MEMORANDUM OF INQUIRY

Transcription

1 MEMORANDUM OF INQUIRY To: From: Re: Steven P. Cullen, Executive Director Christie E. Kelley, Staff Counsel C Reginald Cox, Delray Beach Community Redevelopment Authority Background Complainant, Josh Smith Jr., a private citizen, filed the above referenced complaint against Reginald Cox (Respondent), a board member of the Delray Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). The allegations as contained in the attachment to the complaint involve a cone of silence issue, which is part of the lobbyist registration ordinance. Applicable Law and Analysis Section of the Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics Ordinance states in relevant part, "the jurisdiction of the Commission on Ethics shall extend to any person required to comply with the countywide code of ethics (and) the county lobbyist registration ordinance... " At this time, only the Palm Beach County Code of Ethics applies to the Delray Beach CRA through its Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics (COE). However, the lobbyist registration ordinance does not apply to the Delray Beach CRA because the MOU between the Delray Beach CRA and the COE only mentions the Code of Ethics. The MOU specifically identifies the roles and responsibilities of the Delray Beach CRA and the COE as they relate to the implementation of the Code of Ethics and that the COE shall exercise the authority, functions, and powers provided for in the Commission on Ethics and Code of Ethics ordinances. Legal Sufficiency Legal sufficiency exists where there is an allegation of a violation within the jurisdiction of the Commission on Ethics, purportedly committed by an individual within the authority of the Commission on Ethics. Conclusion Because the allegations contained in the complaint involve actions pertaining to a respondent who is only within the jurisdiction of the Code of Ethics Ordinance, the Commission on Ethics is without jurisdiction to investigate; therefore complaint C against respondent, Reginald Cox, is NOT LEGALLY SUFFICIENT and should be dismissed. The Commission on Ethics may want to consider including or offering to include the Lobbyist Registration Ordinance in any future Memorandum of Understanding with the Delray Beach CRA. Submitted by: Date Reviewed by: (Initials) Date

2 PALM BEACH COUNTY COMMISSION ON ETHICS 300 North Dixie Highway, Suite 450, West Palm Beach, Florida Hotline: or COMPLAINT FORM 1. Complainant (Person bringing Complaint) Add pages, if necessary. Please list all information where you would like to be contacted Our preference is Name: }C., SH S ;Yt, "T)~, :TR. Address: ~ fc J 0 A. v L= ;Jt. 'L-- DeG(E:Ai JS,.,, ;-,(5) A6L. C..!..>.u Cl.ty. '' /J I-' e L,.,:..-'1 ~ Q /l Ell (N. Zip:.::; 7/.:> ~' '5 r-7:. Home #: ---"5~4.,-1-'- -'-f :;;...:._., 9 s~-.-_ """ 7.L.. 2 = :::c-.:...; ~w=-=-o~rk-#-:-:-:---rl.-=-/-r, Cell #: 2. Respondent (Person against whom complaint is made) Add pages, if necessary. Please provide as much information as possible. Name: /( EG 1 /1/HJ..i) ' ' KFCC.!F'' C...c X. Address: City: ~-: ~~~ Home #: ---,...,...,-..., ,: Work #: Cell #: 5~ /- '5 '7 3 - II 3 I Title/Office Held or Sought: (!1-i 11 ifd...mf) l\l of wa 12~ l /)EJ.. RtJt 1 AEAro'"' C.../2J4 &~o~e>p lh tn~e~ l 3. IF KNOWN, GIECK THE BOX OR BOXES THAT APPLY v:(!jegation is against person in Allegation is about County: County/Municipal Government Whistleblower Retaliation 4. STATEMENT OF FACTS BASED ON YOUR PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE In a separate attachment, please describe in detail the facts and actions that are the basis of your complaint, including the dates when the actions occurred. Also attach any relevant documents as well as names and contact infonnation of persons who may be witnesses to the actions. If known, indicate the section of the ordinance you believe is being violated. For further inscructions, see page 2 of this fonn. Zip: 5. OATH I, the person bringing this complaint, do depose on oath or affinnation and say that the facts set forth in the foregoing complaint and attachments are true and~ect, to ~e bes"t of~y _knowledge and belief ~Itt':> { 1- I Y).-:fl:,.(. e of Person Making Complaint ANJUMAN SALAM Notary Public. State of Flonda CommJSSJOn/1 EE My comm tj~ojres Sept STATE OF FLORJDA COUNTYOF p;ttji tat?jw Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this 1sf day of tw.1 L-, 2014, by -;s=os tt s. u LTH :ra2 (Name of Person Mabng Stalcmcnl) who is personally known to me or produced identification /. Type of identification produced: P/AJ2tDA 'DIZdl/&12.- t.iu~~~ (Signature o (Pnnt, Type, or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public)

