City Council Selects Second Opinion Lawyer

The divisiveness among council members over the Short-Term Rental (STR) Registration program continued during their meeting on Monday, June 19th. This time it centered around selecting an attorney for a second opinion. At their last meeting on June 5th, Council voted 4-3 to direct Chairman Greg Folley to work with the City Manager to select an attorney and bring the name, along with a budget, to this meeting. The dissenting votes were not interested in procuring a second legal opinion.

So it was at this meeting that Chairman Folley presented Attorney Robert Pritt to council members. The recommendation met with resistance from Councilors Grifoni, Irwin and Palumbo, specifically over Pritt’s former association with Marco Islander Ed Issler. 

Pritt’s resume includes 17 years as the city attorney for the City of Naples and 13 years as city attorney for Sanibel, along with numerous board certifications, recognitions, and professional and community affiliations. “I looked at 30 attorneys who identified as municipal attorneys who practice in Collier County, about 30 online, and Mr. Pritt far and away had the best experience, the most comprehensive experience,” said Folley. “And as I checked out his reputation, he has pretty much an unflagging reputation for honesty.” Folley goes on to relate conversations he had with two former Estero mayors. “Both of them said whatever you’re counting on, whatever you’re looking for, you’re going to get an absolute straight-arrow opinion from this gentleman, and he is going to give you the benefit of his professional insights. He is as honest as the day is long.”

Vice-Chair Grifoni started his comments with questions about the contractor agreement and concerns over the cost to taxpayers. “But much of that, I think, pales in comparison to maybe the larger issue here, in my opinion, anyway,” Grifoni said. After pointing out Pritt’s history evaluating rental bans in Southwest Florida, Grifoni relates how he remembered Pritt. “He (Pritt) was actually Ed Issler’s attorney when he threatened litigation against the city of Marco Island regarding alleged and or potential noise issues and deed restrictions regarding Veteran’s Community Park,” Grifoni said. He questions why the objectivity of City Attorney Alan Gabriel’s firm has been questioned and said, “To bring in an attorney or a former attorney or attorney who worked with Ed and threatened litigation against the city… frankly that to me is an absolute non-starter.” Grifoni also said that “I’m not necessarily calling into question what his analysis would be but again, I think the perception is what the problem is here. And I think the perception is too big to overcome.”

Grifoni said, “(Issler) is the chairman of the Take Back Marco PAC who drafted or cobbled together or pasted together this ordinance that has gotten us into a lawsuit that threatens significant amount of damages to potentially the city itself and to our city’s tax dollars.” The Take Back Marco PAC was disbanded in January 2023, and all excess funds were donated to Our Daily Bread Food Pantry.

Councilor Brechnitz pointed out that council has confidence in Gabriel, “but the reason we are doing this is because his comments to the council have been part of this lawsuit, and it impairs his ability to do it properly.” He goes on to say that “I think it’s pretty interesting that people who are pro-registration ordinance don’t like him because of his connection to the real estate industry, and the people that are opposed to the ordinance don’t like him because of his association in the case of Mr. Issler. So maybe we’ve made the right decision because no one likes him on either side.”

“Are we getting a second opinion only or are we contemplating having this other attorney then be a representation in a litigation,” Council Irwin asked. “Actually, I had an explicit discussion with him on that and the only purpose is a second opinion,” said Folley. Irwin then reiterated her position on rewriting the ordinance. “We could direct our own law firm to write a legally sufficient ordinance based on what we have currently, which has problems, to just remove the problems, rewrite it, and we could pass it at the city council meeting at any time you want.” 

Councilor Palumbo recommended going back to the drawing board and bringing three names to council to look at and vote upon. “I just think it’s the best transparent thing to do because we’re not going to win either way,” he said.

Councilor Grifoni agreed with Palumbo’s suggestion. “If we had a number of attorneys here and we had to select the best of the handful that were in front of us based on what they provided to us…we would vote, rank them one, two, three, or one to five or whatever. And whoever has the most points at the end of the day they move forward.” Grifoni feels that discussion will help in the long run. “(This) seems like common sense and honestly, something that would probably go a long way to bridging the gap on this issue that clearly has a split vote on this council.”

Councilor Palumbo agreed. “I just cannot imagine how we heal this community by picking this guy, who seems like a fine attorney.”

The vote came down to 4-3 approving Mr. Pritt to provide the second opinion. Councilors Blonna, Brechnitz, Rola and Chairman Folley voting for and Councilors Grifoni, Irwin and Palumbo voting against.