oig preliminary report

8/11/2019 Oig Preliminary Report

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/oig-preliminary-report 1/35

B

H

) \ \

R

0

F F1 E

)I · I II r t ls

p ECT ) H c E \ ERA L

P RELIMJNARY R POR T

R

: N ISCONDUCTBY D

EE

RFIE

L

B E CH A1AYOR J

EANRO

SUMMARY

In May 2014, the Broward Office of the Inspector General (OIG) began an investigation based on

allegations that City of Deerfield Beach (City) Mayor Jean Robb misused her elected position. The

OIG had received allegations that Mayor Robb, in her official capacity, improperly solicited two

charitable donations made by the owner (Owner) of a local luxury automobile dealership.

Although the OIG investigation did not substantiate those particular allegations, we detennined

that after the Owner made the charitable donations, the Mayor used her position

to

attempt

to

obstruct the City's code enforcement efforts involving the dealership. Specifically, Mayor Robb

told a Broward heriffs Office Deputy who was the City's code enforcement officer that I want

you

to

leave [the dealership] a l o n ~ He

just

gave me two 500 checks.

The investigation also uncovered other instances of misconduct by Mayor Robb, to wit: (1) using

her position to obtain benefits for her church and pastor by directing City s taff to issue an

employee parking sticker to the pastor, and to use City employees and equipment to clean the

church's parking lot; (2) attempting to block the City from awarding a contract to a vendor he

personall y disfavored; (3) unilaterally committing the City to pay for transportation for a Little

League baseball team in circumvention of procedures that required the participation and approval

of City employees; and (4) attempting to personally direct the duties

of

the City Purchasing

Manager. In furtherance

of

her aims, Mayor Robb repeatedly personally dir cted and attempted

to

personally direct the duties of City employees- and committed City resources in

so

doing

without the requisite knowledge or authorization

of

the City Manager,

as

plainly required by the

City's charter and code.

The OIG also received allegations that Mayor Robb accepted a gift valued at over $50 and

misappropriated gifts given to the City, but those allegations wer not substantiated by the

investigation. In addition, the OIG received a

ll

egations that Mayor Robb violated Florida' s

Sunshine laws by attempting to block residents' emails and by using her personal email address

to communicate with City staff, but those allegations were unfounded.

The

OIG investigation established probable cause to believe that Mayor Robb engaged in acts

of

ethical misconduct. The OIG wi ll be referring this matter to the Florida Commission on Ethics,

and

the

City, for their independent as essment

of

the application

of

state and local ethics laws.

ection 2 .0 I(A)(2) of the Cha ier of

Brow

ard County (Charter) defines misconduct to include any violation ofan y state

statute or code, any violation ofany county or municipal ordinance or code , or conduct involving corruption or abu se.

OI

G 14-0 17

October 2, 2014

Page

1

of

22



HHO\\ \IUJ 011 f I

()I

'' I I

() {

l \ l

PRELIMINARY

R

EPORT

RE:

MISCONDUCT

BY

CITY OF

D

EERFI

E

LD

BE

C

I-1/viAYOR J

E N

R OBB

name of the charitable organization, the event for which the funds were solicited, and

the name of any individual or entity that may have promoted the solicitation. The fo

rm

shall be filed for public inspection. . ..

3. The requirements and prohibitions oftbis subpati ball not apply to actions

of

an

Elected Official in connection with charities or fundrais ing events sponsored by the

official s governmental entity. . ..

Limits on the A uthority

of

he

A1

a

yo

r ofDeerfield Beach

The Deerfield Beach City Charter expressly limits the manner in which the Mayor is allowed to

interact with city officers and employees, nan1ely, that such interaction be made through the City

Manager. These limitations clearly manifest the intent

of

the Chatier to separate the City s

legislative functions from those of the executive.

2

City Charter§ 3.06, Mayor and vice mayor,

provides:

(a) Mayor. The mayor shall pre ide at meetings of the commission and shall be recognized

as head

of

the city government for all ceremonial purposes; ... and as the city official

designated to

represent the city in all agreements with other governmental entities or

certifications to other governmental entities but shall have no administrative duties

except as required to carry out the esponsibilities herein (Emphasis added).

City Charter§ 3.09, Prohibitions, states in relevant part:

(3) Oversight

of

administration. Except for the purpose

of

inquiries a11d investigations, the

commission or its members hall deal with city officers and employees who are subject

to

the direction and supervision of he City Manager solely through the City Manager,

and

neither the commission nor its members shall give order

to

any such officer or

employee, either publicly or privately. (Emphasis added). othing in th foregoing is

to be construed to prohibit individual members of the commission from examining by

question and personal observation all aspects

of

city government operations so as

to

obtain independent information to assist the member in the formulation of policie

to

be con

id

ered by the commission and assure the implementation of such policies as

have been adopted.

t is the expre s intent of his provi ion, however, that such inquiry shall not interfere

directly with the regular municipal operations of he city and that recommendations for

change or improvement in city government operations be made to and through the City

Manager. (Emphasis added).

2

The Charter limitatio ns were

imposed on

February 14 1989 during Mayor Robb s first turn in office.

OIG

14-01 7

Octobet·

2,

2014

of22



B HO\\

\ Ul Ott I

I <

ll

II ( \...,1 1 < I

OH

<.t I H \1

PR LIMINA

Y

R EPORT

RE

:

MISCO

NDUCT BY CITY

OF

D

EERF

IELD B E CH M YOR l

E

R OBB

Misuse

of

Public Position

The Florida Ethics

Code

prohibits a public officer from using and attempting to use her official

position to secure a personal benefit for herself, or for others. F.S . § 112.313 , Standards

of

conduct

for public officers, employees

of

agencies, and local government attorneys, states in pertinent part:

(6) Misuse of Public Po ition.- To public officer, employee

of

an agency, or local

government attorney shall cotTuptly use or attempt to use his

or

her official position or any

property or resource wh ich may be within his or her trust, or perform his or her official

duties, to ecure a special privilege,

benefit

, or exemption for

him

se

lf

, herse

lf

, or others.

F. . 11 2.3 12, Definitions, describes corruptl

y

as:

(9) Corruptly means done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining, or

compensating or receiving c

ompe

nsation for, any benefit resu lting from some act or

omission

of

a public servant which is inconsistent with the proper performance

of

his or her

public duties

The Deerfield Beach City Code of Ethics (City

Et

hics Code) mirrors the state prohibition

ofthe

use, and attempted use, of official position for either personal gain or gain fo r others. City Code§

2-502, Required and prohibited conduct, states in relevant pati:

(e) A regulated officer shall not use

or

attempt to use his or her official position to

improperly or unreaso nably requ est, grant or obtain in any manner any privileges,

advantages, benefits or exemptions for themselves or others that are not available to

those generally avai lable to city residents or which are not specifically incident to their

position and the conduct

of

their public duties. . ..

(p) A regu lated officer sha ll not, directly or indirectly, induce, encourage, or aid anyone to

violate any provision of this ethics code.

cce

ptance o Gifts

The Broward Ethics

Code

and the City Ethics Code both imp

ose

limits on the source and value of

the

gifts received by regulated individuals such as the Mayor. The Broward Ethics Code states

that:

ec. 1

-1

9(c), tandards of Conduct.

(

1

Acceptance

of

Gifts.

(a) Elected Officia ls

...

shall n

ot

accept gifts, directly or indirectly , regardless of value,

from lobbyists registered with the governmental entity on who e behalf they (or their

spouse, regi tered

domestic

partner, or relati e) serve, or from any principal or

OIG 14-01 7

October 2, 2014

of

22

----



\ IW 11 < I JI 1111 ( \ ,1 1 <

I

( ) I { < 1

\

I I

{

\ I

PRELl 11NAR Y R EPORT

RE: lv ISCONDUCT

BY CITY

OF

DE

E

RFI

ELD B

E C

H

J'r A

YOR J E N R OBB

emp loyer of any such registered lobbyist, or from vendors or contractors of such

governmental entity

(b) Elected Officials may accept gifts from other sources given

to

them in their official

capacity, where not otherwise inconsistent with the provisions of Florida tatutes

Chapter 112, Part III, up to a maximum valu e of 50.00 per occunence. Gifts given

to

an Elected Official in his or her official capacity up to $50.00 in value are deemed

to

be

de minimis

The City Ethics Code, D.B.C. Code§ Sec. 2-502, Required and prohibited conduct, states in part:

(o)(l) A regulated officer ... sha ll not accept a gift as defined in F.

S.

§ 112.312 in excess of

50.00 (during any calendar year) from any person or entity that a regulated officer

mows, or has reason to believe, has received or sought a land use plan amendment,

development permit (other than a building permit) or contract or the payment of city

funds from the city within the previous two years or within six months of the date the

regulated officer assumed his or her respective office, wh ichever is shorter.

