FORT PIERCE, Fla. — Fort Pierce city commissioners voted unanimously Monday night to reject a settlement offer in a lawsuit alleging years of waterfront mismanagement tied to historic restaurant Little Jim Bait & Tackle.
Plaintiff Kevin Keene said he will continue to pursue litigation against the city following the vote.
The city has filed a motion to dismiss Keene's amended complaint.
WATCH PREVIOUS:
Under the proposed settlement terms, Keene would have dropped the case if the city halted any new plans for Little Jim until Florida Department of Environmental Protection permit issues are resolved and allowed a public vote on future waterfront land decisions.
The lawsuit and a separate FDEP action stem from more than a year of WPTV started reporting on uncertainty surrounding Little Jim's future.
Documents WPTV obtained from the FDEP claim the city has been operating docks on state-owned submerged land at Little Jim without the required permits since 2021. The state agency has ordered the city to pay nearly $16,000 by July 17.
The FDEP action, issued in June, comes amid the lawsuit Keene filed as a local resident.
"My motivation is only to protect the publicly owned waterfront property and to make sure that major decisions are not being made without enough transparency, caution, and public awareness," Keene told Investigative Reporter Kate Hussey. "This was never about money or personal gain for me."
City Commissioner Michael Broderick acknowledged the permit issue.
"My information is that accusation is actually true, that there was an extension of the existing docks," Broderick said.
Broderick said someone at some point extended the docks further than allowed. He plans to negotiate FDEP's fines down while the city investigates who authorized the extension.
"But keep in mind that the city of Fort Pierce owns that real estate, so ultimately, in the day, the city of Fort Pierce is the responsible party," Broderick said.
The dispute traces back to last year, WPTV reported the Fort Pierce landmark of nearly 80 years was facing an uncertain future after its lease expired.
The city then offered up the land lease for bidders, much to the outcry of residents.
“Our biggest fear is we don’t want this to change and be a chain restaurant or a big box store," restaurant co-owner, Donna Qvarnstrom said. "It’s local and the people love local."
After an outpouring of community support, the city kept the restaurant open month to month.
Then, despite five formal proposals submitted to the city, including one from the current operators, the city said none met the criteria and scrapped plans to pick a new tenant, much to the frustration of at least one developer who talked to WPTV.
"I understand he's considering, you know, legal action as well, because of the way that was handled," Keene said.
Keene argues the "Little Jim process was marked by instability, changing information and unresolved material issues," and that Little Jim's is part of a "broader pattern of defective administration and poor stewardship" — pointing to two other controversial city projects: Fisherman's Wharf, where state records show the city promised land it didn't own, and King's Landing, where a developer claims the city promised buildable property that contained 1,500 tons of old power plant concrete.
The Fisherman's Wharf handling led to a current multi-million dollar lawsuit the project's developer filed against the city, and led to threats of a lawsuit from the developer of King's Landing.
When asked how he responds to allegations that this is an example of a pattern of mismanaging waterfront properties, Broderick said:
"In my opinion, the handling of city-owned real estate that we subsequently lease out to tenants is — it's not being managed. I will not rest until I get to the bottom of this issue," Broderick said.
"How do you, as a city, fix this?" Hussey asked.
"This is going to take a top down, bottom up approach to look at the entirety of the portfolio of the city of Fort Pierce and fix this one asset at a time," said Broderick.
Broderick also said the city is planning to hire a real estate manager to oversee development decisions to prevent future situations.
Ahead of the meeting, Broderick said he doubts the feasibility of allowing taxpayers to vote on every waterfront land issue.
"We can't be handcuffed to have to put it out to a vote in November every two years, or call a special election to the tune of $75,000 or $100,000 to do something like that, so it's an impractical solution, but I believe that's what you have elected officials there to do, and I'm very comfortable in that arena," said Broderick.
This story was reported on-air by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy.
Read more of WPTV's related coverage below:
Fort Pierce
No deal: City rejects all bids for beloved waterfront property
WPTV Investigates
'We'll all have to pay': Why this city says this wharf is contaminated
Real Estate News
Here's why proposed Fort Pierce development may still happen
Fort Pierce