BRADENTON — Manatee County Administrator Charlie Bishop will receive a commissioner-approved merit bonus in place of a one-time payment for his attorneys' fees after commissioners voted not to renew—but to extend—his contract last month.
The payment issue stems from an April 21 decision where the board voted unanimously to halt contract renewal negotiations with Bishop, instead opting for a six-month extension through the end of the year.
Commissioner Bob McCann, who, at the time, was the commissioner to first raise the proposal of offering the administrator an extension on his contract rather than a renewal under new terms, also proposed as consolation that the county should cover up to $3,000 of Bishop’s personal attorney fees incurred when he hired private counsel to represent him during the negotiation process.
McCann justified the proposed attorney fee reimbursement by noting that the administrator had expended personal funds for his attorney's services under the assumption that a new contract might be executed as a result of the negotiations.
However, upon review by the Manatee County Clerk of Court and Comptroller’s Office, it was determined that using public funds to reimburse an employee's private attorney did not constitute a "lawful public purpose." To circumvent the ruling, the $3,000 payment was placed back on Tuesday's consent agenda, reclassified as a one-time merit bonus.
The reclassification sparked some division on the dais, led by Commissioner Bob McCann—the very commissioner who originally proposed the attorney fee reimbursement in April. McCann pulled the item from the consent agenda to object to the "merit bonus" phrasing and filed a motion to deny the payment entirely.
Commission Chair Tal Siddique also declined to support the measure of a merit bonus as a solution to providing the administrator's personal attorney fee reimbursement in light of the Clerk’s finding.
The motion to deny the merit funds failed, 2-4, with only McCann and Siddique supporting the denial. A subsequent motion to approve the $3,000 bonus passed 4-2, with Commissioners George Kruse, Mike Rahn, Amanda Ballard, and Jason Bearden voting in favor of the payment.
5 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
David Daniels
Just when we thought this BoCC could not go any lower, today they stooped to a new ethical low. The board tried to reimburse Charlie Bishop for his decision to hire an attorney to negotiate his contract. The Clerk of Court ruled this improper because (obviously) paying Charlie Bishop's personal attorney serves no public purpose. To get around this ruling, the board instead tried to sneak the reimbursement through on the consent agenda as a "merit bonus." Unbelievably, Commissioners Kruse and Beaden argued that taxpayers owed Mr. Bishop his attorney fees because the perk-filled contract that Bishop sought was not approved. They argued that, had Mr. Bishop received the fat new contract, then taxpayers would not be forced to pay his attorney. That argument is preposterous. How is the contract Bishop was offered in any way relevant to whether reimbursement serves a public purpose? Taxpayer money should not be used for personal benefit - period. This was a dishonest circumvention of ethics and good government.
Tuesday, May 19 Report this
rayfusco68
David,
I totally agree with your assessment of the situation. The rule of law and common sense seems to have escaped our current politicians.
Wednesday, May 20 Report this
GLEN GADFLY GIBELLINA
To the Board of County Commissioners,
The vote on Tuesday to award a $3,000 "merit bonus" to County Administrator Charlie Bishop is a flagrant insult to the taxpayers of Manatee County and a mockery of fiscal accountability.
Let’s be entirely clear about what transpired: The Clerk of Court and Comptroller’s Office rightly ruled that spending public funds on an employee’s private attorney fees is unlawful. It does not serve a public purpose. Instead of respecting that legal and financial boundary, four commissioners—George Kruse, Mike Rahn, Amanda Ballard, and Jason Bearden—voted to intentionally circumvent the ruling.
Labeling a backdoor legal handout as a "merit bonus" is deeply deceptive. A merit bonus is meant to reward exceptional service and outstanding performance. To use it as a political shell game to cover an administrator’s private billing—especially after the Board explicitly chose not to renew his full contract last month—is an abuse of the system. If the administrator’s performance warranted a merit reward, it would have been brought forward as such, not used as a convenient financial escape hatch to bypass the Clerk's oversight.
At a time when our community faces pressing needs, including a critical shortage of affordable and attainable housing and essential support for our veterans, watching public funds laundered through the agenda to protect a bureaucrat's wallet is unacceptable.
Thank you to Commissioners McCann and Siddique for standing firm, respecting the Clerk’s findings, and voting against this charade. To the four commissioners who voted to approve this sham bonus: you are elected to protect the public trust and safeguard taxpayer dollars, not to engineer loopholes for a county administrator who has done nothing to earn a reward.
Our community expects transparency and legal integrity from its leadership. This vote showed a total lack of both.
For the record
GADFLY
Wednesday, May 20 Report this
Dianna
The county and commissioners cry poor mouth to the citizen's needs while our money flies out the window on stupidity.
Thursday, May 21 Report this
serenowens
This is such a trumpian move that proves politics rots from the head down!
Thursday, May 21 Report this