INVESTIGATIO N

This investigation was predicated on information alleging that Mayor Robb engaged in misconduct

by misusing her elected position. The OrO investigation ubstantiated the

inf

ormation

by

finding

that Mayor Robb attempted to use her position to obstruct City code enforcement efforts involving

a local dealership that donated to her chosen causes; used her position to obtain benefits for her

church and pa tor; attempted

to

block the City from awarding a contract to a vendor he personally

disfavored; unilaterally committed the City to pay for transportation for a Little League baseball

team; and attempted to personally direct the duties of the City Purcha ing Manager. The OrO

investigation did not substantiate allegations that Mayor Robb improperly solicited two charitable

donations, accepted a gift valued at over $50, or misappropriated gifts given to the City.

In

addition, allegations received by the

oro

that Mayor Robb violated Florida's Sunshine laws were

unfounded.

This investigation included the examination by OIG Special Agents of substantial materials

including Parks and Recreation Department logs; City Commission minutes; City Commission

aud io and video recordings; ity emails and correspondence; and materials obtained through

internet research. oro pecial Agents also conducted interviews

of

numerous current and fom1er

City staff, several witnesses from the BSO, Mayor Robb s church pastor, and Mayor Robb.

3

3

OIG

pec

ial Agents originally interviewed Mayor Robb

in

fay 2014. After we di scovered

ftmh

er info

rmati

on that

implicated her in misconduct,

she

declined

ow·

invitation to interview a second time.

OIC

14-017

October 2,

2014

of 22



Ill

\\

\ W ) I I I

c

I

m

I l l [ ..,I I

c

I

<

i{

( , I '\ I{

\1

PR

ELIMINARY

REPORT

RE:

MI

SCONDUCT BY CITY OF D

EERFIELD

B

E CH

M

Y

OR l E N ROBB

Jllfayo r Robb

Did

ot Improperly Solicit Charitable Donations

The OIG [nvest[gation commenced after we received allegations

th

at the owner

of

a luxury

automobile dealer hip

in the City gave Mayor Robb or the City $1,000 in charitable donations, and

that Mayor Robb then donated the money to charities of her choice. This raised a concern about

whether

Mayor

Robb violated the Broward Ethics Code s limitations on charitable

so

licitations,

and whether she

ma

y have misappropriated money intended fo r the City.

On May 14, 2013 , Ma

yo

r Robb acknowledged to OIG Special Agents that at the May 6, 20

14

, City

Commission meeting, she announced her receipt and

di

sbmsement

of

donations

to

two local

organizations. They were the Deerfield Beach Hi torical Society, a nonprofit that identifies, preserves,

and main tains historical sites in the City, and Family Central, Inc. (FCI), a nonprofit that provides

childcare education, childcare, and referral services.

4

Mayor Robb explained that a friend

of

hers had

informed her

th

at the owner

of

Domani Motors asked

to

meet her, and her friend thereafter arranged

the

mee

ting at the dealership. She said this was the first time she had ever met the Owner.

Hi

s wi

fe

wa

also

pr

esent at the meeting. After the Owner asked Mayor Robb if she had any local

recommendations fo r the receipt of charitable donations, she suggested the Hi torical Society a

nd FC

I.

Th

e Owner' s wife then exited and returned a short time later with a $500 corporate check made

payable

to

each of those organizations, both dated May 5, 20

14.

(See non-executed copies

of

the

checks, attached as Exhibit 1)

Thereafter, Mayor Robb mailed the checks to the charities, each wit h a cover Jetter on City stationery

that began, I had the occasion to meet with [the Owne

r] ofDom

ani Motors who wished to make a

contribution to whatever worthy cause I determined. (Exhibit 2) The letters also said that she

intended to honor the Owner for thi act at the May 20, 20

14

, Commis ion meeting. Thereafter,

Mayor Rob b did present certificates

of

recognition

to

the Owner and hi s wife at the May 20 meeting.

Duri

ng

her interview, Mayor Robb stated that she could not recall

the

date or time

of

the meeting,

but

that she had filed a Broward Ethics Code Charitable Contribution Fundraising Di sclosure Form not ing

the donations . he then arranged for a City

staff

member to deliver a copy

of

a disclosure form to OIG

Special Agents. The

fo

rm noted the date

of

solicitation as May 4,

20

14.

5

•

6

(Exhibit 3)

Mayo r Robb stated that neither the dealership nor the Owner had any current or pending matters

before the Commission. She also stated that she did not know whether they had any pending code

enforceme

nt matters. She further stated that the City s budget included a li ne item for

contributions to FC

I,

and that the Historical ociety had received C

it

y funding in the past.

4

FCI

and the

Hi sto

ric

al ociety websites repo rt

th

at they are

regi

stered under

the

Interna l Revenue Code as 50 I(c)(3) not

fo

r- profit

tax exempt corporations.

Flo ri da

corporate records identified the organ iza tion as Florida nonprofit corporations,

and n

eithe

r Mayor

Robb nor any

el

ec

t

ed

City official

was

a

co

rp

orate officer or

board

member

of

e

ith

er or

gan

izati

on

.

The Cl

erk

informed us that the Mayor passed the form to her during the May 6, 20 14, Comm iss ion meeting and that she

had inadve rtently

fai

led to date stamp and

file

the form for pub lic inspection (that is, po st it on

the

City's sea rchable

internet database) . The Cle

rk

remedied these deficiencies following our inquiry about

them

in August 20 14.

6

Mayor obb tol d the OIG tha t the City Attorney adv ised her

to

complete the form noting the donations. The City

Attorney. who was present for Mayor Robb's interview, explained that he

did

not

believe the circumstances requir

ed

the

disclo su re

fom

but, in an abundance of caution and in the in terests of transparency, he adv ise d the Mayor

to

file

it.

OIG 14- 017

October

2,

2014

of22



IW\\

\ W 0111 I 0 1 \-.P I C l 0 1 C I I H \ I

PRELIMIN RY REPORT

R.E:

MISCONDUCT BY CITY OF D EERFIE

L

BE CH M YOR ROBB

Manager confim

1

ed to OIG Special Agents that the C i t ~ had budgeted contributi_on to

'torical ociety in fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 2003, and that 1t had b ~ d g e t e d .15 ,0?0 m .

December 2013. He stated that the City had also provided in-kind d o n a ~ 1 n

.to

H: toncal .

oc1ety.

He fu rther stated that, since at lea t 1998, FCI wa in a contractual relat10n hrp w1th t h ~ C1ty to.

provide social services such as childcare for local low-income families. In 2014, the I ~ y provtded

9,000 in local matching funds to FCI in conjunction with funding from the Federal Ch1ld Care

Block Grant and Early Learning Coalition of Broward.

The OIG s investigation concluded that the Mayor's conduct may have constituted a charitabl

solicitation and that there may have been an understanding between the parties for a direct or indire

benefit. However, we also concluded that, because the City in fact sponsored these charitable entit

she met the exception

to

the limitations on charitable fundraising

as

enumerated in the Broward Et

Code. Accordingly, the allegations that Mayor Robb improperly so licited charitable donations wer

not substantiated.

lvfayor Robb Improperly ttempted

to

Influence Code Enforceme

nt

Efforts

The

Owner acknowledged

to

OIG pecial Agents that his dealership had been the subject of

ongoing code enforcement efforts for parking code violations, although he did not believe that

there were any outstanding code violations at the time of his meeting with Mayor Rob

b.

The last

enforcement action he could recall had been approximately two months ear

li

er. He stated that,

during the meeting, he did not discuss code enforcement issues or violations related to his bu iness

with the Mayor, ask for her assistance, or suggest that she peak to code enforcement officials on

his behalf regarding any pending or future matter .

The OIG met with a Broward

heriffs

Office Deputy who

is

the field supervisor of the City Code

Enforcement Di vi ion (the Deputy). According to the Deputy, Code Enforcement had i sued the

dealership code violation warnings a number of times for what he described as minor violations

regarding where it can park its vehicles. Among other re tricted area , the Owner had been

parking vehicles on the property

of

Florida Power and Light (FPL) without expre s permission.

On April 23, 2014 the dealership received two warnings for parking on vacant lots, but a May 6,

2014, inspection determined that there was compliance, and Code Enforcement was not going

forward

in

that matter.

The

Deputy told us that, one or two days prior to the May 6, 2014, City Commission meeting,

Mayor Robb called him and said, [Deputy] , I want you to leave Domani Motors alone. He just

gave

me

two 500 checks. The Deputy stated that he notified Mayor Robb of the

violations-

which he did not describe in detail

to

h r and she then replied that the Owner told her he had

permission to park on the FPL property, o that the dealership wa not in violation. The Deputy

responded to Mayor Robb that he would talk

to

the Owner but he informed u that he later thought

that could be con idered improper, given the involvement of Mayor Robb and the fact that the

parking violations were actually another code inspector's job responsibilities. The Deputy told u

that

he

believed the purpose ofMayor Robb's call was to influence the code enforcement effolis

regarding the dealership, but he stated that it would not.

OlG

14-017

October

2, 2014

of 22



B

{ 0 \ \

\ W

) I I

I ( I l I I I II 1\

"

I I ( I l I{ , I \ { \ I

PR ELIMINARY

R EPORT

RE: MISCONDUCT BY CITY OF D

EERF

IELD B E CH M YOR J E N ROBB

On May 14

, 2014, in response to a question from an OIG Special Agent about whether she was

aware whether there were pending code vio lations, she said she was not. Contrary to Mayor

Robb' s sta

tem

ent to the Deputy regarding her conversation with

the

Owner, the Owner denied to

OIG Special Agents that they had di cussed the parking problem .

