It never hurts to ask — twice.
The Florida Department of Transportation has resolved to replace the 17-foot-clearance Cortez drawbridge with a 65-foot fixed-span bridge, but a group challenging the department in federal court said it has identified instances in which the agency breached procedure while coming to its decision.
The bridge is slated for construction in 2026-27.
A member of the group spoke before the Bradenton Beach Commission May 6, highlighting DOT procedural errors and asking a second time for the city to join the lawsuit.
In accordance with the timeline laid out by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, the DOT provided the anti-megabridge coalition — which includes former County Commissioners Joe McClash and Jane von Hahmann, a resident of Cortez, as well as Cortezians Linda Molto and Joe Kane — a draft administrative record April 20 that details the department’s decision-making for the high bridge.
The complainants have been reviewing the record for completeness and procedural missteps.
According to McClash, in addition to uncovering bureaucratic errors, the group has determined the record is incomplete and will be requesting additional information from the DOT.
The Cortez Bridge spans the Intracoastal Waterway, linking Cortez on the mainland to Bradenton Beach on Anna Maria Island.
During the public comment portion of the Bradenton Beach Commission meeting May 6, von Hahmann outlined flaws in the DOT’s decision-making process, including selective analysis of community support data and a problem with the access road that would be built beneath the megabridge ramp to connect Cortez.
Von Hahmann, who said she has been finding errors in the 4,000- to 5,000-page record on a daily basis, began her review with an analysis of the five surveys the DOT conducted during the Cortez Bridge project development and environment study. The surveys included questions about whether a new bridge should be built and asked respondents to indicate their preference for the height of a replacement structure.
“They deleted and never used those people who voted for no bridge or bridge rehabilitation. So, when they tell you that 65% of all people voted for the 65-foot bridge, that was of the 30% who voted for a bridge to begin with,” von Hahmann said.
The megabridge opposition group seeks to settle with the DOT on a 35-foot drawbridge replacement. Von Hahmann told the commissioners that, of the 12,029 people surveyed by the DOT, 70% expressed support for rehabilitating the existing bascule bridge or building a 35-foot drawbridge.
At its eastern terminus, the megabridge would extend into the mainland about 720 feet, dividing Cortez in half along Cortez Road. To link the halves together, the DOT plans to build an access road that would stem from the northern side of Cortez Road and loop southward beneath the bridge.
However, since the Cortez Mobile Home Park at Cortez Road’s southern border is private property, von Hahmann told commissioners that pedestrians would not be able to access the road from the south without trespassing.
Von Hahmann invited Bradenton Beach to join the megabridge lawsuit at a March 4 city commission meeting.
On March 18, commissioners unanimously voted to direct city attorney Ricinda Perry to coordinate with outside counsel to join the lawsuit and allocated up to $15,000 for legal expenses related to the case.
However, on April 8, Mayor John Chappie said the city was still gathering information about the costs associated with joining the suit, and commissioners voted 4-1 to reduce the allocation to $5,000.
Perry and DOT attorneys held a closed-door settlement meeting April 16, and, on April 22, city commissioners said they planned to review the DOT’s draft administrative record before directing Perry to conduct a follow-up meeting.
Von Hahmann concluded her commentary May 6 by asking the city, once again, to become the fifth complainant in the case against the DOT.
“We just ask you to please continue,” she said. “If I had a municipal government in Cortez, I would be fighting tooth and nail to have them join this. But (we) don’t. But, you represent a constituency out here that is going to be severely impacted.”