BRADENTON BEACH – The Bradenton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) finds itself in a race against time to complete the long-desired installation of a police department boat lift next to the Bridge Street Pier.
The boat lift project must be completed by Sept. 30 in order to take advantage of a $50,000 West Coast Inland Navigation District (WCIND) grant approved by Manatee County commissioners in May 2017.
The police boat currently sits on a trailer parked near the police station and must be trailered to a boat ramp to be placed in the water.
Complicating matters is the necessity for the boat lift to be connected to the floating dock that must first be repositioned to the east by approximately 8 feet by Hecker Construction Company, which installed the pre-manufactured dock in mid-2019 for $11,600.
Before the boat lift can be installed, the floating dock must be repositioned approximately 8 feet to the east, toward the far end of the pier. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Further complicating the boat lift installation timetable is the need for contract engineer Joe Foster to separately engineer the dock repositioning and the boat lift installation.
During the Wednesday, Sept. 2 CRA meeting, City Attorney Ricinda Perry said Mayor John Chappie had sought an extension for the WCIND grant in vain.
“Moments ago, I received the information that we do not get an extension, so it must be completed by the end of the month,” Perry said.
Lt. John Cosby, of the Bradenton Beach Police Department, also addressed the growing sense of urgency.
“This WCIND money for this boat lift has to be expended by Sept. 30th, which means we have to approve this vendor and they have to get this boat lift installed. It has to be invoiced, it has to be paid and I need a canceled check by Sept. 30th in order for us to receive this money,” Cosby said.
If installed as planned, the boat lift will be placed perpendicular to the pier and floating dock in the open space between the west end of the dock and the corner of the pier walkway near the Anna Maria Oyster Bar’s outdoor seating area.
Police Chief Sam Speciale and the CRA members originally envisioned installing the boat lift on the north side of the pier. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection would not approve that location because it would infringe on the riparian rights of the neighboring Pines Trailer Park.
The proposed boat lift would be located at the west end of the repositioned floating dock. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
On Aug. 27, Duncan Seawall, Dock & Boat Lift General Manager Steve Porter submitted the only response to the city’s request for proposals to install the boat lift.
Duncan’s bid response proposed a $41,279 cost to install a 16,000-pound-capacity aluminum and stainless steel boat lift manufactured by Golden Boat Lifts and supported by four pressure-treated, marine-grade pilings driven into the bay bottom.
Before Wednesday’s CRA meeting began, Porter emailed Perry an additional quote for a 10,000-pound-capacity lift that would cost $37,813.
During the meeting, Porter said the cost estimates include the water and electrical lines and connections, the remote control, the security lighting and a walk-up catwalk. Porter said the lift, as currently designed, must be located at the west end of the floating dock.
Porter said the police boat weighs 3,000 pounds and he recommended a 10,000-pound-capacity lift.
“Give us two weeks after approval and it’s installed in a week,” he said.
This illustration shows the proposed boat lift configuration and location. – Duncan Seawall, Dock & Boat Lift | Submitted
CRA Chairman Ralph Cole said Hecker Construction needs a barge to reposition the floating dock and he did not know how much advance planning that would require. He said he would do his best to get that work done as soon as possible.
Perry said she would help coordinate the efforts to get all the needed work done in the remaining timeframe.
“If I cannot get this engineering done and I cannot get the dock moved in time, we’re probably not able to move forward and I don’t want to bind the city to expend $50,000 at this time. Truth be told, we don’t have it in our budget to do that,” Perry said of the boat lift project’s current reliance on WCIND funds.
The CRA members were divided on the need for Foster to engineer the boat lift installation but given the time constraints, they approved doing so.
The CRA members approved the installation of a 10,000-pound-capacity boat lift, contingent on the WCIND funds being available, and Porter said he understood the CRA’s position and time constraints regarding the grant money.
BRADENTON BEACH – After a tie vote by the Bradenton Beach City Commission, face coverings remain mandatory inside Bradenton Beach businesses in accordance with Manatee County’s mandatory face-covering resolution.