The Deputy stated to OIG Special Agents that he immediately informed the BSO

li

eutenant in hi

chain

of

comm

and about the ubstance

of

Mayor

Robb s

call. ome days later, the Deputy

s

Captain received a telephone call from Mayor Robb, who asked him to tell the Deputy to disregard

what she had sa id.

7

The Captain told OIG Special Agents that, at the time he received the

telephone call , although the ca

ll

was brief and he did not under tand the context of her request, he

did not think it was unusual behavior for Mayor Robb. He contacted the Deputy and conveyed

th

e

message. The Deputy later explained to the Captain that Mayor Robb initially telephoned him (the

Deputy) and told him to back

off

the dealership , and that Mayor Robb s contact with the Captain

was related to that te lephone call. The Captain told us that he instructed the Deputy not to back off

enforcement efforts against the dealership.

The

D

ep

uty also informed the interim City Director ofPla1

ming

and Development ervices (the

PO

Director

,

who

oversees the City's interests in code enforcement matters, about Mayor Robb

s

call

approximately one week prior to the May 20, 2014,

Comm

ission meeting during which she presented

certificates of recognition to the Owner for his donation . The PDS Director acknowledged that the

Deputy had called her and informed her about Mayor Robb s call to him to stop picking on the

dea

lership for code enforcement, that they were good people, and they had given money to local

ch

ar iti

es.

he told OIG Special Agents that during a May

14

ag nda preparation meeting for the

May

20 Co mmiss ion meeting, she informed the City's management staff, the City Attorney, the City Clerk,

and the City Manager about Mayor R

obb s ca

ll to the Deputy.

The

0 IG investigation found probable cause to believe that Mayor Robb engaged in misconduct in

viol

at

ion

of

the Florida Ethics Code and the City Ethics Code when she improperly attempted

to

influence the code enforcement efforts affecting the Owner

of

a dealership w

ho

made $1,000 in

donations to two local charities

of

her choice, for which she took credit. he used her official position

in an at

tempt

to

obtain benefits

fo

r the Owner and his dealership that are not genera

ll

y ava

il

able to

City

res

idents, through actions that were inconsistent with the proper perform ance of her lawful duties.

Fina lly, her attempt to have the Deputy disregard her actions evidenced that she understood what she

had do ne was wrong.

A fayo

r Robb Improperly Procured a City Parki

ng

Sticker

and City

Cleaning Services

The OI

determined during the inves

ti

gation that Mayor Robb directed City staff to issue, at no

charge, an employee parks and recreation parking sticker (PR sticker) to the pastor of Saint Ambrose

Church, of

wh

ich she is a pari hioner. The City did not make avail

ab

le the PRS sticker to City

res idents at any price; a resident parking sticker, with significantly lesser privileges, would cost a City

7

By

then,

the OIG had begun its inquiry including, on or about May 7, 2014, contacting Mayo r Robb's office and

leavin

g a

message requesting she discuss the Owner's donations with

us.

ore 14-01 7

October

2, 2014

of22



BHO\\

\1{1)

0111

< I <II 1\ 1 1

<

I

ClH , f

'\ I H \I

PRELIM

NARY

R EPORT

RE : MISCONDUCT BY

CITY

OF DEERFIELD BE CH M YOR JE N R O

resident $100 for one year.

8

( ee sample PRS sticker, attached

as

Exhibit 4). We also determined that

Mayor Robb directed City staff to employ City personnel and equipment to clean the St. Ambrose

church parking lot for free.

pecifically, the Parks and Recreation Department (PRD) Director stated that in the fall of2013,

without prior notice, Mayor Robb presented herself at the PRD office and asked for a parking sticker

for

the

Pastor. She made it clear that she wa refening to a PRS sticker and not a resident beach

sticker, and told the PRD Director that she thought the City had previously i sued aPR stick r

to

the

Pastor. The PRD Director replied that she had never issued a PRS to the Pastor or any other person

who

was

not a City official or City staff, but that she would check. Mayor Robb re ponded to the

PRD Director, in the presence of her staff, Make sure you follow up. The PRD Director told OIG

Special Agents that she believed Mayor Robb was implying that she would be

in

trouble if she did not

i sue the PRS sticker to the Pastor. The Director said that none of her staff could recall the Pastor

previously receiving a PRS sticker.

The PR

Director stated that, within five to ten minutes after leaving her office, Mayor Robb called

back

and

confinned that what she wanted was a PRS sticker for the Pastor and that she would

immediately be returning to the PRD office to get

it.

Within minutes

of

the telephone call, Mayor

Robb, in fact, returned. She provided the Pastor

s

vehicle description and tag number to the PRD

Director . The PRD Director then gave Mayor Robb the PRS sticker for the Pastor. The PRD Director

told the

OIG

that she felt obligated to comply with Mayor

Robb s

request, and a few days after she

issued the PRS sticker she informed the City Manager about it.

The City Manager informed

OIG

Special Agents that his office staff told him that Mayor Robb

contacted the office requesting that the Pastor be issued aPR sticker.

He

stated that he did not intend

to give the Pastor a PRS sticker, because they are only for elected officials and staff, and

he

did not

respond back to Mayo r Robb. The City Manager said that, some days later during a City directors

meeting, t

he

PRD Director told him that she

is

ued the Pastor a PRS sticker at the Mayor's request.

The

City Manager decided that, since the PRS sticker had already been

is

sued and given to the Pastor,

he was not going to seek its return.

The Pa tor told us that, orne months ago, he found a new parking

st

icker on his desk. He wa not

certain if he had requested it or to whom he made any such request. After he became aware that

someone made an issue of it , he removed it. The Pastor acknowledged speaking to the City

Manager about the sticker, saying that he never needed one in the past and, since removing it, he

will

pay

to park.

With regard to the City's cleaning of the

t.

Ambrose Church parking lot, the Environmental

Services Department (ESD) Assi ta.nt Director stated that sometime around Lent (March 5 to April

20, 2014), l1e received a telephone call from Mayor Robb, who requested that he assign a street

8

The

City

provides residents with beach parking stickers

for an

annual

fee

of$100. The

se

permit residents

to park in

designated areas. The PRD issues PRS stickers to City emp loyees and officials whose City duties would require them

to

park

their

personal vehicles at the City beach and parks. A PRS st icker a

llows

its ho lder to park at otherwise restricted

or

prohibited parking areas. The

PRS

sticker

can be

affixed only one time

and

is normally destroyed

when

removed.

O IG 14-017

October 2, 20 14

of 22



IJIHJ\\

\1{1}

01

11< I

( ) f 1111

' ' ' 1 )

{

( , f

II

{

\ I

PRELIMINA

RY R EPORT

RE: MISCO

NDUCT

BY CITY OF

D EERFIELD B

E C

H

M YOR

J

E N

R OBB

sweeper

to

service the parking lot of the church prior

to

6 a.m. the next day. He did not direct

Mayor Robb

to

the City Manager or his supervisor, but rather agreed to arrange for the cleaning

because he considered her request as being told to do it.

The Pastor stated that the City has swept the church parking lot for many years, particularly after

church festivals, which past mayors and city managers have approved. He said that, around Lent,

as

he had

done in the past, he called someone in the City and requested him or her

to

arrange

to

sweep the parking lot, which was done.

The

ES

D Director told the OIG that, on the Monday after its completion, theE D Assistant Director

informed him that he (the Assistant Director) had assigned a street sweeper

to

service the church. The

ESD Director stated that the City does not utilize its street sweepers

to

service private prop rty unless

the City's activities were the cause of debris deposited on the property, such as that which might result

from underground utility repairs or adjacent roadwork. He added that he could not recall authorizing

the sweeping

of

the church or any other private property parking lot, absent cause, nor could he recall

anyone else authorizing such services. The Director

sa

id that the cost to the City to sweep the church

parking lot was minimal; he said that it would have been a small job for a private service provider and

would cost about 200. Neve1iheless, the City Manager stated that, had he been asked, he would

not

have authorized the sweeping of the church parking lot.

9

The investigation found probable cause to believe that Mayor Robb engaged in misconduct when

she improper ly directed the PRD Director

to

assign employee-only parking benefits to her pa tor

and improperly directed the ESD Assistant Director to assign a City street sweeper, at taxpayer

expense, to

sweep the parking lot

of

her church. Mayor Robb's actions violated not only the

Florida Ethics Code and the City Ethics Code, but also the City Charter, because she gave orders to

employees who are subject

to

the direction and upervision of the City Manager, instead ofmak ing

her requests directly

to

him.

Mayo r Robb tte

mpt

ed

to

Ex

clude a

Ve

ndor

from

Contract

o

nsideration

The

OIG

investigation concluded that Mayor Robb engaged in furiher misconduct when she

improperly attempted

to influence the Purchasing Manager to exclude a vendor from the selection

for a pending contract, in violation

of

the City Ethics Code and Charter.

