MANATEE COUNTY – Gov. Ron DeSantis has appointed Ray Turner to replace Vanessa Baugh on the Manatee County Commission.
The governor’s appointment was to take effect Aug. 1. Turner takes over for embattled District Five Commissioner Vanessa Baugh, who recently announced her resignation effective at the end of July.
Turner
“I’m honored to be appointed by Governor DeSantis,” Turner said in the press release the county issued on July 27. “I will do the very best job I can to serve the people of Manatee County. I look forward to hitting the ground running.”
According to the press release, Turner has been a Manatee County resident for more than 20 years and was a member of the Manatee County Planning Commission at the time of his appointment. Turner, the secretary of the Manatee Sarasota Building Industry Association, began his real estate career in 1991 selling custom homes and later transitioned into real estate finance, international marketing and executive management.
Turner was scheduled to be sworn into office at an Aug. 1 workshop.
Baugh departs
In June, Baugh announced her resignation effective at the end of July, citing family as her reason for resigning. She participated in her final county commission meeting on July 25 and then vacated effective Aug. 1 the remainder of her current four-year term.
During her abbreviated final term, Baugh, a Lakewood Ranch resident, faced intense media scrutiny and was the subject of an ethics complaint and a Florida Commission on Ethics investigation for her role in organizing a pop-up COVID-19 vaccine clinic in early 2021.
Baugh
The pop-up clinic Baugh helped organize provided vaccines for a small number of people on her own personal shortlist and for residents living in two specific Lakewood Ranch zip codes.
In January, the ethics commission investigation led to Baugh agreeing to an $8,000 settlement as a penalty for her role in organizing the clinic. When reaching the settlement in January, Baugh admitted she used her position as an elected official to the benefit or privilege of herself or others.
MANATEE COUNTY – Constituent Dave Tank believes he heard Manatee County Commission Chairman Kevin Van Ostenbridge and County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh discussing county business in a manner that was not compliant with Florida’s Government-in-the-Sunshine Law.
The Sunshine Law requires elected city and county officials to conduct and discuss their official governmental business with one another in properly noticed public meetings, and the state prohibits them from doing so in non-public, non-noticed settings.
On June 8, Tank expressed his Sunshine Law compliance concerns in an email addressed to Van Ostenbridge and Baugh. Tank’s email was also shared with the five other county commissioners, County Administrator Scott Hopes and County Attorney Bill Clague.
“I ate lunch at Robin’s Downtown today. You sat down at the table next to me and talked loudly about various Manatee County matters. I assume you are aware that a conversation between two or more commissioners about public business, without public notice, violates the state’s open meetings law. I’d appreciate you avoiding this sort of thing in the future,” Tank’s email said in its entirety.
Tank also included a link to the Office of the Attorney General website that includes information on the Sunshine Law and a link to the 2022 Government-in-the-Sunshine manual.
In her June 8 response to Tank, Commissioner Misty Servia wrote: “Mr. Tank. Thank you for the email. I hope they were not discussing county business, as that would be a criminal offense.”
In his two-word response to Servia, Tank wrote: “They were.”
As the county’s District 3 commissioner, Van Ostenbridge was elected by constituents from Anna Maria Island, the northern portion of Longboat Key, Cortez and west Bradenton. Van Ostenbridge was contacted by The Sun on June 16, and asked about Tank’s Sunshine Law compliance concerns.
Van Ostenbridge said he and Baugh discussed politics and politicians but did not discuss official county business.
“The Sunshine Law was not violated because I did not discuss anything the board could potentially vote on. I respect Mr. Tank for reaching out to me out of concern. I did respond to him as well and I assured him we didn’t discuss anything we’d vote on,” Van Ostenbridge said.
When contacted by The Sun that same day Baugh declined comment.
“Nothing to comment about,” she wrote in her message to The Sun.
County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh declined comment on the Sunshine Law compliance concerns. – Joe Hendricks | SunBaugh remains the subject of an ongoing Ethics Commission investigation regarding her role in organizing a controversial COVID-19 pop-up vaccine clinic only for those living in zip codes specific to the Lakewood Ranch area she represents as the county’s District 5 commissioner.
On June 17, The Sun emailed Tank and asked him if he would clarify which specific county issues Van Ostenbridge and Baugh discussed during their lunch outing.
In response, Tank wrote, “I don’t see the upside in going into what the commissioners were talking about, other than what I’ve said and written. It wasn’t ‘just politics.’ Since Mr. Van Ostenbridge denies that, all that will result is a lot of ‘he said, he said’ back and forth.”
In his email response to The Sun, Tank also noted, “Mr. Van Ostenbridge and the county FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) people have not produced all of the emails about the conversation.”
On June 14, The Sun requested from the county all email correspondence from any county commissioner as well as Hopes and Clague regarding Tank’s Sunshine Law compliance concerns. At week’s end, the county had not yet provided those requested public records. Earlier this month, the Mantatee Clerk of the Court’s Inspector General’s office notified the county that the Inspector General’s office was reviewing how the current county administration responds to public records requests.
BRADENTON – County Commission Chair Vanessa Baugh has reached a settlement with paralegal Michael Barfield regarding the Public Records Act lawsuit Barfield filed in December.
On June 19, Baugh signed a settlement agreement that required her to pay Barfield $4,319. When contacted on Thursday, July 1, Barfield said he received a check from Baugh the previous day and the check was drawn on her personal bank account. Barfield said he now considers the lawsuit to be “a done deal.”
According to the executed settlement document, “Without admitting any liability, the parties recognize that it is in the parties’ best interest to settle the action and claims between them. The parties are entering into this agreement for the purpose of avoiding greater future costs.”
Barfield’s civil lawsuit originally named County Commissioner James Satcher as the lone defendant and Baugh and Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge were later named as co-defendants.
In April, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge agreed to similar settlement agreements that called for them to collectively pay Barfield $6,000. In May, the Manatee County Commission voted 7-0 in favor of county taxpayers reimbursing Satcher and Van Ostenbridge approximately $56,000 to cover their attorney fees and settlement costs. When the county commission reconvenes later this month, Baugh will have an opportunity to seek similar county reimbursement for her attorney fees and settlement costs.
Baugh deposition
The Sun obtained a transcript of the deposition Barfield conducted of Baugh under oath on May 14. During the deposition, Baugh admitted she did not write the county resolution pertaining to meeting procedures that she presented for county commission adoption on Nov. 19. She also admitted that she previously claimed to have written the resolution herself.
The resolution Baugh presented on Nov. 19 with no advance notice given to the public or the commission as a whole pertained to meeting protocols and what types of commission actions could be taken during a particular type of meeting. The resolution was adopted that day by a 4-3 vote.
That commission action preceded Van Ostenbridge’s motion, which was not publicly noticed, to put then-County Administrator Cheri Coryea on notice that her termination would be discussed at a future meeting. Several weeks later, the county resolution adopted on Nov. 19 was rescinded by a unanimous commission vote.
Shown here at a county commission meeting, paralegal Michael Barfield deposed Vanessa Baugh under oath in May. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Tallahassee-based attorney George Levesque represented Baugh at the deposition and throughout the legal proceeding. The deposition transcript provides a verbatim record of the verbal exchanges that occurred regarding the county resolution.
“Let’s talk about the resolution that was introduced by you at the November 19 meeting. Do you recall that?”
“Yes,” Baugh responded.
When was the first time that you saw that resolution?” Barfield asked.
“Middle part of November. I don’t recall the exact date,” Baugh responded.
Did you draft that resolution?” Barfield asked.
“No,” Baugh responded.
“Have you previously made statements that you did?” Barfield asked
“Yes,” Baugh responded.
“And who drafted the resolution?” Barfield asked.
“Object to the form. I’m going to instruct her not to answer,” Levesque responded.
Barfield then paused the deposition and asked that Circuit Court Judge Charles Sniffen be contacted by telephone regarding Baugh’s refusal to answer his question.
When addressing the judge, Levesque said, “I’m not aware of any cases that would extend that type of public records obligation for disclosure where a private citizen hands a paper document to a government official that would then allow someone requesting the record to go back to that private citizen and say you have to give me the native file of the document that you provided in hard copy form to the government official. It would be a different story if it was drafted by Commissioner Baugh herself or one of the county staff created that document and then provided it (to) Commissioner Baugh.”
Barfield then said, “I think I am entitled to some leeway as to the circumstances of how this record came into existence and whether there are any other records that exist relating to the creation of this resolution. It was a critical document that started this entire case.”
When issuing his decision, Sniffen said, “I don’t believe the public records statute permits a wholesale investigation of the thought processes and motivations of the people who are the subject of the request. I think going into what the origin of documents was, who possessed them, when they were processed, things like that go beyond what is contemplated by the statute.”
When the deposition resumed, Baugh told Barfield she received the resolution in the lobby of the county administration building from an individual whom she did not name. Baugh told Barfield she didn’t have an appointment with that individual and that it was a random encounter.
Baugh told Barfield she then took a photo of the document and sent the photo to then-Chief Assistant County Attorney Bill Clague.
“I wanted to make sure that it was appropriate to bring for our board. I wanted him to look at it and say it was proper,” Baugh told Barfield during the deposition.
