Press Release – Controversial Ethics Bill Heads to Governor’s Desk

Controversial Ethics Bill Heads to Governor’s Desk

By Caroline Klancke – March 10, 2024

 

Tallahassee, FL.—During the final days of the Legislative Session Florida lawmakers passed a controversial ethics bill, CS/SB 7014, which is now headed to the Governor’s desk for signature. This legislation, if signed into law, will severely undermine the ethics investigation process on both the State and local levels of government. 

 

Both the House and Senate passed floor amendments to CS/SB 7014, which were adopted outside of the committee process and without any public hearing—and it is these amendments to the bill which seek to weaken the ethics investigatory process. The amendments introduce burdensome requirements on citizens seeking to file legitimate ethics complaints with state and local ethics commissions requiring that they have “personal knowledge or information other than hearsay” regarding the alleged violations. These requirements, if implemented into law, could prevent the investigation of ethics complaints predicated upon news articles and reports exposing public corruption. This is a profound change in favor of shielding ethics violators from investigatory scrutiny.

 

Additional amendments to the bill seek to prevent local ethics commissions (as well as any other “governing body of the political subdivision”) from ordering the investigation of possible ethics violations even in the presence of overwhelming evidence indicating that a public officer or employee has acted unethically. 

Provisions of the bill seek to adopt new exemptions to the financial disclosure laws which would shield from public scrutiny the major customers and clients of businesses owned by certain public officials—information which is critical to the revelation of voting conflicts and other conflicts of interest. In addition, the bill attempts to tie the hands of the State Commission on Ethics to act as a collegial body. 

 

In defending the floor amendments to the bill, Senator Burgess and Speaker Renner stated that their ostensible purpose was to prevent the weaponization of the ethics complaint process to discredit political candidates immediately preceding an election. However, the Code of Ethics has long contained protections against such misuse of the ethics complaint process in Section 112.324(2)(f), F.S., which requires the Commission to dismiss and reject any complaints or referrals filed against a candidate “within the 30 days immediately preceding the date of the election.” 

 

In response to the Legislative adoption of the bill, Caroline Klancke, executive director of the Florida Ethics Institute issued the following statement:

 

“This bill cuts to the heart of both the state Commission’s ethics complaint process and that of local commissions in an unprecedented attack on the good work that these agencies provide through ethics investigations.”

 

“Despite the clear desire of Floridians for stronger ethics laws, CS/SB 7014 seeks to move us in the opposite direction, making it increasingly difficult for even a modicum of transparency to be given to the public regarding possible ethics violations.” 

 

“The Florida Ethics Institute calls on Governor DeSantis to veto this bill and thereby affirm Florida’s commitment to ethics in government.”

 

“We will continue to protect and defend the ethical safeguards contained within the Code of Ethics and assailed by CS/SB 7014. And we ask that ethically minded Floridians join us in encouraging the Governor to veto this destructive bill and to band together to reiterate our collective commitment to fairness in government. We will not let the tools of accountability slip so easily from society’s grasp.”

###

 
Caroline Klancke
Caroline Klancke

Caroline Klancke is an attorney ethicist and serves as the Executive Director of the Florida Ethics Institute. Ms. Klancke is the former General Counsel and Deputy Executive Director of the Florida Commission on Ethics where she assisted the agency in its constitutional mandate to interpret and enforce the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees. 

 Editorial: Legislature in Florida seems to be devoted to eviscerating ethics laws

Legislature in Florida seems to be devoted to eviscerating ethics laws

Editorial by Lonnie Groot – March 4, 2024

Sunday’s News Journal published renowned columnist Bill Cotterell’s explanation about how the Florida Legislature seems to be devoted to eviscerating Florida’s once revered ethics laws for which I am grateful. In essence, he warned the citizens of Florida of the old bromide that “those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it.”  

 

There once was a golden age in Florida government. It should not be forgotten. During the 1970s, under the leadership of  Governor Reubin Askew, Florida shed the era of Florida’s Pork Chop Gang or “good ole boy” system which controlled the Florida Legislature from post-Civil War time through the 1960s. 

 

Askew was elected to serve as Governor in 1970 as part of a remarkable wave of progressive politics and a desire for legislative reform. Askew led a bipartisan group of politicians who pursued and achieved government reform. That reform included the enactment of judicial reform, legislative redistricting addressing constitutional requirements (at the time 1/3 of the State lying north of about Gainesville elected about 2/3 of the State’s legislators), race relations, and approval of the Sunshine Amendment by Florida voters mandating ethical standards in government while declaring that “public office is a public trust”.  

 

In the 1970s, Florida Supreme Court justices were popularly elected. But a number of scandals threatened to topple the Court until public outrage led to profound reforms and fundamental changes in the way supreme justices were seated. Those scandals led to the resignations of two Supreme Court Justices and to the constitutional amendment providing for merit selection and retention of Florida appellate judges. One Justice abruptly retired after being filmed on an expensive junket to Las Vegas, it was disclosed that two other Justices tried to fix cases in lower courts on behalf of campaign supporters and a fourth justice destroyed illegal evidence by shredding his copy of a document and flushing it down a toilet in his Supreme Court chambers.

 

Outside of the judicial branch, cabinet officials were indicted and embroiled in ethical issues and State legislative and local officials operated in the dark with their finances and activities hidden from the public.

 

Lessons from the past may not always ward off doom, but they can provide insights into the present and even into the future. A clarion call has been sounded to all Floridians to demand ethical government and strong ethics laws.

 

Do we want government in the sunshine or will be accept darkness in the halls of government with ethics merely being a thing to be scoffed at by those in power?

Lonnie Groot
Lonnie Groot

Lonnie Groot is a Daytona Beach Shores attorney who has represented municipal governments throughout Central Florida.  He suggests that interested citizens read Martin Dyckman’s books Reuben O’D. Askew – The Golden Age Of Florida Politics and A Most Dishonorable Court. Dyckman covered local, state and national government and politics and wrote editorials during an almost half-century career with the former St. Petersburg Times and for about a decade he was chief of the newspaper’s Tallahassee bureau.

 Editorial: Another Unintended Consequence by the Florida Legislature

Another Unintended Consequence by the Florida Legislature

Editorial by Dwight Floyd and John Reid – March 1, 2024

Imagine this scenario. A lobbyist offers a bribe to an elected official in exchange for a vote. By chance, a member of the local ethics board overhears this discussion of the quid pro quo. You would assume the local ethics board would now promptly investigate this matter. If the Florida Senate gets its way, the ethics board would be powerless to act.

 

During this Legislative Session, the Senate and House are considering bills that would reform the Florida Commission on Ethics. After several committees heard and passed the Senate’s version of the bill, the legislation went to the Senate floor for final passage. At the eleventh hour, four amendments emerged that extended the bill well beyond its initial scope and weakened the ability of local ethics commissions or boards, such as the Tallahassee Independent Ethics Board, to investigate public corruption. These amendments were never discussed in committee and came as a surprise to all interested parties. The Senate then refused to follow regular order, which requires the bill be amended and heard on two separate days, and instead waived its rules and passed the amended bill on a single day before the public could voice their concerns. 

 

The current Senate bill will make it nearly impossible for local ethics boards to investigate public corruption, even in cases as blatant as the opening example. The bill now prohibits the Florida Commission on Ethics or local ethics boards from self-initiating corruption investigations, instead requiring an individual’s signed, sworn complaint before the ethics board can take any action. The complaint may only be based on “personal knowledge” and may not be based on hearsay, such as an overheard statement, an inspector general’s report, or a news article.

 

Hearsay statements are out-of-court statements offered in a legal proceeding for the truth of what was asserted. These statements are generally not permissible in Court; however, the Florida Rules of Evidence provide for numerous exceptions where hearsay can be admitted. An admission of wrongdoing is an example of a hearsay statement that can be admitted. A printed record created during the course of business is also generally admissible. In the new Senate bill, hearsay is prohibited, and the legislation does not provide for any exceptions. 

 

The bill also prohibits the ethics office from self-initiating a complaint received from an anonymous source. Our more serious complaints are commonly from insiders who wish to remain anonymous to protect them from retaliation. The Senate bill now requires individuals to put their careers on the line before an ethics office can investigate. The likely outcome of this legislation is that fewer people will come forward and wrongdoers will go unpunished. 

 

A concern of the current system is that an elected official might face a meritless complaint from a political rival. This, of course, is a possibility. State law, however, requires that all complaints be confidential and exempt so that frivolous complaints can be discarded before an elected official is publicly accused. Furthermore, the Tallahassee Independent Ethics Board and most of our counterparts around the state authorize sanctions against anyone who files a complaint in bad faith.

 

It may not be intentional, but the current Senate bill is incredibly weak on crime. As public corruption and trust in our government continue to be major problems, it is inconceivable why the Senate would take this position. Fortunately, the House has refused to go along with this travesty. Let’s hope it continues to stand its ground and does not include these harmful amendments.

 

The Florida Ethics Commission and local ethics offices exist to help maintain a democratic society. We, the voters, elect government officials to serve on our behalf. Our system maintains checks and balances and restrictions to ensure government transparency. The ethics offices across the state are essential to the system of checks and balances and public integrity. We should not be hindered from doing our jobs. We can only hope that the Florida House will reject the Senate’s amendments and that the Florida Legislature will stand up to public corruption.