Thursday evening, city commission members voted 2-2 on a proposed city ordinance that would have made face coverings optional but mandated that businesses post signs recommending face coverings.
The tie vote resulted in the proposed ordinance not being adopted, leaving the city still subject to the county face-covering resolution adopted by a 4-3 vote of the Manatee County Commission on July 27.
According to the county resolution, “An individual in a business establishment must wear a face covering.”
The county resolution includes exemptions for those who can maintain 6 feet or more of social distance inside a business, for children under 6 and for those with breathing issues or pre-existing medical conditions.
The county resolution does not apply in cities that adopted local face-covering mandates, including Anna Maria and Holmes Beach.
The county resolution is now being challenged in court by Pastor Joel Tillis and State Rep. Anthony Sabatini (R-Lake County).
The proposed Bradenton Beach emergency ordinance was modeled after the emergency ordinance adopted by the Bradenton City Council on July 15.
Bradenton Beach Mayor John Chappie and Commissioner Marilyn Maro supported the adoption of the proposed emergency city ordinance, which would have resulted in the city essentially opting out of the county’s face-covering mandate because the city ordinance would have superseded it.
Commissioners Jan Vosburgh and Jake Spooner opposed the city ordinance and chose instead to stay in line with the county resolution.
Commissioner Ralph Cole previously expressed opposition to the county resolution, but he was unable to attend Thursday’s meeting due to a family emergency.
Chappie was the only commission member who attended Thursday’s meeting in person. Maro, Spooner and Vosburgh participated remotely, as did City Attorney Ricinda Perry.
Proposed ordinance
Two days earlier, during the Tuesday, Aug. 4 emergency special commission meeting, the commission, minus Vosburgh, who was absent, directed Perry to draft an emergency ordinance modeled after the city of Bradenton’s emergency ordinance.
During Tuesday’s meeting, Perry said he had legal concerns about the county resolution and questioned its constitutionality.
Modeled after the Bradenton ordinance, the proposed Bradenton Beach ordinance presented Thursday evening said, “Each business establishment shall post a sign visible at each public point of entry, which sign shall either advise persons entering that face coverings are required or requested to be worn within the business establishment; or notify persons entering that the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends the wearing of face coverings in public, particularly where social distancing cannot be maintained.”
Perry inserted additional language that said, “Notice shall also be provided that states that individuals with a religious, physical or mental limitation preventing them from wearing a face covering are exempt.”
Using language contained in the Bradenton ordinance, the proposed ordinance said, “The legislative intent of this ordinance is to educate and encourage members of the public to wear face coverings within enclosed business establishments. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to mandate the wearing of face coverings nor require the owner or operator of any business establishment to mandate or otherwise enforce the wearing of face coverings.”
Commission discussion
“Its purpose and intent is to do the least intrusive means that has not been legally challenged,” Perry said of the proposed ordinance.
She noted the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office and the local law enforcement agencies are responsible for enforcing the county resolution.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry has legal concerns regrading the county resolution. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The Bradenton ordinance takes that onus off the police officer and places it on those who are engaging in business. They need to be the ones who are policing the masks. It’s a bit of a friendlier approach towards the mask policy, as opposed to the Manatee County mandate,” Perry said.
“It’s mandating that businesses place mask notices on all of their locations, but it allows the business owner to decide whether or not they want to make that a mandate of their store or not,” Perry clarified in response to a question posed during public input.
Vosburgh referenced the 4-1 commission consensus reached during the commission’s emergency meeting on July 28. With Cole in opposition, the majority consensus reached that day was to not take any action and remain under the umbrella of the county resolution.
“Frankly, I was very surprised we put this on the agenda because we just voted on this a week ago. With what’s going on in Bradenton Beach, I reluctantly have to vote again to go along with the county,” Vosburgh said.
Spooner asked Lt. John Cosby if the city’s police officers had encountered any problems or confrontations since the county resolution took effect.
“No, we haven’t had any reported problems up to this point,” Cosby replied.
“I’d like to just stay in line with the county if there hasn’t been any problems with enforcement,” Spooner said. “I don’t want to have the businesses and their employees get in confrontations with people. Right now, it’s real easy for the employees to say, ‘It’s the law,’ and that kind of ends any confrontation.”
