Joel EngelhardtCourt action could result in terminating controversial leases of town marina to Forest Development.
Lake Park violated the Sunshine Law in 2021 and 2022 when it selected Forest Development to take over the town’s marina and build a hotel, restaurant and boat storage building, a Palm Beach County Circuit Court judge ruled last week.
The ruling blessed an agreement between the town and the resident who sued in February over the Sunshine Law violations, Pablo Perhacs. The two sides agreed that they no longer had any dispute since the town had admitted to the violations and agreed to pay Perhacs’ attorney fees of $17,325.
“The town of Lake Park has accepted responsibility for having had private meetings that inadvertently violated the Sunshine Law,” Mayor Roger Michaud said in a statement. “Going forward, the town of Lake Park is committed to a transparent public process should it elect to discuss the redevelopment of the Lake Park Harbor Marina.”
The two sides reached the deal after Forest’s efforts to intervene in the lawsuit, including appeals, were exhausted and even a last-minute plea filed by Forest on Thursday fell flat, rejected by Circuit Court Judge Darren Shull in his ruling the next day.
“It’s a victory for open government and democracy,” Perhacs told Stet News.
Shull wrote that between March 2021 and October 2022, the town held eight closed-door meetings to discuss the marina proposal. The meetings initially were allowed under a state law aimed at keeping the details of proposed public-private partnerships confidential.
Five of the meetings were inadvertently not recorded, violating state rules for closed-door meetings, the judge found. Six of the meetings came after Oct. 2, 2021, when the state law allowing such meetings was repealed, meaning they, too, violated the law, Shull wrote.
The judge refused to assess a civil fine against the town as a result of the “unintentional” violations of the Sunshine Law. Knowingly violating the state law that calls for public business to be conducted in public is a second-degree misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail or a $500 fine.
By saying the town had no intention of violating the law, the ruling deflects the potential for criminal charges against town officials.
Next move likely in separate lawsuit
Perhacs declined to say more since the legal drama is not over. Forest is seeking to depose him in a separate case it filed against the town over the town’s failure to live up to the commitments it made in the lease agreements, which were signed in 2023 and 2024.
In that case, Forest accuses the town of slow-walking actions it was required to take under the leases. With this ruling, the town can claim the Sunshine Law violations render those leases void.
In an April 3 counterclaim in the Forest lawsuit, the town declared that it would do exactly that.
Rather than ask the Town Commission to take such action, the town is preparing to ask the judge to do it.
Town Attorney Tom Baird of Jones Foster said his office is preparing a motion to throw out Forest’s lawsuit because of the judge’s ruling in the Sunshine Law case.
Judge Shull is presiding over that case as well.
Forest accuses town of collusion
Forest did not respond to a request for comment, but in its own filing in April, it declared that the town and Perhacs had colluded to deprive the development company headed by Peter Baytarian of its rights.
The town’s motivation to admit to the Sunshine Law violations aims “to obtain a more favorable deal” on the lease terms, which the town said provides too little revenue, “rather than any genuine concern regarding alleged Sunshine Law violations,” Forest attorney John Shubin wrote.
The leases call for Forest to pay $1.2 million up front and $3 million over 10 years to control the town’s waterfront property for 99 years. Forest recently completed its 330-unit twin tower luxury condo complex, Nautilus 220, next to the marina.
The town coordinated with Perhacs to fabricate the Sunshine Law violations “to shirk its obligations” under the lease, Shubin wrote, and “force Forest Development to renegotiate the terms of the agreement under the threat of having the agreement declared void.”
The town said it didn’t learn of the Sunshine Law violations until a consultant for Forest requested the recordings for the closed-door sessions, prompting a review by Baird, who outlined the problems in a December memo.
In its pleadings, Forest points to a commissioner asking in July 2021 if the closed-door meetings can continue after the state law sunsetted. Meeting minutes show the town’s consultant, Don Delaney, told her that would not be a problem because the town would be grandfathered in to continue meeting in private.
The town explained that the town clerk set up an iPad to record the meetings and told the town manager how to start recording, but she left before the meetings began so she didn’t know whether they were recorded.
The clerk could not find recordings of meetings held on April 15, 2021, and Jan. 26, June 29, Aug. 24 and Oct. 25 in 2022.
Town Commissioner Michael O’Rourke, who attended the meetings, insisted they had been recorded, prompting Forest to argue that the town had presented no evidence to discount O’Rourke’s assertion. The judge dismissed that claim.
Editor’s note: This story was updated after publication to clarify the town’s next step.