Dwight Floyd is the Executive Director of the Tallahassee Independent Ethics Board and a member of the Council on Government Ethics Laws.
Dwight Floyd

Dwight Floyd is the Executive Director of the Tallahassee Independent Ethics Board and a member of the Council on Government Ethics Laws. He previously served as the Bureau Chief of Training for the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. He may be reached at ethics@talgov.com.

John Reid serves as the Board Counsel for the Tallahassee Independent Ethics Board. He also practices administrative law and represents clients before state agencies.
John Reid

John Reid serves as the Board Counsel for the Tallahassee Independent Ethics Board. He also practices administrative law and represents clients before state agencies. He may be reached at jr@johnreidlaw.com.

 

 2024 Mid-Session Florida Ethics Legislative Report

2024 Mid-Session Florida Ethics Legislative Report

For the Period Ending February 9, 2024

2024 Florida Commission on Ethics’ Legislative Recommendations

 

Each year the Florida Commission on Ethics adopts Legislative Recommendations to strengthen and streamline the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees (Code of Ethics) and for the consideration by the Legislature. Click HERE for the Commission on Ethics’ 2024 Legislative Recommendations regarding proposed changes to the Code of Ethics. 

 

 
Legislative Tracking—Summaries of all the bills impacting Florida ethics regulations are listed below:

 

The following is a list of bills the Florida Ethics Institute (FEI) is tracking during the 2024 legislative session. The selected bills have ethics law implications in Florida. The bills identified are divided into those proposed in the Florida House of Representatives and the Florida Senate.  

 

Florida House of Representatives

HB   735 – Government Accountability

General bill sponsored by Representative Robert Alexander “Alex” Andrade

 

➢  Now in House State Affairs Committee

 

➢  On 01/25/24 HB 735 with Proposed Committee Substitute (PCS) was voted favorably out of the Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee

 

  • Related bill SB 734 – Government Accountability 

The bill seeks to amend portions of the Code of Ethics, Part III, Ch. 112, F.S., to prohibit individuals from soliciting or accepting anything of value from a foreign country of concern. The bill seeks to adopt s. 112.3262, F.S., within the Code of Ethics to prohibit people from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district without first registering as lobbyist and establishes requirements for registration, compliance, investigations, and registration fees.

 

 The bill also seeks to amend portions of ss. 125.73, 125.75, 166.021, and 1001.50, F.S., to prohibit entities from renewing or extending certain employment contracts during a specified timeframe. The bill seeks to amend s. 166.041, F.S., to require that only two (2) members of governing body must be physically present at meeting for quorum purposes and authorizes members to participate in deliberations of governing body through technology.

 

✍ NOTE: At its January 26, 2024 Meeting, the Florida Commission on Ethics’ Executive Director, Kerrie Stillman, highlighted the potential impact of HB 735 and the companion bill, SB 734, which seeks to adopt s. 112.3262, F.S., within the Code of Ethics to prohibit people from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district without first registering as lobbyists and establishes requirements for registration, compliance, investigations, and registration fees. Stillman stated that if passed, this legislation would result in the imposition of this registration requirement upon 2,500 local government entities. She further noted that the language of SB 734 requires the use of an electronic system for such registrations and provides that if a locality does not possess such an electronic system that the State Lobbyist Registration and Compensation Reporting System, currently used for the registration and compensation reporting of State lobbyists seeking to lobby the Legislature or Executive Branch agencies. She cautioned that the system was not designed for expansion and the system would have to be entirely redesigned prior to the July 1 effective date. She cautioned that this would lead to both funding and logistical issues for the Commission and for the regulation of lobbyists. 

 

HB   1597 – Ethics

General Bill sponsored by Representative Robert Brackett

 

➢  Now in the House State Affairs Committee

 

➢  A Proposed Committee Substitute (PCS) to HB 1597 was filed on 1/22/24 and was voted favorably out of the Ethics, Elections & Open Government Subcommittee on 1/24/24

 

  • Related bill SB 7014 

The bill seeks to revise and provide requirements relating to the Code of Ethics, including lobbying by public officers, Commission on Ethics membership and procedures and timeframes for investigation & reports of complaints or referrals of violations of code. 

 

✍ NOTE: At its meeting on January 26, 2024, the Florida Commission on Ethics voted to submit a letter to the Legislature opposing the language of HB 1597 (and the Senate companion bill SB 7014) which seeks to require “at least six members of the commission” to vote to “reject or deviate from a written recommendation of the counsel representing the commission.”

 

✍ NOTE: As of the date of this report, the language of CS/HB 1597 does not contain the amendment language added to the Senate companion bill SB 7014. See SB 7014 below for additional information and explanation regarding the substance of the four amendments adopted by the Senate. 

HB   433 – Workplace Heat Exposure Requirements

General Bill by Representative Tiffany Esposito 

 

➢  Now in the House State Affairs Committee

 

➢  01/11/2024 voted favorably with Committee Substitute (CS) by Regulatory Reform & Economic Development Subcommittee

 

  • Related bill SB 1492 

HB 433 seeks to adopt actions preempting local heat exposure requirements and other actions by political subdivisions. 

 

Current provisions of the Code of Ethics, s. 112.326, F.S., permit the governing body of any political subdivision to adopt, by ordinance or rule, more stringent standards of conduct and disclosure requirements than those specified in the Code of Ethics—and applicable to the public officers and/or employees of that locality.  

 

✍ NOTE: FEI is monitoring the progress of this bill because portions the PCS added to Regulatory Reform & Economic Development Subcommittee agenda on December 6, 2023, and which failed to pass on December 13, 2023—sought to adopt s. 448.077, F.S., which would, in part, expressly preempt the “regulation of the terms and conditions of employment . . . to the state.” This broad language could negatively impact more stringent ethics and/or disclosure ordinances adopted by political subdivisions under the authority currently afforded by Code of Ethics, s. 112.326, F.S. 

 

HB   1017 – Insurance

General Bill sponsored by Representative Jervonte Edmonds

 

➢   Now in the Insurance & Banking Subcommittee

 

  • Related bill SB 102-Property Insurance 

The bill seeks to create the Property Insurance Commission; provide for the election of the Commissioner of Insurance Regulation; prohibit the commissioner from engaging in certain activities or employment for a specified period after leaving office; prohibit property insurers from claiming insolvency under specified circumstances; require residential property insurers to release specified information to insureds upon request, etc.

 

Portions of the bill seek to amend the Code of Ethics, Part III, Ch. 112, F.S., through the creation of s. 112.3134, F.S., setting forth current and post-office-holding restrictions applicable to the position of Commissioner of Insurance Regulation. 

HB   7005 – OGSR/Financial Disclosure

General Bill by Ethics, Elections & Open Government Subcommittee and Representative Jeff Holcomb

 

➢  02/01/24 the bill was passed (or adopted) by unanimous vote

 

➢  1/17/24 voted favorably out of State Affairs Committee by unanimous vote 

 

  • Related bill SB 7012- OGSR/Secure Login Credentials Held by the Commission on Ethics

The Open Government Sunset Review Act requires the Legislature to review each public record exemption and each public meeting exemption five years after enactment. If the Legislature does not reenact the exemption, it automatically repeals on October 2nd of the fifth year after enactment.

 

In order to modernize and streamline the financial disclosure filing process, a mandatory electronic filing system for financial disclosures was created in 2019 via the adoption of Code of Ethics s. 112.31446, F.S. Filers required to file full and public disclosure of their financial interests with a CE Form 6 were required to submit their disclosures electronically beginning January 1, 2023. Those required to file the less detailed disclosure of financial interests via the CE Form 1 will be required to start submitting their disclosures electronically beginning January 1, 2024. 

 

The bill saves from repeal the public record exemptions for all secure login credentials held by the Commission for the purpose of allowing access to the electronic financial disclosure filing system, as well as information entered into the system for the purposes of making the disclosure.

HB   7029 – Florida Statutes

General Bill by Rules Committee and Representative Linda Chaney

 

➢   On 01/18/24 the companion, bill SB 74, was substituted for this bill, and SB 74 was passed by unanimous vote

 

  • Related bill SB 74 

 

The bill seeks to delete provisions that have expired, have become obsolete, have served their purpose, or have been impliedly repealed or superseded; replaces incorrect cross-references & citations; corrects grammatical, typographical, & like errors; removes inconsistencies, redundancies, & unnecessary repetition in statutes; & improves clarity of statutes & facilitating their correct interpretation.

 

In part, the bill seeks to clarify the language of Code of Ethics, s. 112.313(7)(a)1, F.S., containing and exemption to the conflicting employment and contractual relationships prohibition.

Florida Senate

SB  734 – Government Accountability

General Bill by Senator Blaise Ingoglia

 

➢    Now in Senate Appropriations committee

 

➢   02/05/24 voted favorably out of Senate Ethics and Elections committee

 

➢   01/29/24 voted favorably out of Senate Community Affairs committee

 

  • Related bill CS/HB 735 Government Accountability 

The bill seeks to amend portions of the Code of Ethics to prohibit individuals from soliciting or accepting anything of value from a foreign country of concern. The bill seeks to adopt s. 112.3262, F.S., within the Code of Ethics to prohibit people from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district without first registering as lobbyist; establishes requirements for registration, compliance, investigations, and registration fees; and requires a Commission on Ethics and Public Trust established by a county or municipality or the Florida Commission on Ethics to investigate a lobbyist or principal upon receipt of a sworn complaint containing allegations that a lobbyist has failed to register or submitted false information in a report or registration. 