Bradenton Beach Mayor John Chappie supported the proposed city ordinance. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Chappie then made his motion to adopt the proposed city ordinance. After the tie vote occurred, Perry said the commission could continue the matter until next week, when Cole would be present to serve as the tie-breaker. Chappie made that motion and Maro seconded it, but Vosburgh and Spooner opposed the continuation and the motion failed as the result of another 2-2 vote.
The county resolution can be viewed and downloaded at the county website.
BRADENTON BEACH – The Bradenton Beach City Commission has directed City Attorney Ricinda Perry to draft an emergency face-covering sign ordinance that would allow the city to opt out of the Manatee County face-covering resolution now being challenged in court.
The commission issued this directive during this morning’s weekly emergency special city commission meeting. The emergency ordinance will be presented for commission approval during the commission’s regular meeting on Thursday, Aug. 6, which starts at 6 p.m.
Soon after the emergency meeting concluded, Perry emailed the mayor and commissioners copies of the emergency ordinance to be voted on Thursday.
Using the same language as the Bradenton ordinance, the Bradenton Beach ordinance says, “Each business establishment shall post a sign visible at each public point of entry, which sign shall either advise persons entering that face coverings are required or requested to be worn within the business establishment; or notify persons entering that the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends the wearing of face coverings in public, particularly where social distancing cannot be maintained.”
Perry inserted additional language that says, “Notice shall also be provided that states that individuals with a religious, physical or mental limitation preventing them from wearing a face covering are exempt.”
This face-covering sign can be downloaded at the city of Bradenton’s website. – City of Bradenton | Submitted
Using the same language as the Bradenton ordinance, the Bradenton Beach ordinance also says, “The legislative intent of this ordinance is to educate and encourage members of the public to wear face coverings within enclosed business establishments. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to mandate the wearing of face coverings nor require the owner or operator of any business establishment to mandate or otherwise enforce the wearing of face coverings.
The city of Bradenton makes this downloadable sign available to business owners. – City of Bradenton | Submitted
According to Perry, the city ordinance would take effect Friday if adopted.
Under the county resolution – which states, “An individual in a business establishment must wear a face covering,” – Bradenton Beach business owners, employees and patrons are required to wear masks in businesses because the city has no official policy on the matter and the city lies within the county. However, if the city ordinance is adopted Thursday evening, the county resolution will not apply and masks will become optional within the Bradenton Beach city limits.
The county resolution provides exceptions for those who can maintain 6 feet or more of social distancing inside a business, for children under 6 years old and for those with breathing issues or pre-existing medical conditions.
A first offense of the county resolution warrants a written warning. The second offense could result in a $50 fine, with a $125 fine for a third offense and a $250 fine for subsequent offenses.
Commission discussion
Mayor John Chappie initiated Tuesday morning’s discussion about adopting an ordinance based on the Bradenton ordinance. He noted the county resolution is being challenged in court and he said he spoke with Perry on Monday about possibly opting out of the county requirements.
“Since we had no resolution on the record, we are automatically part of the umbrella resolution the county has adopted. I know a lot of people are really happy with the resolution the city of Bradenton has done, which has basically accomplished the same thing,” Chappie said.
He then asked Perry to share her thoughts.
“As far as the county resolution goes, I already had a number of legal concerns,” Perry said.
Perry said Chief Assistant County Attorney Bill Clague solicited insight from the city attorneys within Manatee County on Friday afternoon before the resolution was presented to county commissioners on Monday, July 27. The divided county commission then adopted the resolution by a 4-3 vote.
“I stated that I had objections with the fact that the county was usurping the authority of the city and acting as a charter county. We are not a charter county. The cities should not have been part of that process and it concerned me for future precedent,” Perry said.
“I also had concerns with due process in that particular resolution. The resolution itself did not provide for any appeal. The issue of due process is still outstanding in my mind. You need to be able to appeal a penalty that is filed against you and there’s just no mechanism to do that. That is a violation of your procedural due process in my opinion,” Perry said.