Baugh said she does not know what became of the original document and she told Barfield she had no additional contact with the individual who provided her with the resolution.
LONGBOAT KEY – Manatee County officials have been notified that a state agency is reviewing the possibility that the Town of Longboat Key may be designated as entirely in Sarasota County or Manatee County.
The northern portion of Longboat Key is currently in Manatee County and the southern portion is in Sarasota County.
On May 27, R. Philip Twogood, coordinator for the Florida Legislature’s Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA), sent written notification of the review to Manatee County Commission Chair Vanessa Baugh. County Administrator Scott Hopes was also copied on the one-page letter.
“At the direction of the Legislature, the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability will examine administrative and fiscal factors related to placing the Town of Longboat Key in either Sarasota or Manatee county. We expect to begin this review immediately. To assure the least disruption to your agency, we would like to meet with you or your representative to discuss the procedures for this review. We will contact your office in the near future to establish an appropriate time and place for the meeting. Thank you for your cooperation,” Twogood’s letter states.
The current county designations result in some Longboat Key property owners paying property taxes to Manatee County and some paying taxes to Sarasota County. The county designations also determine where and how Longboat Key residents vote.
When contacted on Thursday, June 3, Longboat Key Town Manager Tom Harmer said the town was previously notified of the state review.
“We made a request to OPPAGA to review the circumstances around Longboat Key being in two counties. This was discussed with both Manatee and Sarasota counties and one of our legislative priorities was to ask OPPAGA to do an independent review of the challenges of being in two counties,” Harmer said.
Town Manager Tom Harmer awaits the results of the state agency’s study. – Town of Longboat Key | Submitted
“This has been a topic of discussion for a number of years – the challenges and differences with the property appraisers, the tax collectors, the supervisors of elections and the emergency management offices. There are also differences in how the two county governments are funded and what services they provide here. We’ve done our own review, but this would be an independent review,” Harmer said.
In 2018, the town commission held public hearings pertaining to the town’s two-county status. Harmer said no final conclusions were drawn from the 2018 hearings.
“We were just presenting the finding to both county commissions, so we had joint meetings with both Sarasota County and Manatee County. We looked at the differences and some of the challenges we face. One thing that did come out of those hearings was related to emergency management. Both counties agreed that we shouldn’t report to two different counties during an emergency, like a hurricane. The two sheriffs may have different curfews. The two counties may have different evacuations and reentry timings. We entered into a three-party agreement a little over a year ago that says during an active state of emergency we report through Sarasota County. This applied to the COVID pandemic too,” Harmer said.
“We’ve had discussions with Manatee County and looked for ways to partner with them financially. They agreed to partner with us on our beach renourishment project,” Harmer said.
Harmer provided The Sun with a copy of a March 2021 town presentation titled “Two Counties Challenges.” The presentation notes the total millage rate imposed on Manatee County property owners was 13.87 mills in 2020, compared to 11.7 mills for Sarasota County property owners.
“There’s been no discussion with the town commission on a preference. We’ve provided what we think is factual information to say here’s the difference in the millage rate, here’s the difference in services, here’s the difference in grant opportunities, school board funding and how working with the West Coast Inland Navigation District differs in both counties. The residents have not taken a vote and the commission has not taken a formal position on a particular county at this point,” Harmer said.
“This is really an act of the state Legislature. It’s the state Legislature that would approve it. That’s not something the town can do. Anything that we would do would be more of a non-binding straw ballot or survey. The state is the only one that can move county boundaries,” Harmer said.
Harmer was asked if the facts favor one county over the other.
“It’s a little bit of apples and oranges the way the counties are funded and how we interact with them. That’s why we want to present this to the state Legislature. We want to present the two different financial models for the counties and how it impacts us. We’re looking to the state for recommendations or options on how we address some of these concerns. Some of the concerns are about duplication, some are financial. We’re looking for the state to tell us what we can do and what we should do. Our residents may have different views, the counties may have different views, so why not go to the state and ask for a review of the circumstances and their thoughts on our options,” Harmer said.
“In their notice to us, they said they were moving forward immediately and wanted to complete the report in September. We appreciate them taking this on,” Harmer said.
According to Harmer, the current population of Longboat Key is approximately 7,200 residents.
UPDATED Monday, May 24, 2021 at 11:40 a.m. – MANATEE COUNTY – County commissioners Kevin Van Ostenbridge and James Satcher will be reimbursed for the attorney fees and legal expenses they incurred as defendants in a Public Records Act lawsuit filed by paralegal Michael Barfield in December.
On May 11, the county commission voted 7-0 in favor of reimbursing Van Ostenbridge and Satcher up to $60,000. The commission approved the reimbursements without being provided with itemized attorney bills that supported the reimbursement requests.
Citing standard operating procedure, Clerk of the Court and Comptroller Angel Colonneso said the commission-approved reimbursements would not be paid until her office received and reviewed itemized invoices from Van Ostenbridge and Satcher’s attorneys.
According to the non-itemized attorney fee summaries County Attorney Bill Clague provided The Sun on May 12, Van Ostenbridge incurred $26,368 in attorney bills and $281 in additional legal costs for legal services provided by attorney Morgan Bentley and his office, for a total of $26,650. According to detailed invoices provided later by the Clerk of the Court’s Office, Van Ostenbridge received 97.2 hours of attorney services from Bentley’s office.
Van Ostenbridge incurred an additional $7,500 in expenses for legal services provided by attorney Sean Flynn and his office. According to the itemized invoice provided by the Clerk of the Circuit Court office, Van Ostenbridge received 22 hours of legal services from the Flynn Law firm. Van Ostenbridge’s attorney fees and legal expenses totaled $34,150.
According to the non-itemized invoice received from Clague, Satcher incurred $15,750 in attorney fees for 70 hours of service at $225 per hour. According to the itemized invoice later provided by the Clerk of the Court’s Office, Satcher’s total bill was $15,785.
Van Ostenbridge and Satcher’s combined attorney fees and legal costs totaled $49,935. The commission-approved reimbursement also included the $6,000 settlement payment Van Ostenbridge and Satcher agreed to pay Barfield to settle the lawsuit without an admission of liability regarding Public Records Act compliance. The settlement agreement with Barfield was executed in late April.
According to the invoices and settlement agreement, the total reimbursement sought is $55,935.
Commission Chair Vanessa Baugh is now the lone remaining defendant named in Barfield’s lawsuit he filed in December. On May 14, Barfield deposed Baugh under oath. An in-person court hearing before Judge Charles Sniffen is pending.
According to Barfield the purpose of the hearing is to seek a ruling from Sniffen as to whether Baugh fully complied with the Public Records Act and provided all the records he requested.
Commission discussion
During the May 11 commission discussion, Clague referenced a legal memorandum he included in the agenda packet.
“Florida law allows the county to pay the legal expenses incurred by commissioners in this case, subject to the board finding that the commissioners were performing their official duties for a public purpose,” the memo stated.
When addressing the commission, Clague said, “The purpose of the law is to prevent what the courts refer to as a ‘chilling effect’ on the performance of official duties by public officials, particularly elected officials. The idea is that if officials are afraid that they will be forced to pay legal expenses, personally, for doing their jobs, they will be afraid to do their jobs. People will not always agree with the decisions elected officials make and the law recognizes that the place to deal with that is the ballot box.”
Commissioner Carol Whitmore asked Clague if Van Ostenbridge and Satcher could recuse themselves from the vote if they wished to not give the appearance of personal gain or loss. Clague said they could, but they’d have to leave the room. Neither commissioner recused themselves, nor were they asked to.
Satcher said he was surprised when the lawsuit was filed and originally named him as the first and only defendant, with Baugh and Van Ostenbridge later named as co-defendants. Satcher said it was never his desire or intent to hold back any records Barfield requested.
Regarding the pending vote on the requested reimbursements, Satcher said, “People shouldn’t be bankrupted for being elected.”
Public input
County residents Matt Bower and Glen Gibellina expressed opposition to the reimbursement requests as presented, in part because the public had not yet been provided with copies of the attorney bills.
“This bill is excessive,” Bower said of the total reimbursements sought.
Bower said he and more than a dozen other county residents he communicated with were unhappy about the taxpayers being asked to pay the commissioners’ legal bills.
Gibellina said, “Any time there’s a settlement, it’s a red flag. We make deals to save time and money, but at the cost of transparency to the citizens.
Gibellina said the reimbursement request should have been delayed until the public was provided with copies of the attorney bills.
“If we’re paying the bill, we deserve to see what the bill is,” he said.
MANATEE COUNTY – County Commissioners James Satcher and Kevin Van Ostenbridge have reached a $6,000 settlement with paralegal Michael Barfield in the lawsuit he filed regarding Public Records Act compliance.
According to the settlement agreement, “Van Ostenbridge and Satcher shall pay Barfield the sum of $6,000 within 30 days of full execution of this agreement. Barfield agreed to file notice of voluntary dismissal.”
County Commission Chair Vanessa Baugh is now the lone remaining defendant in the civil lawsuit Barfield filed and then amended in December alleging the defendants’ failure to fully comply with the public records requests he submitted on Nov. 20.