 

The bill also seeks to amend portions of ss. 125.75 and 166.021, F.S., to prohibit entities from renewing or extending certain employment contracts during a specified timeframe. The bill seeks to amend s. 166.041, F.S., to require that only two (2) members of governing body must be physically present at meeting for quorum purposes and authorizes members to participate in deliberations of governing body through technology.

 

✍ NOTE: At its January 26, 2024 Meeting, the Florida Commission on Ethics’ Executive Director highlighted the potential impact of SB 734, and the companion HB 735, which seeks to adopt s. 112.3262, F.S., within the Code of Ethics to prohibit people from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district without first registering as lobbyists and establishes requirements for registration, compliance, investigations, and registration fees. She stated that if passed, this legislation would result in the imposition of this registration requirement upon 2,500 local government entities. She further noted that the language of SB 734 requires the use of an electronic system for such registrations and provides that if a locality does not possess such an electronic system that the State Lobbyist Registration and Compensation Reporting System, currently used for the registration and compensation reporting of State lobbyists seeking to lobby the Legislature or Executive Branch agencies. She cautioned that the system was not designed for expansion and the system would have to be entirely redesigned prior to the effective date. She cautioned that this would lead to both funding and logistical issues for the Commission and for the regulation of lobbyists. 

 

 

SB   7014 – Ethics

General Bill by Ethics and Elections

➢  On 02/01/24 the bill was passed (or adopted) as amended by the Senate by unanimous vote

 

➢  On 01/31/24 four amendments were filed by Senator Burgess. All four amendments were adopted by the Senate on 02/01/24 including: 

 

      o Amendment No. 170806 seeking to amend the Code of Ethics, financial disclosure laws ss. 112.3144 and 112.3145, F.S., pertaining to the portions of the Form 1, “Statement of Financial Interests” and Form 6, “Full and Public Disclosure of Financial Interests,” requiring the disclosure of major clients of businesses that the filer owns in the Secondary Sources of Income disclosure section to include an exemption for the disclosures of attorney filers and others subject to a client confidentiality requirements to allow them “write “Legal Client” in the disclosure fields without providing further information.” 

 

      o Amendment No. 932020 seeking to amend the Code of Ethics’ statute governing the Florida Commission on Ethics’ ethics complaint process, s. 112.324, F.S., to require that ethics complaints and concomitant ethics investigations can only occur in the presence of a sworn complaint “which is based upon personal knowledge or information other than hearsay”.

      o Amendment No. 562898 seeking to amend the Code of Ethics, s. 112.324, F.S., to require that the Commission may only deviate or reject the written recommendation of its counsel via a two-thirds majority vote. 

 

      o Amendment No. 317468 seeking to amend the provisions of the Code of Ethics, s. 112.326, F.S., which allow political subdivisions of the State (such as cities and counties) to adopt more stringent ethics requirements (via ordinance or rule) than those set forth in the State ethics laws—to prevent local ethics commissions from self-initiating any ethics compliant investigations;  requiring that local ethics investigations can only occur as a result of written, sworn complaints “based upon personal knowledge or information other than hearsay”; and requiring the establishment of a process for the recovery of attorney’s fees and costs by public officials that have had ethics complaints “based on malicious intent” filed against them. 

 

➢  On 01/10/24 Amendment No. 45261 was voted favorably out of the Rules Committee by unanimous vote.

 

➢  On 01/09/24 Amendment No. 451260 was filed by Senator Burgess. 

 

  • Related bill HB 1597 – Ethics

The bill seeks to revise and provide requirements relating to the Code of Ethics, including lobbying by public officers, Commission on Ethics membership, & procedures & timeframes for investigation & reports of complaints or referrals of ethics violations. 

 

✍  NOTE: Portions of this bill, as well as the amendments thereto, have been opposed by the Florida Commission on Ethics, as well as current and former ethics commission members who have expressed concerns that this bill could undermine the ethics investigation process on both the State and local levels of government. 

SB   74 – Florida Statutes

General Bill by Senator D ebbie Mayfield

 

➢ SB 74 was passed by unanimous vote on 01/18/24. On 02/08/24 the bill was presented to the Governor for signature

 

  • Related bill HB 7029 

 

The bill seeks to delete provisions that have expired, have become obsolete, have served their purpose, or have been impliedly repealed or superseded; replaces incorrect cross-references & citations; corrects grammatical, typographical, & like errors; removes inconsistencies, redundancies, & unnecessary repetition in statutes; & improves clarity of statutes & facilitating their correct interpretation.

 

In part, the bill seeks to clarify the language of Code of Ethics, s. 112.313(7)(a)1, F.S., containing and exemption to the conflicting employment and contractual relationships prohibition. 

SB   102 – Property Insurance

General Bill sponsored by Senator Shevrin D. “Shev” Jones

 

➢ The bill had been referred to Banking and Insurance; Ethics and Elections; Appropriations Committees 

 

  • Related bill HB 1017-Property Insurance 

 

The bill seeks to create the Property Insurance Commission; provide for the election of the Commissioner of Insurance Regulation; prohibit the commissioner from engaging in certain activities or employment for a specified period after leaving office; prohibit property insurers from claiming insolvency under specified circumstances; require residential property insurers to release specified information to insureds upon request, etc.

Portions of the bill seek to amend the Code of Ethics, through the creation of s. 112.3134, F.S., setting forth current and post-office-holding restrictions applicable to the position of Commissioner of Insurance Regulation.

SB   7012 – OGSR/Secure Login Credentials Held by the Commission on Ethics

General Bill by Ethics and Elections

 

➢    On 02/01/24 was substituted for HB 7005 and on the same day HB 7005 was passed by unanimous vote 

 

➢  01/24/24 was voted favorably out of the Senate Rules Committee by unanimous vote 

 

➢   12/13/23 the bill was reported favorably out of the Ethics and Elections Committee

 

  • Related bill HB 7005 – OGSR/Financial Disclosure

 

The bill seeks to preserve from repeal current public records exemptions protecting the disclosure of secure login credentials held by the Commission on Ethics and certain information entered into the electronic filing system for financial disclosures.

Florida Ethics Update: Commission on Ethics Determinations—January Meeting

Florida Ethics Update: Commission on Ethics Determinations—January Meeting

February 1, 2024

By Caroline Klancke, Esq., Florida Ethics Institute.

 

During its meeting on Friday, January 26, 2024, the Florida Commission on Ethics (Commission), the constitutionally created independent agency tasked with interpreting and enforcing the State’s ethics laws, took action on a myriad of matters involving the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees (Code of Ethics) and the “Ethics in Government” amendment to the State constitution (Art. II, s. 8, Fla. Const.). 

 

Public Session

 
Consideration of Settlement Agreements

 

Settlement of Ethics Complaint Filed Against the Former General Counsel of the Florida Virtual School  

During its public session meeting, the Commission approved a Settlement Agreement (referred to by the Commission as a “Joint Stipulation”) resolving an ethics complaint filed against the former General Counsel of Florida Virtual School (FVS), Frank Kruppenbacher.  

 

The ethics complaint alleged, and the Order to Investigate issued by the Commission sought investigation of, allegations that while employed as General Counsel Mr. Kruppenbacher used his position to require his employees to perform work and personal services for the benefit of himself, his family members, and his private businesses and clients; that he directed FLVS staff to analyze the salary of his daughter, who was also an FLVS employee and sought to ensure that a raise was afforded to her; that Mr. Kruppenbacher used his position to ensure that FLVS hired his daughter’s boyfriend (now husband) as an FLVS vendor despite his apparent lack of qualifications; that Mr. Kruppenbacher destroyed and/or otherwise created false or misleading public records in order to hide or conceal unsupported legal department expenditures; and further alleged that he failed to take annual leave during several multi-week trips for outside business activities and subsequently used those hours for his benefit via the encashment program.  

 

In a July 21, 2021, Order the Commission found Probable Cause to believe that Mr. Kruppenbacher misused his official position and information not available to members of the general public for his personal benefit and requested an administrative trial before the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) regarding these findings.  

 

At last Friday’s meeting, the Commission voted to enter a final order approving a proposed settlement agreement of the matter finding that Ms. Kruppenbacher while employed as the General Counsel of FLVS misused his official position “by using his position to require his agency’s employees to perform work and personal services for the benefit of himself, his family members, and/or his private business and clients” and dismissed the remaining allegations. In light of this ethics violation, a total fine of $5,000 and public censure and reprimand was recommended by the Commission for imposition by the Governor. 

 

Settlement of Ethics Complaint Filed Against Noma Town Council Member  

The Commission also approved a Settlement Agreement of an ethics complaint filed against a current member of the Noma Town Council, Aneala Beachum.  

The ethics complaint alleged that after Ms. Beachum was appointed to the Town Council she began renting a house owned by the Town and owed the Town $4,000 in past due rent which constituted a conflicting employment and contractual relationship. The complaint further alleged that prior to renting the house, the member violated the voting conflict law when the Town Council voted to purchase an air conditioning unit and security system for the house.  

 

At its September 8, 2023, meeting the Commission found probable cause to believe Beachum violated the conflicting employment and contractual relationship provision of the Code of Ethics and ordered an administrative trial on this allegation.  

