Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Attorney Client Session topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stuart Commission closes public meeting for attorney–client session in Polk Street Hotel litigation
Summary
The Stuart City Commission recessed its public meeting to hold a closed attorney–client session under Florida Statute 286.011(8) concerning pending litigation over Polk Street Hotel, then reconvened and adjourned after the session concluded.
The Stuart City Commission recessed its public meeting to hold a closed attorney–client session under Florida Statute 286.011(8) in connection with litigation involving Polk Street Hotel.
Special legal counsel Lee Baggett told the commission that "Section 286.011 subsection 8 of the Florida statutes provides an exemption from public meetings," and identified the matter as Polk Street Hotel Inc. v. City of Stuart, case number 432025AP00002, pending in the appellate division of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit for Martin County. Baggett said he estimated the confidential attorney–client session would "last approximately 15 to 30 minutes." He also listed those expected to attend, including Mayor Christopher Collins, Vice Mayor Sean Reed, Commissioners Laura Giobbe and Eula Clark, Commissioner Campbell Rich, special legal counsel Carrie Linier, interim city manager Louis Boggioli and a court reporter.
Before the closed-door session, the commission approved the published agenda after a motion and second; commissioners signaled assent with recorded "Aye" responses. Following Baggett's recommendation to move the attorney–client discussion to the antechambers, the presiding officer declared, "The public portion of this meeting is hereby closed," and the commission recessed. After the attorney–client session concluded, the presiding officer announced the session had ended and adjourned the special meeting.
The city’s attorney advised the closed session would be recorded by a certified court reporter, whose notes will be transcribed and filed with the city clerk and made part of the public record only after the litigation, including appeals, is concluded.
No policy actions, budget decisions, or public testimony affecting third parties were taken during the public portion prior to the closure. The session was announced as an attorney–client discussion tied to pending litigation; no additional details of the merits were disclosed in the public record at the meeting.
