HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-30-2008 Brenda Brown Continuing to Serve on the Tuskawilla Lighting and Beautification District Advisor Committee ("TLBD")kri aftlivan
JAN 3 1 2008
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
BROWN, GARGANESE, WEISS & D'AGRESTA, P.A.
Debra S. Babb-Nutcher
Joseph E. Blitch
Usher L. Brown'
Suzanne D'Agresta'
Anthony A. Garganese,
J.W. Taylor
Jeffrey S. Weiss
'Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer
*Board Certified City, County 3 Local Government Law
'Board Certified Appellate Practice
Attorneys at Law
Offices in Orlando, Kissimmee, Cocoa, Tara L. Barrett
Ft. Lauderdale & Tampa Vivian P. Cocotas
Scott J. Domstein
Robin Gibson Drage
Mitchell B. Haller
Katherine W. Latorre
Terri E. Oster
Amy J. Pitsch
January 30, 2008
(Via email through the City Clerk's Office)
The Honorable Mayor John F. Bush and
Members of the City Commission
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708-6912
Erin J. O'Leary'
Catherine D. Reischmann
William E. Reischmann, Jr.
Of Counsel
RE: Brenda Brown Continuing to Serve on the Tuscawilla Lighting and
Beautification District Advisory Committee ("TLBD")
Dear Mayor and City Commission:
This letter is presented at the City Commission's request for a legal opinion on whether Ms.
Brenda Brown, wife of Commissioner Rick Brown, may continue to serve on the TLBD Advisory
Committee in light of Florida's Anti -Nepotism Statute. For the reasons more fully explained below,
it is my opinion that Ms. Brown may continue to serve on the TLBD for the remainder of her term.
FACTS
The facts are very important for purposes of this opinion. The relevant facts in this case
are that Commissioner Brown was elected to the City Commission In November of 2006. Prior to
his election, Brenda Brown was appointed by the City Commission to serve on the TLBD on August
14, 2006. Ms. Brown's term on the TLBD expires in July of 2009. The TLBD was created by
Ordinance No. 704. In general, the Ordinance adopted a special assessment district for most of
the area generally referred to as the Tuscawilla PUD for purposes of beautifying the assessed
area. See State v. City of Winter Springs, 776 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 2001). The Ordinance also created
an advisory committee called the Tuscawilla Lighting & Beautification District Advisory Committee
("TLBD"). The TLBD provides Input and makes recommendations to the City Commission
concerning issues affecting the Tuscawilla PUD assessed area including, but not limited to, budget
determinations, amounts of assessments, debt obligations, installing and maintaining the local
improvements constructed through the levied assessments, and providing related services.
According to the City's web site, the current population of the City is 34,621 residents.
225 East Robinson Street, Suite 660 - P.O. Box 2873.Orlando, Florida 32802-2873
Orlando (407) 425.9566 Fax (407) 425-9596 - Kissimmee (321) 402-0144 - Cocoa (866) 425-9566 • Ft. Lauderdale (954) 670-1979
Website: www.oriandolaw.net • Email: firmf12orlandolaw.not
January 30, 2008
Page 2
BRIEF ANSWER
Florida's Anti -Nepotism Law prohibits a public official (including a collegial body like a city
commission) from appointing, employing, promoting, advancing or advocating for appointment,
employment or advancement, a relative of the public official, into a position in the agency in which
the official is serving. As such, the City Commission is generally prohibited from appointing a
"relative" of one of the City Commissioners to a City board. However, because Ms. Brown was
appointed to the TLBD prior to Commissioner Brown being elected, Ms. Brown may continue to
serve on the TLBD in her current capacity until her term expires in July of 2009 because her
appointment is "grandfathered." Upon the expiration of Ms. Brown's term on the TLBD, Ms. Brown
should not be reappointed to the TLBD or appointed to any other City board so long as
Commissioner Brown remains on the City Commission, although the City may qualify for a limited
exemption to the Anti -Nepotism Law if its population is "less than 35,000."
Florida's "Anti -Nepotism" Law provides:
A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, or advance, or
advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement,
in or to a position in the agency in which the official is serving or over
which the official exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who
is a relative of the public official. An individual may not be
appointed, employed, promoted, or advanced in or to position in an
agency if such appointment, employment, promotion, or
advancement has been advocated by a public official, serving in or
exercising jurisdiction or control over the agency, who is a relative of
the individual or if such appointment, employment, promotion, or
advancement is made by a collegial body of which a relative of the
individual is a member. However, this subsection shall not apply to
appointments to boards other than those with land -planning or
zoning responsibilities in those municipalities with less than 35,000
population.
§112.3135(2)(a), Fla. Stat.
The overriding purpose of Florida's Anti -Nepotism Law is that individuals not be placed in
public positions by their relatives or by collegial bodies on which their relatives sit. CEO 96-5.
