Manatee County Code Enforcement Chief Tom Wooten is no longer employed by the county, according to an internal email sent late Wednesday afternoon by the county's Director of Development Services.
In the September 16 email addressed to multiple county leadership officials, including County Administrator Charlie Bishop, Nicole Knapp, director of Development Services, announced that Wooten's employment with the county had "ended" earlier that same day.
“For those who may not be familiar with Mr. Wooten, he served as the Chief of Code Enforcement,” Knapp wrote.
In response to our request for comment on Friday, the county declined to discuss any of the circumstances surrounding his departure, including whether Wooten resigned or was terminated.
In an email responding to questions from TBT, county Communications Manager Casey Zempel wrote, “Manatee County does not comment on personnel matters involving current or former employees beyond information that is available through public records.”
Multiple sources alleged to TBT independently, however, that they understood Wooten had been terminated. When specifically asked about that allegation, the county declined to confirm or deny it.
A public records case seeking documents related to Wooten's separation—including copies of any disciplinary action forms, a termination notice, or resignation letter—was submitted to the county. An automated confirmation email from the county’s ‘JustFOIA’ portal arrived before the close of business Friday, stating our request would “be processed in the order it was received.”
Wooten was first hired as a Manatee County code enforcement officer in 2007. Years later, he would be promoted to supervisor before eventually being named the division's chief in 2024.
In her email on Wednesday, Knapp also addressed the future operation of Code Enforcement, identifying several areas she said require attention.
“As we move through this transition, I also want to address several ongoing operational matters within the Code Enforcement Section, particularly regarding communication, case management, and case follow-through,” she wrote.
Knapp directed county officials to route communications regarding code enforcement matters through herself and Deputy Director Stephanie Charles during the transition.
“This will provide a clear line of accountability, promote consistent communication, and ensure that concerns regarding individual cases or departmental operations are addressed through the appropriate supervisory channel,” she explained.
Knapp closed the email by adding, “Later next week, I will provide the additional updates on both the personnel transition and the communication protocol that will be followed as we move forward.”
As part of our request for comment, TBT asked who might be leading the division in Wooten’s absence, but the county did not identify an acting or permanent replacement for Wooten.
Wooten's departure comes after years of organizational changes and scrutiny surrounding the county's Code Enforcement Division.
In 2021, six Manatee County employees were placed on administrative leave as the county Clerk's Inspector General investigated allegations levied by a code enforcement officer against her superiors involving code violations at a 47-acre Myakka property being developed as the permanent site of the Sarasota Medieval Faire. Those allegations included claims of favoritism in how some code enforcement cases were managed.
Wooten, a Code Enforcement Division supervisor at the time, was reportedly among the employees placed on leave as the investigation got underway.
When the Inspector General completed its investigation in March 2022, its final report substantiated allegations that the county’s Building and Development Services Department—since renamed to Development Services—and Code Enforcement management had instructed staff to close cases and/or not enforce county codes because of personal or professional relationships.
During the investigation, staff examined numerous individual code enforcement cases.
Having analyzed 240 code enforcement cases and 103 permits/plans identified through tips from then-current and former employees, data analytics, a review of employee emails, and citizen complaints, the IG’s investigation identified 26 code enforcement cases and 7 permits involving 18 properties that were not handled in accordance with policies, procedures, rules, and/or codes.
According to the report, five of the mishandled cases and six of the permits showed evidence of supervisor involvement. In three of those cases, investigators established evidence of a personal or professional relationship between the subject and high-ranking employees.
In response to the investigation, county administration announced organizational changes, moving Code Enforcement out of Building and Development Services and into the Public Safety Department. The Building and Development Services Department was renamed to ‘Development Services,’ and a separate Code Enhancement Division created in 2022 was placed under its oversight. County officials said the changes were intended, among other things, to address management and oversight concerns identified during the investigation.
When the then-Code Enforcement Division chief was reassigned to lead the newly created Code Enhancement Division, the county hired George McCorkle to lead the original code division.
In January 2024, McCorkle was terminated as Code Enforcement Chief. As TBT previously reported, multiple sources with knowledge of the matter described his departure as being “pushed out.” After McCorkle's termination, Wooten became acting chief and, two months later, was named permanent.
Later in 2024, the Code Enforcement Division again faced public scrutiny when allegations arose that division management may have issued directives to enforcement officers based on an individual commissioner's personal requests.
Additional details uncovered in the months that followed appeared to further validate those concerns and revealed that a code enforcement officer had resigned his position. The additional reporting also shed more light on the circumstances leading up to the former chief’s termination ahead of Wooten’s promotion.
The two divisions were later consolidated again under one Code Enforcement Division, with Wooten serving as chief.
The division was subsequently reorganized again in Feb. 2026, when it was moved back under the Department of Development Services.
This latest leadership change comes roughly seven months after the division returned to Development Services.
The county has not said whether Wooten's separation was related to any of those earlier reported matters, nor has it identified any disciplinary action involving Wooten preceding his departure.
For now, the county's only official confirmation is that Wooten's employment ended Wednesday.