 

At its meeting last Friday, the Commission approved the Settlement Agreement finding that Beachum violated the Code of Ethics by having a conflicting relationship that would create a continuing or frequently recurring conflict between her private interests and the performance of her public duties when she rented a duplex owned by the City to operate her two private businesses out of the space.  In light of this ethics violation, the Commission recommended a total fine of $2,500 and public censure and reprimand for imposition by the Governor. 

 

Settlement of Ethics Complaint Filed Against the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of the Coquina Water Control District Board 

The Commission also approved a Settlement Agreement filed against the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of the Coquina Water Control District Board (Board), David Law.  

 

The ethics complaint and the Order to Investigate focused on allegations that Mr. Law violated the constitutional disproportionate benefit prohibition as well as the misuse of public position, anti-nepotism, and voting conflicts requirements of the Code of Ethics, when he made a motion and voted in favor of the District hiring his son as a temporary, part-time District employee. The complaint further alleged that ninety days after the vote, Mr. Law directed District staff to “make” his son a full time District employee, resulting in a promotion and raise for his son.  

At its December 1, 2023, meeting the Commission found Probable Cause to believe that Mr. Law had violated the constitution and the Code of Ethics as alleged in the complaint and order an administrative trial on these matters.  

 

At its meeting last Friday, the Commission approved the Settlement Agreement finding that Mr. Law failed to follow disclosure requirements after abstaining on an April 2023 vote, violated the anti-nepotism law when he advocated for his son to be hired by the District, and that he violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit, and misused his position for the benefit of his son. In light of these ethics violations, the Commission recommended a total fine of $4,250 and public censure and reprimand for imposition by the Governor.

 

Consideration of Advisory Opinion Requests

The Code of Ethics provides that any public officer, public employee, and certain others who are in doubt regarding the application of the Code of Ethics or Sunshine Amendment may request an Advisory Opinion from the Commission. 

 

Consideration of Advisory Opinion Requested by Independent Special District Board Members Voting on Converting the District to a Nonprofit Entity  

The Commission also approved the adoption of draft advisory opinion (File No. 2808) advising members of the Lee Memorial Health System Board of Directors that they would be permitted to vote on measures to convert the Independent Special District to a nonprofit entity, despite an apparent voting conflict, due to the application of specific legislation expressly permitting the members of an Independent Special District Board to undertake such a vote, even when they intend to serve the nonprofit entity as compensated board members following the conversion. The opinion advised that while Board members must still comply with the other requirements of the voting conflict law, by orally stating the conflict and filing a Form 8B within 15 days of the vote, the members would be permitted to vote on the measure. 

 

Additional guidance was provided on whether participating in the vote would constitute a disproportionate benefit prohibited by Article II, Section 8(h)(2) of the Florida Constitution.  

 

Consideration of Advisory Opinion Requested by a Jacksonville City Council Member Regarding Conflicts of Interest and the Application of the Sole Source of Supply Exemption  

The Commission approved the adoption of draft advisory opinion (File No. 2809) which requested by the Director of the Jacksonville Office of Ethics, Compliance, and Oversight on behalf of a Jacksonville City Councilman. In the opinion the Commission advised the member that he would not have a conflicting employment or contractual relationship were his company to provide sports lighting installation services to the City, under his personal professional license, due to the application of the “sole source of supply” exemption to negate the apparent conflict. In the opinion, the Commission reasoned that the sole source exemption applied because the member’s company was the only qualified provider of these services within the City.  

 

However, the Commission further cautioned the member that he would have a voting conflict, requiring abstention regarding any votes on sports lighting projects before the City Council. Thus, he had to be cognizant of, and comply with, all requirements of the voting conflicts law regarding such measures. 

 

Deferral of Advisory Opinion Concerning the Disclosure of Trusts in The Absence Of Knowledge Of The Trust’s Holdings to March Meeting  

During the Commission’s meeting the Board voted to table the consideration of draft advisory opinion (File No. 2811) until its March 8, 2024, meeting to allow for the inclusion of an additional question.  

 

Consideration of Amendments to Commission’s Financial Disclosure Rule Chapter 34-8, Florida Administrative Code  

The Commission also considered and had a spirited discussion regarding proposed amendments to Commission Rule Ch. 34-8 of the Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) which govern disclosure of financial interests. The discussion at the meeting centered on proposed amendments to Rule 34-8.005 regarding the requirements of disclosure concerning the CE Form 6, “Full and Public Disclosure of Financial Interests” pertaining to the Secondary Sources of Income portion of the filing. Currently the Rule, and related instructions, require filers to identify each source of income (including clients and customers) that contributed more than ten percent of the gross income of businesses that they own.  

 

The proposed Rule amendment seeks to include a new subsection—subsection 5—wherein attorney filers would need only disclose “Legal Client” in satisfaction of the secondary sources of income disclosure section without providing any further identifying information. 

 

The Commission’s Deputy General Counsel explained that the proposed rulemaking arose in response to statements made by a member at the last meeting expressing concerns regarding the Florida Bar’s confidentiality requirements which prohibit attorneys from disclosing information related to the representation of a client.  

 

During the public comment portion of the discussion attorney and former Commission member, Mark Herron, expressed concerns regarding this proposed amendment stating that it would effectively “put a shade over” the filer’s secondary sources of income and as such “the public is going to be denied access to information.”  

 

Commissioner Wengay Newton echoed these concerns from the bench and stated that “It looks a lot like legislating from the bench.” He further opined that “The people of the State of Florida want to know about where [public official’s] finances are coming from.” He further expressed concerns that the proposed amendment would effectively conceal from revelation to the public information relevant to conflicts going forward.  

 

In light of this discussion, the Commission voted to table the consideration of these Rule amendments until its March 8, 2024, meeting wherein alternative amendment language will be able to be considered.

 
Discussion of Legislative Report  

The Commission discussed several proposed bills having ethics impact identified in its Legislative Report that had arisen during the Regular Legislative Session which commenced on January 9, 2024.  

 

The Executive Director explained that staff has been working with Legislators to “tweak” language currently contained in House Bill 1597 and its companion Senate Bill 7014 which seeks, in part to implement time frames for the resolution of ethics complaint proceedings. However, she noted that Commission Chair Ashley Lukis had expressed in committee testimony concerns regarding portions of the bill that seek to require a super-majority of six commissioners to deviate from the written recommendation of the Commission’s counsel. At the meeting, Commissioner Tina Descovich stated “I am shocked that the Legislature wants to take this authority away from the Commission.” The Commission voted to draft a letter to provide to Legislative committees and others opposing the six member vote requirement language.  

 

The Executive Director also highlighted the potential impact of House Bill 735 and the companion Senate Bill 734 which seeks to adopt s. 112.3262, F.S., within the Code of Ethics to prohibit people from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district without first registering as lobbyist and establishes requirements for registration, compliance, investigations, and registration fees. Executive Director, Kerrie Stillman, stated that, if passed, this legislation would result in the imposition of this registration requirement upon 2,500 local government entities. She further noted that the language of Senate Bill 734 requires the use of an electronic system for such registrations and provides that if a locality does not possess such an electronic system that the State Lobbyist Registration and Compensation Reporting System, currently used for the registration and compensation reporting of State lobbyists seeking to lobby the Legislature or Executive Branch agencies. She cautioned that the system was not designed for expansion and the system would have to be entirely redesigned prior to the July 1 effective date. She cautioned that this would lead to both funding and logistical issues for the Commission.  

Executive Session

During its closed session meeting (wherein confidential and exempt matters are addressed) the Commission took action on twenty-four (24) matters. In a Press Release issued on January 31, 2024, the Commission made the following findings.

 

Ethics Complaints Considered for Probable Cause

 

During the meeting, seven (7) ethics complaints were considered for probable cause. Commission determinations regarding probable cause are based upon the ethics complaint, the Report of Investigation, the Advocate’s Recommendation, as well as written statements submitted by the respondent (against whom the complaint is filed) and any oral statements made at the meeting.  At the meeting to determine probable cause the Commission may find that no probable cause exists to believe that a violation of the Code of Ethics or other breach of the public trust has occurred, and a public report will be issued concluding the matter and closing the file. Conversely, the Commission may find that probable cause exists to believe that a violation has occurred and order a public hearing of the complaint before the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) or it may find that probable cause exists but no further action should be taken in the matter due to the totality of the circumstances. A finding of probable cause is not a determination that a violation has occurred. Such a determination is made only after a full evidentiary hearing on the allegations.  

 

The Commission considered two complaints against former North Miami Beach Commissioner Paule Villard. In the first complaint, the Commission found probable cause on four allegations. The allegations were that she violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit and misused her position by using City property or resources while recording Facebook live videos for her Facebook followers. In addition, allegations she failed to complete the statutorily-required ethics training for calendar year 2021 and failed to certify the training on her 2021 Form 1 resulted in a finding of probable cause. No probable cause was found on two allegations that she violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit and misused her position by having an on-duty City police officer transport her in a City vehicle to multiple locations and events. The second complaint contained similar allegations that she violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit and misused her position were dismissed with a finding of no probable cause; having an on-duty City police officer transport her in a City vehicle to multiple locations and events; using a city-issued credit card to attend the funeral of an activist for the Haitian community; and using City funds to pay for a trip to Haiti, were dismissed with a finding of no probable cause. No probable cause was found to believe she failed to timely file her CE Form 1F, “Final Statement of Financial Interests,” within 60 days of leaving office. 

