensity as compared to its former use, and came to a consensus to invite parking lot owner Shawn Kaleta to speak at the next city commission meeting.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry had been asked by the commission to research the parking lot. She said the lot is zoned C-1 commercial, is within the overlay of Bridge Street and is part of the CRA district.
“This is important because it is the most intensive commercial area within the city of Bradenton Beach and the city commission has articulated over the course of the past couple years that they would encourage alternative parking options for parking within the CRA district and specifically within the C-1 zoning,” she said.
Perry said it is unclear as to whether standalone or commercial parking is allowed without a principal use or whether it can be an accessory use on its own. Prohibited uses are multi-level parking structures or facilities.
“When you look at the property issue you will see there is no building on the site, therefore it does not meet the definition of a parking facility or parking structure as a prohibited use under C-1,” she said.
Permitted uses in the zoning district include institutional, public, semi-public, libraries, community centers, public parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities. Additionally, Perry said planned development, professional offices, residential as well as retail stores and sales offices and service establishments as well as special permit uses may be allowed.
Perry raised the question as to whether or not there would be some type of non-conforming use which can be allowed by the city.
“That is going to have to be an interpretation by the commission,” she said. “I will say the commission looked at recreation uses previously and determined that parking can be associated with a recreational use and parking was permitted as standalone parking lots around the CRA district as temporary use permits.”
Perry showed a 1977 historical aerial photo of the parking lot which appeared to show vehicles parked on the site, and she also referenced a 1971 photo from the Florida Department of Transportation.
“The commission did agree that there was some form of parking, at least, going back to 1971,” Perry said. “The question then becomes whether or not the use itself has been enlarged, expanded, increased or intensified as of 2016. That increase would not be permitted, it’s an expansion of that use so you would have to compare that to what would have been allowed.”
The ordinance for the C-1 district was effective on March 9, 2016, Perry said. Any use prior to that date is a grandfathered, non-conforming use.
“If you can establish that there was a use on a property that exists and has not been abandoned, the city cannot interfere with that use if it meets the definition of a non-conforming use,” Perry said. “Often you hear interchangeably that a non-conforming use is a grandfathered right.”
Perry said it rests with the commission and code enforcement to determine if paid parking constitutes an enlargement, increase, expansion or intensity in use.
“I think it’s a logical conclusion the commercial is a higher density, higher intensity in uses. I think a paid parking lot is more intense than a non-paid parking lot that is specifically designated for one thing,” Mayor John Chappie. “I think we all want to try to get more information.”
“It’s also been brought to my attention that the Pines residents got parking passes to park in that lot when they moved there, so if they were given parking passes by Mr. Kaleta’s organization when they bought the trailer so they could park in that lot, they are agreeing that that parking lot is a Pines resident parking lot,” Commissioner Deborah Scaccianoce said.
Scaccianoce also questioned whether the current paid parking lot meets the city’s requirements for ADA compliance, width of lanes and ingress and egress.
“It’s being changed to invite the general public in, which to me, creates a whole different issue of rules and regulations,” Chappie said. “Others had to submit plans to meet the standards that are in our land development regulations.”
The commission had decided by consensus at the April 3 meeting to invite the property owner – Kaleta or a representative – to attend the next commission meeting.
“The consensus was by changing it to paid parking, we’re telling him that’s an increase,” Commissioner Scott Bear said. “We can’t do that without them first having their say.”
“If you’re going to make this kind of decision that impacts somebody’s property rights that you should invite that individual to attend that meeting so that their opinion can be heard,” Perry said.
The next city commission meeting is scheduled for Thursday, April 17 at noon in the Katie Pierola Commission Chambers, 107 Gulf Drive N.
BRADENTON BEACH – At the March 20 commission meeting, commissioners considered Ordinance 25-563, which would allow hurricane-impacted homeowners to place a temporary shelter – an RV or trailer – on their residential property for up to three years following the governor’s declaration of a state of emergency while repairs to the home are being made.
“The ordinance will accommodate individuals who have suffered a loss of their homes from the hurricanes with an immediate way of continuing to stay on the Island in a temporary shelter,” City Attorney Ricinda Perry said.
Commissioner Ralph Cole asked Perry to define allowable temporary shelter.
“The statute (Florida Statute 125.023) that I referenced says for the purpose of this section the term ‘temporary shelter’ includes but is not limited to a recreational vehicle, a trailer or similar structure placed on a residential property,” Perry said.
According to the ordinance, “All recreational vehicles and park trailers shall be fully licensed and ready for highway use, which means the recreational vehicle or park trailer is on wheels or jacking system (wheel-based unit), is attached to the site only by quick-disconnect type utilities and security devices for water, sewer and electric.”
Permanent attachments, such as stairs, decks and porches are not allowed.
Bradenton Beach resident Betsy Sillars has been displaced from her home since Hurricane Helene on Sept. 26.
“We took a big hit, we cannot live in it and we’ve been in a hotel for five months,” she said.
She said she and her husband are actively looking for a trailer and asked about size restrictions, placement and screening.
“Let’s try to make this as easy as we possibly can,” Cole said.
Commissioner Deborah Scaccianoce said she is working on the permit form.
“Basically what we need is a site plan,” she said. “You apply for the permit. You put the dimensions of the trailer, where you want to put it. If it’s large, they’re going to require you to screen it so that it’s not unsightly for people around you.”
An addition to the ordinance was made requiring the property owner to remove the trailer from the property in the event of a storm event for safety reasons.
The second reading of the ordinance will be at the Thursday, April 3 city commission meeting.
