An independent investigator, attorney Greg Rossman, delivered a final report to the Palatka City Commission alleging a conflict of interest in one land transaction, reporting he shared documents with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and recommending further review.

Rossman said his review produced a finding that he "made a finding that I believe there was a conflict of interest, and that that was not disclosed" in one transaction; he reported he had provided his reports to FDLE and discussed the matter with the 7th Circuit State Attorney’s Office as part of referrals he sought. Rossman also said he had not been able to reach every potentially relevant witness; some invited sources declined to speak.

Why it matters: the report spurred extended public comment and sharp disagreement. Members of the public and representatives for parties named in the report criticized its methods and conclusions, saying Rossman had not interviewed key people and had relied on public records; they requested retraction and defended the named parties. Several residents urged better local procedures for handling anonymous complaints and for publicly filing conflict disclosures.

Legal and procedural constraints: City Attorney Carney told commissioners that state law changed in 2024 and now requires that complaints to the Florida Commission on Ethics be filed under oath by an individual with personal knowledge; agencies may not directly submit complaints. Carney advised that city staff should not file an ethics complaint in their personal capacity because they could face personal liability for frivolous filings. She recommended letting FDLE, which may already be examining the matter, make any formal referral to the Commission on Ethics if warranted.

Commission response and next steps: Commissioners who had previously directed staff to pursue an ethics referral were told by counsel that the agency cannot file on the city’s behalf; several commissioners expressed concern about the report’s reach and asked staff to await any FDLE determination. Rossman said he had submitted his materials to FDLE and had been in contact with the state office but that FDLE would not publicly confirm whether it opened a probe.

Public reaction: more than a dozen members of the public spoke, pressing matters of process and disputing Rossman’s conclusions. Those speakers urged (1) clear city policies for conflict disclosure and public posting of Form 1 financial statements, (2) a more transparent process for responding to anonymous complaints, and (3) that the commission consider procedural reforms to avoid reputational harm from inconclusive inquiries.

What the report covered: Rossman said he reviewed three transactions (identified in his report) and concluded probable‑cause‑level concerns in two. He provided footnoted exhibits and wrote that where he could not verify allegations he did not draw conclusions. He characterized the investigation as limited by lack of subpoena power and by some individuals’ refusal to speak with him.

Staff and counsel advised the commission that FDLE is in possession of the investigator’s report and that any further action — including a formal Commission on Ethics referral — should proceed through agencies authorized by state law.