Based on Director Knapp's email, county officials may be able to provide more information sometime next week regarding who may lead the division—either as interim or as its new chief—moving forward.
Dawn Kitterman is a staff reporter and investigative journalist for The Bradenton Times, covering local government news. She can be reached at dawn.kitterman@thebradentontimes.com.
5 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
sandy
He had been a convicted felon as a county sheriff who served time in jail. He never should have been a code enforcement officer let alone chief.
Saturday, September 19 Report this
David Daniels
The fact that Charlie Bishop promoted a convicted felon dirty sheriff deputy to lead Code Enforcement, a quasi law enforcement department, tells us more about Bishop than it does about Wooten. Wooten’s crimes weren’t just an error in judgement. For years, he and other members of Manatee’s Delta Squad planted evidence on innocent people. They falsified reports. They stole money. They used excessive force. They conspired to lie to the FBI and internal investigators. In one case, they planted evidence in order to seize a new Ford Mustang, which then became one squad member’s official vehicle per Florida’s contraband seizure laws. In another case, Wooten raided the duplex home of a young woman named Sarah (I won't use her last name). Wooten planted crack cocaine in her home and later lied about it in court. As a result, Sarah was convicted of possession of rock cocaine. She lost custody of her 1-year old daughter who was placed in foster care. Sarah spent over a month in jail. Her record was later cleared and she received $275,000 from the Sheriff's Office to prevent a lawsuit.
Wooten was facing a long prison sentence but ratted out his fellow dirty deputies and received a 1-year sentence. He was released after serving less than half a year. But, as Dawn’s reporting shows, it’s not like Wooten had changed his ways.
Wooten’s promotion is part of the organizational rot that comes when that organization’s leader has no integrity. County Administrator Charlie Bishop, as a Department head, awarded a no-bid county contract to his girlfriend. As Deputy Administrator over Property Management - he failed to pull building permits for county construction projects. As Deputy Administrator, he violated county public records laws, costing county taxpayers $75K in legal fees. As Administrator, he promoted Wooten. He also promoted Sarah Brown after she intentionally asked for a shelter evaluation “by phone” in order to avoid making a public record. He called the mayor of Bradenton Beach seeking a favor for himself, his girlfriend and her daughter to cut in line at a busy island restaurant. He vindictively sought felony charges against a shelter volunteer for exposing the prefab kennels. Instead of allowing the county’s own wetland experts, Bishop hired Carlos Beruff’s environment consultant (using taxpayer money) to present the policy eliminating wetland buffers - which the BoCC approved in 2023 and is still official county policy.
Charlie Bishop has not once been questioned by Commissioners. Instead, Commissioner Siddique negotiated a fat new contract for Bishop that included paid overtime and deferred compensation. Actually, Siddique negotiated that contract with Bishop’s personal attorney. And yes, taxpayers paid Bishop’s attorney fees for that negotiation. That contract was postponed to February because of public outcry. Unfortunately, voters re-elected the same commissioners who will now likely reward Bishop with that perk-filled contract. The fish rots from the head.
Saturday, September 19 Report this
rayfusco68
It is like playing whack a mole. You think eliminated one rascal and another one pops up.
Sunday, September 20 Report this
Debann
GET RID OF BISHOP..HE'S ANOTHER LOSER IN MANATEE COUNTY..geez what does it take. Another Scott Hopes..Pathetic
Sunday, September 20 Report this
Dianna
Absolutely correct David Daniels. Complaints against Code Enforcement came from both employee whistle blowers and citizens across the county even before the fairgrounds issue. The IG investigation narrowed the focus of all complaints and only held them to the “favoritism” standard of the fairgrounds, many which had nothing to do with the fairgrounds and everything to do with employee behavior and corruption within the department. If every case had been allowed to focus on employee behavior and following the code as written, most of the cases would have been “substantiated on misconduct” within code enforcement at all levels. Fabricated reports were written by staff on both employee whistleblowers and citizens to cover up corrupt behavior. Many public records were hidden from both the IG office and citizens requesting records during the investigation. Citizens who pulled public records prior to the investigation turned up with substantially more public records than were given to the IG office during their investigation. Code Enforcement carefully curated reports that were given to the IG office. Citizens turned over evidence proving management was involved at all levels including Wooten, who was a supervisor at the time. Instead of addressing the issues, the county dictated the outcome of those investigations and other independent investigations by changing and narrowing the focus and timelines for what information could be included in determining the outcome of the investigations. This resulted in removing evidence of fabricated staff reports, issues with enforcement, harassment, and how the code was incorrectly applied to individual complaints to close cases. The main problem is that the county REFUSES to document citizen complaints against employees, instead they retaliate by fabricating lies about citizens. Even complaints from their own staff resulted in retaliation against the staff members and pushing the employee out. The county’s policy is “we do not document employee misconduct,” something the county did prior to Jeff Boman becoming Chief. The LDC and ordinances are the official book of citizen’s rights. Every time code enforcement does not follow the code as written, they are violating a citizen’s rights under that code.
If you don’t document public complaints, then you do not have to address issues. This practice needs to change. Resolution needs to begin with removal of the county administrator.
Sunday, September 20 Report this