Perry said she reached out to Bradenton City Attorney Scott Rudacille and he provided her with a copy of Bradenton Emergency Ordinance 3067.
“As the mayor articulated, it gets you to the same place the county is, but it’s a document that’s not being challenged in court. If that challenge is successful, that resolution goes away and there is absolutely nothing on the books,” Perry said.
Bradenton Beach Police Lt. John Cosby mentioned a previous discussion he and Chappie had about the Bradenton ordinance.
“The discussion you and I had was that if we ever did choose to adopt an ordinance that would be the one to go with, because it does achieve every goal they’re trying to get to, but it does it in a more educational way and a friendlier way than what we’re currently doing,” Cosby said.
Commissioner Jake Spooner asked Perry to provide a quick summary of the differences between the county resolution and the Bradenton ordinance.
“The city of Bradenton’s mechanism for encouraging enforcement is much friendlier and it encourages compliance. It’s not a mandate to the citizenry to put masks on their face. It’s a mandate to the business community that any business must post a sign at their business location encouraging the use of masks. If you fail to post a sign you can be penalized, and that’s where it stops. It encourages compliance, with businesses being a partner in educating the public, as opposed to using police officers to go around and confront individuals in the public and fining them,” Perry said.
BRADENTON – Manatee County 12th Circuit Judge Edward Nicholas ruled Friday that former Planning and Zoning Board members Reed Mapes, John Metz, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent, and former Scenic WAVES Committee members Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent violated the Florida Sunshine Law.
The Sunshine Law violations occurred at Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) meetings in June, July and August of 2017.
The potential Sunshine Law violations were first reported by The Sun on Aug. 2, 2017.
The city of Bradenton Beach and co-plaintiff Jack Clarke filed the civil lawsuit on Aug. 11, 2017. The lawsuit sought a judge’s determination as to whether the advisory board members violated the Sunshine Law by discussing advisory board business at CNOBB meetings.
The non-jury trial took place at the Manatee County Judicial Center in downtown Bradenton and began on Monday, July 15. When the testimony and legal arguments concluded on Thursday, July 18, Nicholas said he’d issue his ruling Friday morning.
The defendants and defense attorneys awaited the judge’s ruling Friday morning. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Attorney Robert Watrous represented the city and Clarke in the case, assisted by paralegal Michael Barfield and City Attorney Ricinda Perry.
Attorneys Thomas Shults and Jodi Ruberg represented Metz – and to a lesser degree the five pro se defendants who previously discontinued the services of their shared attorney.
“I am hoping to some extent the conclusion of this trial may help close the wound that has been so open and so raw out in Bradenton Beach for so long,” Nicholas said before issuing his ruling.
Judge’s ruling
When issuing his detailed ruling, Nicholas first cited the Florida Constitution and the Sunshine Law contained within it.
“We begin with Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution that reads: ‘All meetings of any collegial body of the executive branch of the state government, or of any collegial body of any county, municipality, school district or special district at which official acts are to be taken, or at which public business of such body is to be transacted or discussed shall be open and noticed to the public,’” Nicholas said.
Judge Edward Nicholas ruled all six former advisory board members violated the Florida Sunshine Law. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Nicholas noted the defendants were all duly sworn advisory board members who acknowledged participating in Sunshine Law training.
During the trial, Watrous established that each defendant took an oath of office as an advisory board member and swore to protect the United States Constitution and the Florida Constitution. Watrous said those oaths followed the advisory board members wherever they went, including CNOBB meetings.
“The Sunshine Law prohibits discussions of public business. Public business was discussed at every CNOBB meeting.” – Edward Nicholas, Manatee County 12th Circuit Court Judge
In their testimony and/or pre-trial depositions, Metz, Mapes, Shay and Bill Vincent expressed their beliefs that CNOBB’s parking garage discussions did not violate the Sunshine Law because the city’s comprehensive plan prohibited parking garages and it was not reasonably foreseeable that one could ever be built.
Nicholas noted City Planner Alan Garrett testified the comp plan only prohibited parking garages in two of the city’s 11 zone district designations in 2017.