 

The Commission found probable cause to believe that North Miami Beach Planning and Zoning Board Member, Mark St. Vil, violated the financial disclosure laws by failing to file a 2020 CE Form 1, “Statement of Financial Interests.” However, the Commission elected to take no further action on the allegation due to the particular circumstances of the matter. 

 

The Commission considered a complaint against Polk County School Board Member, Lori Cunningham. The Commission found probable cause Ms. Cunningham had a conflicting contractual relationship that created a continuing or frequently recurring conflict between her private interests and the performance of her public duties when a company she owns sold uniforms to Lake Wales Charter Schools. Allegations that she violated ethics laws by doing business with her agency were dismissed with a finding of no probable cause. 

 

North Bay Village Mayor, Brent Walter Latham, was cleared of charges that he misused his position to file a complaint with the Florida Bar against the former North Bay Village Attorney. 

 

No probable cause was found to believe Manatee County Commissioner, Kevin Van Ostenbridge, violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit and misused his position by using his County purchasing card to purchase an email database of registered voters in his district so that he could to send them a government activities newsletter. 

 

Probable cause was found to believe that Fernandina Beach City Commissioner, Daniel Sturges, violated the voting conflict law by his failure to state the nature of his voting conflict and then file, within 15 days, the required Memorandum of Voting Conflict (Form 8B) when he abstained from a vote to authorize the City Attorney to defend him in a prior ethics complaint. However, the Commission elected to take no further action on the allegation due to the particular circumstances of the matter. 

 

Ethics Complaints Dismissed for Lacking Legal Sufficiency

 

The Commission also reviewed and dismissed seventeen (17) ethics complaints for lacking legal sufficiency. These reviews are limited to questions of jurisdiction and determinations as to whether the contents of the complaint are adequate to allege a violation of the Code of Ethics or other laws within the Commission’s jurisdiction. In any matter where a complaint is found legally insufficient and dismissed, the Commission will issue an order explaining the rationale for the dismissal.  Once an order dismissing the complaint has been rendered, the order dismissing the complaint and all documents related thereto will become public records.  

At its January meeting the Commission dismissed complaints filed against the following public servants due to a lack of legal sufficiency: Betty Shannon, Florida Bureau Of Vital Statistics Program Administrator; David Osteen, Dixie County Commissioner; Brittni Brown, Greenville Mayor; Lee Jones, Greenville Town Manager/CEO; Cynthia Mcintyre, Cory Lakes Isles Community Development District Board Of Supervisors Member; Audra Bosler, Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office Child Protection Investigator; Two Complaints Against Beverly Nash, Quincy City Manager; Marlen Martell, Pembroke Park Town Clerk; Cameron May, Jupiter Town Council Member; Four Complaints Against Cynthia Burton, Crescent City Commissioner; Francis Xavier Suarez, Miami Mayor; Brandon Arrington, Osceola County Commission; And Michael Anthony Moran, Jr., Sarasota County Commissioner. 

### 

Florida’s Constitutional Lobbying Bans Remain Effective for the Moment: Current Status of Constitutional Lobbying Restrictions

Florida’s Constitutional Lobbying Bans Remain Effective for the Moment: Current Status of Constitutional Lobbying Restrictions

 

January 24, 2024

Court House

By Caroline Klancke, Esq., Florida Ethics Institute.

In 2018 Florida voters overwhelming approved two new constitutional restrictions designed to curtail the ability of public officers to engage in lobbying activities both while in office and for six years after leaving their public position. In 2023 and 2024 there have been a barrage of legal determinations regarding these new constitutional requirements contained in Article II, s. 8(f), of the Florida Constitution, leaving public servants to wonder where are we now?

 

In rulings issued on August 9, 2023, a federal judge struck down the In-Office portions of the lobbying restrictions contained in Article II, s. 8(f)(2) of the Florida Constitution, via the issuance of a permanent injunction in Garcia v. Stillman, Case No. 22-CV-24156, 20235095540 (S.D. Fla. August 9, 2023), finding that the restriction was an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech. However, Judge Bloom did not block the enforcement of the six-year Post-Office Holding Lobbying Restrictions portion of the constitutional amendment contained in Art. II, s. 8(f)(3), of the Florida Constitution, which prohibit “public officers” (including all state lawmakers and elected officials, City Councilmembers, County Commissioners, School Board members, and others) from lobbying for compensation “on issues of policy, appropriations, or procurement for a period of six years” after leaving their public office or position. The Post-Office Holding Lobbying Restrictions further provide in Art. II, s. 8(f)(3)a.-c., the manner in which the post-office restrictions would apply to different types of public offices—detail which was not present in the In-Office Lobbying Restrictions. In her ruling Judge Bloom noted that the “Post-Office Restrictions are narrowly tailored based on the public official’s office” indicating that the 6-year Post-Office Holding Lobbying Restrictions may prevail in future constitutional challenges.

 

In October 2023 the Commission applied this ruling as the basis of advisory opinion CEO 23-6 issued to a Brevard County Commissioner finding that the member, who is a non-attorney employee of a law firm, could engage in lobbying on behalf of municipal clients while serving as a county commissioner.
During this same period the Commission appealed the ruling to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In addition, the Office of Solicitor General filed a motion requesting a stay of the ruling pending the resolution of the underlying appeal.

 

On November 30, 2023, a three-judge panel from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the Office of Solicitor General’s motion finding that the In-Office Lobbying Restrictions could remain enforceable during the period when the appeal is proceeding through the judicial process. This means that as of November 30, and until such time that a ruling on the appeal before the 11th Circuit is issued, the constitutional In-Office Lobbying restrictions are effective and enforceable by the Florida Commission on Ethics. Further, the constitutional six-year Post-Office-Holding Lobbying restrictions remain in effect regardless of the outcome of the appeal. Thus, all current and former public officers should be cognizant of, and refrain from engaging in, any activities that constitute “lobbying” in contravention of the constitutional In-Office or Post-Officeholding Lobbying bans.

###

FEI Honored by the Florida Association of County Attorneys with the Ethics in Government Award

The Florida Ethics Institute and its Executive Director Honored by the Florida Association of County Attorneys with the Ethics in Government Award

CMK with FACA Award

Caroline Klancke, founder and Executive Director of the Florida Ethics Institute (FEI) was honored for her work in advancing ethics in government. The Florida Association of County Attorneys provided Ms. Klancke with the 2023 Ethics in Government Award for her service as an attorney-ethicist and the publication of the Florida Ethics Handbook.

Klancke, an attorney with more than 15 years of ethics and open government law experience, served as General Counsel, Deputy Executive Director, and Senior Attorney with the Florida Commission on Ethics where she assisted the agency in its constitutional mandate to interpret and enforce the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees.

FACA Award

Prior to her tenure with the Ethics Commission, she served as Chief Ethics Officer and Senior Attorney with the Florida Public Service Commission. She is the author of the Florida Ethics Handbook—the only comprehensive guide to governmental ethics regulations in Florida. In her capacity as an ethics and open government law educator she has trained hundreds of public officers and employees, journalists, citizen ethics advocates, and attorneys.

 

“It is an honor to be recognized by this prestigious organization and by attorneys that I deeply admire for the ethics work that is my life’s calling. I want to thank the FACA for their recognition of our important work,” Klancke said. “I accept this award on behalf of the Florida Ethics Institute and will use this recognition to fuel our continued work to advance ethics in government in 2024 and beyond.” 

 

For more information about the Florida Association of County Attorneys and to see the list of 2023 FACA award recipients, please click HERE. 

2024 Pre-Session Florida Ethics Legislative Report

2024 Pre-Session Florida Ethics Legislative Report

The 2024 regular Legislative Session commences on January 9 and will adjourn on March 8
 
 

2024 Florida Commission on Ethics’ Legislative Recommendations  

 

Each year the Florida Commission on Ethics adopts Legislative Recommendations to strengthen and streamline the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees (Code of Ethics) and for the consideration by the Legislature. Click HERE for the Commission on Ethics’ 2024 Legislative Recommendations regarding proposed changes to the Code of Ethics. 

 

Legislative Tracking—Summaries of bills impacting Florida ethics regulations are listed below: 

 

The following is a list of bills the Florida Ethics Institute (FEI) is tracking during the 2024 legislative session. The selected bills have ethics law implications in Florida. The bills identified are divided into those proposed in the Florida House of Representatives and the Florida Senate.  

 

Florida House of Representatives

HB  735 – Government Accountability

General bill sponsored by Representative Robert Alexander “Alex” Andrade

 

➢ Now in Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts 

 

• Related bill SB 734 – Government Accountability 

 

The bill seeks to amend portions of the Code of Ethics, Part III, Ch. 112, F.S., to prohibit individuals from soliciting or accepting anything of value from a foreign country of concern. The bill seeks to adopt s. 112.3262, F.S., within the Code of Ethics to prohibit people from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district without first registering as a lobbyist and establishes requirements for registration, compliance, investigations, and registration fees.

 

 The bill also seeks to amend portions of ss. 125.73, 125.75, 166.021, and 1001.50, F.S., to prohibit entities from renewing or extending certain employment contracts during a specified timeframe. The bill seeks to amend s. 166.041, F.S., to require that only two members of a governing body must be physically present at meeting for quorum purposes and authorizes members to participate in deliberations of governing body through technology.