The Purchasin g Manager told OIG Special Agents that hartly after Mayor Robb took office, the

City Commission had directed that a fea ibility study be done in contemplation of transitioning

from the BSO back to a municipal police department, and

he

wa

in

the process

of

researching and

preparing the bid solicitation for the study. The Purcha ing Manager informed the OIG that the

Mayor told him that she did not want the City to permit a particular vendor

to

bid on the

solicita

ti

on

and did not want th City to award the feasib

ili

ty study contract

to

the vendor.

10

This

9

The City Man ager told the OIG that the City has used the church parking lot for specia l event parking, and in such

an

inst

ance

.

he mi

g

ht

authori

ze

the u

se of

the street sweepe

r He

also said that

the

City

ha

s

an

agreement

with the

church

for

mutua l

use of

its facilities, but the agreement does

not

include sweeping the parking lot clean.

1

The Purchasing Director could not recall the identity

of

the vendor.

ore

14-01 7

October 2, 2014

of



HI {

l \ \ \ IW 11 I I 01 I I

II .

11< I l id

rl

I H \I

PR ELIM fNA

RY

R EPOR T RE : MISCO

NDUCT 81'

CITY OF

D EERFIELD B EACH M AYOR J

E N

R OBB

was ou tside the scope of Mayo r Robb s duties and, once again, in contravention

of

the Charter s

proh ibi tio n that she not direct the Ci

ty s

administrative staff members. The Purchasing Manager

repl

ie

d

to

Mayor Robb that the City would not exc lude a vendor from the

so

licitation or selection

and that it would not deviate from the standard procurement process. He said that, after some

research, the City Commission declined to bid out the feasibi

li

ty study altogether, and the City

took no further action.

Nfayor Robb Unilate

mll

y Committed

t Te City to

Fund Tra nsportation

for

a Little League Team

The O G investigation found that

Ma

yor Robb again vio lated the City Charter by conunitting the

City

to

pay for bus transportation services fo r the City-sponsored Little League baseball team and

then directing City staffto facilitate the commitment without conferring with the City Manager or

the app ropriate department head.

In July 201 3, Mayor Robb called the City's Athletic Coordinator and

to

ld him that she had promised a

Little League team that the City would pay for a charter bus to transport it to a multi-day competition

in Tampa, Florida. The PRD Director told the OIG that the City regularly paid for such trips and, if

requested, would likely have approved the expense using the standa

rd

procedures. Although the Little

League team should have submitted the request to the City Manager or the PRD Director, the League

went di rectly to Mayor Robb, who in tum directly contacted the Athletic Coordinator. ( ee the

Athlet ic Coordinator s July 22,2013, email

to

the PRD Director de cribing Mayor Robb s call,

att

ached as Exhibit 5) In addition

to

unilatera

ll

y making the commitment

to

provide a bus for the trip

at City expense, Mayor Robb asked the Athl etic Coordinator to suggest that the City authorize $2,300

for D

av

is Tran portation (Davis) to provide the bus service. The PRD Director aid that, when she

became aware

of the request, he advised Mayor Robb that the team should have made the request

through her (the Director) or the City Manager. We observed that Davis ' s written proposal of July 22,

2013. (Ex hibit 6) bears the facsimile header

of

Mayor Robb s personal fax number. The proposal also

lists '· 1ayor Jean Robb s Group as the proposed clie

nt.

The PRD Director ultimately did approve

Davis as the vendor, which received approximately 2,900 due to the trip b ing an extended an extra

day .

I

Nfayor Robb Improperly A ttempted to Dh·ect th e Duties oftlze Purc wsing Manager

The inYestigation found that Mayor Robb imprope

rl

y attempted to direct the duties of the Purchasing

Manage

r, in violation of the City Charter. The Purchasing Manager stated that in late 20 13 or early

20 14.. whil e he was a member of a multi-departmental committee

to

conduct a citywide parking study

to modemize parking revenue and enforcement efforts, he received a telephone call from Mayor Robb.

he

r

eq

uested that he research the installation

of

parking meter at the Cove

Pl

aza parking lot

to

generate City revenue and asked him to determine how much the City should charge for parking in

that area. The Purchasing Manager told us that he advised her that

th

e setting of parking fees was a

City

or

dinan

ce

Sec. 38 -126(a), grants department heads the authority to purchase goods and se rvices which are less than

$2,500

for a single purchase, subject to a valid current appropriation

for the

items

to

be purchased. The

OIG

did

not

review

the

detai Is of the trip expenditures, and the re lationship between Mayor Robb

and

Davis, if any, was not a focus of

the invesrigat ion.

OIG

14-017

October

2, 2014

Page l l

o

f22



\ \ \ 01 1 \ -1 1< I id \ I H \

PR ELIM

NA

RY R EPORT RE : M ISCONDUCT

BY CITY

OF D EERFIELD BE CH

M YOR

J

E N

R

OBS

City Commission policy decision and beyond the scope

of

his position but agreed to look at what

infon11ation was available on parking systems.

The

Pu

rchasing Manager stated that he later attended a January

28,20

14, City Conunission meeting at

which Mayor Robb publicly commented on the request she made

of

him. At that time, the City

Manager openly advised her that

she

should direct her requests thJough him, and he would then assign

the request to the appropriate staff. He offered to continue working with her, saying,

You've

asked

me

for th ings, and

I've

tumed around and given them to you in a quick manne

r.

12

Rather than asse1i

any defense or explanati

on

to the act

of

going around the City Manager, Mayor Robb merely replie

d,

I h

ave

some things I

haven

' t gotten, yet.

A ayor Robb Did Not Accept a Gift Valued Over 50 or iVJisappropriate Gifts Given to th e City

The OI G

received an allegation that, in her official capacity, Mayor Robb received toys from a

local toy manufacturer valued at over $50, in violation

of

the Broward Ethics Code, Sec. 1-

19(c)(l

). The

OIG received a second tip alleging that the toys were a gift to the City and that

Mayor Robb appropriated them by giv ing them to a family

of

her own choice, without

Commission approval.

The

inves tigation did not substantiate the allegations.

We

determined that, at the March 4, 2014, City Commission meeting, representatives

of

a toy

manufacturer headquartered in the City were present to recei

ve

recognition from the City

Commission for the company having rece ived an award from the To y Industry Association. At the

meeting, tl1e company representatives gave two toys directly to Mayor Robb. A verbal exchange

between the Mayor and the company representatives ensued, as follows:

3

Company:

Mayor:

Company:

Mayor:

Compan

y:

Mayor:

Mayor, we've got some gifts for you (unintelligible)- the hottest toy

of

the

year.

I hope

it's

not wo1ih

mor

e than $50.

No (laughing) - no, no it

's

not - it

's

this big, big, big play set for girls who

want

to

pretend to be Doc Me tuffin and actually (unintelligible) their toys.

My six kids and 11 grandchildren thank you.

There

's more

, here

's

a doll from last year (unintelligible).

Anybody have any grandchi ldren that a re that age (speaking to the dais)?

Th

e recorded statements

of

the company representat ives indicated that they gave the toys directly

to Mayor Robb, and they made no statements that suggested they intended the toys to be gifts to

the Ci

ty.

None

of

the Commissioners made any comment that he or she understood otherwise.

The City Manager's statement is e c o r d e d on the 28, 2014, City Com mission meeting video at 03: 12:00.

The \ Ideo

commences at

00:06:5).

It cannot be conclus1ve ly dete

rmm

ed from the video which company representat ive

was

spea

king.

OI G 14

-01

7

October 2, 20 14

o f22



HIW \

\\ W

11

I < I l l I I l l \ -. 1 < I <ll< C t ' \ I I {

\1

PRELII\ INARY REPORT

RE:

MiSCONDUCT BY CITY OF D EERFIELD B EACH

M YOR

J

E N

R OBB

----------------------------------------

~

2 Interview

of

he Deputy Sheriff

and

de Enforcement Supervisor

The Deputy stated that he has been involved in the code enforcement function for the City

almost continuously since 1997, when the City contracted with BSO for its serv

ic

es. He

currently supervises the BSO civilian code enforcement inspectors. The Deputy's duties

include reviewing code inspection reports, reviewing enforcement action

s,

responding to

inquiries and complaints, attending commissioners '

di

strict and regular Commission meetings,

and attending special magistrate hearings related to code enforcement matters. The Deputy

stated that the goal

of

code enforcement ac

ti

ons is compliance.

The Deputy said that he was famil iar with Domani Motors and its owner, who have generally

come into compliance, except on one occasion, when a matter was brought before the code

enforcement magistrate, who ruled in part for the dealership and in part for the City. The City

had warned the dealership a number of times for what the Deputy described as minor

violations, generally the result

of

site plan restrictions, wh ich operate to limit the location

where Domani Motors can park its vehicles. In addition, the dealership had been parking

vehicles

on

the property ofFPL, without its express permission.

l he

Deputy was present for the May 6, 20 14 , City Commission meeting when Mayor Robb

announced that she received two $500 donations from Dom

ani

Motors for two local causes, the

Historical Society and FCI. The Deputy stated that a day or two prior to the May 6 meeting, he

received a telephone call at

hi

s office directly from the Mayor. The Deputy said that Mayor

Robb to ld him, [Deputy], I want you to leave Domani Motors alone. He just gave me two

$500

checks. The Deputy told her that the dealership had code vio lations pending. Mayor

Robb spontaneous ly rep

li

ed that the Owner said he had permis ion to park on the FPL property

and that the dealership was not in violation . The Deputy said he then told her that FPL denied

gi Ying

the dealership such permission. He informed us that, based on his knowledge

of

Mayor

Robb and the fact that her call was not preceded by or related to any other s

ubj

ect, he

be

lieved

t

he

purpose

of

her call was to influence code enforcement efforts regarding the dealership. The

Deputy said that he did not feel intimidated by Mayor Robb 's conversation, and fe lt

he

had the

supp01t ofBSO ' s administration.

