Legal but Ethical? Go Hillsborough's Highly Paid "Insider" Busybody

The Go Hillsborough law enforcement investigation report was released on the Monday afternoon of the day before our Tuesday Primary Election. That's a convenient way to change the media coverage……get it drowned out by our Primary Election coverage. 

All of the media reporting from the Tribune and the Times basically focused only on the 12 page summary from State Attorney Mark Ober. The Tribune/Times reporters, to my knowledge, have not read the almost 2000 page investigative report. They should. Only WTSP's Noah Pransky, who broke the story last fall, appears to have actually read through the details according to his latest reporting, The 3 most damning things in Go Hillsborough investigation.

Our local print media refuses to report on the details. Why? Because they are part of the "Insiders" and as economist Larry Summers once told Senator Elizabeth Warren: 

Outsiders could say what they want, he told her, but people on the inside don’t listen to them. 

Insiders get more access to push their ideas to powerful people.
“But insiders also understand one unbreakable rule: They don’t criticize other insiders,” Summers told Warren

Our local media, except for WTSP's Noah Pransky, made a conscious decision to be Insiders because it corroborates their own agenda for a sales tax hike and that end justifies any means for getting there. Shameful!

Most reporting also fails to include there are Ethics complaints being investigated by the Ethics Commission in Tallahassee. 

The big news (or not) is that State Attorney Ober found no criminal wrong doing. That was what we always expected because the legal bar is low, no forensic investigation was conducted and the investigation was contained within a very narrow focus.

Cronyism does not equate to illegal and we never stated it did. Just because something is not illegal, does not mean it is ethical, moral, virtuous, honest or has any sense of integrity.  

But thanks to County Administrator Mike Merrill who asked for the investigation. The bigger news is the detailed investigation report confirms much of what the Eye has stated about the Go Hillsborough debacle. The cronyism is obvious and the timeline of events are not coincidental. 

The entire investigative report can be found here. Read it because it is "Eye" opening. It's a pdf file so use the "Find" tool and search on the words Parsons, Beth Leytham, lobbyist, or the names of those interviewed which included all the commissioners, Mayor Buckhorn, Mike Merrill, Bob Clifford. A Pepcid or antacid may be needed before reading to prevent heartburn or nausea. 

We are trudging through the almost 2000 pages. Here's a glimpse of some of what we have read, learned or confirmed:

Confirmed: Go Hillsborough was always about a sales tax hike…..stupid……

The county used the guise of public engagement to orchestrate and create a taxpayer funded Go Hillsborough campaign to specifically sell another sales tax hike. Go Hillsborough was not about doing engineering work - there was never an engineer provided by Parsons nor any certified engineering documents produced. We did get branding, electioneering focus groups, electioneering polling and colluding with the media to create their "message".

What is in this report? 
Confirms Beth Leytham's massive access. Pages 147-158 of the report contains Leytham's phone records for the time period of 8/1-9/5. That was the time period leading up to the County handing Parsons their no bid million dollar blank check. WTSP's Pransky added up the number of calls for that time period in his last report:

As reported by WTSP's Noah Pransky,
# of calls from/to Beth Leytham
between 8/12014 and 9/5/2014

Below are Leytham's phone records just for the day of the August 12 Policy Leadership Group (PLG) meeting where suddenly the PLG was voting on hiring a consultant to do public engagement.

Leytham calls day of August 12, 2014 PLG meeting  (click to enlarge)

What really happened between June and August of 2014?

Merrill stated at the May 2014 PLG meeting that the transit projects were to be presented to the PLG members at the next PLG meeting in June. Roads had already been discussed during previous months meeting. Merrill cancelled June and July PLG meetings. Instead of picking up where they left off in May and presenting transit projects to the PLG in August, all of a sudden the PLG was voting to hire a "transportation expert not a PR firm" to do transportation public engagement.