HB  7005 – OGSR/Financial Disclosure

General Bill by Ethics, Elections & Open Government Subcommittee and Representative Jeff Holcomb

 

➢ The bill is now in State Affairs Committee

 

•  Related bill SB 7012- OGSR/Secure Login Credentials Held by the Commission on Ethics

 

The Open Government Sunset Review Act requires the Legislature to review each public record exemption and each public meeting exemption five years after enactment. If the Legislature does not reenact the exemption, it automatically repeals on October 2nd of the fifth year after enactment.

In order to modernize and streamline the financial disclosure filing process, a mandatory electronic filing system for financial disclosures was created in 2019 via the adoption of Code of Ethics s. 112.31446, F.S. Filers required to file full and public disclosure of their financial interests with a Form 6 were required to submit their disclosures electronically beginning January 1, 2023. Those required to file the less detailed disclosure of financial interests via the Form 1 will be required to start submitting their disclosures electronically beginning January 1, 2024. 

 

The bill saves from repeal the public record exemptions for all secure login credentials held by the Commission for the purpose of allowing access to the electronic financial disclosure filing system, as well as information entered into the system for the purposes of making the disclosure. The exemptions will repeal on October 2, 2024, if this bill is not passed.

 

HB  433 – Workplace Heat Exposure Requirements

General Bill by Representative Tiffany Esposito

 

HB 433 seeks to adopt actions preempting local heat exposure requirements and other actions by political subdivisions. 

 

Current provisions of the Code of Ethics, s. 112.326, F.S., permit the governing body of any political subdivision to adopt, by ordinance or rule, more stringent standards of conduct and disclosure requirements than those specified in the Code of Ethics—and applicable to the public officers and/or employees of that locality.  

 

FEI is monitoring the progress of this bill because portions the PCS added to Regulatory Reform & Economic Development Subcommittee agenda on Wednesday, December 6, 2023, and which failed to pass on December 13, 2023—sought to adopt s. 448.077, F.S., which would, in part, expressly preempt the “regulation of the terms and conditions of employment . . . to the state.” This broad language could negatively impact more stringent ethics and/or disclosure ordinances adopted by political subdivisions under the authority currently afforded by Code of Ethics, s. 112.326, F.S.

 

HB  1017 – Insurance

General Bill sponsored by Representative Jervonte Edmonds

 

•  Related bill SB 102-Property Insurance 

 

The bill seeks to create the Property Insurance Commission; provide for the election of the Commissioner of Insurance Regulation; prohibit the commissioner from engaging in certain activities or employment for a specified period after leaving office; prohibit property insurers from claiming insolvency under specified circumstances; require residential property insurers to release specified information to insureds upon request, etc.

 

Portions of the bill seek to amend the Code of Ethics through the creation of s. 112.3134, F.S., setting forth current and post-office-holding restrictions applicable to the position of Commissioner of Insurance Regulation.

 

Florida Senate

SB  102 - Property Insurance

General Bill sponsored by Senator Shevrin D. “Shev” Jones

 

➢ The bill has been referred to Banking and Insurance; Ethics and Elections; Appropriations

 

•  Related bill HB 1017-Property Insurance 

 

The bill seeks to create the Property Insurance Commission; provide for the election of the Commissioner of Insurance Regulation; prohibit the commissioner from engaging in certain activities or employment for a specified period after leaving office; prohibit property insurers from claiming insolvency under specified circumstances; require residential property insurers to release specified information to insureds upon request, etc.

 

Portions of the bill seek to amend the Code of Ethics through the creation of s. 112.3134, F.S., setting forth current and post-office-holding restrictions applicable to the position of Commissioner of Insurance Regulation.

 

SB  734 – Government Accountability

General Bill by Senator Blaise Ingoglia

 

➢ The bill has been referred to Community Affairs; Ethics and Elections; and Rules Committees. 

 

The bill seeks to amend portions of the Code of Ethics to prohibit individuals from soliciting or accepting anything of value from a foreign country of concern. The bill seeks to adopt s. 112.3262, F.S., within the Code of Ethics to prohibit people from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district without first registering as lobbyist; establishes requirements for registration, compliance, investigations, and registration fees; and requires a Commission on Ethics and Public Trust established by a county or municipality or the Florida Commission on Ethics to investigate a lobbyist or principal upon receipt of a sworn complaint containing allegations that a lobbyist has failed to register or submitted false information in a report or registration. 

 

The bill also seeks to amend portions of ss. 125.75 and 166.021, F.S., to prohibit entities from renewing or extending certain employment contracts during a specified timeframe. The bill seeks to amend s. 166.041, F.S., to require that only two members of a governing body must be physically present at a meeting for quorum purposes and authorizes members to participate in deliberations of governing body through technology.

 

SB  7012 – OGSR/Secure Login Credentials Held by the Commission on Ethics

General Bill by Ethics and Elections

 

➢ December 15, 2023, the bill was referred to Governmental Oversight and Accountability; Rules

 

➢  December 13, 2023, the bill was reported favorably out of the Ethics and Elections Committee

 

•   Related bill HB 7005 – OGSR/Financial Disclosure

 

The bill seeks to preserve from repeal current public records exemptions protecting the disclosure of secure login credentials held by the Commission on Ethics and certain information entered into the electronic filing system for financial disclosures.

 

SB  7014 – Ethics

General Bill by Ethics and Elections

➢  The bill has been referred to Rules Committee 

 

The bill seeks to amend portions of the Code of Ethics, s. 112.3122, F.S., to increase the maximum fine for violations of the newly applicable constitutional lobbying restrictions contained in Art. II, Section 8(f), Fla. Const., from $10,000 to $20,000. The bill further seeks to amend the Florida Commission on Ethics’ membership requirements contained in s. 112.321, F.S., to prohibit members from serving more than two full terms, instead of two full terms in succession, as it currently provides. 

The bill seeks to amend the ethics complaint statute, s. 112.324, F.S., to expedite the complaint investigation process undertaken by the Commission on Ethics. For example, the bill seeks to require that the Commission make a determination as to whether a complaint is technically sufficient “no later than 5 days after receiving the complaint” and make a determination as to legal sufficiency of a complaint for investigative purposes “no later than 21 days after receiving the complaint.” Further, the bill seeks to require that if an Order to Investigate is issued, all ethics complaint investigations “must be completed no later than 120 days after the beginning of the preliminary investigation” and further requires that the Commission “complete the preliminary investigation, including the probable cause determination, no later than 1 year after the beginning of the preliminary investigation.” The bill further seeks to amend the ethics complaint statute to require that “[a]t least six members of the commission must vote to reject or deviate from a recommendation of counsel to the commission.” Currently the Commission may reject or deviate from a recommendation of its attorney (referred to as “Commission Advocate”) by majority vote.

2023 Year In Review

YearInReviewWhite

Thank you from the Florida Ethics Institute 

 

Whether you attended an FEI Ethics Educational event, participated in the Ethics Rocks Benefit Concert, or contributed to our mission, we are truly grateful that you chose to join our Ethics Community! 

 

In 2024, FEI remains committed to advancing ethics through advocacy and education! The Institute accomplishes this mission via its educational programs and partnerships. Below are a few of the many ethics highlights from the past year and our plans for 2024 and beyond!

FEI Making a Difference !

Florida Ethics Handbook
 

In 2023 FEI published the first edition of the Florida Ethics Handbook-the only comprehensive guide to Florida’s governmental ethics requirements with the goal of publishing the Handbook annually to serve as an invaluable resource for those wanting to better understand the tools of governmental access and accountability.

The 2023 Legislative Session resulted in a host of changes to the Code of Ethics. The 2024 Edition of the Handbook, available now-contains analysis of recent changes in ethics regulations, as well as ethics court cases and advisory opinions issued in 2022-2023 and contains as a brief but rigorous review of Florida’s current ethics laws, and related constitutional provisions, by topic—including gifts, conflicts of interest, nepotism, financial disclosure, voting conflicts, and more. 

Learn more about the Florida Ethics Handbook.
FEI Ethics Educational Outreach Initiatives

• Ethics and Open Government Seminars: In 2023 FEI’s ethics educators have hosted or participated in more than fifteen ethics educational lectures and trainings and provided ethics, professionalism, and open government education to hundreds of public servants, as well as attorneys, and citizen ethics advocates to assist them in understanding the continuously changing landscape of ethics and open government regulations. In this capacity, FEI has partnered with organizations and associations including the Florida Bar, Florida Association of Counties, Florida Public Pension Trustees Association, and others to help their members meet and exceed Florida’s fairness and transparency requirements.

• Online Learning Initiatives: In addition, through our Online Learning Center FEI provides quality, up-to-date online ethics education available on demand. In 2024 FEI will record and offer new, current on-line ethics education modules which highlight recent changes in governmental ethics regulations.

• Ethics News Updates: FEI has authored and disseminated dozens of ethics news updates to the public spotlighting changes in ethics regulations, recent case law with ethics impact, and advisory opinions affecting Florida’s public servants, as well as investigation and enforcement actions by the Florida Commission on Ethics.  

Florida Capital
Go to News & Events

• FEI Assists Journalists to Empower the Public with a Better Understanding of Ethics: In 2023 FEI also assisted an array of journalists and media outlets, including Vanity Fair, Reuters, Forbes, The Guardian, Washington Post, Miami Herald, Miami New Times, Orlando Sentinel, and others in their understanding of Florida’s ethics laws and their application to facts involving ethics in the Sunshine State.

FEI Ethics Legislative Tracking Program

 

During the critical period prior to and during each Legislative Session, FEI raises public awareness regarding proposed legislation impacting Florida’s ethics laws in real time through its Ethics Legislative Tracking Program.

