Rep. Jeff Clemens Photo/Florida House of Representatives

Steve Miller

Florida Center For Investigative Reporting

A bill introduced by state Sen. Jeff Clemens would enhance the penalties for filing a state ethics complaint containing false information, making the complainant liable for costs up to $5,000 in addition to the attorney fees violators are now subject to.

Senate Bill 606 was filed last week by Clemens, the former mayor of Lake Worth, and praised in a press release by the Florida League of Cities, a group that represents the interests of municipalities.

A press release from the league hails Clemens, a Democrat from Lake Worth, and claims the bill is “pushing tough new ethics guidelines,” but also takes a defensive posture: “The provisions of SB 606 in no way weaken the laws that are on the books.”

The bill would also prohibit a county ethics program from extending into municipalities, as in Palm Beach County, where Clemens’ district lies.

The legislation was drafted with language submitted by the Florida League of Cities, said League spokesman Kraig Conn, who admitted that there would be changes to the measure – perhaps substantial ones – down the line.

“As with any bill, there are opportunities for changes and criticisms to be made,” Conn said. “We’re using this bill as a starting point to open the dialog for a fair and reasoned ethics discussion.”

Clemens did not return calls or emails.

Robert Wechsler, director of research at City Ethics, a non-profit clearinghouse for government ethics programs, said the bill is a nefarious attempt to intimidate potential complainants.

“It is a bill that was drafted by the Florida League of Cities to benefit the municipalities at the expense of the taxpayers,” Wechsler said.

In a series of essays, Wechsler examines the nuances of Clemens’ legislation, and calls it “one of the worst ethics reform bills I have ever read.”

He noted that current Florida law provides for attorney costs and other fees in the case of a complaint filed with the sole intent to injure the reputation of an official.

“The idea is that they want to intimidate people who might make a complaint by making the penalty more significant in the case of a mistake in a filing,” Wechsler said.

He contends that the additional penalties on complainants, including a constitutionally dubious provision that prevented the contents of a grievance from being disclosed, are intended to reduce the number of complaints.

Conn countered, “We’ve had too many public officials spending money and time and energy to defend unfounded ethics complaints. There is nothing in this bill that prohibits someone from filing a truthful complaint. This adds a penalty for untruthful and reckless complaints. And there will be a discussion of the First Amendment implications.”

A companion bill has been filed by state Rep. Dave Hood, a Republican from Daytona Beach.

Clemens is also the author of 2011 legislation that narrowed the ability of the public to examine internal audit reports prepared for a local government, including “an investigative or audit report on an inspector general” until it is presented to the governmental unit in question. The bill became law in October 2011.