Obviously a decision was made between the May and August PLG meetings, outside of Sunshine and behind the scenes that the direction of the PLG changed. Who made that decision and/or who influenced that decision? From those interviewed, the county or Merrill or someone(s) felt there was a sense of urgency to getting this public engagement done so a vote could be taken by the commissioners to put another sales tax hike on the 2016 ballot. It was all about getting a referendum on the 2016 ballot. The transit projects, as promised by Merrill, were never presented publicly to the PLG. 

What else is gleaned from the report?

• Page 95 - Commissioner Hagan and Leytham text each other during county commission meetings, including text messages related to agenda items (ironically the agenda for county commission meetings provided the public clearly state ALL CELLULAR PHONES AND PAGERS MUST BE TURNED OFF WHILE IN THE BOARDROOM.) Are they exempt from their own rules? 

Every BOCC agenda contains this
statement regarding cell phones

Text messages between Leytham and Hagan
during 10/7/2015 BOCC meeting (click to enlarge)

• We know who sends potty mouth text messages (text at 11:43:02)
• We know who cannot sneeze without speaking first with Leytham
• We know who writes Commissioner Hagan's scripted soliquoy's
• We know the sequence of events were not coincidental
• While apparently not illegal,the county abused the CCNA procurement process which is governed by Florida Statute 287.55 to procure "professional engineering services". This Statute must be reformed by our state legislators so the abuse of using it to procure taxpayer funded campaign work for a referendum never happens again - as that is using taxpayer money against the taxpayer - a post for another day.

One of the biggest issues the Sheriff's investigation seemed concerned about was all the gray matter surrounding what constitutes a lobbyist (or not).

Page 47 of the report includes Parsons Brinckerhoff's "Political Consultants" agreement with Beth Leytham dated April 2014. Parsons paid Leytham a $5000 a month retainer fee to use her politically well connected relationships to obtain business for PB in the Tampa Bay area. 

Parsons/Leytham "Political Consultants" Agreement
dated April 2014 (click to enlarge)

Leytham was working for Parsons when all those calls above were made. Common sense indicates Parsons Brinckerhoff was paying Leytham to exploit her access, especially the massive access she has with electeds. She was being paid $5000 a month by Parsons to obtain "prospective opportunities" during those months leading up to the county handing Parsons the public engagement "opportunity". It was well worth Parsons investment because four months and $20K later, Parsons was handed the $1.35 million campaign with Leytham "in tow".

Leytham and Parsons Brinckerhoff have had contracts working together for years. Her website highlights Parsons Brinckerhoff as one of her clients. As we posted here, Leytham and Parsons worked on Buckhorn's $1.2 million InVision Tampa. Everyone knows who Leytham is as she has had plenty of media coverage over the years (another post for another day). Don't kid yourself that there is anyone down at County Center who suddenly got amnesia and feigns ignorance of who Beth Leytham is. 

Leytham's clients highlighted on her website

A concern that appears to have been brought up in the report  is the numerous hats Leytham wears. She wears so many - "friend", campaign consultant, consultant, advocate, close associate, lobbyist, political consultant, information traffic cop, political ally, intelligence gatherer, media conduit, personal Google alert….How did those decision makers, who she had massive access to and was in constant communication with, know what hat she was wearing whenever they were communicating or she called or texted?

It is apparent that Leytham likes to stick her nose into county and city business while wearing all her hats. But Leytham was not just a nosy busybody like Mrs. Gladys Kravitz of the old TV show Bewitched. Leytham is a highly paid "Insider" busybody who has been on the receiving end of lots of money, including lots of taxpayer money. Exploiting her massive access to electeds and decision makers, it certainly appears her "Insider" busybody nosiness has benefited her. 

Nosy Busybody Gladys Kravitz from "Bewitched"

A common question throughout the investigation asked of those interviewed under oath was whether Beth Leytham was a lobbyist. Many of those interviewed conveniently used the same terminology to describe Leytham (as if coached) - she's an advocate, a consultant and an "intelligence source". But asked if she was a lobbyist - almost all said no.