In 2023 FEI published eight Florida Ethics Legislative Reports for the benefit of all in Florida—including the publication of the 2023 Post-Session Ethics Legislative Report detailing the significant actions which occurred during the legislative session relating to ethics in government.

 

In advance of the 2024 regular Legislative Session, which commences on January 9, FEI has published the 2024 Pre-Session Florida Ethics Legislative Report.

Support FEI Here
Our Call to Action!

 

If you believe in our mission we humbly ask for your support of our ethics educational projects and initiatives. Through educational activities designed to facilitate ethical leadership and service through education, FEI is committed to ensuring that a public office is a public trust.

 

With your help, we can begin the new year focused on empowering ethics with FEI as the central nonprofit leader in ethics understanding to build a more sustainable future in Florida.

Florida Ethics Update: Commission on Ethics Determinations—December Meeting

Florida Ethics Update: Commission on Ethics Determinations—December Meeting

December 8, 2023

By Caroline Klancke, Esq., Florida Ethics Institute.

 

During its meeting on Friday, December 1, 2023, the Florida Commission on Ethics (Commission), the constitutionally created independent agency tasked with interpreting and enforcing the State’s ethics laws, took action on a myriad of matters involving the Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees (Code of Ethics) and the “Ethics in Government” amendment to the State constitution (Art. II, s. 8, Fla. Const.). 

 

Commission on Ethics Welcomes New Member
Laird A. Lile
Laird A. Lile

The Commission began its meeting by welcoming a new member to the board—Laird A. Lile.

 

Commissioner Laird A. Lile is an attorney and partner in the law firm Laird A. Lile, PLLC, which specializes in estate and trust matters. Lile has practiced law in Florida since 1984. He is certified by The Florida Bar as a Wills, Trusts and Estates lawyer (since 1989), is a Fellow of the American College of Trust and Estate Counsel (ACTEC) (since 1995), is included in Woodward/White’s The Best Lawyers in America (since 1995), is recognized as one of Florida’s “Legal Elite” (Florida Trend, since 2005), and as one of Florida’s “100 Top Super Lawyers” (since 2010). Laird is a graduate of the College of William and Mary (B.B.A. 1981), Ohio Northern University (J.D. with honors 1984), and the University of Miami (LL.M. in Estate Planning 1987). He is also a Certified Public Accountant (inactive, Florida).

 

Public Session

Settlement of Ethics Complaint Filed Against the Former Greater Ft. Lauderdale Convention and Visitors Bureau’s (CVB) Vice President of Convention Sales

During its public session meeting, the Commission approved a Settlement Agreement (referred to by the Commission as a “Joint Stipulation”) resolving an ethics complaint filed against the former Greater Ft. Lauderdale Convention and Visitors Bureau’s (CVB) Vice President of Convention Sales, Christine Roberts.

 

The ethics complaint, filed in 2018 by a representative of the Broward Office of Inspector General, alleged that while employed as the CVB Vice President of Convention Sales, Ms. Roberts misused her official position during the period of 2012 to 2015 to influence the County’s selection of her boyfriend’s event production company for County functions and in contravention of the County’s procurement policies and directives. The complaint further alleged that Roberts had an impermissible conflict of interest arising from a personal loan between Roberts and her boyfriend, which existed during the period when the boyfriend’s company was doing business with the County.

 

The Settlement Agreement was formed between the Commission’s attorney (referred to by the Commission as its “Advocate”) and Roberts after the Commission found probable cause at its March 5, 2021 meeting, to believe that Roberts violated the ethics laws by misusing her official position to benefit herself and another person connected to her in a private capacity, had a contractual relationship that conflicted with her official public duties, and misused information not available to the public for the benefit of another.

 

At last Friday’s meeting, the Commission voted to enter a final order finding that Ms. Roberts had a conflict of interest arising from a conflicting employment or contractual relationship while employed with the CVB. In light of this ethics violation, a total fine of $1,500 and public censure and reprimand was recommended by the Commission for imposition by the Governor.

 

Settlement of Ethics Complaint Filed Against St. Augustine Beach Commissioner

The Commission also approved the Settlement of an ethics complaint filed against former St. Augustine Beach Commissioner, Ernesto Torres.

 

The ethics complaint, filed in 2022 by the St. Augustine Beach Chief of Police, alleged that Torres misused his position as City Commissioner during and after a DUI traffic stop of a vehicle driven by Torres’ wife on January 23, 2022, at 12:13 a.m. Following the arrest of Mrs. Torres, the Chief of Police as well as other law enforcement officers received several phone calls from Torres. After being advised that his wife was going to jail, Commissioner Torres asked the Police Chief to “help” him. After the Police Chief advised the commissioner that “if I ‘helped him’ it would be unethical, that I could lose my job, and I would lose all respect and credibility from my agency” the Commissioner replied “well think of all the credibility you will be losing from me if you don’t help me.” The Polic Chief stated in the complaint that he took this response as a threat to his agency and his job as Torres was one of five commissioners that he reported to regarding matters pertaining to the Police Department.

 

Torres resigned from his position as St. Augustine Beach Commissioner on January 31, 2022, seven days after the incident occurred.

 

At its September 9, 2022, meeting the Commission found probable cause to believe Torres violated the ethics laws prohibiting bribery, misuse of official position, and the constitutional provision prohibiting disproportionate benefit, by soliciting favors from law enforcement officials, by using or attempting to use his official position to obtain favorable treatment for himself and his wife, and by abusing his position to obtain a disproportionate benefit.

 

In the Settlement Agreement, which was approved by the Commission last Friday, the Commission agreed to dismiss the anti-bribery allegation finding that there was no quid pro quo predicated upon a meeting of the minds between Torres and the police officers and Torres acknowledged that he violated the constitutional provision prohibiting disproportionate benefit “by abusing his official position to obtain a disproportionate benefit for himself and/or his wife” and that he misused his official position “to secure favorable treatment for himself and/or his wife.” In light of these ethics violations, the Commission recommended a total fine of $4,000 and public censure and reprimand for imposition by the Governor.

 

Dismissal of Ethics Complaint Filed Against City of West Palm Beach Mayor

During the meeting, the Commission granted the Advocate’s Motion to Dismiss a complaint filed against City of West Palm Beach Mayor, Keith James. The ethics complaint in the matter alleged that the Mayor circumvented the City’s procurement policies by awarding a no-bid contract for the provision of security guard services to a corporation owned by a friend of the Mayor. At its July 24, 2019, meeting the Commission found probable cause to believe that the Mayor misused his official position by “urging the award of a no-bid security contract to a company operated by one of his friends” and referred the matter to the Division of Administrative Hearings (“DOAH”) for a full administrative trial.

 

At the meeting last Friday, the Commission dismissed the matter by granting the Advocate’s Motion to Dismiss the complaint wherein the Commission’s attorney sought the dismissal on the basis that after conducting additional discovery in preparation for a hearing, there was insufficient evidence to support a violation of the law.

 

Dismissal of Ethics Complaint Filed Against Former North Miami Board of Adjustment Member

The Commission also voted to grant the Advocate’s Motion to Dismiss a statutorily required, self-initiated investigation concerning a former North Miami Board of Adjustment Member, former North Miami Personnel Board Member, and former North Miami Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee Member, Mary C. Estime-Irvin. The motion was granted on the basis that Ms. Estime-Irvin no longer serves in her appointed positions.

 

Adoption of Advisory Opinion Given to Okaloosa School Board Members

In an advisory opinion approved at the meeting, the Commission advised current members of the Okaloosa County School Board that due to the application of a “sole source” exemption to the conflicts of interest prohibitions of the Code of Ethics, she would not be faced with a prohibited conflict if the School Board purchased property from a Credit Union where a School Board member serves on the Board of Directors and where several other members of the School Board do business and maintain accounts. The Commission further advised that the “sole source” exemption would also apply to negate a conflict were a School District employee to sell a parcel of land to the District.

 

Consideration of Advisory Opinion Requested by a Recent Appointee to the Commission on Ethics

The Commission also adopted portions of a draft advisory opinion providing guidance to the newest member of the Commission on Ethics, Laird A. Lile, regarding the financial disclosure requirements for reporting his interests in trusts on the 2024 Form 6 “Full and Public Disclosure of Financial Interests.” Although Commissioner Lile spoke at the meeting during the consideration of the draft advisory opinion, he did not participate in the vote on the opinion.

 

The opinion request arose as a result of a 2023 change to the financial disclosure laws requiring that commissioners of the Florida Commission on Ethics file a Form 6, “Full and Public Disclosure of Financial Interests” beginning on January 1, 2024. In light of this new filing requirement, Commissioner Laird inquired whether he was required to disclose his interest in a trust which has a “spendthrift clause” which prevents him from borrowing against trust property and income. In response to this question, the Commission advised the Commissioner that he was not required to disclose his interest in that trust as an asset because it contained clauses that prevented him from selling or borrowing against his interest in the trust.

 

The Commissioner further inquired whether he was required to disclose “an intentionally defective grantor trust” (IDGT) as a primary source of income on his financial disclosure form. The facts indicated that he serves as the grantor of the trust and is responsible for paying income taxes due from income earned from trust property. The Commission advised the member that he was not required to disclose the IDGT as either a primary source of income or as an asset on his financial disclosure filing.

