Florida Commission on Ethics issues three advisory opinions clarifying when local officials and staff may serve private entities that do business with their own

The Florida Commission on Ethics on June 10, 2026, voted to adopt three advisory opinions clarifying conflict-of-interest rules for public officers who also have private business roles that touch their agencies.

In advisory opinion file 2833, staff summarized a fact pattern involving the University Park Recreation District and an LLC (Park Boulevard Management) owned by a homeowners association. Staff told commissioners that the LLC’s operating agreement made the HOA’s board officers the LLC’s corporate officers and that a management committee would have full authority to hire, fire and direct LLC executives who run the LLC’s business. "If they join the LLC's management committee, they will be considered to be directors of that LLC and will be considered to be selling to their own agency," staff said, citing section 112.313(3), and the commission adopted the draft opinion as written.

In advisory opinion file 2834, the commission considered a teacher, Frederick Shernoff, who owns an LLC marketing a cloud-based hall-pass system called Aegis. Staff said the principal legal questions turn on 112.313(7)(a) and 112.313(3). Because Shernoff’s contract with the Palm Beach County School District would be through his LLC rather than directly with his school, and because he has represented he has no role in procurement, evaluation, or purchasing decisions for his school or the district, staff concluded section 112.316 could be applied to negate a facial conflict and allow the sale so long as his public duties are not impaired. The commission adopted the opinion as drafted.

In advisory opinion file 2835, staff reviewed whether a member of Key West’s "bite" management district board who owns a marine salvage business and leases a commercial slip at the marina has a conflict. Staff explained that although the board has ordinance-based authority related to marina leases and rent, a municipal ordinance reserves at least one board seat for a maritime professional. Staff recommended applying the statutory exemption in section 112.313(7)(b) (the 7B exemption) because the ordinance requires or permits appointment of persons from certain professions, including the maritime industry; staff also concluded any effect on the board member’s lease from a state bay-bottom discount was too remote to create a disqualifying voting conflict. The commission adopted the draft opinion.

Why it matters: The opinions clarify when participation in a private entity’s governance amounts to acting as a director under section 112.313(3) and when statutory exceptions (for required professions under 112.313(7)(b) and the mitigating provision in 112.316) permit continued private practice or transactions with a political subdivision. The decisions provide guidance for special-district board members, teachers who commercialize classroom tools, and local board members whose careers are tied to the industries their boards oversee.

What happens next: Each advisory opinion is legally binding on the facts presented to the commission and will be provided to the requesters. The opinions do not impose penalties; they advise whether the proposed conduct would violate the statutory standards enumerated in the opinions.