Barfield sought from Baugh, Satcher, Van Ostenbridge and Commissioner George Kruse all emails, text messages, social media and other digital messages sent or received from Nov. 3 (election night) through Nov. 20. He also requested detailed phone logs of all calls made or received during that period. Because he promptly complied with Barfield’s requests, Kruse was not named in the lawsuit.
Barfield’s records requests were preceded by the Nov. 19 special county commission meeting requested by Van Ostenbridge during which he proposed putting County Administrator Cheri Coryea on notice that her potential termination would be discussed at a future meeting. Van Ostenbridge made that motion with no advance notice given to the public or the commission as a whole.
When opposing the motion, Commissioner Reggie Bellamy said the efforts to oust Coryea appeared to be “premeditated.” Commissioner Carol Whitmore said they appeared to be “orchestrated.”
It was also learned that Van Ostenbridge requested and received a private meeting with Coryea earlier that morning, during which he asked Coryea to resign without first consulting with the commission as a whole. Coryea told Van Ostenbridge she would not resign.
District 3 Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge has agreed to settle the lawsuit and now seeks reimbursement from the county. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
On Feb. 23, Coryea and the county commission mutually agreed to a separation agreement that ended her tenure as county administrator and called for her to receive approximately $204,000 in compensation from the county.
Settlement reached
When contacted May 4, Barfield said, “They are reimbursing not all, but a significant portion of my costs. There were no attorney fees because I didn’t hire an attorney. That probably saved them another $10,000 or $15,000 in legal fees. Vanessa Baugh hasn’t settled yet.”
On Tuesday, May 11, the county commission will discuss Satcher and Van Ostenbridge’s request to collectively be reimbursed $60,000 for the attorney fees and costs they incurred as defendants. Attorney Morgan Bentley represented Van Ostenbridge and attorney Robert Robinson represented Satcher.
As of Sunday, the meeting packet for Tuesday’s meeting did not include any documents that detail how the $60,000 reimbursement figure was determined. The reimbursement request requires the support of at least four commissioners.
The meeting packet includes a memo from County Attorney Bill Clague that states, “Florida law allows the county to pay the legal expenses incurred by commissioners in this case, subject to the board finding that the commissioners were performing their official duties for a public purpose in the matters covered by the litigation.”
On Thursday, May 6, The Sun requested from the Manatee County Records Division, acting County Administrator Scott Hopes and others any documents Satcher and Van Ostenbridge provided in support of their $60,000 request. The only response received was from Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller Angelina Colonneso, who also requested those records.
“We are requesting the itemized receipts which would be needed prior to any reimbursement. The request will be made of the commissioners themselves, not via the county,” Colonneso stated in her response, adding that she will provide copies of those documents when received.
“We had one very brief hearing in this case and one all-day deposition (for Van Ostenbridge). I can’t figure out how they could cumulatively run up legal bills for $54,000. They’re only paying me $6,000,” Barfield said.
“We’re entitled to see the back-up material: the amount of fees, the billing hours incurred and the rates they’re paying their attorneys. It has to be a reasonable number. You can’t determine reasonable costs until you know what the $54,000 is based on. In my view, all of this should come out of their own pockets because they failed to comply with the law, and they didn’t turn over any records until after a judge issued an order for them to do so. They are now asking the county taxpayers to support their violations of the Public Records Act,” he added.
In response to a criminal complaint also filed by Barfield, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) conducted a criminal investigation of Baugh, Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge.
On March 19, FDLE spokesperson Jeremy Burns provided a case summary that stated, “In December, the state attorney for the 12th Judicial Circuit requested FDLE’s assistance with reviewing a citizen complaint concerning allegations of Sunshine Law violations and possibly other law violations by several Manatee County commissioners. FDLE Agents met with the complainant who alleged that James Satcher, George Kruse, Vanessa Baugh and Kevin Van Ostenbridge conspired to reverse a controversial land purchase (the Lena Road property) and to fire the Manatee County administrator. There was no information obtained to substantiate that a criminal violation occurred.”
By settling the lawsuit, the defendants are neither admitting or denying the allegations made by Barfield in his civil suit, but are, in part, “entering into this agreement for the purpose of avoiding greater future costs.”
Bower memo
In response to the reimbursement request, District 3 resident and former commission candidate Matt Bower submitted to the county a four-page memorandum in opposition to the award of attorney fees.
“At this time, no documentation has been presented to the board or to the public giving rise that these two commissioners actually paid for the legal services they are requesting reimbursement. Considering the asset and income disclosure by each of these two commissioners at the time of their filing for county commissioner, it is difficult to believe either commissioner personally paid for such legal services. To even consider whether such legal fees should be reimbursed, the burden of proof is upon these two commissioners to submit proof – copies of checks, wiring of funds or otherwise – that such fees were paid and incurred,” Bower’s memo states.
According to the disclosure form Satcher filed when seeking office, Satcher Ministries earned $28,932 and Satcher earned $16,714 as a business consultant per his 2019 federal tax returns. According to his disclosure form, Van Ostenbridge earned $20,000 from Boyd Realty and $58,791 as the owner-operator of Be Easy Tours. Manatee County Commissioners currently earn approximately $90,000 per year.
District 1 Commissioner James Satcher seeks county reimbursement after settling a Public Records Act-related lawsuit. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“If an award of attorney’s fees is granted, those fees must be considered reasonable. Thus, without a billing ledger from the commissioners’ attorney, no board member, nor the public, is in a position to grant this request. I find it disingenuous that a billing ledger has not been provided,” Bower’s memo stated.
Baugh deposition and hearing
“I’ve said I wouldn’t end the case until I have comfort that I received all the records I requested. I’m not there yet with Commissioner Baugh,” Barfield said.
Baugh
On May 5, 12th Judicial Circuit Court Judge Charles Sniffen approved Barfield’s request to depose Baugh under oath on Friday, May 14. A subsequent hearing before Sniffen has been scheduled on Friday, May 26 at 9 a.m.
On April 27, Tallahassee-based attorney George Levesque sent Sniffen a letter on behalf of his client, Baugh.
“In light of the allegations made in Mr. Barfield’s petition, the undisputed sworn evidence and the procedural history in this case, we believe there is just cause for this court to dismiss or deny the petition. Commissioner Baugh would like for this court to conduct a non-evidentiary hearing to afford her the opportunity to advance these arguments,” Levesque’s letter stated.
Barfield said he hopes the May 26 hearing produces a ruling as to whether Baugh has fully complied with the Public Records Act.
PALMETTO – County and state officials believe they now have the Piney Point crisis under control.
During today’s 4 p.m. press conference, acting County Administrator Scott Hopes said, “This has been short-lived. We have dramatically reduced the risk in a very controlled way, so that, hopefully, all of us have time to recover both physically and emotionally. I think everybody should rest assured that this is very much under control now. The risk has been lessened to the point that people will be able to return to their homes. Well water (and) drinking water is safe. The environment is being protected as much as possible.”
Manatee Public Safety Director Jake Saur said the Piney Point evacuation order has been lifted and residents and business owners and operators are now allowed to return to their homes and businesses. US-41 is open but a stretch of Buckeye Road remains closed.
According to Saur, the breached pond currently contains approximately 59 feet of water. More than 20 pumps are being used to continue siphoning approximately 33-34 million gallons a day of water from the breached containment pond continue to be pumped into Tampa Bay.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) is taking frequent water quality samples at the Piney Point site, at Port Manatee and in the waters beyond the port. Water quality sample results can be found online.
Kevin Guthrie, the deputy director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management said a submersible will be brought in Wednesday to survey and hopefully repair the tear or tears in the liner of the breached retention pond.
Earlier today, during the Manatee County Commission meeting, Hopes said there has been no second breach of the containment pond. He said the thermal imaging previously detected by aerial drones and thought to be another potential breach in the containment wall, proved to be plant material rather than water seeping through a tear into the containment wall. Hopes said approximately 300 million gallons of water remained in the breached containment pond as of this morning.
During today’s meeting, county commissioners unanimously approved using deep well injection to remove any remaining water from the breached pond and also from the more polluted water contained in two additional Piney Point retention ponds that have not been breached. According to County Commission Chairwoman Vanessa Baugh, the water will be treated to the county’s standards before it is injected deep into the ground using a deep injection well to be located on a nearby county-owned property.
FDEP Secretary Noah Valenstein said the permitting, engineering and design work for a deep injection well typically takes two to three years before the actual injection process begins.
State and federal funds are expected to be provided to cover or help cover the significant cost of the deep well injection process.
In closing Hopes said he did not anticipate the county holding any additional press conferences on the Piney Point situation.
FDEP and FDEM officials and are expected to remain at the Piney Point site for the foreseeable future.
Updated March 22, 2021 at 5:22 p.m. – MANATEE COUNTY – A Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) investigation found no evidence that four Manatee County commissioners committed crimes or violated the Sunshine Law.
“In December, the state attorney for the 12th Judicial Circuit requested FDLE’s assistance with reviewing a citizen complaint concerning allegations of Sunshine Law violations and possibly other law violations by several Manatee County commissioners. FDLE agents met with the complainant who alleged that Manatee County Commissioners James Satcher, George Kruse, Vanessa Baugh and Kevin Van Ostenbridge conspired to reverse a controversial land purchase and to fire the Manatee County administrator,” according to the case summary that FDLE spokesperson Jeremy Burns provided on Friday, March 19.
