William March
Despite a staff recommendation for a finding of probable cause, the Florida Commission on Ethics rejected a complaint against Hillsborough County School Board Chair Karen Perez regarding a controversial dinner with the Cuban ambassador in Tampa last year.
The staff recommended rejecting another part of the complaint concerning Perez’s trip to Cuba, and the Commission followed that recommendation.
In another action, the Commission rejected a complaint against St. Petersburg City Council member Deborah Figgs-Sanders after staff analysis found it didn’t include allegations that would violate state ethics laws.
The complaint against Figgs-Sanders, filed by occasional Council critic Bradlee McCoy, alleged that Figgs-Sanders violated ethics laws by casting council votes that benefitted individuals or organizations that had given her campaign contributions. Among them were donors connected with the Historic Gas Plant project and the Woodson African American History Museum, which had given her son a scholarship.
The Commission said campaign contributions are not considered gifts under laws prohibiting gifts intended to corruptly influence public officials’ actions. There was no evidence the scholarship’s continuation was contingent on her votes.
The dinner involving Perez occurred during a visit to Tampa by Cuban Ambassador Lianys Torres Rivera in March 2023.
Three local elected officials – Perez, Tampa City Council member Guido Maniscalco and Hillsborough Clerk of Court Cindy Stuart — attended a dinner for her at an upscale restaurant organized by attorney and lobbyist Ron Christaldi.
Anti-Castro Cubans, who said they happened to be eating at the restaurant at the same time, staged a protest inside the restaurant and later publicized a video of the protest.
Several state legislators later held a news conference blasting the event and officials who attended; state Sen. Jay Collins, a Tampa Republican, introduced a condemnation resolution that failed to pass.
The complaint, filed by Vanessa Vasquez Anderson, a Republican Party and anti-Castro activist, alleged that the dinner was a prohibited gift worth more than $100 from a registered lobbyist, with the per-person cost of the event at $325.
Perez said she left when the protest broke out, didn’t eat dinner, and had only one drink before leaving, a gift not worth $100. But the Commission advocate, Melody Hadley, recommended a finding of probable cause to believe Perez had violated the gift prohibition.
If the Commission had accepted the recommendation, it would not have amounted to a finding of guilt but could have led to an evidentiary hearing and a final decision. The Commission rejected the recommendation.
The complaint also alleges that Perez took a trip to Cuba in 2019, which the complainant said may have been a gift given as part of the Cuban government’s attempt to influence U.S. public opinion.
However, Perez told Ethics Commission staff she paid her own way to Cuba, traveling with a friend to provide humanitarian aid and providing aid to the family she stayed with as compensation for the stay.
Perez said she went to the dinner “to gain a better understanding of different perspectives ” but did not participate in any conversations.
“From the outset, I knew these claims were unfounded, and I had full faith that the truth would come to light,” she said. “I remain committed to upholding the highest ethical standards. … I’m grateful that this matter has been resolved fairly and justly.”
Luna threat update
U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna provided only minimal new information on what she called a “very serious shooting threat” since Florida Politics reported it Thursday.
Luna told Fox Business that the Capitol Police are taking the threat “very seriously … not something they think is just a joke” and that she was “comfortable at least saying that it was from a very far left-wing activist.” She didn’t elaborate.
It’s still unclear why the alleged threat was initially delivered to St. Petersburg College, which then transmitted to law enforcement.
In an emailed statement, college spokesperson Samantha Stanich said the threat was in an email.
“The email did not originate from SPC,” she said, not from any student or employee. “It was sent to a general SPC email address. … Also, no political officials were named in the email.”