Thus, Florida's Anti -Nepotism Law has been interpreted by the Florida Commission on Ethics to
prohibit a collegial body from appointing a relative of one of its members to serve on a city advisory
board.' The term "relative" includes a wife of a public official. §112.3135, Fla. Stat. Consequently,
the Florida Commission on Ethics has previously opined that a city commissioner's husband cannot
be appointed to a city's code enforcement board. CEO 98-22. Further, a city council member's
husband could not be appointed to an uncompensated position on a city advisory board (land
development and regulatory agency). CEO 90-58; see also , CEO 96-5 (A community
This prohibition cannot be avoided by having the collegial body member abstain from voting on the
appointment of his or her relative. See, e.g. Op. Fla. Att'y Gen. 77-130.
January 30, 2008
Page 3
redevelopment agency is prohibited from appointing a husband of one of its members to an agency
advisory board).
However, the Florida Attorney General and the Florida Commission on Ethics have
recognized that In some cases previous appointments or employment will be "grandfathered" from
the prohibition set forth in the Anti -Nepotism Law, where the prohibited relationship came into being
after the person's employment or appointment or the relative took the higher position after the
person's employment or appointment. See CEO 90.58 (citing CEO 89-46; AGO 77-36; AGO 73-
351). In other words, the person will be allowed to continue their employment or appointment in
the same position, but can not be appointed or reappointed, promoted, advanced, or employed In
a different prohibited position, or recommended or advocated for the same. Id. Therefore, in Ms.
Brown's current situation, she can continue to serve on the TLBD until July of 2009 when her term
expires. However, as long as Commissioner Brown serves on the City Commission, Ms. Brown
can not be reappointed to the TLBD or appointed to any other City Board because the
reappointment or appointment will be prohibited by the Anti -Nepotism Law.
Furthermore, it is also worth noting that although the TLBD makes recommendations to the
City Commission, Ms. Brown's position on the TLBD does not present a voting conflict of interest
for Commissioner Brown when the City Commission considers those recommendations. In CEO
83-14, the Florida Commission on Ethics opined that a city council member may vote on a matter
that was recommended by the city's planning commission, of which the council member's spouse
is a member. The Commission on Ethics reasoned that the fact that the council member's spouse
was involved in the determination or recommendation of the planning commission did not indicate,
in and of itself, that the measure being voted upon by the city council would inure to the special
private gain or loss of the city council member. Id.
Lastly, in 1994 the Florida Legislature adopted a limited exemption from the anti -nepotism
prohibition which applies only to board appointments In municipalities with populations of "less than
35,000 residents," provided the board in question does not have "land -planning and zoning
responsibilities." While this exemption arguably applies at the moment to the City of Winter Springs
given the City's current stated population of 34,621, it is my recommendation that the City
Commission not use this exemption to appoint any "relative" of a City Commissioner to any City
board. The margin between the statutory threshold of "less than 35,000 residents" and the current
stated population of 34,621 is only 378 residents. This margin appears to me to be too close to
risk a violation of the Anti -Nepotism Law, especially in light of the expected future residential growth
along the S.R. 434 corridor including the Town Center.
Notwithstanding my recommendation, if the City Commission desires to utilize the
exemption, the Anti -Nepotism Law still prohibits appointments of "relatives" to City boards that have
"land -planning or zoning responsibilities." The term "responsibilities" has been interpreted to apply
to a city board that "has a duty to take some action as to a particular matter, as opposed to merely
the ability to formulate policy recommendations and to present its advice to a superior board or
officer." In the case of the City of Winter Springs, the City Commission will be prohibited from
appointing a "relative" of one of the City Commissioners to the City's Code Enforcement Board
because the Code Enforcement Board's enforcement of zoning ordinances constitutes a
"responsibility which concerns zoning." See CEO 98-22 (Code Enforcement Board has the duty
to take some action that is not merely recommendations or advice to the City Commission).
Likewise, the City Commission Is also arguably prohibited form appointing a "relative" of a City
Commissioner to the City's Land Planning Agency, See Op. Fla. Att'y Gen. 2006-13 (members of
the local planning agency exercise the powers of the sovereign over land development and are
officers for purposes of the constitutional dual office holding prohibition). On the other hand, while
January 30, 2008
Page 4
the TLBD likely has been assigned "land planning" duties,2 It is questionable whether or not those
duties constitute "responsibilities" under the Anti -Nepotism Law because under Ordinance 704, the
TLBD is charged with only providing "input and recommendations" to the City Commission and the
TLBD does not have final decision making authority.
Therefore, assuming the City has a population of "less than 35,000" at the time Ms. Brown's
current term on the TLBD expires in July 2009, the City Commission may arguably consider her
for reappointment to the TLBD or appointment to some other City "advisory" board" that does not
have "land planning or zoning responsibilities." However, for the reasons explained above, it is
not advisable for the City Commission to attempt to utilize the board appointment exemption to the
Anti -Nepotism Law.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Ve my urs,
Anthony A. Garganese
City Attorney
AAG/if
cc: City Manager (via email)
The concept of "land planning" is defined in American Jurisprudence, Zoning and Planning, as the process
for determining use for a particular area of a community. 83 Am. Jur. 2d Zoning and Planning, § 4 (updated
July 2007). "Planning is more than a suggestion pattern of land use, as it involves the planning of all the
usual public improvements and services which go into making up a community. `Planning' may range in
scope from a study of the parking needs of a community, followed by a proposed solution, to a
comprehensive plan for the development of an entire municipality." Id.