When Florida built a courthouse for the First District Court of Appeals in Tallahassee two years ago, the architect’s plan for the $50 million building included miles of African Mahogany paneling, high-end light fixtures, and hundreds of framed historic photographs to hang on the walls. But, even after most of the lavish details survived an intense audit, the commissioned photographs remain in storage, as two government departments battle over whether the state should pay the art gallery’s $360,000 bill.
A two-day hearing called by Florida Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater is the latest step in an ongoing fight over paying for the controversial courthouse, which the Tampa Bay Times nicknamed the Taj Mahal.
Now, two years after its construction, and the subsequent resignation of Chief Judge Paul Hawkes amid an investigation, all of the building project has been paid for except for 369 photos that were enlarged and framed at a cost of almost $1,000 each.
Department of Financial Services lawyer Michael Davidson says the Department of Management Services, which oversaw the project, lacked the authority to spend that much money on what he considers decorative elements. He says, to fit into the spending category that was used for the allocation, they’d have to be fixtures essential to the functioning of the District Court of Appeals.
“Let’s think about it, guys. The DCA’s been in operation going on two years. The pictures aren’t there. Have they been impaired somehow? I don’t think so," Davidson said at Tuesday's hearing.
He says, even if the prints are defined as art instead, the amount invoiced for them exceeds the $100,000 cap on art in public places put in place by Florida law. Signature Gallery, the Tallahassee art gallery that did the work, is suing the project’s general contractor, Peter Brown Construction, for payment. Mary Maida owns Signature, and her husband, attorney Tom Maida, represented her at the hearing.
"From the department’s perspective, I think they probably view Signature Gallery as regrettable collateral damage. We’re tired of being collateral damage," he said.
Bob Buesing, the lawyer for Peter Brown Construction, says the original audit, under former Florida Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink, was based on a misunderstanding of state law. He says the $100,000 spending limit applies only to so-called created art, like sculptures or paintings, but not to the framed prints, which he says are more along the lines of permanent fixtures, like wallpaper. On top of the nearly $360,000 for the prints, the contractor is seeking for the state to cover more than $30,000 in legal fees it’s spent trying to recoup the money. The hearing will continue on Wednesday.