The Deputy said that, some days following Mayor Robb's phone call , the Captain telephoned

him and informed him that he had

ju

st finished speaking to

her,

and she asked that

he

tell

the

Deputy to disregard what she had said . At the time, the Captain was not aware

of

the context

of her request and message. The Deputy observed that the request to disregard could not have

been related to any matter other than the Mayor Robb ' s request that

he

leave Domani Motors

alone .

The Deputy stated that he has not had any further contact

wit

h Mayor Robb since the telephone

call, and he was unaware

of

her contacting any code enforcement

in

spector or any BSO staff

o ther than the Captain) regarding the dealership. The Deputy stated that the Captain directed

that there would be

no

change in e

nf

orcement efforts re lated

to

the dealership, and

he

did not

tell the code inspector respons ible for the dealership area about the call.

OI G 14 -01 7

October 2, 20 14

Page IS o

f22



~ J \ \ \ I W O I I

<ll

h l ' l < I JJl (, l {\

PR ELl

1I

NA RY R

EPORT

R :

M ISCONDUCT B Y

CITY

OF D EERFIELD B E CH

M YOR

l

E N

R OBB

The Deputy stated that it was not

unusua

l to receive a telephone ca

ll

from a City commissioner

regarding code enforcement issues, but that he received more calls from the Mayor. He said

that, in no other case, has a commi ioner improperly attempted to influence code enforcement

action.

3 In terview of he BSO District C

hi

ef and Captain

The Captain (who is also the District Chief) stated that, sometime in May 2014, Mayor Robb

ca lled

him

and asked him to te

ll

the Deputy to disregard what they had talked about. The

Captain aid that, at the time he received the telephone ca

ll

, he did not

know

the context

of

her

request.

He

aid that he did not consider the brevity

of

the call unusual for her. In response to

t

he Mayor Robb s

telephone ca

ll

, he called the Deputy and informed him

of

hermes age.

Some

days later, the Captain received a telephone call from the lieutenant who is in the chain

of

conunand between the Deputy and the Captain. The lieutenant told the Captain that he

had

l

eame

d that Mayor Robb had spoken to the Deputy about Domani

Motors s

code violations.

The Captain stated that, sometime before the May City Commission meeting when the owners

of

the

dea

ler hip received recognition for donating to a local cause, the Deputy told him that

t

he

donations from the dealership were related to the telephone call that the Captain had

received from

Mayor

Robb a few weeks earlier. The Deputy told the Captain that she had

initially telephoned

him

and told him to back off the dealership, and that her call to the Captain

was related to that call. The Captain stated that he then infonned the Deputy that they would

not

be

backing

off

enforcement efforts.

4

In terv

ie

w of

th

e Planning and Development Services Dir

ec

tor

The PD Director stated that the City contracts ou t code enforcement responsibilities to the

BSO, and that the City considers the Deputy to be the supervisor

of

the day-to-day

enforcement efforts. It is her job, in consultation with the City Manager and the City Attorney,

to ad vi e the Deputy on the interpretation and application

of

the City s ordinances.

The PD Director stated that, during a discuss ion with the Deputy about Domani Motors in

May, he to ld her that he had received a telephone call from Mayor Robb. he could not quote

the conversation but said that the Deputy told her that Mayor Robb asked him why he wa

picking on the dealership and declared to him that they were good people and had given money

to local chari ties.

The PDS Director took no action at the time; however, during a May

14

, agenda preparation

meeting for the fay 20, 2014, City Co1m11ission meeting, she observed that the owners of

Domani Motors were

on

the agenda to receive a presentation from Mayor Robb for their

donations She stated that it was dur ing this meeting, attended by the City s management staff,

the City Attorney, City Clerk and the City Manager, that she told the group about Mayor

Robb s

telephone ca

ll

to the Deputy.

OIG

14-017

October

2, 201 4

P

ag

e

16

o

f22



B

H<l\\ \ lUI Oi l I(

I ( ) j 11 (\-..1 1 (

j )l{ ,

1

d I{ \ I

PR E

LII\

ARY REPO RT

RE: MISCONDUCT BY CITY OF D EERFIELD B EACH

VIA YOR

l E N

RO

BB

-----------------------------------------------------------------

------

5 IntervieJv of the Parks and R ecreation Director

The

PRD

Director stated that, in the fall

of

2013, her

staff

informed her that Mayor Robb

presented herself, without prior notice, at

her

office reception area and asked about getting a

beach sticker for the Pastor. The staff told

Mayor

Robb she would have to speak

to

the

PRD

Director.

Upon

meeting with the PRD Director, Mayor Robb reiterated her request for a beach

parking sticker for the Pastor. The PRD Director asked her

to

clarify whether she was referring

to a resident st icker

or

a PRS sticker.

Mayor

Robb stated she was referring to a PRS sticker,

and told the PRD Director that she thought that the Pastor had previous ly received one. The

PRD Director told Mayor Robb that she had never issued a PRS sticker to the Pastor or anyone

who was not an elected official or on the City staff, but that she wou ld do so

me

research

and

respond back.

7

Mayor

Robb responded in the presence

of

the PRD staff, Make sure you

follow up . The

PRD

Director stated that she believed that Mayor Robb was impl

yi

ng that she

would be in trouble

if

she did not comply with the request. Mayor Robb left, and the PRD

Director

made

inquiries

of

her

staff

to determine if the City had ever issued the

Pa

stor a

PRS

sticker. She stated that no one could recall

and

there were

no

records

of

it.

The PRD Director stated that, within five to

ten

minutes

of

Mayor Robb leaving the office, she

called back and confinned that she

wa

nted a PRS sticker

an

d that she would immediately

be

c

oming

back to get it. Within minutes

of

the call, Mayor Robb arrived back at her office. The

PRD Director felt she was obligated to

comp

ly with the request and issued the PRS sticker

for

the Pastor to Mayor Robb. She later told the City Manager what had occurred .

The

PRD Director stated that Mayor Robb obligated the City to provide a service without

going

through the City Manager on another occasion. She said that, in July 2013, the Athletic

Coordinator told her that Mayor Robb told him that she had promised a local Little League

team that the City would pay for a charter bus to transport

it

to a multi-day competition in

Tampa, Florida.

The

PRO Director told the

OIG

that, although the City regularly approves and

pa

ys for such trips, the tean1 should have submitted the request to the City Manager or her.

She did not believe the City Manager was aware

of

Mayor Robb ' s request. She said that,

according to the Athletic Coordinator, Mayor Robb also told the Athletic Coordinator that

she

wanted him to recommend that the City authorize $2,300

for

a bus to be provided

by

Davis

Transportation. The PRO Director stated that the City Manager has directed all City

management

staff

to route all

of

Mayor Robb

s

requests through him .

6. In t

erview

of

the Pastor

The

Pastor stated that he has been the pastor

of

the Saint Ambrose Church twice, most recently

from 1993 to the present. He said that he has known Mayor Robb and other City officials

and

emp

loyees for many years. He expressed that he did not want to get involved in discussions

about the PRS sticker. He stated that he

wa

s aware that a local person had made an issue

of

the

PRS

sticker and, as a result , he removed it.

He

said that the City only issued the one sticker

to

7

At

t

he

time, the City had on ly emplo

ye

d the

PRD

Director for approximately two years.

ore

14-017

October 2, 2014

Page 7 of 22



HH ( l \\ \ l ll ( ) I I H I 0 I f II I [ I I I ( l H ( d I I{ \1

PRELIM fNARY R EPO RT RE: M ISCONDUCT

BY

CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH

v

AYOR J EAN R OBB

-

him The Pastor acknowledged speaking to the City Manager about it. He stated that he had

never needed one in the past and, since removing the sticker,

he

will pay to park.

T

he

Pastor stated that he received the sticker some months ago, when it appeared on his desk.

He was not certain

if

he had reques

ted

the recently issued parking sticker or,

if

so,

to

whom

he

m

ad

the request.

He

said that

many yea

rs ago, he had a beach parking sticker, but he did not

know if the

new

sticker was the same as he

was

previously issued or even that there were

different stickers.

The Pastor stated that the City had wept the church parking lot for many years, particularly

after church festivals, a practice that

past

mayors and city managers approved.

He

said that,

around Lent, he called someone in the City to sweep the parking lot as

he

had done in the

pa

st

and ,

as

requested , the City swept the lot.

The

Pastor told

us

that his maintenance man

informed him that the current city manager may

not

continue the practice.