“A parking garage could theoretically be built in nine designated areas within the city,” Nicholas said of the comp plan as it existed in 2017.
Compliance concerns
Nicholas noted Perry sent an email to the Planning and Zoning board members on July 25, 2017, notifying them of the potential Sunshine Law implications of their CNOBB meetings and email exchanges.
Nicholas noted Perry also emailed then-Mayor Bill Shearon two days later, and Shearon forwarded that email to the planning board members. That email also expressed concerns about advisory board members attending CNOBB meetings in violation of the Sunshine Law.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry, paralegal Michael Barfield and attorney Robert Watrous successfully presented the city’s case.
The trial included extensive discussion about the 2017 correspondence Bill Vincent had with the Florida Commission on Ethics and the Florida Office of the Attorney General regarding advisory board members participating in CNOBB meetings.
The Commission on Ethics response advised Vincent to review the Sunshine Law manual at the Attorney General’s website and possibly consult with private counsel. The Attorney General Office’s response advised Vincent to consult with the city attorney.
“The defendants never got answers to those questions. The defendants continued to meet despite their concerns, despite not getting answers to these very important questions. Had they contacted Ricinda Perry, she would have answered: ‘Yes, the Sunshine Law applies.’ Had they contacted any attorney in the state of Florida they would have said, ‘Yes, the Sunshine Law applies,’ ” Nicholas said.
Constitutional rights
During the trial, Shults, Metz, Mapes and Vincent expressed their opinions that state law allowed the advisory board members to discuss city issues that pertained to the possible pursuit of citizens’ initiatives.
Attorney Thomas Shults, left, was unsuccessful in his defense of John Metz and the five pro se defendants. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The defendants attempt to characterize these violative meetings as ballot initiative meetings pursuant to Section 166.031 (Florida Statute) is simply not persuasive. This ballot initiative defense strikes this court as an after-the-fact attempt to justify or otherwise rationalize what were otherwise clear and unequivocal violations of the Sunshine Law. It is a clever explanation for such violations, but it is not a compelling or persuasive one,” Nicholas said.
“The efforts to characterize their violative meetings as the right to assemble and speak freely as guaranteed by the First Amendment also is not persuasive. Every citizen has the right to assemble and has the right to free speech. However, when an individual joins a government advisory board the Sunshine Law still applies. If that were not the case, every county commission, every city council, every advisory board could hold secret meetings and simply say I have a First Amendment right to do so. That would largely make the Sunshine Law meaningless and void,” Nicholas said.
Meeting recordings
During the trial, Nicholas heard audio recordings of entire CNOBB meetings and audio excerpts from CNOBB meetings.
“It’s certainly unusual that we have tapes of at least some of the meetings that took place outside of the Sunshine,” Nicholas said.
He then recited some of the statements made at CNOBB meetings:
“I have concerns about how the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) is functioning;”
“We need to prohibit the construction of a parking garage in the city of Bradenton Beach;”
“It is on the CRA list;”
“Parking garage could easily come before Planning and Zoning;”
“That whole strip over there would be a parking garage;”
“We need to specify a municipal parking garage;”
“It would be a huge building;”
“We need to prohibit construction of a parking garage in Bradenton Beach, it doesn’t matter if it’s by a municipality or a huge corporation;”
“Horrendous traffic problems with a parking garage.”
Nicholas then said, “Those were all quotes. That is the very definition of a discussion about public business. And it wasn’t just parking garage discussions: CNOBB discussed ropes and bollards, sidewalks, parking issues, the Bridge Tender (Inn) land swap, Bridge Street planters – all issues that had come before Planning and Zoning or Scenic WAVES.”
The judge ruled that former Planning and Zoning Board members Reed Mapes and Bill Vincent violated the Sunshine Law. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The Sunshine Law prohibits discussions of public business. Public business was discussed at every CNOBB meeting. Public business was discussed every time CNOBB met. That was largely the point of the organization,” Nicholas said.
“Also, there were at least four CNOBB meetings that were not recorded early on as the group was becoming organized. What was discussed at those meetings? Who attended those meetings? These questions point to the obvious need for Sunshine Law compliance,” Nicholas said.
