City of St. Petersburg v. Wright

241 So. 3d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA)

This case was filed under Florida's Sunshine Law challenging the City's amendments to its trespass ordinance in violation of statutory requirements for enacting ordinances. During SLC's Catron litigation against the St. Petersburg, the City amended its trespass ordinance in response to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision in 2011. At the time, it appeared the City had violated the Sunshine Law by deliberating in secret during a closed attorney-client session to amend the ordinance, but SLC had to wait until after the Catron litigation concluded at the end of 2012 to obtain a copy of the transcript from the closed session. SLC obtained the transcripts and filed this lawsuit on behalf of Rev. Bruce Wright, who we also represented in a challenge to a trespass warning banning him from Williams Park for one year. The court granted our motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the City failed to provide reasonable notice of its hearing to amend the ordinance, but ruled that the City did nothing wrong during the attorney-client session.

The court voided ab initio the portions of the ordinance added in violation of the Sunshine Law and Florida statutory requirements for amending ordinances. The City appealed, and we cross-appealed the portions of the judgment about the attorney-client session. The First Amendment Foundation filed an amicus brief in support of our client’s position. The Second DCA reversed the part of the judgment that the City of St. Petersburg did not violate the Sunshine Law during a private strategy session with the City's attorneys, known as a "shade" meeting. And it affirmed the part that the council members violated statutory notice requirements when, upon emerging from their shade meeting with the attorneys, they took up and voted to approve an ordinance amendment that had been discussed during that meeting. We co-counseled with Alice K. Nelson.