County Administrator Mike Merrill admits that "depending on who you ask, yeah she was a lobbyist" and how "clever" she was because she never disclosed who she was representing. He throws it back to Leytham's responsibility to register as a lobbyist, which of course, she did not. He throws his hands up and says it's not his or the county's responsibility to enforce anything. Nice, huh? No wonder she wanted that lobbying ordinance presentation from Hagan on the day that item was on the county commission agenda. Think she wanted to weigh in on it?

From HCSO Interview with Merrill
 (click to enlarge)

In Commissioner Murman's interview that begins on page 734, she cearly stated Leytham was a lobbyist:

From HCSO Interview with Leytham
(click to enlarge)

Here’s some definitions for lobbyist:

dictionary.com: a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest

vocabulary.com: A lobbyist is someone hired by a business or a cause to persuade legislators to support that business or cause.

businessdictionary.com: The act of attempting to influence business and government leaders to create legislation or conduct an activity that will help a particular organization.

If lobbying before the state legislature, below is FL Statute 11.045 Lobbying before the Legislature which defines lobbying and lobbyists:

(f) “Lobbying” means influencing or attempting to influence legislative action or nonaction through oral or written communication or an attempt to obtain the goodwill of a member or employee of the Legislature. 

(g) “Lobbying firm” means any business entity, including an individual contract lobbyist, that receives or becomes entitled to receive any compensation for the purpose of lobbying, where any partner, owner, officer, or employee of the business entity is a lobbyist. 

(h) “Lobbyist” means a person who is employed and receives payment, or who contracts for economic consideration, for the purpose of lobbying, or a person who is principally employed for governmental affairs by another person or governmental entity to lobby on behalf of that other person or governmental entity.

Leytham never registered as a lobbyist. 

If it walks, talks and squawks like a lobbyist, what is it?

Do we expect our electeds and powerful decision makers to tiptoe around and tiptoe over the legal bar or be leaping over the ethical bar? 

Read the investigative report and you decide. 

More to come so keep a big supply of antacid.

Bring Back Integrity, Remove Merrill from the Transportation Initiative

It is unfortunate that the county commissioners voted at the October 7 BOCC meeting to bring tainted Parsons Brinckerhoff back to present their tainted Go Hillsborough plan at the November 5 Transportation Policy Leadership Ship Group Meeting. The tainted Parsons contract should have been terminated instead. 

The taxpayers are now forced to pay tainted Parsons hundreds of thousands of dollars more while they and the county are being investigated by law enforcement. How tone deaf is that? As we posted previously, the Parsons contract is Risky Business.

We now wonder what County Administrator Mike Merrill may be orchestrating between now and November 5. What buttons and levers are being pushed by the Wizard of Oz behind the green curtain and outside of Sunshine, especially since the commissioners ridiculously scheduled a workshop immediately after the November 5 PLG meeting. What are these folks thinking?

In this TBT article published recently Merrill sounded off:

County Administrator Mike Merrill said part of the problem stems from the ease with which opponents can organize, while backers — who range from homeowner associations to chambers of commerce to concerned citizens — lack a unified voice.

"What they really need to do is let commissioners know that this is very important to them," Merrill said. "Because, mostly, all the board is hearing from mostly is this small band of folks that have been hammering away." (emphasis mine)

How can Merrill honestly make a statement like that?

Merrill has been touring the county for the last year and a half like an unelected County Mayor making presentations pushing for another huge sales tax referendum.  

The presentation Merrill presented titled "A Comprehensive Mobility Proposal can be found here. 

Fourteen pages of Merrill's 35 page presentation is about fixed guideways with numerous pictures of high cost rail, including this one that looks like an accident waiting to happen and  a way to increase congestion.

From Merrill's presentation - train, car lane and bike lane
 An accident waiting to happen

Just THREE pages of Merrill's 35 page Mobility presentation is non-transit needs. It's called "non-transit" and not road needs because that bucket is much more than desperately needed road repaving, road improvements and road projects. The non-transit needs includes sidewalks, bike lanes, trails and expensive complete streets.

From a public records request submitted, I received a list of the organizations that the transportation tax hike presentations were made to. That list can be found here. Note that the tab of the spreadsheet is titled "Coordination meetings". Is that legal?