Nicholas said the defendants’ passionate and firmly held beliefs regarding city issues caused them to abdicate their obligation to follow the law.
“My finding that all the defendants clearly and unequivocally violated the Sunshine Law does not in any way suggest that they are bad people. I do not agree with the suggestion that the defendants attempted to form a secret government or a shadow government, or that their meetings were surreptitious or clandestine in any way,” Nicholas said.
The judge ruled that former advisory board members Rose Vincent, Patty Shay and Tjet Martin violated the Sunshine Law. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“Do these individuals have a right to assemble? Absolutely. Do these individuals have a right to free speech? Absolutely. Do these individuals have a right to be concerned about their beloved city? Of course. But once you choose to become part of the government by becoming a member of a government advisory board you are no longer just a spectator. Rules apply, laws apply. The defendants simply did not follow those rules. The defendants simply did not follow those laws. This is not a close call,” Nicholas said.
“Judgment is in favor of the city. The court finds that all the defendants, as members of Planning and Zoning and members of the Scenic WAVES Partnership Committee were subject to Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution and Section 286.011 of Florida Statute,” Nicholas ruled.
Additional comments
Nicholas said a post-trial hearing will be scheduled to address potential sanctions. These include the city’s request to be reimbursed for a portion of its legal fees that now exceed $250,000.
“We agree with everything the judge said,” Watrous said after he left the courtroom.
“The Sunshine Law has been vindicated,” Barfield said.
“We agree with the judgment and look forward to the city moving forward and healing. The city does not wish to sue any of its board members, and it’s unfortunate this wasn’t settled earlier, but the Sunshine Law is important. It provides the city and its citizens with an open government,” Perry said,
“Obviously, I’m pleased with the verdict,” Clarke said.
“Government in the sunshine is why we are here. It’s as simple as that, it’s as important as that. It’s the foundation of what good government is built on; openness, transparency and accountability. Anything less is just not acceptable and now’s the time to heal,” Mayor John Chappie said.
“I’m very pleased with the judge’s ruling and I would like to thank everyone involved for presenting a clear case to the court. This was an unfortunate circumstance the city commission was put in to uphold our oaths to protect the laws of the state and to protect the city from litigation. I wish this would’ve been resolved through our previous settlement offers for a less expensive and earlier conclusion,” Vice Mayor Jake Spooner said.
Co-plaintiff Jack Clarke, Vice Mayor Jake Spooner (second row), Mayor John Chappie, City Attorney Ricinda Perry, paralegal Michael Barfield and attorney Robert Watrous await the judge’s arrival Friday morning. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
In March, all six defendants rejected a settlement offer from the city that proposed a collective admission that mistakes were made regarding Sunshine Law compliance and a $500 payment from each defendant. The defendants rejected the settlement offer that required them to acknowledge non-compliance with the Sunshine Law.
In May, Metz and the other defendants submitted counter proposals that sought significant financial reimbursement from the city. Metz’s offer also expressed a willingness to subject the city to a future appeals process.
BRADENTON BEACH – The trial for the Sunshine Law lawsuit filed against six former city advisory board members has been rescheduled for July 15. The trial was previously scheduled to take place in mid-March.
A pretrial conference has been scheduled for July 8.
The depositions for City Planner Alan Garrett, City Attorney Ricinda Perry and defendant John Metz also have been rescheduled. Perry is now scheduled to be deposed by Metz’s attorney, Thomas Shults, on Wednesday, March 20.
On behalf of the city of Bradenton Beach and co-plaintiff Jack Clarke, attorney Robert Watrous is now scheduled to depose Metz on Thursday, May 30. Garrett’s recently-postponed deposition has not yet been rescheduled.
The attorneys also have submitted the lists of witnesses they will or may call upon to testify during the trial.
Paralegal Michael Barfield is assisting Watrous and said the trial was pushed back due to temporary health issues experienced by some witnesses and Shults’ plans to soon take a long vacation out of the country.
