Opinion ID: 2533069
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: e-mails

Text: Lastly, Citizens contend that the trial court erred by ruling that any violations committed in e-mail discussions between board members were cured by the Board's public meetings that were held up to and including July 22, 2009. Agreeing with the contrary arguments of the City and County, we affirm the trial court. In Tolar, 398 So.2d at 429, this Court held that Sunshine Law violations can be cured by independent, final action in the sunshine, which this Court distinguished from mere ceremonial acceptance or perfunctory ratification of secret actions and decisions. See also Zorc v. City of Vero Beach, 722 So.2d 891, 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) ([O]nly a full, open hearing will cure a defect arising from a Sunshine Law violation. Such violation will not be cured by a perfunctory ratification of the action taken outside of the sunshine.); Monroe County v. Pigeon Key Historical Park, Inc., 647 So.2d 857, 861 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (Governmental actions will not be voided whenever governmental bodies have met in secret where sufficiently corrective final action has been taken.). In Tolar, a school superintendent-elect met privately with school board members and discussed, among other things, the removal of Tolar as director of administration and abolition of his position. 398 So.2d at 427. At a subsequent public meeting in which Tolar was present and given full opportunity to express his views, the school board members voted to transfer Tolar to another position and abolish his position. Id. Tolar sued for injunctive relief, alleging a violation of section 286.011. Id. As this Court noted, By the express terms of section 286.011, any resolution, rule, regulation, or formal action taken at these secret meetings would not be binding. Id. at 428. Yet this Court declined to invalidate the action taken by the school board. Id. Instead, this Court distinguished Tolar from its previous holding in Gradison, 296 So.2d 473, where this Court held void formal action that was merely the crystallization of secret decisions. Tolar, 398 So.2d at 428. As explained in Tolar, the Gradison holding invalidating what was merely a summary approval of secret decisions does not mean, however, that public final action of the Board will always be void and incurable merely because the topic of the final public action was previously discussed at a private meeting.... .... ... [H]ere[,] the Board took independent, final action in the sunshine in voting to abolish the position. The Board's action was not merely a ceremonial acceptance of secret actions and was not merely a perfunctory ratification of secret decisions at a later meeting open to the public. 398 So.2d at 428-429. In this case, e-mails from constituents to members of the Board were copied to other members and sometimes led to comments between Board members regarding the topic of bringing the Orioles to Sarasota for spring training. The last such e-mail exchange, which possibly violated the Sunshine Law, occurred on April 12, 2009. However, the Board conducted multiple public meetings subsequent to that April 12 exchange where the topic of Orioles spring training was discussed and considered. For example, on April 14, 2009, the Board publicly rejected a commissioner's detailed proposal for an agreement with the Orioles as well as another commissioner's alternative proposal. Then, on May 13, 2009, the Board publicly discussed stadium costs and financing and directed the County Administrator to proceed with negotiations providing funding in the amount of $28.2 million contingent upon specific terms relating to operations and maintenance, advertising, construction management, stadium uses, property taxes, terms of occupancy, and the Cal Ripken youth facility. Then, on May 26, 2009, the Board considered the Orioles' response as well as funding sources for the renovation of the stadium. One commissioner noted that she could handle another $3 million in addition to the prior $28.2 million offer. Ultimately, on July 22, 2009, the Board held a properly noticed public hearing and approved the MOU and the Interlocal Agreement after a multi-hour discussion. In fact, representatives of Citizens spoke at that July 22 hearing as well as the prior meeting on May 26. Based upon the fact that, subsequent to the last possibly violative e-mail, multiple proposals were discussed and rejected before one was finally approved, it is clear the Board took independent, final action in the sunshine regarding Orioles spring training in Sarasota. This simply is not the case of a ceremonial acceptance of secret actions [or] merely a perfunctory ratification of secret decisions at a later meeting open to the public. Tolar, 398 So.2d at 429. Therefore, any possible e-mail violations were cured.