Ethics Commission Enforces Order Against Beruff

After five long years, the Florida Commission on Ethics recently voted to adopt a staff draft order affirming an Administrative Law Judge's recommended order regarding ethics violations by politically powerful developer Carlos Beruff, tied to the builder's time as chair of the Southwest Florida Water Management District's board.

In 2020, the commission found probable cause after investigating a complaint filed by Manasota-88 in June of 2017, alleging that requirements to disclose assets on financial disclosures for the years 2013, 2014, and 2015 had not been met by Beruff.

Beruff admitted in testimony that his financials did not comply with the requirements, stating that he did not fill out the forms, which he said were completed by an employee who prepared them before he added his signature and submitted them to the state (click here to listen to an audio recording of Beruff's testimony to the commission).

Additionally, Manasota-88 alleged that Beruff, while serving as chairman of the SWFWMD board, had a voting conflict when he made a motion to approve a permit to destroy wetlands that benefited fellow developer Pat Neal. Neal and Beruff were beneficial owners of several lots in a development known as the Inlets, the same property that was not described as required on financial disclosures Beruff filed.

In May of this year, an administrative law judge wrote that Beruff should get a $1,500 fine, official reprimand, and public censure for failing to properly disclose information on the forms.

Beruff took exception to five of the findings of fact from the recommendation and the draft final order prepared by ethics commission staff and then rejected all of them.

"I've been serving as an advocate since 2009, this is by far the worst case of failing to disclose that I've ever seen," said Melody Hadley, Ethics Commission Advocate during the hearing.

Some members of the commission–particularly former state rep. Jim Waldman and former Florida Senate President Don Gaetz–seemed inclined to give Beruff tremendous benefit of the doubt, before ultimately voting 7-1 to approve the staff-drafter order, with only Waldman dissenting.

As a result of the ruling, the $1,500 fine, along with the official reprimand and public censure will stand.