“FDLE initiated a preliminary inquiry to determine if any criminal violations occurred. After the review of records provided by the complainant and conducting several interviews, there was no information obtained to substantiate that a criminal violation occurred,” according to the FDLE case summary.
According to Burns, FDLE considers the investigation closed.
The investigation was conducted in response to a complaint filed by paralegal Michael Barfield.
“Obviously, I’m disappointed. It seems the standard in this jurisdiction requires a confession before a Sunshine Law violation is charged,” Barfield said when contacted Friday afternoon. “We will look at the preliminary investigation FDLE conducted. I don’t believe they conducted a full investigation. My understanding is they didn’t even interview Mr. Van Ostenbridge.”
Van Ostenbridge, Satcher and Baugh are still named as defendants in a related civil lawsuit that Barfield filed in early December regarding the commissioners’ compliance with the Public Records Act and the public records he requested of them and Kruse in late November.
Barfield said the FDLE findings have no impact on the civil case.
“In a criminal investigation, you have to prove that there was a criminal intent to violate the law and the burden of proof is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ Fortunately, a civil process does not require any intent. The standard of proof is much lower, and the judge makes that determination,” Barfield said.
Van Ostenbridge deposed
As part of the ongoing civil proceedings, Barfield deposed Van Ostenbridge under oath on March 12. Barfield said Van Ostenbridge did not invoke his Fifth Amendment rights or refuse to answer the questions posed to him – as was previously suggested in a motion that attorney Morgan Bentley filed on Van Ostenbridge’s behalf.
County Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge has been deposed under oath regarding the still pending civil case. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“We took Commissioner Van Ostenbridge’s deposition, and I am still waiting for additional records to be produced that I’ve been promised. There wasn’t anything terribly new in the deposition in terms of what we didn’t already know, but Mr. Van Ostenbridge did say he made the decision to terminate Cheri Coryea before he was sworn in on Nov. 17. He said he made that decision sometime between the 11th and the 13th of November,” Barfield said.
At the request of Bentley, the media was excluded from attending Van Ostenbridge’s deposition. Barfield said he will order and later place in the court records a copy of the verbatim transcript being prepared by the court reporter tasked with producing the official record of the deposition.
Barfield said he previously obtained email records that show Baugh, on Oct. 28, sent Van Ostenbridge, Kruse and Satcher a copy of then-County Administrator Cheri Coryea’s employment contract. Barfield said the emails containing Coryea’s contract included no additional comments from Baugh. The commissioners were subject to the Government in the Sunshine Law after being elected Nov. 3.
Barfield said he’s also still waiting on additional records to be produced by Baugh and Satcher.
“After I reach the point in time when I feel confident there’s no other records to recover, we’ll have time to review everything,” he said.
Additional investigations
The Manatee County Sheriff’s Office has not yet released any findings in a separate criminal investigation conducted in response to a criminal complaint Barfield filed regarding Baugh’s involvement in the pop-up vaccine distribution site she helped establish in her Lakewood Ranch district in February.
Baugh is also the subject of an unresolved ethics complaint that attorney Jennifer Hamey filed regarding the Lakewood Ranch vaccination site.
BRADENTON – Manatee County resident Jennifer Hamey filed a complaint with the Florida Commission on Ethics Tuesday regarding County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh’s recent role in organizing a pop-up COVID-19 vaccination distribution site in Lakewood Ranch.
Hamey, a local attorney, filed the ethics complaint one day after Sarasota paralegal Michael Barfield filed a sworn criminal complaint with 12th Judicial Circuit State Attorney Ed Brodsky’s office and the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office regarding Baugh’s participation in arranging the event and including herself and four friends on the vaccine list.
Hamey’s ethics complaint and Barfield’s criminal complaint are separate and independent actions that pertain to the same issues.
Ethics complaint
Taking place the week of Feb. 16 at the Premier Sports Campus in Lakewood Ranch, the pop-up clinic Baugh helped organize was limited to 3,000 recipients in the 34202 and 34211 zip codes only. As part of her organizational efforts, Baugh also submitted to Manatee County Public Safety Director Jacob Saur a list containing the names of five specific individuals, including herself, to be vaccinated.
As a result of the public fallout that ensued, Baugh later apologized to some degree for her actions and she said she chose not to receive the vaccine herself.
Baugh helped organize the Lakewood Ranch vaccination site in conjunction with Gov. Ron DeSantis and Lakewood Ranch developer Rex Jensen.
Manatee County issued a press release on Feb. 15 in which Baugh was quoted as saying, “This unique opportunity was made possible by Governor DeSantis calling (Schroeder-Manatee Ranch Inc. president) Rex Jensen wanting to do a vaccination site near Lakewood Ranch. The governor has been trying to find large areas of neighborhoods to target.’”
According to Baugh’s shortlist, which contained each person’s zip code, address, phone number and birthdate, two of the five people on that list – Rex Jensen and his father, Lawrence Jensen – do not live in the 34202 or 34211 zip codes. Baugh’s shortlist also included Lakewood Ranch residents Robert and Marie Keehn, who like Baugh, do live in the 34202 zip code.
The Lakewood Ranch pop-up vaccine site’s zip code restrictions were not in accordance with the randomized, lottery-based registration and standby pool protocols previously established by the Manatee County Commission, according to the ethics complaint.
Issues for consideration
Hamey’s ethics complaint lists two issues for consideration by the Commission on Ethics.
“Did respondent (Baugh) violate Florida Statute 112.313(6), Misuse of Public Position, by ignoring the county’s lottery system for the COVID-19 vaccine distribution and instead unilaterally picking two zip codes in her district to receive 3,000 additional vaccines issued by the state, to the detriment of all other Manatee County residents 65 and over who had signed up for the lottery system?”
“Did respondent violate Florida Statute 112.313(6), Misuse of Public Position, by putting herself and four friends onto a ‘VIP’ list provided to the county to ensure she received a vaccine from the extra doses provided by the state?”
Hamey’s complaint says Baugh was approached earlier this month by DeSantis with an offer to provide 3,000 additional vaccines for a pop-up vaccination site at the Premier Sports Campus.
To date, the county-administered vaccinations have generally occurred at Tom Bennett Park in east Manatee County and at the county’s public safety center.
Hamey’s complaint notes that the Premier Sports Campus is owned and operated as a Manatee County park.
“Respondent (Baugh), by her own admission as stated by her at a county work session on Feb. 18, took full responsibility for choosing the two zip code locations and advised she was not directed by the governor to do so. Both of these zip codes are located in her district, are predominantly white and have an average median income of over $100,000,” the complaint states. It also notes Baugh lives in the 34202 zip code and owns a business there as well.
The ethics complaint states, “Respondent (Baugh) further admits in her responses to correspondence from an angry resident that she ‘did have a lack of judgment.’ ”
Hamey’s complaint cites language contained in Florida Statute 112.313(6) that states, “No public officer shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or her official position or any property or resource which may be within his or her trust, or perform his or her official duties to secure a special privilege, benefit or exemption for himself, herself or others.”
The complaint also states, “The first instance of violating 112.313(6) occurred when respondent (Baugh) took it upon herself to determine what two zip codes were worthy to receive an additional 3,000 vaccines and chose two areas that were advantageous to her personally and to the detriment of the other 150,000 persons over the age of 65 who had done as directed and entered into a lottery system.
“Respondent used her position to advise the governor of her choices. She did so with no discussion with the other six commissioners, and she did so without any consideration to the very lottery system she (and the other commissioners) put into place for the residents of Manatee County to maintain fairness in the process,” according to the complaint.
“The second instance of violating 112.313(6) occurred just days after already excluding over 140,000 residents from a chance at the 3,000 vaccines – only 7,285 of the approximately 150,000 signed-up residents lived in 34202 or 34211. Respondent created a ‘VIP’ list to ensure that she and several friends and neighbors got vaccines out of those 3,000 that were provided by the state. Two of the parties that she listed on her ‘VIP’ list didn’t even live within the two zip codes that she chose as the ones to get the vaccine,” Hamey stated in her complaint.
“These actions taken by the respondent, separately and over the course of approximately a week, are a clear violation of the requirements outlined in 112.313(6),” the complaint states.
The ethics complaint is accompanied by several evidentiary exhibits, including the Monday, Feb. 15 email Baugh sent Saur that contained her list of five specified vaccine recipients.
The exhibits also include the Tuesday, Feb. 9, email Baugh sent Saur that said, “Jake, the state wants Rex to keep a list. Can we do that.”
In response, Saur wrote, “The state hasn’t mentioned anything to us on this end yet on what they require. We would be able to pull from our vaccine waiting pool for scheduling for them.”
Baugh remains commission chair
On Tuesday, the Manatee County Commission voted 4-3 in opposition to Commissioner Reggie Bellamy’s motion to remove Baugh as the commission chairperson. Bellamy’s motion did not seek to remove Baugh as a county commissioner, nor does the commission have that authority. Before making his motion, Bellamy asked Baugh if she would resign as commission chair. Baugh said she would not.
County Commissioner Reggie Bellamy unsuccessfully proposed removing Vanessa Baugh from her position as the county commission chairperson. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Baugh was then joined by commissioners George Kruse, James Satcher and Kevin Van Ostenbridge in opposing her removal as chair. Commissioners Misty Servia and Carol Whitmore joined Bellamy in support of his failed motion.