Merrill's "Coordination Meetings" with local power brokers
and so-called stakeholders

Merrill, his deputy Lucia Garsys and Parsons Brinckerhoff's Bob Clifford have presented to all the local power brokers. County and city of Tampa staff also participated in those meetings. Hagan participated in some of the power broker meetings as well we understand.

Some of those power broker meetings with Merrill, Hagan, other county staffers and city of Tampa staffers were private and not open to the general public. The private advocacy campaign to support a sales tax hike referendum was discussed with county and city of Tampa staff - such as raising money, who would lead the advocacy campaign and when would the campaign start. Discussing an advocacy campaign in these meetings goes way beyond the bounds of educating or reaching out to stakeholders for their input about the transportation issue. 

To digress for a moment. What exactly was said at those meetings? Who has been already been trying to raise money for an advocacy campaign for a sales tax hike referendum that is not even been on the ballot? Have there been any violations of Sunshine laws? Have there been any violations of our electioneering laws? It is ILLEGAL for Merrill, county staff or city of Tampa staff to be discussing or "coordinating" about an advocacy campaign. The law enforcement investigation must find out if any illegal or unethical activity occurred at any of these meetings - perhaps they need to interview those who participated and attended.

Merrill and company presented to numerous taxpayer funded entities, the Chambers, the leader of the rail cartel - Tampa Bay Partnership, the Downtown Partnership, the leaders of civic and community associations, engineering groups and homeowners associations. 

Merrill even presented to 2 partisan Democrat groups. Is that legal or ethical for the County Administrator to be making policy making presentations to a partisan group and to only one political party?

Merrill used his County Administrator power as if he was an elected policy maker to speak to all these groups, organizations and associations and push for a huge sales tax hike. Merrill and company used their "bully pulpit" to speak to thousands of people in an attempt to garner support for a huge sales tax hike referendum.

Now Merrill complains whines that all those people he presented to, and somehow he assumes are all backers of his huge tax hike, lack a unified voice. That is a ridiculous assumption and a ridiculous position. Merrill needs to stop blaming others for the mess he helped create and that occurred on his watch. 

The reality is Merrill and company have been trying to sell a bad, flawed product created by a flawed, crony, unethical and perhaps illegal process. 

Proposing a huge tax hike for a plan that does not exist is totally backwards to any true project management/program management methodology. The reason this effort is so backwards is because the answer was already decided at the beginning. The County handed Parsons a Work Order issued under an umbrella Miscellaneous ENGINEERING Services contract procured through a CCNA process intended for ENGINEERING Services, with a Scope of Work titled "Hillsborough County Transportation REFERENDUM Support".

No wonder there is no unified voice of support. Who wants to back a huge sales tax hike  proposed by the Merrill/Clifford/Leytham team that is now under a law enforcement investigation? 

Merrill should never have been "handed" responsibility for the critical but politically charged transportation issue in January 2014. How did that even happen? 

Somehow Merrill "magically" become the facilitator of the Transportation Policy Leadership Group initiative after Herb Marlowe, the facilitator the county hired in June 2013, left in December 2013. The county commissioners never publicly discussed, never voted on or never took any formal action in the Sunshine to appoint or assign Merrill total responsibility for the transportation initiative. 

That decision was done behind the green curtain and outside of Sunshine. Why? Perhaps because we have separation of powers in our County Charter and the electeds cannot delegate their policy making power to the County Administrator, an unelected bureaucrat.

The County Administrator's role is to implement the policies decided by the electeds. Of course he can provide advice and recommendations to the county commissioners. However it is not the role of the County Administrator, an unelected bureaucrat accountable to no voter, to run around the county on the taxpayer dime acting like a policy maker. 

Merrill had to expand our local government and hire numerous high level staff to do his day job while he focused on transportation. 

At the same time the county was doling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to politically well connected PR lobbyist Beth Leytham via the crony Parsons no bid contract, Merrill hired a new county Communications Director, another brand new high level staff position. While Merrill grows his bureaucracy, the county refuses to appropriately fund our roads and infrastructure.

