Attorney addresses DID concerns

A state statue banning public officers from voting on a measure “which would insure to his or her special private gain or loss” has Downtown Improvement District (DID) Board members worried.

The statute subject was broached in an April 29 memorandum drafted by city attorney Robert Fournier to DID Operations Manager John Moran.

“A ‘special private gain’ described by the voting conflicts statute almost always refers to a financial interest of the public officer that would be directly enhanced by the vote in question,” Fournier wrote in his memorandum.

The memo scared DID board members, who all own commercial properties in the DID district where a Main Street streetscape project was just approved by city commissioners.

“I have a financial interest in The Gator Club,” said DID Chairman Ernie Ritz at the May 15 DID meeting. “They are going to put a bulbout there, and the business might benefit from that.”

Fournier, though, attended the meeting to assuage the concern of DID board members.

“Purpose of the (DID) group is to make improvements,” Fournier said. “Sometimes the benefits might be too direct, but not often. I’ve been told I caused some unanticipated angst and consternation, and I’m sorry about that.”

Fournier said the board members must be careful to state any conflict of interest that might arise before a vote is made and to tread cautiously.

“In the meantime, there’s a good argument to be made in a special district like this that because of the way the DID is set up, all of the properties in the district receive a benefit from enhancement projects,” Fournier said. “Projects like streetscapes, undeniably there’s a benefit, but I don’t know you can say that’s the sole factor that might increase a certain property value.”

DID board member and downtown property owner Dr. Mark Kaufman was glad to hear it.

“Your letter was quite scary to me and to many of us,” Kaufman said.

Fournier stressed that he failed to reiterate that organizations such as the DID have a main goal of beautifying their properties through a special taxing district.

“I think it’s right to be cautious, prudent and aware,” Fournier said. “But I failed to take into account the specifics of this board and what you were doing. What I failed to emphasize in the memo is you are board members and property owners of a special district that’s taxing yourselves and spending your own money.”

What might be a conflict of interest, Fournier said, is an expansion of outdoor dining seating that would help certain property owners who are DID board members.

“In most cases, there’s a good argument that these types of improvements won’t make a business more money,” Fournier said. “And because the (Main Street ) project is part of a larger plan for the district, I’m comfortable with that.”

Fournier clarified his position in a Monday, May 21 memorandum to the DID board.

“The charge of the (DID) board and the very purpose for which the district was created is to make improvements in the downtown core,” Fournier wrote. “In order to fund these capital improvements within the district, ad valorem taxes are levied against all of the properties in the district, further supporting a conclusion that all of the properties in the district benefit when the board votes to make expenditures to fund improvements in the district.”

Fournier also stated that “most of the improvements funded by the DID have a more general and, thus, less direct or measurable benefit to the properties in the district.”