Former city council member Sherri Myers is upset about the costly litigation regarding the 401a plan. The issue could have been resolved two years ago, but the county clerk bogged down the court with several motions that Judge William Stone outlined in his decision.
- Over 16 months were spent dealing with the clerk’s motions to stop the case from going to trial. She is entitled to her legal strategy, but the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) didn’t drag this case out and drive up her legal bills. Pam Childers did.
Judge Stone outlined the procedural history on pages 2-4: 
On January 21, 2022, the County filed a Complaint for a Writ of Mandamus. On January 26, 2022, this Court was assigned to this case. The County filed an Amended Complaint on January 31, 2022. On February 8, 2022, this Court issued an Alternative Writ in Mandamus.
Clerk filed a Motion to Quash that took four months to resolve – Judge Nelson denied it.
On March 1, 2022, the Clerk filed a Motion to Quash. On March 8, 2022, this Court entered an order directing the County to file a response within 20 days. On March 24, 2022, the County filed a Stipulated Motion to Extend Deadline, which this Court granted via an order entered on March 29, 2022. On April 1, 2022, the County filed its response to the Motion to Quash. Subsequently, on April 14, 2022, the Clerk filed a reply. On June 17, 2022, the Court held a hearing on the matter, and on July 5, 2022, the Court entered an order denying the Motion to Quash.
Clerk then filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, then two Motions for Partial Summary Judgment that took over a year to resolve – Judge Nelson denied the motions.
On July 12, 2022, the Court entered an order setting a case management conference. The Court held the case management conference on August 16, 2022, and entered an order reciting the action taken at the case management conference and providing directions to the parties. On the same day, the Clerk filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. On August 23, 2022, the parties filed a joint statement per the Court’s case management order.
On August 31, 2022, the Clerk filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Interpretation of Section 121.182, Florida Statutes. On September 1, 2022, the Clerk filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Determining that Retirement Benefits are Part of a County Commissioner’s Compensation. The Court held a case management conference on September 12, 2022, at which time the parties agreed to have those motions heard without a hearing, and a briefing schedule was set via a case management order entered on September 28, 2022. Also on September 28, 2022, the Clerk filed amended versions of both motions.
On November 11, 2022, the County filed written oppositions to the motions. The Clerk filed replies on December 14, 2022, followed by an amended reply on December 27, 2022. On March 1, 2023, the Court entered an order directing the parties to file additional briefing on two issues. Subsequently, pursuant to the Court’s order, the parties filed their additional briefs on March 31, 2023. On August 23, 2023, the Court entered orders denying the motions for partial summary judgment.
The judge filed notice that the case was ready for trial last September.
On September 19, 2023, the Clerk filed a notice stating that the case is “ready to be set for non-jury trial.” A case management conference was held on December 19, 2023. On January 10, 2024, the Court entered an order for trial with directions to the parties to file a joint pretrial statement. The parties filed a joint pretrial statement on February 9, 2024, followed by an amended joint pretrial statement on February 22, 2024. The trial was held on February 26 and 27, 2024. Subsequently, the parties filed closing arguments on March 5, 2024, and responses were filed on March 12, 2024.
Note how quickly Judge Stone made his ruling once the clerk’s motions were handled.
- The trial was held less than six months after the notice.
- His ruling was issued a month after written closing arguments were submitted.
Had Childers allowed the case to go to trial sooner, we might have had the case completely resolved before the end of 2022.
C.J.
The home rule argument wasn’t overlooked. Several of the legal arguments in the lawsuit were shot down, and Judge Stone also shot down the clerk’s arguments in her motions to squash, for summary judgment, and for partial summary judgments. There’s nothing nefarious in making motions and legal arguments – it’s how our justice system works.
The plan was unlawful because it was not a supplemental plan. The only persons eligible were county employees 50 or older with 25+ years of service. Furthermore, elected officials are not county employees, which prevented them from participating. The Clerk of Court, County Commission, or HR professionals didn’t know these things in June 2021 when the dispute began. No one knowingly enrolled in an unlawful plan.
I look forward to seeing how the Florida Retirement System, County, and Clerk of Court work together to unravel the 401(a) mess and make the FRS system whole.
The majority of the clerk’s legal fees were for making and defending motions that Judge Stone denied.
Wait a second, I beg to differ on the idea that “you didn’t think anybody was really pressing for Pam to be strapped with a bunch of misdemeanors on her knowing check writing for what she had determined to be illegal a long time ago”.
Her office is literally he place where people have to go to pay for misdemeanors.
When paying my $53.00 fee some years ago for some infrction I cannot even remember no one in Pams office said “Hey, it’s free from fees friday you can just put that $53.00 towards food, rent or a bouquet of flowers for your mom and we will tear up that pesky paltry fine”.
If fees are paid online the fees are actually even paid through a third party vendor freeing up the clerk so she can manage charging extra fees just for our courtesy of paying conveniently with credit or debit cards something that even Walmart will not contemplate.
On the other hand, if Escambia County had acted lawfully there would have been no cost at all to county taxpayers. Overlooked in Judge Stone’s Order is the critical part on page 9 where he shoots down the county’s “home-rule argument.” Escambia County had cited Section 125.01 Powers and Duties, Florida Statues, as an alternative authority to enroll commissioners in the “Local Plan.” Judge Stone shot that claim down on page 4 of his Order. How many other BCC actions have also been unlawful? Perhaps the Clerk’s Office should fact-check claims made by the Office of the County Attorney on behalf of the BCC.
While Ed Fleming laughed all the way to the bank. Well done, and congrats Ed! Must be such a disappointment that the BCC decided not to appeal.
THANK YOU to Levin Papantonio Rafferty for seeing what a horrible bind the Clerk was putting the Board and the taxpayers in, and litigating the case towards a judicial determination pro bono.
Never forget that Alison Rogers stated publicly that she had tried to convince the Clerk to work together on an AG ruling on whether it was legal, and Pam stated her refusal publicly. Just a horrendous waste of resources in a community so lacking in them for all of the pressing and grave homeless and housing problems on the near horizon.
Rick, heard you say on your morning program that you didn’t think anybody was really pressing for Pam to be strapped with a bunch of misdemeanors on her knowing check writing for what she had determined to be illegal a long time ago–possibly to her own staff members as well?
While I wouldn’t personally want to see her prosecuted, as the County needs to move on from her side show, she might want to think twice about continuing to mock those of us who have pointed out that if everybody who has broken the law got prosecuted for it, the timeline she herself set in open court on when she realized the plan was illegal would automatically trigger multiple misdemeanors. Most people would take it down a notch once the public realizes this. It’s important and needs to be said.