The court-ordered mediation session previously scheduled for Monday, Feb. 25 is expected to take place as planned. The mediation will provide all parties involved an opportunity to discuss a potential settlement, but Perry previously told the city commission she doesn’t believe a settlement is likely.
The only known settlement offer to date occurred in September 2017, when the defendants, minus Metz, offered to pay their own legal fees and pay $100 each toward the legal fees incurred by the city and Clarke. That settlement offer included no admission or denial of liability or fault and noted that all six defendants had resigned from their positions as city advisory board members. The city rejected that settlement offer.
Additional actions
During the Feb. 7 city commission meeting, Perry said Shults now plans to depose Mayor John Chappie, commissioners Ralph Cole and Jake Spooner and Building Official Steve Gilbert as well.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry provided city commissioners with a lawsuit update on Feb. 7. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Perry also said former Concerned Neighbors of Bradenton Beach (CNOBB) webmaster Michael Harrington may be deposed a second time due to discoveries made during his first deposition in January.
During his deposition, Harrington testified under oath that he thought he had deleted all of his email correspondence pertaining to CNOBB. He later realized that was not the case and turned those and other emails over to Barfield and Watrous.
Harrington also testified under oath that he asked for the hard drive in his malfunctioning computer to be destroyed and he confirmed that former Planning and Zoning Board and CNOBB member Reed Mapes asked him to delete two CNOBB-related emails.
While deposing Clarke in January, Shults laid the groundwork for a potential line of defense based on the legal argument that the city and Clarke filed the lawsuit in bad faith due to contentious relationships between Metz and Clarke and Metz and the city.
In 2015, Metz filed an unsuccessful lawsuit against Clarke. In 2016, Metz filed a still-pending lawsuit against the city and Gilbert. In 2017, Metz was unsuccessful in his efforts to prevent Cole from continuing to operate his Coastal Watersports rental business on beachfront property leased from the Silver Surf resort.
The lawsuit
The 2017 lawsuit seeks a ruling from 12th Circuit Court Judge Ed Nicholas as to whether four former Planning and Zoning Board members (Metz, Mapes, Patty Shay and Bill Vincent) and former Scenic WAVES Committee members Tjet Martin and Rose Vincent violated the Florida Sunshine Law by discussing past, present and potential board and committee matters during CNOBB meetings that occurred that summer at the Annie Silver Community Center and the Pines Trailer Park. Under the law, official board and committee member business is only supposed to be discussed at properly-noticed city meetings, most of which take place at city hall.
The CNOBB members discussed the potential pursuit of a citywide prohibition on parking garages. They also discussed the updated Community Redevelopment Agency that references parking and other potential CRA projects. Email exchanges obtained from the defendants and others during the pretrial discovery process also include several references to parking garages, the CRA plan and other city business.
While deposing Mapes, Shay and Bill Vincent, Watrous established that these matters were previously reviewed by the advisory board members and he asserted they could have foreseeably come before them again.
BRADENTON BEACH – Mayor John Chappie, City Attorney Ricinda Perry and the city of Bradenton Beach have invited 75 Bradenton Christian School third-graders to participate in the “Youth In Politics – Elementary Students Take Over Local Government Day” pilot program.
Taking place at Bradenton Beach City Hall and several other locations throughout the city, the inaugural event has been scheduled for Thursday, Oct. 25.
It will coincide with Florida City Government Week 2018, taking place Oct. 22-28. Supported by Gov. Rick Scott’s 2017 proclamation, City Government Week is sponsored by the Florida League of Cities (FLC).
According to the FLC website, Florida City Government Week was created to help raise public awareness about the services cities perform and the workings of city government.
“Cities are encouraged to involve their local schools, businesses, media and civic clubs in planning City Government Week activities,” the FLC website says.
The third-graders will be divided into three groups and each group will participate in a mock City Commission meeting at city hall. Student mayors and commissioners will rule on the fictional “Case of the Barking Dog,” which involves a noise complaint and a permitting request to build a dog house. Other students will serve as the building official, the city clerk, police officers and newspaper reporters.