7. Interview of h e Environmental Services Department ssistant Direc tor

he

ESD

Assistant Director stated that sometime around Lent (March 5 tlu·ough April 20,

20

14

), Mayor

Robb

called him at his office

and

requested that he ass ign a City street sweeper

to sweep the parking lot

of

the aint

Ambrose

Church prior

to

6 a.m. the next day. He agreed

to provide the service. He stated that the time was not an issue because street sweeping

commences

very early in the moming.

However

, as the street sweeper operator had already

left for the day,

he

had to call him at

home

to tell him about the new ass ignment. The sweeper

cleared the lot as Mayor Robb requested.

In anticipation

of

the OIG interview, the ESD Assistant Director researched his depmiment' s

records but could not find a notation about sweeping the church. He stated that he took Mayor

Robb

s reque t as being told to do it.

He

did not immediately te ll the ESD Director about

her request, and he did not inform the City Manage

r

It was

on

ly sometime after he completed

the a sigrunent that the E D Director became aware

of

the matter. He said that

he

could not

reca

ll

any other such requests from Mayor Robb or the City Commission.

8

Interview

of

h e Environmental Services Department Director

The ESD Director stated that, sometime in Apri l 20 14 ,

theE

D Assistant Director infom1ed

him that he had authorized the sweeping

of

the Saint Ambrose Church parking lot pursuant

to

a

direct request from Mayor Rob b.

The ESD Director said he recalled that the ESD Assistant

Director had informed him that Mayor Robb made her request late on a Friday, and he (the

ESD Dir

ector) learned

of

the request early the next week after the service had been rendered.

He said

he instructed the ESD Ass istant Director to route all future extraordinary requests

through the City Manager. He stated that

he

could not recall any time when he had authorized

sweeping

of the church or any other private property, nor could

he

recall such services being

authorized by anyone else in the City, including the former mayor. He added that the City doe

not uti lize its street sweeper to service private property, unless municipal activity caused debris

OIG 14-017

Oc t

obe r 2, 2014

of2

2



BH<l\\ \1{1 0111<

I

{)I

l

\ -

1 1 { 1{)1{ (,1

{

1

PRELIM £NARY

REPORT RE:

MI

SCON

DUCT

BY

CITY

OF

D

EE

RFIE

LD

BE CH M

YO

R J

E N

R OBB

-

-

to

be deposited on the property, such as would result from underground utility repairs or

a

dj

acent roadwork. The ES D Director stated that he had heard that th e Saint Ambrose parking

lot may have been swept at one t ime, but he didn't know when or the circumstances. He sa id

the cost to sweep the church lot would be a small job for a pr ivate provider, who he estimated

might charge 200 .

9 Interview of h e Athletic Coordinator

The

Athletic Coordinator stated that Davis transported a local Little League team to Tampa in

Jul y 2013 . The Little League team is usually the only sporis team that travels outside the

tri-

county area. He stated that Mayor Robb received or requested the original quote for

transportation for the trip fro m Davis. He also stated that he fo rwarded the reques t for the

tr ip

to his supervisor, the PRD Director. He stated that the original quote was fo r less than 2,500,

which is belo w the bidding threshold, and thus within the authority of the PRD Director to

approve. The Athletic Coordinat

or

said that the length

of

the trip was originally for two

days

,

but because the team won, it was required to extend the trip another day. Thus, the team Dav is

submitted an additional requ est for 600.

10

l

nt

ervie1v

of

he Purchashtg ~ 1 a n a g

The Purchasing Manager stated that in late 2013 or early 2014, while he was a member of a

multi-depatimental committee

to

conduct a citywide parking study

to

modernize the parking

revenue and enforcement efforts, he received a telephone ca

ll

from Mayor Robb. She wanted

him to research the installation of parking meters at the Cove Pl aza parking lot to generate City

revenue and asked him to determine how much the City should chm·ge for parking in that area.

He advised her that parking fees were a City Commission

po

licy decision and beyond the

scope

of

hi

s duties. However, the Purchasin g Manager did

te

ll her that he would look into

information on parking systems. He stated that he later attended a City Commission meeting

where Mayor Robb publicly commented on the request she made of him. The City Manager

ope

nl

y responded

to

her that she should

ha

ve directed her request through him and not have

gone directly to the Purchasing Manager

The Purchasing Manager recalled another instance when Mayor Robb attempted to affect

hi

s

duties without going through the City Manager. He could not reca ll when it was, only that he

believed it was shortly after she took office. He stated that at the time, the City Commission

had directed that staff co nduct a feasibi lity study in contemplation of transitioning from the

BSO ba

ck

to a municipal police department, and he was in the process

of

researching and

preparing the contract soli citation for the study. He said that

Ma

yo r Robb to ld him that she did

not want a particular vendor to be permitted to bid on the so licitation or awarded the feas ibility

stud y contract. The Purchasing Manager said

th

at the vendor she was referring

to

had

previously provided services to the City, but he could not reca

ll

its nam

e

He sa

id

he

advi

sed

Mayor Robb that they would exclude no one from the so licitation or selection and that there

would be no deviation from the standard procurement process. The Purchasin g Manager stated

-

OIG 14-01 7

October

2, 2014

o

f22



HI { ) \

\

\1 {1) <l l If (

I

)I

1 \-..1 1 ( l

<l ld t \ { \

PRELIMINARY R EPORT

RE: MISCONDUCT BY CiTY OF D EERFIELD

BE

CHM YOR JE NR OBB

that

, after some research, the Commi ion declined to bid out the feasibility study and took

no

further action on the matter.

11 Interview of he City J anager

The City Manager stated that he was formally appointed

to

his position in September 2010. He

expressed that he had a strained relationship with Mayor Robb.

The City Manager stated that, pursuant to the Charter, the Mayor and any Commissioner may

m

ake

inquiries

of

City staff, but they

may

not direct or interfere in

staff

members

job

duties or

ass igm11ents. He also stated that he knew

of

no instances when any other members

of

the City

Corm11i

ssion attempted to direct the

work

of City employees.

He

stated he can and has

cautioned Mayor Robb about her conduct, and

he has directed his staff to let him know if she

attempted to affect their job duties. He further stated that

he

believed that the Ci

ty

Attorney

has also advised her about the prohibition against her directing the act ivities

of

City staff.

The City Manager said that the PDS Director had contacted him and informed him about a call

Mayor

Robb made to the Deputy prior to the May 6, 2014, Commission meeting. The Deputy

told the PD Director that Mayor Robb told or implied to him that he should go easy or lay

off

the dealership because they had donated money. The PDS Director added that Mayor Robb

lat

er

called the

Deputy s

captain and asked him to del iver a message to the Deputy to disregard

their previous discus ion. The City

Manag

r said that Mayor Robb s call

to

the Deputy

occurred after the OIG began its inquiry into the donations.

The City Manager stated that, sometime in October or November 2013, his office staff

informed him that Mayor Robb had requested that the City issue

aPR

ticker to the

Pa

tor.

He

further stated that

he

did not intend on issuing the Pastor a PRS sticker, because they are

only for elected officials and employees who are required to park their personal vehicles at

City parking areas for City business. The City Manager repeated that he had a strained

relationship with Mayor Robb and that she limited her interaction with him. Thus,

it

did not

surprise

him

that she had bypa ed him with such a reque t The City Manager stated that,

some

days later at a City directors meeting, the PRO Director informed him that she had issued

aPR sticker to the Pa tor at Mayor Robb s request.

He

aid that he made a decision that

sinc e the PR had already been issued, he was not going demand its retum.

The

City Manager stated that for many years, the City had an agreement with the church,

recently formalized , to use its parking lot. In return, the City provided in-kind services but was

not responsible for routine parking lot maintenance. The City Manager was aware that a City

street sweeper had recently cleaned the church parking lot. He said that was not one

of

the

se rvices pursuant to the agreement and,

had

he been a ked, he would not have authorized it

OIG

14-017

October

2, 2014

of22



IW \\ \ lU ) I I I< I

<II

1\

I I

< I

<

I< C I I H \1

PRELIM

lNA

RY REPORT RE MI

SC

ONDUCT BY

CITY OF

D

EERFI

ELD

BE C

H M YOR l

E N

R OBB

12 JntervieJv of J1ayor Jean Robb

Mayor

Robb said she previously served as City

mayo

r from 1980 to 1993. When OIG Special

Agents read excerpts

of

the City Com

miss

ion meeting minutes from May 6, 2014, regarding

her receipt and disbursement

of

donations, she stated that a

fr

iend

of

hers ca

ll

ed and told her

that the owner

of

the Domani Motors car dealership had expressed interest in meeting with her.

She

said she did not recal l the specific date or time she met with the Ovmer. Mayor Robb

stated that she did not personally

know

him but knew he

su

pported her mayoral opponent

in

tbe last electio

n

Ma

yor Robb stated that the O

wne

r expressed his appreciation

of

the City and told her that

he

had previously given donations to

many

local causes and non-profits, such a youth sports and

City events, and would again like to contribute to a local nonprofit that benefited residents. He

asked

if

she had any recommendations, and she suggested FCI and the Historical Society.

