VIDEO: Gwen Brown Met with Applicants Before Changing Vote on Robinson Farms

BRADENTON – The Robinson Farms Comp Plan Amendment story just keeps getting better. Everyone expected that a "back room" meeting led to Commissioner Gwen Brown's sudden and impactful change of heart, but everyone had a different story as to what actually happened. When in doubt – go to the tape.
This is the Manatee County Administrative Building's security tape from the October 12 BCC meeting, where the controversial Robinson Farms Comp Plan change was passed, allowing for a tripling of the density for an upcoming development, despite widespread opposition in the community. Commissioner Brown originally voted against the change, but later motioned for a re-vote, where she changed her position, swinging the vote to 4-3 in favor of the applicant. In the video, she appears to be talking privately with the applicants shortly before she would call for the re-vote.  

Initially, there was wide-spread speculation that it was some sort of "back-room deal" that led to Brown's about face. However, Pat Neal of Neal Communities was so offended that he responded to a letter by Judy Cantwell to the Bradenton Herald and assured readers that "there are no back-room deals in Manatee County" and that "comprehensive planning and zoning is done in the sunshine as required by law, and communication is in the sunshine, too."

Neal went on to assure Cantwell and other readers that the "private conversation with the lobbysist was with Betsy Benac" and that "it was not a private conversation at all as it occurred in the presence of both the county attorney and the planning director." The video appears to show Ms. Benac, John Neal (Pat's son and the developer for the project) and his attorney Ed Vogler. Manatee County Attorney Sarah Shenk, nor Planning Director John Osborne are not anywhere to be seen.

Of course, because these are security tapes and no audio is available, there is no way of knowing what the group was discussing. They may well have been having a pleasant conversation about whether Council's or Shake Pit has the better burger, or how each felt the recent sequel to Wall Street stacked up to the original. What we do know is that all commissioners were instructed by the county attorney not to have conversations with the applicant, who they are involved in a federal lawsuit with over the very matter in question.   

Yet here is Commissioner Brown, engaged in a pow-wow with the applicants just before re-entering the commission chambers where she would motion to revisit the application and change her vote, tipping the balance to 4-3 in favor of the density change. Neal claims that Brown simply misunderstood the legal nuances of the application and once sorted out, voted where her heart had always been. In Neal's defense, Brown's voting record on comp plan changes and her propensity for appearing not to understand issues that the board addresses both lend credibility to such an argument. To that end, I believe Neal.

However, no matter the circumstances, this is not the intent of "government in the sunshine." It is bad enough that the large gathering of citizens who'd taken time from their workdays to attend that meeting and left feeling like they'd earned a hard-fought victory to preserve the character of their community had to learn that the issue was "re-addressed" once the cameras were off and the crowds had gone home. Now to learn that merely sacrificing their time to be in the chambers that day did not afford them the opportunity to hear and respond to all conversation that led to the decision, because some of it took place in a different venue... well what's that saying about salt in a wound?

Pat Neal ended his letter to the Herald by warning of the dire financial burden that Amendment 4 would cost the state of Florida. I wonder what he would assess as the value of the lost faith in the democratic process that videos such as this one inspire. I've said it before and I'll say it again – if Amendment 4 does pass, for better or worse, there will be a lot of opponents who will have to look no further than their own mirror when seeking someone to blame as to why the taxpayers felt that such a drastic reform was necessary.