MANATEE COUNTY – Manatee County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh’s role in the controversial Lakewood Ranch pop-up vaccination distribution site has prompted a sworn criminal complaint filed by Sarasota-based paralegal Michael Barfield.
Barfield filed his complaint Monday evening with 12th Judicial Circuit State Attorney Ed Brodsky’s office and also with the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO). The complaint alleges Baugh’s vaccination-related efforts may have violated Florida law.
The sheriff’s office is now investigating Barfield’s complaint. When contacted by email on Tuesday, MCSO Public Information Officer Randy Warren said, “It’s an active investigation. Michael Barfield filed a complaint yesterday and our detectives are looking into it now.”
“Sometime near Tuesday, Feb. 9, Manatee County resident Rex Jensen received a telephone call from Pat Neal. Governor Ron DeSantis was already on the line when the call was made.” – Michael Barfield
In contrast to the randomized, lottery-style vaccine registration and standby pool protocols previously established by the Manatee County Commission, Baugh helped organize a pop-up vaccine distribution site for 3,000 recipients in the 34202 and 34211 zip codes only. In doing so, Baugh did not consult her fellow commissioners. The vaccinations occurred the week of Feb. 16.
On Feb. 16, Manatee County issued a press release regarding the pop-up clinic. In the press release, Baugh was quoted as saying, “This unique opportunity was made possible by Governor DeSantis calling Rex Jensen wanting to do a vaccination site near Lakewood Ranch. The governor has been trying to find large areas of neighborhoods to target.”
Jensen is the president of Schroeder-Manatee Ranch Inc. Schroeder-Manatee Ranch is the parent company of Lakewood Ranch.
In addition to restricting vaccine access to zip codes only, Baugh produced a list of five specific vaccine recipients who did not have to rely on their names being randomly pulled from the county’s standby registration pool. That list included Baugh herself, even though she decided later not to receive the vaccine.
“Vaccine distribution must not be based on politics. Manatee County unanimously adopted the Vaccine Standby Pool and residents have been patiently waiting for their number to be called. It’s offensive and criminal when one commissioner diverts 3,000 vaccine doses to an affluent area and then adds names, including her own, to a VIP list.” – Michael Barfield
On Monday, Feb. 15, Baugh emailed her list of specific recipients to Manatee County Public Safety Director Jake Saur. Baugh’s list included Jensen, whom she listed as living in the 34212 zip code, and his father, Lawrence Jensen, whom she listed as living in the 34208 zip code. Baugh’s list also included Lakewood Ranch residents Robert and Marie Keehn, whom she listed as living in the 34202 zip code, and herself, whom she listed as living in the 34202 zip code. Baugh also owns the Vanessa Fine Jewelry store in Lakewood Ranch.
Complaint allegations
“Based on the following information, I have a reasonable belief that violations of Florida Statutes occurred by Vanessa Baugh beginning on or about Feb. 9,” Barfield stated in his complaint.
The complaint references the following Florida Statutes:
“When Baugh inserted individuals and herself on a COVID-19 vaccine distribution list, she acted contrary to the adopted Vaccine Standby Pool and used her official position to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for herself and others, which may be in violation of section 112.313(6), Florida Statutes, Misuse of Public Position.
“By including herself and individuals on a COVID-19 vaccine distribution list, Baugh acted contrary to the adopted Vaccine Standby Pool and altered or caused the alteration of an official record or official document, except as authorized by law or contract, or caused another person to perform such an act, which may be in violation of Section 838.022, Florida Statutes, Official Misconduct.
“By including herself and individuals on a COVID-19 vaccine distribution list, Baugh acted contrary to the adopted Vaccine Standby Pool and used her official position to take action in reliance on information to which she had access in her official capacity and which had not been made public, to acquire a pecuniary interest or gain a benefit by such information, which may be in violation of section 839.26, Florida Statutes, Misuse of Confidential Information,” Barfield stated in his complaint.
Supporting statements
Barfield’s complaint includes several additional supporting statements.
“On Jan. 6, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) of Manatee County held a special meeting regarding COVID-19 and vaccinations. At the conclusion of that special meeting, the Manatee BCC adopted a motion authorizing the county administrator to implement the ‘Vaccine Standby Pool,’ effective Jan. 7, until further notice. The motion was adopted unanimously. As explained in the public presentation during the special meeting, the effect of the Vaccine Standby Pool was to randomize distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine through a lottery system,” the complaint states.
“On or about Feb. 8, constituents of Baugh were actively soliciting her about their eligibility and inability to get appointments for vaccine distribution in Manatee County. Sometime near Tuesday, Feb. 9, Manatee County resident Rex Jensen received a telephone call from Pat Neal. Governor Ron DeSantis was already on the line when the call was made. The reported purpose of the call was to facilitate a location for a pop-up vaccine distribution site at Premier Sports Campus for additional doses of COVID-19 vaccine,” the complaint states.
“On Feb. 9, Baugh sent an email to Jacob (Jake) Saur, Director of Public Safety of Manatee County stating, ‘Jake, the state wants Rex to keep a list. Can we do that.’ That same afternoon, Jensen sent an email to Courtney Coppola, a Florida Department of Health employee, stating Baugh helped reserve the pop-up site and outlining the tentative plan: ‘I have no infrastructure or staff to field all the calls necessary to assemble and maintain a list of candidates for the vaccine. I am copying Commissioner Baugh in the hope that she might be able to think creatively to find a solution,’” the complaint states.
“Baugh ignored the Vaccine Standby Pool process and selected two zip codes within her own district, including friends and herself, that would receive the additional doses of COVID-19 vaccine at the pop-up site. On Feb. 12, Alicia Niki Boyette, a contractor on behalf of the Florida Division of Emergency Management, sent an email to Baugh regarding the registration process for the ‘upcoming vaccination event.’ Boyette indicated that the information the department required for the event was a list with names, date of birth and phone numbers. Baur forwarded the email from Boyette to Saur, who replied that he was working on it. The next day, Baugh replied to Saur ‘Pls send to me when you have info as I am working on a list.’ On Monday, Feb. 15, Baugh sent an email to Saur with the subject matter ‘Names for list’ in which she added a number of individuals to the list of those who would receive the extra doses of vaccine at the pop-up site,” Barfield’s complaint states.
“A notice was sent out to Manatee County residents on Feb. 17 advising that the vaccinations scheduled for Bennett Park under the adopted process would be rescheduled due to inclement weather. Meanwhile, the plan to distribute the additional doses at the pop-up site went forward,” the complaint states.
Barfield comments
When contacted Tuesday, Barfield said, “Vaccine distribution must not be based on politics. Manatee County unanimously adopted the Vaccine Standby Pool and residents have been patiently waiting for their number to be called. It’s offensive and criminal when one commissioner diverts 3,000 vaccine doses to an affluent area and then adds names, including her own, to a VIP list.”
Paralegal Michael Barfield alleges the recent vaccination selection process may have violated state law.- Joe Hendricks | Sun
“Worse, the regular vaccine distribution that was planned for the same weekend was canceled on the grounds of inclement weather. Yet the vaccine distribution at the pop-up site for the VIP list went forward without a hitch. If those optics aren’t bad enough, the VIP list and two zip codes selected by Baugh for vaccine distribution at the pop-up site happen to be the most affluent and white in Manatee County. I might add that these two zip codes have the lowest rate of COVID-19 infection within Manatee County,” Barfield said.
“This conduct is the classic example of corruption and using official power to gain a benefit for friends and the well-connected. It’s time for our system of justice to hold her accountable,” Barfield said.
MANATEE COUNTY – County Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge has provided paralegal Michael Barfield with a call log that details calls made and received on his personal phone.
As the District 3 county commissioner, Van Ostenbridge represents Anna Maria Island, Cortez, the Manatee County portion of Longboat Key and west Bradenton.
Van Ostenbridge provided Barfield his phone records last week in response to the public records request Barfield made on Nov. 20.
As of Monday afternoon, Barfield said he had identified most of the calls listed in Van Ostenbridge’s call log, but he was still reviewing those records.
Van Ostenbridge’s phone log reveals who he talked to, when he talked to them and for how long, but it does not provide any details on the content of those phone conversations.
The Florida Sunshine Law prohibits members of the same county or city commission from discussing official or foreseeably official county business in any setting other than a properly noticed public meeting. The Sunshine Law does not prohibit members of the same elected body from discussing matters unrelated to their official government business.
Van Ostenbridge and Baugh calls
Van Ostenbridge was elected on Nov 3.
According to the call log he provided to Barfield, Van Ostenbridge and Baugh communicated by phone 15 times between Nov. 4 and Dec. 1. Their calls totaled 129 minutes and ranged in length from one minute to 23 minutes.
Van Ostenbridge and Baugh spoke for 17 minutes on Nov. 5, 23 minutes on Nov. 12, 14 minutes on Nov. 13, 10 minutes on Nov. 16 and for six minutes and 11 minutes on Nov. 18.
One day later, during the special county commission meeting Van Ostenbridge requested, Van Ostenbridge made a motion to put County Administrator Cheri Coryea on notice that her termination would be discussed on Jan. 6.