Mayor

Robb stated that she never suggested that the Owner donate any specific amount

of

mone

y to either cause. he further stated that after their discussion, the Owner

's

wife exit

ed

to

a

noth

er room and came back with two checks for 500 each, one for the

Hi

storical ociety and

one

for FC

I

After receiving the checks, Mayor Robb mailed them to each organization

accompanied by a letter she authored on City stationer

y In

the letters, she to

ld

the charities

that

she

arranged

fo

r the donations to be directed to them.

Mayor Robb stated that neither the

Owner

nor the dealer hip had any current or pending

matters before the Commission. She also stated that she did not lmow whether Domani Motors

or the Owner had any pending code enforcement matter

s

1ayor

Robb said that the

City's

budget included a line item for contributions

to

FCI. In the

cmTent budget, it was 9,000, and she stated that he was recommending that the City increase

funding

to

20,000. In the past, the City has budgeted contributions to Historical Society, but

in recent years, due to financial constraints, the City may not have budgeted any.

Mayor

Robb stated that after she in f

ormed

the City Attorney about her receipt

of

the donations,

he advi sed her to complete a disclosure form noting the two organizations and

to

file it with

th

e

City C lerk.

COl'\CLUS

IO

NS

The

OIG investigation fow1d probable cause to believe that Mayor Robb engaged

in

misconduct when

s

he

attempted

to

use her po

si

tion

to

obstruct City code enforcement efforts involving a

lo

cal dealership

that donated to her chosen cause . We found that Mayor Robb

ro

uti

ne

ly abused her authority

by

directing st

aff

members without the City Manager

's

lmowledge and approva

l

Given Mayor Robb

's

l

ong

t

en

ure in her position, we mu t conclude that uch abuse was not

ac

cidental. Such actions

contravene the City charter's well-considered safeguards separating the executive from the

le

gislature.

O IG 14-017

Octobe r 2, 20 14

Page 2 1 of 22



H Htl \ \ \H I

I

O i l I < I )I I

i l l 1,

,.1 I l l l ( ,J

Il l

\ I

PRELI MINA RY

R EPORT R

.E

:

M ISCONDUCT BY

CITY

OF D

EERF

IELD B E CH

M YOR

J

E N

R OBB

·--

They

al

so

have a predictably coercive effect

on

employees and circw1went controls designed

to protect

pub

c reso urces and maintain governmental accountability.

The

G

wi ll be refening this matter

to

the Florida Conunis ion on Ethics , and

the

City for their

independent assessment

of

the application

of

state

and

loca l ethics l

aws.

In

acco

rdance with Section

12.0

1 D)(2)(a)

of

the Charter ofBroward County, a pre liminary

copy

of

this

report is being provided

to

Mayor Robb and the City of Deerfield

Beach

for their discretionary written

responses, which, if received by the OIG sha

ll

be

included in the OIG s fina l

report.

The OIG reserves

making any reconu11endations pending review

of

any response received

to

these preliminary report

findings.

OI

G 14-017

October 2, 20 14

o

f

2



OIG 14 017

EXHI IT 1



__

. ~ P • ____ ,___ _ .......-. ..

.,.;

.

---------·--- · -·-

-··---·------·

·•••.-•---.------·

··-•

• • -

· '-------.L..-·- o o

·

. , · ·

· ~ = = = = = = = = ~ = = = = = = = = ~ = = ~ = = = = = = = = ~ = = = = = = = = ~ ~ ~ ~

sUNrn us r AC>t RT-061000104

63-:215-631'

. 5 1 ¥ . 2 1

~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ D ~ E E ~ R ~ F ~ I E ~ L D ~ ~ H = I S ~ T ~ O ~

R ~ l ~ C ~ A L ~ S O ~ C ~ l = E T Y ~~

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-

~ 5 Q o . o o .

. .... ,,... . ...........

....

. ....................

, ... ,

..... ••.•• ....

.

Fiv

e ·Hurtd red a

nd

........

.. .............. ....... u:ARs ·

~ . : : = : . ~ ~ : : : : : : . . : : : : ~ : : : . . . : . : : : : : : . : _ _ _

- - JY .

J

DEERF

I

ELD

HIS

TORICAL

S

OCIETY

MEMO

DONATION



OIG 14 017

EXHI IT

2



®

C

t r

o f

EERFIEL

E

A

C

t t \ J I

Jen1 1 o loh

I .

. . .

1

·' · r

l l ~ 1 1

l ' l 'e

i

l< ttl

Bill

Gun

.lnseph 1'. M il lr

o

lli e

ltanl

S.

(.'i11· I I""". . .

B

t C::

S

a 1 t .

nternetCoas t

· · ·

_ D e . • : t ' . l ~ . B _ e a _ c ~ . Q ~ < : t • l ~

2·0·01

2·0·0·

3

.

. . 0 _ ; : _ _ ; : _ . _ _ _ _ p

- ~ ~ ~ _ 1 _

~ ~ ~ ? ~ .

··· ··

······--····

Dee tileld Beach

I iO : ><• ·nlt d ' '' J),

-,

..

li

1

·1tl 1

1

•

111

-

lt. ' lo rida

:l: 111- :

SI)Il

Trlr plt o

tte

951) tHO- 12

00 Fnx

(9

5·1) •IB0--

12o

G

May 05 2014

Aimie Kay Tenner

President

Deerfield Beach Historical Soc

ie

ty

PO Box 755

Deerfield Beach FL 3344 i

Dear Ms. Tenner

I had the occasion today to meet with Michael Domani of Domani

Motors who

wi

shed to make a contribution to whatever worthy

cause I determined . My first thought vvas

for

the Deerfield Historical

Society and I am enclos i

ng

his check in the amount of 500.00 for

you to

use

to

furthe r your cause. I intend to honor him on

Ma

y 20 th

at the commission meet ing to express

ou

r gratitude for his kind

contri

bu

tion .

Sincerely

Jean M. Ro bb Mayor

www. de erfie ld-ben

ch

.co111



®

W

C i l ) of

DEEn FIELD

B E A C H

, ayur

.l

em

a 1\oltla

l 'il' t ' ii /1

n r

11

.'om rn i.

...:imlt•

s

Bill Ganr

,lnsq

>h 1'

.

Wlh

·r

f(i

dwnl

S. Ro sl' ll1.1H'if

C:it1·

a n r t . ~ r

B

uqrc.-. :'s

I h.u1:-::n

Q

n ternetCoast

Deerfield Beach.

Deerlfeld Beach

z : ~ f O I

········

1

2·0·0·3

······--···----' .

~ - ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ? ~ ~ ~ -

Mlmeria

n n ; ~

···· ····

···

············

Deerfield Beach

2·0·04.

' : ~ ~ ~ . : ~ : ~ ~ - ' :

~ ~ ~ ~

\JC

\'fAYCCAYI'

A

1

· · 1 1·1 · 1 'l '

l

11 '' <JU 'l' ·l · I • I) ·

1110-

1200 £i'ax (95·1) ·lfi0- ·1263

lSO

N.

E.

Scrond

n •

tllll l C't'

riH

·ld

n,•

ar

l

•• 111'1(

" . •• • .• . ) l jl

lOlll-..iJ•

) . ·

May 05 2014

Barbara

A

Weinstein Ed.

D.

P r e s i d ~ n t /CEO

Family Central Inc.

840 SW

81

51

Avenue

North Lauderdale FL

33068

Dear Ms. Weinstein

I had the occasion today to meet with Michael Domani of Domani

Motors who wished to ma .ke a contribution to whatever worthy

cause I

d e t ~ r m i n e d

I thought of our conversation

~ o u t

the children

who go hungry and I asked him to

make

a contribution to your

cause. Enclosed you will find his check in the amount of

500.00 .

I

am also pushing for the city to up its contribut

io

n to 20;000 for the

upcoming year. I intend to honc:H him on May 20th at the

commiss ion meeting to exp ress our gratitude for his kind

contribution .

Fondly

. Jean

M.

Robb Mayor

www.dec

rf ie

ld

-

bc

ac

h.

co ll

Rer p INIPUJIC



OIG 14 017

EXHI IT 3



OIG 14 017

EXHI IT 4



t o

EERFIEL

BE CH



OIG 14 017

EXHI IT 5



fi-

9·r' l:·

Si: n

t>

:

1:0.:

sub')ect:

S . \ ? { ~ t 1 n : e .

J i + ~ d a ~ ] l t / y ; t j i 2 0 1 : 8

AM

~ ~ r S J : ~ t t v

~ 9 $ .

~ ; r g a : ; ; ; ~ : ; t ~ ; ~

~ i ~ i ~

~ ~ : ; ; ,

~ ; k ~ ~ ~ ; ; ' ; ~ i ; ~

~ ; : ; ~ i J Z ~ r d / , ~ ~ f ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ : & ~ ~ a

: . : . ~ ~ a : : : f b Y :

~ < f ? c e p

< J : L t p ~

n \ 1 W ? . i i t , J b : ~ R r f

~

. f : Q

W > < '

~ i N

~ ? : Y

M ' i 3 - o : r a ii6

q V O . t ~ t r a n

t ~ t h ~

t i t ~ ~ i l s ~ i f t h ~ t € a m

. w e r e

to

~ y f o

f ~ ~ w N ~ r $ . q ~ ~ g f . wP:.:1Jd i ; i Y

r r t d o t t h ~

~ ~ t l ~ p m . f f l . 6 8 a h

~ s : - t o r -

the;

p t u ~ g r ~ t u

lty:,

( UI: h y ~ ~ H g ~ t [ D a l t ~ t \ f ~ J p r f t f J G i l : \ Q

f l .