While one group is conducting its commission meeting, the other groups will visit the police department, the Bradenton Beach Fire Hall and possibly the Public Works Department. Students will also walk across the street from city hall to the beachfront City Park to visit volunteers and animals from Wildlife Inc. Education & Rehabilitation Center and AMI Turtle Watch and Shorebird Monitoring.
Resident volunteers will read to students at Tingley Memorial Library and Commissioner Marilyn Maro will host play activities at Lou Barolo Park.
Anna Maria Oyster Bar President John Horne will provide a healthy lunch buffet at the Historic Clock Tower on the Bridge Street Pier and Beach House owner Ed Chiles and executive chef Will Manson will provide a sustainable seafood and farm fresh food tasting extravaganza.
Paradise Boat Tours’ General Manager Sherman Baldwin offered to take the students on a boat tour and Commissioner Jake Spooner, owner of The Fish Hole, is offering free putt-putt golf.
Commissioner Ralph Cole, owner of Coastal Watersports, offered to give a boating safety class near City Park and said he’d asked members of the county marine patrol to join him.
Commission all in
Chappie and Perry presented their concept to the City Commission on Thursday, Oct. 4. The commission fully supported the event and authorized Chappie’s request to issue a press release.
“There is something for everyone and we look forward to making this Youth In Politics program a lasting one to show the next generation that government can be fun, positive and great,” the press release says.
Perry’s daughter, Victoria, is a member of this year’s third-grade class at Bradenton Christian School. The school was selected for the pilot program because of the short time frame and the school’s status as a private school. Chappie and Perry hope to garner interest from the Manatee County School Board during this year’s event and include Anna Maria Elementary and other public schools next year.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry helped organize the “Youth In Politics” student event. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“When the mayor and I were talking, I said I’m sickened by the way politics have become viewed in our nation. I think this is an opportunity for our city and our elected officials to reach the next generation and teach them the right way to run politics – while also sharing the beauty of what Bradenton Beach is,” Perry said.
“When I sat down with the teachers and my leadership team at the school I had a number of them say, ‘I didn’t know Bradenton Beach had all this. I want to bring my family out to visit.’ I see this also as a grassroots opportunity to bring 75 kids out, experiencing our city and taking that story home,” Perry said.
As a secondary benefit, Perry believes the student event would provide additional exposure for the Bradenton Beach business community that’s still recovering from red tide.
“We also talked about having designated reporters to do a story on the adventure here,” Chappie said, expressing hope that the students’ stories might appear in local newspapers and in FLC’s “Quality Cities” magazine.
“I’m amazed at how excited people are,” Chappie said.
BRADENTON BEACH – The Florida Bar has dismissed a complaint that Bradenton Beach resident and former Planning and Zoning Board member John Metz filed against City Attorney Ricinda Perry.
In the complaint filed last summer, Metz alleged that Perry plagiarized The Florida Planning Officials Handbook in a July 28 email she sent to him and the other planning board members. The email cautioned them to adhere to quasi-judicial hearing procedures and the Florida Sunshine Law when reviewing the Bridge Tender Inn’s efforts to bring its Dockside Bar into full compliance with city code.
“After careful consideration, I conclude that there is insufficient evidence that Ms. Perry has violated any of the rules adopted by the Supreme Court of Florida which govern attorney discipline,” said the Nov. 21 letter from Florida Bar Executive Director John Harkness.
During their Dec. 7 meeting, Perry told city commissioners the complaint was dismissed.
“Again Mr. Metz lost,” she said, referencing previous unsuccessful legal actions and informal complaints Metz has initiated against the city and its residents.
Perry said she spent $5,000 on the attorney who defended her against Metz’s Bar complaint. She said she would not ask the city to cover those legal expenses, even though they were incurred while providing legal services to the city and its Planning and Zoning Board.
“I don’t like the idea of you having to pay for this,” Mayor John Chappie said, suggesting the possible reimbursement of Perry’s personal legal expenses be discussed at a future meeting.
“Thank you. It’s a generous consideration, but I’m not going to make that request of you,” Perry said.
“That’s horrible,” Commissioner Jake Spooner said of Metz’s actions.