Baugh, Satcher and Commissioner George Kruse supported the motion made by Van Ostenbridge with no advance notice given to the public. But on Dec. 10, Kruse withdrew his support for further discussion on Coryea’s termination and those efforts have now ceased.
During the Nov. 19 meeting, Baugh also introduced a county resolution pertaining to commission meeting procedures, which was adopted by the same 4-3 vote with no advance notice given to the public.
When contacted Monday, Van Ostenbridge provided the following response via text message: “Vanessa Baugh is a very good friend and we speak regularly. I turned over all my calls with the other commissioners in the spirit of transparency. I did not discuss county business on any of those calls.”
County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh has provided paralegal Michael Barfield with a copy of her personal call log. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
When contacted Monday, Baugh provided a similar response: “Just personal conversations between two people who became friends on the campaign trail. We campaigned very closely together and forged a friendship.”
Calls with other commissioners
According to Van Ostenbridge’s call log, he engaged in five phone conversations with Satcher between Nov. 7 and Nov. Nov. 24. Those calls totaled 39 minutes and included a 21-minute call on Nov. 7 and a 13-minute call on Nov. 24.
According to his call log, Van Ostenbridge initiated two phone conversations with Commissioner Misty Servia: a nine-minute call on Nov. 8 and a 13-minute call on Nov. 17 – the same day Van Ostenbridge, Satcher and Kruse were sworn in as commissioners.
Regarding her phone conversations with Van Ostenbridge, Servia said, “I endorsed Kevin and we had a friendly relationship, with messages of ‘Congratulations on being sworn in,’ and, ‘Are you getting settled into your new office?’ I wanted to see him grow and succeed. It goes without saying that I was extremely disappointed when he suggested firing our county administrator, and I had no idea that he planned to do that just hours after being sworn in.”
According to his call log, Van Ostenbridge engaged in three phone conversations with Kruse between Nov. 4 and Dec. 1, for a total of 15 minutes.
According to his call log, Van Ostenbridge initiated a one-minute call to Commissioner Carol Whitmore on Nov. 16 and Whitmore initiated consecutive one-minute and five-minute calls to Van Ostenbridge on Nov. 18.
Additional calls
Private citizens who do not hold public office or work for a local governmental agency are not subject to the Sunshine Law, but Van Ostenbridge’s call log provides additional insight into those he’s in frequent contact with.
According to his call log, Van Ostenbridge and developer Carlos Beruff had nine phone communications for a total of 67 minutes between Nov. 11 and Nov. 21.
The pair spoke for 15 minutes on Nov. 11, for 17 minutes at 7:25 p.m. on Nov. 17, for seven minutes at 1:24 p.m. on Nov. 19 and for a total of 14 minutes on Nov. 20 during three consecutive calls that occurred between 6:39 a.m. and 7:17 a.m.
According to Van Ostenbridge’s call log, he spoke to developer Michael Neal six times for a total of 91 minutes between Nov. 12 and Nov. 20; and to developer Pat Neal three times for a total of 21 minutes.
According to his call log, Van Ostenbridge and Bradenton Mayor Gene Brown engaged in 10 phone conversations for a total of 80 minutes between Nov. 16 and Nov. 20.
According to his call log, Van Ostenbridge and campaign supporter Bob Spencer, from West Coast Tomato, spoke nine times for a total of 55 minutes.
Barfield comments
When contacted Monday, Barfield commented on the calls made between commissioners.
“They would have you believe that all these calls were completely about friendship, but it appears they were taking steps behind the scenes to terminate Cheri Coryea, and to bring forth Commissioner Baugh’s resolution,” Barfield said.
“There’s still pieces of the jigsaw puzzle that are missing. Unfortunately, the picture coming into focus raises very troubling concerns about commissioners routinely chatting with each other on key dates surrounding the efforts to terminate the county administrator,” Barfield said.
Paralegal and Sunshine Law expert Michael Barfield continues to investigate the private communications of four Manatee County commissioners. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Barfield also commented on some of the other phone calls that took place.
“When you start piecing everything together, it tells me there are some key people acting as conduits between the commission, as well as the commissioners talking among themselves,” Barfield said.
Barfield said he was still reviewing the call log he received from Baugh on Christmas Eve. His partial review of Baugh’s calls between Nov. 3 and Nov. 11 indicate Baugh engaged in four calls with Van Ostenbridge and 12 calls with Kruse during that period.
According to Barfield, attorney George Levesque, from the GrayRobinson law firm in Tallahassee, is representing Baugh, and attorney Morgan Bentley is representing Van Ostenbridge.
MANATEE COUNTY – Led by County Commissioner George Kruse, the Manatee County Commission has ended its efforts to potentially terminate County Administrator Cheri Coryea.
On Nov. 19, Kruse joined commissioners Vanessa Baugh and James Satcher in supporting Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge’s motion to put Coryea on notice that her termination would be discussed and voted upon on Wednesday, Jan. 6.
Toward the end of Thursday’s land use meeting, Kruse delivered an unexpected speech that concluded with him making a motion to reconsider that Nov. 19 action.
“I don’t think it’s a secret that I wasn’t a huge fan of it, but at the time I voted for it to allow for dialogue, and for myself to do my proper diligence and get it to a finality,” Kruse said.
“I promised everybody at that meeting that I would talk to everybody. In these last three weeks, I’ve canceled a trip out of town. I’ve talked to five mayors. I’ve talked to literally every single department head. I’ve talked to business leaders, associations and I’ve spent probably four to five hours one-on-one with Cheri going over everything I want in Manatee County, how she envisions Manatee County and if we could work together.
“But I also promised on my campaign that there’s certain things I would do as a commissioner for the citizens of Manatee County. I promised I would work on lowering taxes and fixing our quality of life with some of the reserves we’re sitting on. I promised that we would push for less regulations and more efficiencies in government. And I said that I would work on cleaning up the departments and how we handle hiring, because in some cases it looks like there’s a bit of cronyism in the seniority versus merit. I also wanted to add a sense of private sector conservatism to our county,” Kruse said.
“I didn’t campaign on the promise of firing one person. I campaigned on a promise of improving the lives of 410,000 people in Manatee County, but I did not promise to come in here as an agent of chaos. I promised to come here as an agent of change. In my opinion, the best interest of Manatee County – both for my supporters and the people who didn’t support me – is to get these changes moving quickly and efficiently. I do not inherently believe that delaying these important items 12, 18, 24 months while we rebuild our government makes sense for anyone. It was not a fundamentally sound reason to do so. It would burn half my term and eliminate half my agenda just to get back to a perceived better square one,” Kruse said.
“I’ve taken over and I’ve run businesses in the past. I’ve worked with and molded many people without similar ideologies as me into successful teams. If I felt, after all of my meetings these past three weeks, that would not be the case here, I would whole-heartedly push towards January 6 and terminate our county administrator.
“However, I believe I can achieve the actual results that I promised without this unnecessary disruption. And if 12 months from now the changes I promise you are not made for the benefit of Manatee County, then I will personally be the one to make the next motion for termination. But I’m hopeful that will not be the case,” Kruse said.
Cheri Coryea will continue serving as the county administrator. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“I’m well aware of trading one opposing group for another, and I’m sure my Facebook is already starting to light up, but many of you who supported me and elected me did so because you trusted my judgment and my experience. If I can accomplish our overriding goals with our current administration, then I’ve kept my promise and I made Manatee County a better and more conservative place to live. All I ask is that you trust my judgment. That goes for the citizens of Manatee County and the members of this board. We would be better as a community with the full support, even if begrudgingly given, to allow this board and this administration the opportunity to achieve all that you elected us to do,” Kruse said.
“I’d like to formally make a motion to reconsider the Nov. 19 decision to start the termination process of County Administrator Cheri Coryea,” Kruse said when concluding his speech.
With no hesitation, Commissioner Reggie Bellamy seconded Kruse’s motion.
Commissioner’s comments
“I’m tongue-tied,” Commissioner Carol Whitmore said.
Commissioner Misty Servia then said, “I want to say to the new board: You guys have us on our toes because there is a surprise at every meeting.”
She then said, “Thank you, George. I think your motion today was a responsible one. I think that it was the right thing to do. I think that it was the most business-oriented decision to bring forward. I have been so concerned about what’s going to happen to our county government with the chaos that’s been created, and it was created unnecessarily because things were moving perfectly. I’ve never worked with a such an efficient county administrator.
“I thank you so much for listening and representing the entire county. It was very wise of you. You have helped this county to move forward in a positive direction. And I think what you’ve just done is brought this board together. We have to be together in unity to move forward and get the business of our county done. And for anyone who has a concern about anything our county administrator is doing in terms of management style, I am open to hearing that, and I am open to any changes that are meaningful and well described,” Servia said.
Speaking next, Van Ostenbridge said, “I thank Commissioner Kruse for the diligence he put into this and the seriousness with which everyone has taken this. I did run as an agent of change, but I did not run as an agent of chaos. If we don’t have the votes, we don’t have the votes. You’re going to win some and you’re going to lose some. If the board is not as conservative as I thought it was, then that’s OK. I don’t enjoy the turmoil that it’s created within the county. Whichever way the vote is going to go, I’d like to put the turmoil to an end so that we can move on.”
Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge initiated the efforts to terminate Cheri Coryea. Joe Hendricks | Sun
Baugh said she seconded Van Ostenbridge’s Nov. 19 motion because she believed further discussion about the county administrator was needed.
“Misty, I appreciate your comments, but not everything in this county is run properly. There’s many changes we need to look at and I’m hoping with Cheri maybe we can do it. If not, then I will not be happy,” Baugh said.
“Does that mean make a major change? No, maybe it means that the county administrator is willing to change how things have been done here in the county. We’ll have to see,” she added.
Baugh addressed a rumor regarding the Nov. 10 farewell ceremony for departing commissioners Betsy Benac, Steve Jonsson and Priscilla Trace. The rumor alleged Baugh suggested to ceremony attendee and DeSoto County Economic Development Director Tara Poulton that there might soon be a job opening in the county administration.
“It is a silly rumor and whoever started that really should be ashamed, because it’s not true,” Baugh said.
When contacted Wednesday afternoon, Poulton was asked about Baugh’s alleged comments at the ceremony.
“It was such a casual conversation. She said something to the effect of, ‘You never know, we might have a position open.’ There was no mention of any specific position opening up,” Poulton said.
When asked if she’s had any contact with Baugh since then, Poulton said, “No, none whatsoever. And I have no intention of applying for the county administrator’s position if it opens up.”
During Thursday’s discussion, Satcher addressed speculation that there was a coordinated effort to terminate Coryea – speculation that prompted paralegal Michael Barfield to submit individual public records requests to Satcher, Baugh, Kruse, Van Ostenbridge and Jonsson.
“I pastored a church when I was 25 years old. When I was witness to someone, I’d tell them about the Lord and I’d invite them to church. They’d say I’m not into organized religion, and I’d say well this is the place for you because we ain’t organized around here. I think it’s kind of humorous that people might be accused of planning when I don’t know if anyone knows what’s coming,” Satcher said.
Commissioner Reggie Bellamy praised Kruse for his insight and willingness to listen to everybody.
“As commissioners, we all have that ability to set upon a county administrator our expectations as far as what we want and how we want our county to be ran,” Bellamy said.
He also said he’s concerned about public sparring that’s taken place and the negative impact that’s had on the community.
Misty Servia expressed praise for George Kruse and Cheri Coryea. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Servia noted that when she was first elected in 2018, she wanted to conduct a national search for retiring County Administrator Ed Hunzeker.
“I did not support Cheri Coryea. I said we need to make sure we’re getting the best county administrator, instead of just promoting from within. What I have learned since that time is that Cheri Coryea is the best county administrator I’ve ever worked with. I’ve been in county government for 30 years. I have worked in county government for 18 and with county government in the private sector for 13, and I’ve never worked with anyone who is as effective and as hardworking as Cheri Coryea,” Servia said
At the end of the discussion, Kruse said, “I’m making a motion to reconsider the previously approved motion from Nov. 19.”
The commission unanimously approved Kruse’s motion.
Coryea did not attend the land use meeting. When contacted Thursday evening, she politely declined comment on the commission’s decision.
Barfield investigation
When contacted Thursday evening, Barfield was asked what impact the commission’s decision might have on his public records request and his investigation of the records produced.
“I’m going to take 24 hours at least and think about it. My records requests stand and I expect full compliance. I’m not willing to compromise on that,” Barfield said.
MANATEE COUNTY – County Commissioner George Kruse’s personal call log indicates he has had numerous private phone conversations with commissioners Vanessa Baugh, James Satcher and Kevin Van Ostenbridge since being elected.
It is not illegal for members of the same elected body to communicate by phone, text message or email, but it is a violation of Florida Sunshine Law if they discuss anything that has, will or could foreseeably come before them as official county business.
On Tuesday, Dec. 8, Kruse provided paralegal Michael Barfield with a call log and a copy of a text message exchange he had with Satcher. Kruse produced those records in response to the public records request he received from Barfield on Friday, Nov. 20.
Baugh, Satcher, Van Ostenbridge and former commissioner Steve Jonsson received similar records requests and were originally given until Friday, Dec. 4 to respond. Barfield made his records request according to Florida’s Public Records Act.
According to Kruse’s call log, he had, or attempted to have, 16 telephone communications with Baugh during the Nov. 3 to Nov. 20 timeframe specified in Barfield’s records request.
Kruse had three phone communications with Satcher and two with Van Ostenbridge during that same period. He also made one call and received one call from developer Carlos Beruff, and on Nov. 20, Kruse called 12th Judicial Circuit Court Judge Edward Nicholas.
Nicholas swore Kruse in as a county commissioner on Tuesday, Nov. 17. Satcher and Van Ostenbridge were also sworn in that day as new commissioners, joined by Baugh, an incumbent who was elected to another term.
Later that day, the newly-reconfigured commission participated in a commission work meeting. Kruse left Satcher a voice mail at 6:39 p.m. and called him again at 10:18 p.m., according to his call log. At 10:22 p.m., Kruse called Baugh, and then called her again at 9 a.m. the following morning.
At 6:45 a.m. on Thursday, Nov. 19, Kruse sent Satcher a text message that said, “Ignore our call the other night. Stick to original.”
George Kruse provided Michael Barfield a copy of this text message exchange he had with Commissioner James Satcher. – Submitted | Michael Barfield
During the work meeting that took place later that morning, the commission adopted by 4-3 vote a county resolution presented by Baugh with no public notice. The adopted resolution now allows the commission to change its meeting procedures while a meeting is in progress, with no advance notice to the public.
“Any of the foregoing rules may be waived at any board meeting then in session by a majority vote of the board, unless such waiver is in conflict with state or local law,” according to Resolution 20-191.
Van Ostenbridge then initiated a discussion, with no advance public notice, that resulted in a 4-3 vote to put County Administrator Cheri Coryea on notice that her potential termination would be discussed and determined on Wednesday, Jan. 6.
Commissioners Reggie Bellamy, Misty Servia and Carol Whitmore opposed the Nov. 19 actions initiated by Baugh and Van Ostenbridge.
Bellamy said the efforts to terminate Coryea seemed “premeditated” and Whitmore said they seemed “orchestrated.”
Barfield began submitting his records requests the following day.
Barfield’s reaction
“It’s a bombshell,” Barfield said Wednesday afternoon when discussing these initial discoveries.
According to Barfield, the three new commissioners became subject to the Public Records Act and the Florida Sunshine Law once the election results were known on Nov. 3. As an incumbent, Baugh has long been required to comply with the Public Records Act and the Sunshine Law.
“There’s 16 calls between Vanessa Baugh and George Kruse at various times,” Barfield said.
Commissioner Vanessa Baugh had 16 phone communications with Commissioner George Kruse. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“That message about ‘ignore the other night’ is so telling, coming hours before the Nov. 19 meeting began,” Barfield said about the Kruse-Satcher text message exchange.
“It seems to me this is strong evidence of coordination in advance of a meeting,” Barfield said regarding the various communications between commissioners.
Barfield said Baugh had not provided him with an original draft copy of the resolution she presented with no public notice.
He said Baugh’s official county emails indicate she had a conversation with the county attorney’s office on Nov. 18 about her requested resolution, but did not provide the county attorney’s office with a digital copy of the document.
“To date, she has not produced that record. Vanessa did provide a photograph of the draft language of the resolution,” Barfield said.
Barfield questions whether Baugh or someone else wrote the original draft of that resolution.
Still awaiting records
Barfield said he received some preliminary records from Van Ostenbridge Wednesday afternoon and was told he’d receive copies of Van Ostenbridge’s text messages and personal call log on Thursday.
Regarding Baugh, he said, “I received a couple emails from her official county account and a phone log from her official county phone that has virtually nothing on it. I’ve received nothing from her private email accounts or her private cell phone, including her text messages and call log.”
Barfield said Satcher produced some records Tuesday night that he was still reviewing.
When asked where all of this might be headed, Barfield said, “I’m still collecting evidence.”
Commissioner James Satcher received a summons when he arrived for Thursday morning’s work meeting. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Just before the start of Thursday morning’s county commission work meeting at the Bradenton Area Convention Center in Palmetto, Satcher was served with a summons from the Manatee County Clerk of Court.
According to Barfield, the summons formally started the five-day window for Satcher to show cause to the court as to why the records request should not be granted.
As he walked into the meeting area, Satcher said, “I just got served. I love this job.”
Paralegal Michael Barfield attended the county commission work meeting Thursday morning. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
MANATEE COUNTY – Efforts to fire County Administrator Cheri Coryea have prompted objections and procedural concerns should the commission decide to terminate her from the position.
Newly-elected commissioners Kevin Van Ostenbridge, George Kruse and James Satcher, along with Commissioner Vanessa Baugh, voted unexpectedly on Nov. 19 to begin termination procedures against Coryea, who has worked for the county for more than 30 years.
Reactions include County Commissioner Misty Servia’s Nov. 23 email regarding Coryea’s possible termination, sent to several upper-level county staff members.
“I would like to add an item to the Dec. 15 agenda. In order to prepare for the possible firing of our county administrator on Jan. 6, I would like to understand the succession plan so that county business continues with limited interruptions. Below are the items I would like for our board to discuss to prepare for the possible termination of Administrator Coryea:
Do we have a succession plan that is a part of the ordinance that establishes the county administrator position?