Merrill is tainted because he's been front and center of this entire transportation initiative mess. His credibility on the transportation issue is shot and trust has been lost.

Merrill has turned the policy making power totally upside down at County Center and that must stop.

The county commissioners must protect the taxpayers and take back control and leadership of our local transportation issue. 

The county commissioners must disengage themselves from the cronies, the lobbyists and the special interests pushing a sales tax hike agenda.

The county commissioners must remove Mike Merrill from the transportation issue.

Because integrity must be brought back to the transportation issue.

Go Hillsborough Goes Rogue

The Transportation Policy Leadership Group (PLG) meeting was cancelled for August. 

At the July 26 PLG meeting, the county commissioners took a ceremonial vote. They voted to continue pursuing the 30 year half-cent $3.5 BILLION sales tax hike proposed by Parsons Brinckerhoff and County Administrator Mike Merrill at the June 11th PLG meeting. 

So what happened in August instead of a PLG meeting?

Go Hillsborough campaign decided to double down. Go Hillsborough decides to pursue a full one-cent $7 BILLION sales tax increase during their last taxpayer funded meetings to buy votes throughout the county. 

The timing was perfect. Many families are focusing on getting their children ready for a new school year not this issue. Great way to entice the transit supporters who support huge tax increases for high cost solutions to get out and voice "their" support for a full cent tax increase.

Was this one-cent sales tax hike ever proposed to the PLG and county commissioners?  No

Did the PLG or the county commissioners ever discuss a one-cent sales tax hike?  No.

Did the PLG or the county commissioners ever take any vote to pursue a one-cent sales tax hike?  No.

The Go Hillsborough PR lobbyist Beth Leytham simply sent out a Press Release Monday announcing their new plan wanting a one-cent sales tax increase. 

Go Hillsborough goes rogue and
wants a full cent tax hike

Leytham had NO governing authority to send out this Press Release.

I have not found ONE elected official or policy maker who authorized this Press Release. 

This decision was orchestrated by the County Administrator Mike Merrill and the cronies behind the green curtain outside of any Sunshine.

As the TBT reported

County Administrator Mike Merrill said officials received strong feedback in support of putting the half-cent option on the 2016 ballot but also recognized that the 1-cent tax would have a more significant impact on solving the county's transportation woes. 

"Now, we want to make sure that our citizens … understand what a half-percent actually can fund," Merrill said, "and the critically important projects it cannot." 

"The idea is to make sure people understand the difference of what you can get with the half and here's what you can potentially get with the full," Clifford said. "We want to make sure there's no expectations or misunderstandings of what a half-cent provides."

This one-cent tax hike was a unilateral decision made by an unelected bureaucrat Mike Merrill, a taxpayer funded consultant Bob Clifford and PR lobbyist Beth Leytham. 

Remember Clifford resigned from TBARTA, part of the 2010 rail cartel, last May. He conveniently went to work for Parsons Brinckerhoff right before Parsons was handed their million dollar no bid blank check last September. Leytham is a political insider who was rail cheerleader Mayor Buckhorn's PR campaign consultant and a close associate of commissioner Ken Hagan.

Go Hillsborough has now gone rogue.

The Eye predicted this when we posted here about the cronies taking over our transportation initiative.

The Go Hillsborough campaign is out of control. Unelected bureaucrats and crony consultants and PR lobbyists are dictating policy changes in the middle of their campaign game. They do not have the authority to do that. 

The county commissioners have lost control of this initiative. 

County Administrator Mike Merrill continues to act as an unelected County Mayor and overstep the boundaries of his unelected bureaucrat authority. His authority, as defined by our County Charter, is only to IMPLEMENT the policies of the elected officials NOT dictate policy. Merrill politicized this issue, awarded contracts to cronies and helped create the mess this campaign is now in.

Who will be held accountable for this corrupted Go Hillsborough process?

Do our county commissioners care? If they do, they will shut down the Go Hillsborough campaign immediately. 

If they don't, at least we now know Go Hillsborough's Plan B: Double down on Failure!

And we'll all be losers.