 

During the Commission’s deliberation of the third question raised in the draft opinion, the Commissioner elected to withdraw it from further consideration. The question pertained to whether “a filer who is an attorney” would be required to “disclose the identities of his legal clients as secondary sources of income” on his Form 6 financial disclosure filing as “such disclosures will place him in violation of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar.” The financial disclosure requirements of Commission Rule 34-8.005(2) of the Florida Administrative Code (“F.A.C.”) pertaining to secondary sources of income currently provide that if a Form 6 filer owns over 5% of the total assets or stock of a business, and received more than $1,000 in income from the business, than he or she must disclose the identity of any client or customer of that business providing 10% or more of that business’s gross income during that year.

 

The draft opinion noted that the question as to whether an attorney filing financial disclosure must disclose the identities of clients as secondary sources of income had previously been raised before the Commission which had determined, and reiterated in subsequent years, that legal clients exceeding the reporting thresholds should be disclosed despite the existence of confidentiality requirements of the Florida Bar.

 

During the deliberation of this question Chair Ashley Lukis asked the Commission’s General Counsel “would you recommend rulemaking to try to harmonize the current [language] of the rules with the obligation of attorneys to maintain client confidentiality” and the General Counsel advised the board that rulemaking could be undertaken by the agency to amend the requirements as to the disclosure of secondary sources of income on the Form 6 as those requirements are set forth in the Commission’s rules. He further advised that if it was the will of the Commission, their staff could institute the rulemaking process for consideration at the Commission’s next meeting on January 26, 2024. However, he further explained that rulemaking could not be undertaken to abrogate the client disclosure requirements applicable to the secondary sources of income on the Form 1, “Statement of Financial Interests” as the requirements of this form were set forth by law in Section 112.3145, F.S. In light of possible clarification via the rulemaking process, the Commissioner elected to withdraw question three from further consideration.

 

Thereafter, the Commission voted to approve the analysis as to questions one and two and directed staff to initiate rulemaking proceedings regarding the clarification of the Commission’s rules regarding secondary sources of income and the disclosure of client identities on the Form 6, “Full and Public Disclosure of Financial Interests.”

 

Executive Session

During its closed session meeting (wherein confidential and exempt matters are addressed) the Commission took action on forty-two (42) matters. In a Press Release issued on December 6, 2023, the Commission made the following findings.


Ethics Complaints Considered for Probable Cause

During the meeting, eleven (11) ethics complaints were considered for probable cause. Commission determinations regarding probable cause are based upon the ethics complaint, the Report of Investigation, the Advocate’s Recommendation, as well as written statements submitted by the respondent (against whom the complaint is filed) and any oral statements made at the meeting. At the meeting to determine probable cause the Commission may find that no probable cause exists to believe that a violation of the Code of Ethics or other breach of the public trust has occurred, and a public report will be issued concluding the matter and closing the file. Conversely, the Commission may find that probable cause exists to believe that a violation has occurred and order a public hearing of the complaint before the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) or it may find that probable cause exists but no further action should be taken in the matter due to the totality of the circumstances. A finding of probable cause is not a determination that a violation has occurred. Such a determination is made only after a full evidentiary hearing on the allegations.


The Commission considered a complaint filed against Fernandina Beach City Commissioner, Daniel Sturges, and found no probable cause to believe that he had a voting conflict when he voted on a measure concerning litigation involving a city-owned building. The building was subleased to a café that employs an individual who co-owns the building with Mr. Sturges. An additional allegation Mr. Sturges misused his position to terminate the City Manager over concerns about documents related to the insurance policy obtained by the café, in connection with its lease on City property, also was dismissed with a finding of no probable cause.

 

In a complaint filed against West Villages Improvement District Board of Supervisors member (WVID), John Meisel, the Commission found probable cause to believe the member had a continuing or frequently recurring conflict of interest. The complaint and additional documents in the matter indicated that Mr. Meisel attended and participated in a meeting of the board of directors of the Gran Paradiso Property Owners Association (POA) weeks after receiving a legally binding opinion from the Ethics Commission advising him that his service on the WVID while simultaneously serving as a member of the board of directors of the POA created a conflict of interest. However, the Commission voted to take no further action on the allegation unless Mr. Meisel requests a hearing.

 

No probable cause was found on an additional allegation that Mr. Meisel had a prohibited conflict of interest when he sent an email to the POA board offering the WVID liability insurance policy as a mechanism for reimbursement to the POA for damages and attorney’s fees because the information was obtained in his private capacity.

 

In a complaint filed against the Supervisor of the Cory Lakes Isles Community Development District (CDD), Cynthia Mcintyre, probable cause was found to believe that she misused her public position by using her official CDD email to send correspondence endorsing her preferred candidates for the upcoming homeowner’s association election. However, the Commission voted to take no further action on the allegation unless Ms. McIntyre requests a hearing.

 

An ethics complaint filed against Crescent City Mayor, Michele Myers, was dismissed with a finding of no probable cause to believe she misused her position by signing a check to reimburse another City Commissioner for legal fees incurred during the defense of a voter requested recall petition, without the approval of the City Commission.

 

The Commission found probable cause to believe that the Former Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of the Coquina Water Control District (District), David Law, failed to follow disclosure requirements after abstaining on an April 2023 vote. The Commission also found probable cause to believe that he violated the anti-nepotism law when he advocated for his son to be hired by the District. Allegations that Mr. Law violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit and misused his position for the benefit of his son, also resulted in a finding of probable cause.

 

No probable cause was found to believe former North Miami Beach City Manager Arthur H. Sorey, III, violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit and misused his position when he charged a meal to the City’s purchasing card when he already received per diem for the meal prior to travelling. Additional allegations that Mr. Sorey failed to timely file his 2022 Form 1 and 2023 Form 1F were dismissed with a finding of no probable cause.

 

An ethics complaint against former Crescent City Planning and Zoning Commission Member, Tracy Eckhardt, was dismissed with a finding of no probable cause. The Commission found no probable cause to believe Eckhardt violated the constitutional amendment prohibiting abuse of office for a disproportionate benefit and misused her position to acquire City utility information for several properties within the City and then use the information as a basis for filing voter challenges in a recall election. An allegation she used her public position to obtain privileged information for use in the recall election resulted in a finding of no probable cause.

 

In a complaint filed against the former Chief of Staff in the Executive Office of the Governor, James Uthmeier, the Commission found no probable cause to believe Mr. Uthmeier misused his position to have employees and officials in the administration solicit campaign funds for Governor DeSantis’s Presidential campaign.

 

In a related complaint, no probable cause was found to believe the former Legislative Affairs Director in the Executive Office of the Governor, Stephanie Kopelousos, misused her position to solicit endorsements for Governor DeSantis’s Presidential Campaign.

 

In a complaint filed against Marion County Commissioner, Carl Zalak, III, the Commission found no probable cause to believe Mr. Zalak misused his position to terminate the employment of a county inspector after the inspector was involved in an altercation following a failed residential inspection.

 

An investigation of Marion County Assistant County Administrator, Tracy Straub, also resulted in a finding of no probable cause.

 

Ethics Complaints Dismissed for Lacking Legal Sufficiency

The Commission also reviewed and dismissed thirty-one (31) ethics complaints for lacking legal sufficiency. These reviews are limited to questions of jurisdiction and determinations as to whether the contents of the complaint are adequate to allege a violation of the Code of Ethics or other laws within the Commission’s jurisdiction. In any matter where a complaint is found legally insufficient and dismissed, the Commission will issue an order explaining the rationale for the dismissal. Once an order dismissing the complaint has been rendered, the order dismissing the complaint and all documents related thereto will become public records.


At its December meeting the Commission dismissed complaints filed against the following public servants due to a lack of legal sufficiency: Michael T. Twitty, Pinellas County Property Appraiser; David Schulson, Broward County Assistant State Attorney; Marty Lawing, Fort Myers City Manager; Wesley Griffin, Washington County Commissioner; Elizabeth Voss, Polk County Assistant County Attorney; John Haas, Adjutant General of the Florida National Guard; Robert Carruthers, Assistant Adjutant General of the Florida National Guard; Ryan Gill, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors for the Hillsborough Soil and Water Conservation District; Richardo Gray, Clay County Sheriff’s Office Detention Deputy; Jacob Spooner, Bradenton Beach City Commissioner; Todd Sampson, Lake City Councilperson; Stephen Witt, Lake City Mayor; two complaints filed against Ricky Jernigan, Lake City Councilperson; Todd Kennon, Lake City Attorney; Robert Nixon, Quincy City Manager and Chief Executive Officer; David Gladding, Union County Deputy Sheriff; Brandi Gabbard, St. Petersburg City Councilmember; Richie Floyd, St. Petersburg City Councilmember; Charlie Bishop, Manatee County Acting County Administrator; Mark Gregg, Islamorada Village Council; Mike Rahn, Manatee County Commissioner for District 4; Jamey King, Cross City Chief of Police; David Hazellief, Okeechobee County Commissioner; Deborah Manzo, Okeechobee County Administrator; Allyson Berry, Leesburg City Commissioner; Chris Forehand, First Judicial Circuit State Attorney’s Office Investigator; Joseph Filippelli, Sarasota-Manatee Airport Authority Senior Vice President for Real Estate Development and Properties; Robert Och, Heritage Landing Community Development District Assistant Secretary and Board of Supervisor; Teresa Granger, Otter Creek Mayor; and Carmine Marceno, Lee County Sheriff.

###