Who will be appointed in the interim until a permanent county administrator is hired?
If one of the deputy county administrators is appointed as interim county administrator, will we need to appoint an interim deputy county administrator? If so who will that be?
Are there any other potential gaps in the organization that need to be considered to ensure seamless government operations?
What process is envisioned for hiring the next county administrator? Will the public be involved?
Are there any changes planned to the county administrator job description?”
On Nov. 19, County Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge proposed terminating the county administrator. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
County resident Shane Wedel emailed County Commissioner Carol Whitmore regarding Coryea’s potential severance pay.
“I have been looking at Ms. Coryea’s publicly available contract. I noticed that Section II, 1, b, (2) indicates that Ms. Coryea would be due a severance payment for being let go without cause to be paid within 10 business days after the effective termination date. Her contract stipulates that this would be 20 weeks of her pay plus accumulated leave payouts, which for such a long-standing employee is likely to be substantial,” Wedel wrote.
“This information would certainly be important for the public and for the rest of the board of county commissioners to be aware of. Hopefully, the newer members are aware of this stipulation in her contract. I believe the public deserves to be aware of this ‘responsible’ use of limited resources if it (Coryea’s termination) becomes reality,” Wedel wrote.
Whitmore referred Wedel’s comments to Human Resources Director Kim Stroud.
County Attorney Mickey Palmer distributed an email on Nov. 25 to county commissioners and others regarding the potential termination process.
“This is information that I will be prepared to share with the BCC at the Board’s December 15 meeting. But there is no time like the present, I suppose. By copy of this reply to personnel in both Human Resources and Payroll (a division of the Clerk’s Office), I am asking them to run the calculations with a projected termination date of Jan. 6. My preference would be that the folks in Payroll and HR be of one mind on the calculations, and that the calculations be forwarded to me as promptly as they are completed.”
Also on that date, Manatee County Government Agenda Coordinator Diane Vollmer distributed an email to county commissioners, Coryea and several other staff members regarding the Jan. 6 discussion.
“Inasmuch as there is a legislative delegation meeting scheduled in the Longboat Key Room at the Convention Center from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Wednesday, Jan. 6, the special meeting to vote to terminate the county administrator’s contract has been scheduled for that afternoon from 1:30 p.m. to 5 p.m. In the event the meeting is not concluded at that time, it will be continued to 5 p.m. on Jan. 7, following the land use meeting,” Vollmer wrote.
League of Women Voters supports Coryea
League of Women Voters of Manatee County President Alice Newlon sent Whitmore an email on Nov. 27 stating the League’s position on the proposed termination.
“The League of Women Voters has actively worked supporting good governance for the last 100 years. We oppose the actions taken by the four county commissioners (Vanessa Baugh, George Kruse, James Satcher and Kevin Van Ostenbridge) at the Nov. 19 meeting where they: 1) improperly brought up and voted on, with no public notice or notice to their fellow commissioners, significant changes to county operations; 2) came with and passed a resolution allowing the commission, by majority vote, to ignore procedures designed to allow public notice and input and 3) voted to initiate the termination of Cheri Coryea, without notice, without cause and without any forethought of the community repercussions,” Newlon wrote.
“We hear that those who voted to terminate the administrator want to run our county like a business and take the county in a new direction. However, county government has a different structure and purpose than that of a business. As a business, making a profit is the primary goal.
“In contrast, a county government operates any services, not for profit, but for the well-being of its citizens. The similarity? Both businesses and government retain high-performance employees. What they normally do not do is fire without prior warning, using a weak excuse.
“A recent decision to remove our county administrator during an already precarious time in the life of our community – the disruption of COVID-19 – is destabilizing and serves to create increased uncertainty.
“The loss of Manatee County Administrator Cheri Coryea would be a great loss to our county, considering her excellent work and high ratings by her supervisors and praise from those who worked with her.
“As an employee for over 30 years, she served in a number of positions, doing well for the county, its communities and its citizens, always improving what she found. She has been called the best county manager in the state.
“We urge you to return to the procedures that have created a government allowing for proper research, planning and notice.
“We also urge you to reverse the rash decision to terminate Cheri Coryea and instead take the time to reassess, in collaboration with the many entities of this community, and develop a long term strategy that will help all of Manatee County and its residents continue to thrive, ” Newlon’s letter said in conclusion.
Updated Nov. 23, 2020 – BRADENTON – Thursday’s Manatee County Commission discussion about potentially terminating County Administrator Cheri Coryea has triggered a public records request from Florida Sunshine Law expert Michael Barfield.
On Friday afternoon, Barfield, a paralegal, submitted individual written public records requests to county commissioners Vanessa Baugh, George Kruse, James Satcher and Kevin Van Ostenbridge. County Attorney Mickey Palmer was copied on each of the requests Barfield submitted on behalf of Sarasota-based Denovo Law Services.
The records requests seek the public records in the individual possession of Baugh, Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge. A subsequent request seeks records from former Commissioner Steve Jonsson.
On Nov. 3, Baugh was re-elected as the county’s District 5 commissioner. Kruse was elected as the at-large District 7 commissioner. Satcher was elected as the District 1 commissioner. Van Ostenbridge was elected as the District 3 commissioner, a district that encompasses Anna Maria Island, Cortez and west Bradenton.
County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh is the subject of the public records request. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The four commissioners were sworn into office on Tuesday, Nov. 17. Two days later, Van Ostenbridge initiated, with no advance public notice, a preliminary discussion seeking the termination of Coryea without cause.
At the conclusion of Thursday’s discussion, the newly-reconfigured county commission voted 4-3 in favor of putting Coryea on notice that her potential termination would be discussed at a special county commission meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 6. Baugh, Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge supported that action. Commissioners Reggie Bellamy, Misty Servia and Carol Whitmore opposed that action.
Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge initiated Thursday’s termination discussion with no advance public notice. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
During Thursday’s discussion, Bellamy said the efforts to oust Coryea appeared to be “premeditated.” Whitmore said the efforts appeared to be “orchestrated.” Servia called the Van Ostenbridge-led efforts “reckless” and “dangerous.”
Records requests
According to the public records requests: “This is a request for records pursuant to Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, otherwise known as the Public Records Act of the Florida Constitution. We understand that a citizen is not required to make a written request to obtain public records under the act, but we want to be clear what we are seeking from you.”
The records requests pertain to the following records made, sent or received in connection with the transaction of official business, or the rendition of services on behalf of each of the four request recipients:
All emails sent or received from Nov. 3, 2020 to Nov. 20, 2020.
All text messages sent or received from November 3 to November 20.
All messages sent or received via any digital app or social media platform from Nov. 3 to Nov. 20.
A detailed phone log of all calls made or received between the period Nov. 3 and Nov. 20.
Commissioner James Satcher is the recipient of a public records request. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
According to the records requests, the term “record” or “public records” also includes responsive records in both digital and hard copy formats, including email, text, SMS, MMS, .doc and voicemail.
According to the requests, “This request for records further includes any responsive records sent or received by any individual or entity via any private, nongovernmental account, as well as those records maintained, stored or archived in the cloud, on a shared drive, on the Internet, via social media accounts or any other electronic device such as a cell phone, tablet, flash drive, that is capable of sending, receiving or storing digital information.”
The records requests are also directed to any individual or entity – including any other public or private agency, person, partnership, corporation or business entity – acting on their behalf of any of the records request recipients.
“If you contend that any record, or portion thereof, is exempt from inspection, please state in writing the basis for the exemption and include the applicable statutory exemption,” the records requests note.
The records requests state the requested records shall not be disposed of for a period of 30 days after the written records requests were submitted on Friday.
Commissioner George Kruse has received a public records request. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Citing Florida Statutes, the records requests state: “If a civil action is instituted within the 30-day period to enforce the provisions of this section with respect to the requested record, the custodian of public records may not dispose of the record except by order of a court of competent jurisdiction after notice to all affected parties.
“The absence of a civil action instituted does not relieve the custodian of public records of the duty to maintain the record as a public record if the record is in fact a public record subject to public inspection and copying and does not otherwise excuse or exonerate the custodian of public records from any unauthorized or unlawful disposition of such record.
“We are requesting that you notify each and every individual and entity in possession of records responsive to this request, and that all such records be preserved on an immediate basis.
“Please produce all records responsive to this request as provided by 119.12(1)(b), Fla. Statute,” the public records requests say in conclusion.
According to Barfield, the three new commissioners – Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge – became subject to the Public Records Act and the Florida Sunshine Law at the conclusion of the Nov. 3 elections.
According to Barfield, the four commissioners have until early December to fulfill the public records requests.
Recent Sunshine case
While assisting the attorneys representing the city of Bradenton Beach, Barfield recently played a significant role in the city prevailing in a Sunshine Law lawsuit that resulted in two of the six defendants paying the city $350,000 on Friday.
The $350,00 payment was partial reimbursement for the attorney fees the city incurred as a result of a civil lawsuit the city filed against six former city advisory board members in 2017.
An extensive number of emails and other records and documents Barfield obtained from the defendants and others in that case factored into the judge’s 2019 ruling that Sunshine Law violations occurred.
