The owner of this retail center has been in a dispute with Lantana over code enforcement at the site. Photo provided
By Jane Musgrave
What began as disputes over white rocks and mahogany trees has morphed into lawsuits that call into question the legitimacy of code enforcement in Lantana.
In the latest lawsuit filed in March in Palm Beach County Circuit Court, Manalapan real estate investor John Bols claims the town is improperly using code enforcement to harass people and make money.
“The town of Lantana has intentionally devised and implemented a deliberate policy and plan of action which is … designed to levy fines against citizens and business owners, such as (Bols), with excessive penalties in an attempt to create profits for the town,” attorney Christopher Mills, who represents Bols, says in the lawsuit.
The claims aren’t new.
Since Bols was first cited by code enforcement in May 2023 for using white rocks to landscape his four-store retail center in the town’s small downtown on East Ocean Avenue, a legal war — and he claims a code enforcement one — has erupted.
After a special code enforcement magistrate ordered him to replace the rocks with grass, shrubs and flowerbeds at his property at 114 E. Ocean Ave. or face $250-a-day fines, Bols filed his first lawsuit against the town.
And he won.
An appellate panel of county and circuit judges agreed that the town had used the wrong code against Bols. While a prior code required natural vegetation, one approved in May 2022 allowed the use of xeriscaping, the three-judge panel agreed.
“This is a clear violation of the essential requirement of law as the town applied the wrong law at the code enforcement hearings by applying the prior code to the violation,” the panel wrote. “It is widely acknowledged that the application of the incorrect law is a violation of the essential requirements of law.”
Other rulings, other fines
By the time the panel ruled in February 2025, Bols had been cited and fined $1,250 for trimming two mahogany trees on his property on two occasions in 2024, court records show.
Again, he asked county judges to reverse the decisions. This time, the judges denied his requests. Unwilling to take no for an answer, he appealed one case to the Florida Supreme Court. It refused to hear the case.
But, he has two other lawsuits pending, including the one filed last month. The suits could cost Lantana at least $100,000 and, if Bols has his way, could rein in what he sees as a rogue agency that is wreaking havoc in the small town.
Bols readily admits he is on a quest.
“Lantana has a distinct pattern of going after people,” he said. “It’s not about code enforcement. It’s about collecting money.”
In addition to the roughly 15 citations he or his tenants received in the 28 months between April 2021 to August 2023, four nearby businesses were fined a total of nearly $109,000 for code violations. All were minor, Bols said.
A real estate office in his building was cited because pictures it posted in its windows, promoting its listing, violated a town code. Another tenant, a smoothie shop, was cited for an improper sign.
He was cited for “hat-racking” two mahogany trees, which is against town codes because it weakens trees. Two years later, he said the trees are thriving.
An issue for years
Then, there’s the infamous case of Zenaida “Sandy” Martinez. She was cited in 2013 and fined as much as $250 a day for parking cars on the grass near her driveway, not replacing a storm-damaged fence and not repairing a cracked driveway. At first unaware of the fines and then unable to pay them, she saw them balloon to $165,000.
While the town offered to settle the dispute for $25,000, that, too, was beyond the reach of the single mother who lived with her three adult children, her mother and sister.
In 2021, she sued the town. She lost, in part because she hadn’t appealed the decision eight years earlier.
Circuit Judge Luis Delgado acknowledged the fines were “admittedly high.” But he rejected Martinez’s claim that they were “unconstitutionally excessive because they are grossly disproportionate to her offense.”
Noting that the Florida Legislature hadn’t put a cap on code enforcement fines, he ruled that those imposed on Martinez were “well within the range deemed appropriate by the legislature and substantial deference must be given to its determinations.”
His ruling was upheld on appeal. The state’s high court declined to hear the case.
What happened to Martinez is heartbreaking, but not unique, Bols said.
“This is a pattern with them,” he said. “It’s not just me. They’re so used to getting away with it.”
Prior setbacks for plaintiff
Mayor Karen Lythgoe declined to address Bols’ allegations, saying she can’t comment on pending litigation. Town Manager Brian Raducci didn’t return an email seeking comment.
In court papers, the town’s attorneys pointed out that two judges rejected Bols’ claims of retaliation in a 2023 lawsuit that grew out of the landscaping and tree citations.
U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg in 2024 threw out Bols’ claim that Lantana went after him because he exercised his constitutional rights to sue the town and to speak out.
“Although (Bols) attempts to show that (Lantana) customarily issues retaliatory citations, (he) does not provide any facts demonstrating that any other citations issued were without basis or motivated by retaliatory intent,” Rosenberg wrote, sending the case back to state court.
Circuit Judge Carolyn Bell followed Rosenberg’s lead. While most of Bell’s 11-page order dealt with procedural flaws in Bols’ lawsuit, she ruled that Bols couldn’t sue Lantana for fraudulently and intentionally citing him for violating the wrong code. Lantana is protected from such claims by sovereign immunity, an ancient legal doctrine that protects governments from lawsuits.
While people can sue governments if they cause death, injury or loss of property, sovereign immunity protects them from being sued for financial loss, Bell ruled.
Further, she rejected Bols’ request to stop Lantana from engaging in “continued unlawful enforcement.” The request was akin to asking her to “weigh in on matters that have not and may never happen.”
Lantana’s attorneys urged the 4th District Court of Appeals to accept Bell’s “well-reasoned” order and reject Bols’ appeal.
The fights aren’t over
Bols’ attorney countered that Bell missed the point of the lawsuit.
“(It) alleges a clear pattern of retaliatory enforcement and policies causing substantial harm and seeks a declaration that the town’s entire code enforcement framework is unlawful,” Mills wrote.
While that suit continues to move through the appellate process, arguments in the other one are just beginning.
In the lawsuit filed in March, Bols wants the court to order Lantana to pay the $100,000 in attorneys fees he racked up fighting the improper landscape citation.
He is also seeking damages, claiming he was the victim of malicious prosecution by the town and its attorneys who knew the code allowed xeriscaping but cited him anyway.
Bols, who bought the retail center in 2021 for $1.1 million, said he didn’t set up shop in Lantana to start a fight with the town.
“But they made it very clear to me that I was a wealthy guy who bought property in town and I should just pay up,” he said.
If it is successful, Mills said, the lawsuit could help others. “There’s just so many people who took the repercussions, paid the fines and moved on,” he said.
Comments