. . . .

staise.

·

:eo n

e,_

:J?Rff.

; a : t R ~ . a h o Re:cr 13 ano·i: 8 a g ~

1

o

¢ ~ d i e

·

Phone'

. J f 4 M ~

~ o ~ ( f i ~ r 6 ~ t d ~ ~ M o - s o m

he

oHy;

D . e e t : t l e l ~

Bea

.

ch

o v ~ r r w d

f ~ ~

~ g t ~ f R ~ P . < ; H # ~

f : \ ; p J . , ~ g

~ t ~ ~ t n

C . b . ~ J ?

I l t

~ h . f ~ i . l ~ L ~ ~ Y t ~ $ ,

Et".'>l:iil

and: ;o;.,;:tiil a d c t ~ s s - e

'j

f:es"''; k:

'ecr

+

Q.

"h ··

R 151\i

:o,-

eo'

;

I\

cc·· ct

• ··:

e

- 1 5 : l l ~ reoot.o.s·s_

.

-e

_

t .to ~ h s ~ J o s u f e . - :

All

·· .. ..§ · · ····· · ·

-· > ' : ··· . , ..,_ .. : · · .

· ·

· Y : J . . , _ . ~ ~ ~ •

JJ

•.

S

.

-

? f " ~

fi,U . <·

· · · . 1

1 .•. .:

\ \ ; - · - ·

-

-< .... ·

·- ,.

· <: • . . • .

e i ~ a : 1

and ~ Y . c o r r . e s p n d J g g ~ r : p ~ J K _ ~ : q : d . r . ~ s ~ s ~ ;

Mt

- t ~ f . e i Y . ~ ~ d . m. t ~ 1 ~ m ~ 5 f b , Y t h ~ f f l f t

l ( q h ;

p M C b . l i ~

~ ; : ~ ~ ' i ~ f ~ ~ ~ ~ d · f ~ ~ ~ : i i ~ ~

t : ~ ~ l i q ~ : ~ : ~ : t t ~ ~ r ; ~ ~ ~ : ~ i l t : ~ i ~ ~ ~ .

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ j ~

~ G ; , 1 ~ t ~ ~ ~ 1 i f i $ y ~ q



J

ul

22 13

11:1

0a

·

:t

/1 1

/ 'LI? I

tll

Je

an

Robb

95448201 17

tJ t:J: IL':J:J.jt1

D a t ~ 1 • 22.13

D VIS TOURS

w w w _ D ~ ~ ' l o u t s . c o m

P.O. BOX 16147

Client

..\,.d Net l

Ft

Laudardale, FL 33318

Office:

954.472.2958 Fax: 954.472.9538

Ylayw

Jean o b b ~ s

Grou.p

N'WJe

:

No.«>( Cbn.to.ct

N ine of Tou

Jeaa Robb-

f t . 2 ~ 4 . 4 2 7 . 9 2 . 9 3

/'Fi

9S4.482

.{)ll7

Catbleen

Williwu-

P: 254.24S.7UO

Tampa

;l n'e

$2,300 ( 2 - D a ~ - ) Retcu'n S11.turdny)

5.2

1

900 ( ~ D a y s - - ) Return Sunday)

$3,3{}0 {4--Days

~ R e t u r n Manday)

:Pl t9 Driver's

Gratuity Ilotelroom

NambQ; oE . l t ? C J , l l ~

Nttmbu

of:

llttn J

T r l p P : ~

57-PAX

One

F r l d ~ a . y - 7.:Z6J3

.. ""DAYIS'rOURS'IS

NOT

RE5PON5ffiLE

FOR ITEMS

LE.O:

OJ'.'I

Al'<Y

BlJS

AFTER

FINAL

OltOJ:'

F ' T

. . _ ~ ~ W

I T H I N ~ DAYS

AF.r.E.RA NATURAL DlS.ASTEJt 1'H1S CON'X'RA.Cf

CAN

BE CAiiCELLEJ)

AT AN'r' 'l'.IMEA.1' DAYl8 TOURS

SOLE D l S C ~ 1 ' k O N ' . . . ,

"*"'WE

COl"SIJ)ER

THIS

TOUk O N . F f f l . M ~ I l

ONLY

UPON OlJR

RECE l'l'

A

Dr.l'«JSIT &:

SlONE )COPY OF

TIUS .l.

.

I.'IT.EB.

0'1 '

A G ' R E E . M E ~ H ·

Y O U ~

~ . P O N ' S T B L E

FOR DRIVEft'S l i O " r ~ L ROOM ~ ' D CRA'IlJITY

PL.E.A:s.E <ID'J> GRATUITY

DIRECTLY TO .tH:UVER

...

'"'"DA VlS

TOURS

rtrA

Y

SU:SS l'fll'J:E: ~ m n BUSES T ANYTlME

fOR

ANY

LOCAL CHARTER BOOJ(l,NG O:F;. MOl'ORCOACH•H

.. • +-NO

FOOD

OR DRINRS ( \ 1 - i [ . . Q W t ~ ON BUSI:S WlTHOO'X'

' - ' » l ~

ARRANGEMENT' • •

L

.lniti:U

DepoBit:

$5d0.00 l\o'iih

sisow

contntt

2.

F i l l t y l l l e u

·

B ~ t l a 1 1 c e due by

7.25.13

.

P l ~ a s e make checks Pa.Yable

to

:oAVJS

TOURS, INC.

C..;l CEU .AilQN f;'OLICY:

O>Jposl s

are fu yrofunclalte if c.anco

Btion Is

eoa

l

ved

45

da'f

s

prior ro departure

.

Less than

4

5dil

Y5

ca

n

CGRatlon

n o ~ c e w i ~ res ut n Q r 1 e i t ~

o

Any bcx:

Mtl S

n ~ l e d

Y>i

lhh

45 d<y& of

depar1ura

date 'Mil

forfe it

th

etfepo

sll E Otlg ~ h any

non-mfimdab

le

payments

made 1o the

airl

i

nes

,

hote

ls

,

restaurants, etc., if amotor coach ls

canceled

'Wit

hi

n2 kle&ksof e p ~ ;

there

"niU

be a5{}% offull

con

tact prioo assassment fee. We S 1 r 0 0 9 ~ te<:Ommend he purchBSe of

k l l ~ n ins;Jrance. Ttil .l priw vafid Cflly for 7days a ler

~ o f

r;ontract. The o n r a

mu l

btl contvmed, $igned

and

re IJrned

to

D rJ

is

To

II'$ t ~ l h

the requ I

red

deposit

tn

be va Kf.

With<rut

~ a t u r e ,

conflnnatlon

anclrBtum uf

contr.r.rt

to

Davis

fours ,v.ithUle ~ u r e d deposit,

the quo

red price cell be m6de I

nval

idand null at ttle role

l ~ r e l o n

of Oa vli Tou

rs.

Da

vis

Tomls not ulred

tD

notif1

ro

_

•e

cHent

of rice chan

es after In al 7

da

after

co

nlract issent to

me cHe11l

SJ,>OT

·IJl ' :II

8:30am

@River Town

Square

..)

1015 S. .federal Jf.\vy. Deerfield Beach 3344 1

DEPART:

9:00a.m

For

Tampa

~ P l e a s e provide destination name and address)

p.2

Return wiJI depend on if

they

win or Jose

the

game.s: If 11ey

win on

Fri.

they st

ay overnight and

play i they win on, Sat.

they

stay overnight and

J?la

y on Sun. i

hey wih

on

Su

n. 'they stay

overnight

and return on

MOllday.

TlllS

LE'.TIER OF .A GltLEl\1ENT IS SUBIE.CT

TO

A V ~ H L A B I L m

OF THE

SERVICES COVEQ.Wl

tu:REIN

ON

TtiE

DATE TifE SIGNEP L ~ T l E R O

J?

AGREEMENT fS llECEl\1 )1:0

WfrH

DF.l'OSH BY DAVIS TOURB

DAYIFOUI}$

Sign.ed

by: Jim D ~ v i Signe<l

b - y ~

Ihte: 2 . 1 3 Da te:

LlAB.JJJ X ACREEL'r1ENT: Cust.ome.r a ~ c c p t ~ f\1ll responsibility

fo

r vehicle damage

or

speclal

cleaning

arJd

a u t h o r i ~ ~

DAYlS TOURS

10 ch arge

fur

tb.e expenses regardless ofMd in addition to any

prior u

nderstand

ings an

d

agrcem

.

ents. Cu

sto

mer

agrees that

a ny

of hislheJ

activi

ti

es or ~ vior

deemed

by the cltautfear ro be illegal or perito

t)s

will resu lt in imm ediste

tennin

alion of h e

job

without a .('efund .

oig preliminary report

Documents