Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Vice Chair urges legal review after HPCA schedules 'Coffee With Candidates' event
Summary
The Heritage Pines CDD board added a late agenda item Sept. 17 to consider an Oct. 9 "Coffee With Candidates" event after Vice Chair Arthur Rhodes said candidate bios and HPCA involvement raise potential Florida Sunshine Law concerns; the board directed staff and counsel to review.
The Heritage Pines Community Development District board voted Sept. 17 to direct the district manager and District Counsel to review the implications of an HPCA‑scheduled "Coffee With Candidates" event and to provide a legal opinion on possible Sunshine Law issues.
Vice Chair Arthur Rhodes raised concerns that candidate biographies distributed by the Heritage Pines Community Association (HPCA) and the scheduling of the Oct. 9 event could amount to a campaign‑style meeting that would implicate the Florida Sunshine Law. Rhodes said attendees' histories of participation were relevant, noting that "Mr. Steele attended one meeting; Mr. Steele, Mr. Putman and Mr. Kleeman" were named as candidates and that attendance records show limited prior engagement. He asked who instructed Ms. Kim Norton to schedule the event and requested counsel guidance.
HPCA General Manager Herb Hurley told the board "the candidates asked for the event to be scheduled so they could become known as candidates for the CDD Board" and declined to discuss the matter further, saying it should be addressed by attorneys. The board passed a motion, moved by Arthur Rhodes and seconded by Carol Vaughan, to have the District Manager review the implications and to have District Counsel prepare a legal memorandum; the motion passed "with all in favor."
Resident Joyce Welsh had earlier asked that meetings be recorded, a request discussed separately during public comment. District Manager Chuck Adams said he will ask District Counsel to prepare a memorandum and reminded board members not to reply to related emails.
The board did not take further substantive action on the event at the meeting; the motion requests a legal opinion and a staff review before any determination or change in practice.