3 March 31, 2014 TO: PALM BEACH COUNTY ETHICS COMMISSION COMPLAINT AGAINST REGINALD (REGGIE) COX (CHAIRMAN OF DELRAY BEACH WARC (WEST ATLANTIC REDEVELOPMENT COALITION) AND CRA (COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY) BOARD MEMBER COMPLAINT FILED BY JOSH SMITH, JR. Ed.D. (DELRAY BEACH CITIZEN) NAME AND/OR SUBSECTION OF ORDINANCE VIOLATED: CRA PROJECT NO.: CRA REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (SECTION U, PAGE 13 OF THE RFP) ENCLOSED REGINALD "REGGIE" COX AND CHARLES "CHUCK" RIDLEY ETHICAL AND PROCUREMENT VIOLATIONS MANY ETHICAL, PROCUREMENT AND GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE SUNSHINE VIOLATIONS HAVE OCCURRED BETWEEN DELRAY BEACH CRA (COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY) BOARD MEMBER AND WARC (WEST ATLANTIC REDEVELOPMENT COALITION) CHAIR REGGIE COX AND RECENTLY APPOINTED OCTOBER 9, 2013 WARC BOARD MEMBER CHUCK RIDLEY. CRA BOARD MEMBR AND WARC BOARD CHAIR REGGIE COX, AND RECENTLY APPOINTED OCTOBER 9, 2013 WARC BOARD MEMBER CHUCK RIDLEY HAVE VIOLATED THE CRA AND WARC NO LOBBYING CONE OF SILENCE IN SECTION U, PAGE 13 OF THE RFP; AS WELL AS DISCUSSING THEIR WARC AND CRA BOARD VOTES OUT OF THE SUNSHINE IN THE SHADE WITH EACH OTHER AND JONES/NEW URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY. COX AND RIDLEY HAVE COMPROMISED THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS, THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE, AND CONE OF SILENCES APPLICABLE SINCE MAY 26, 2013 TO ALL WARC AND CRA BOARD MEMBERS UNTIL THE AWARD HAD BEEN MADE THE WARC BOARD IS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CRA AND THE CRA IS A DEPENDENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. ALL PROCUREMENT RULES AND REGULATIONS AS WELL AS FLORIDA STATUTES, AND THE CITY AND CRA ADOPTED RULES GOVERNING COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT CONE SILENCES, 1

4 PROHIBITIONS AGAINST MEETING WITH RESPONDERS DISCUSSING OPEN PROCUREMENT OUT OF THE SUNSHINE, APPLIES SIMULTANEOUSLY TO BOTH BOARDS AND ALL MEMBERS, STARTING MAY 26, 2013 AND WAS IN EFFECT UNTIL THE AWARD HAD BEEN MADE. COX AND RIDLEY ETHICAL AND PROCUREMENT VIOLATIONS THE CRA, CITY AND WARC HAVE OR SHOULD HAVE A POLICY PROHIBITING A CRA BOARD MEMBER FROM ALSO SIMULTANEOUSLY SERVING AS WARC BOARD MEMBER DOES NOT MATTER. WHAT IS A FACT IS THAT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT A DUAL BOARD MEMBER CAN ADHERE TO THE CONEOF SILENCE AND NO LOBBYING PROHIBITIONS, WHILE DISCUSSING THEIR VOTE AS A WARC BOARD MEMBER, BEFORE CASTING THEIR VOTE AS A CRA BOARD MEMBER. COX'S VOTE AND RATIONALE FOR HIS VOTE IS PERMANENTLY DOCUMENTED IN THE WARC BOARD MINUTES AS THE CHAIR OF THE WARC BOARD AS OF OCTOBER 16, 2013, EIGHT (8) DAYS BEFORE THE SCHEDULED VOTE ON OCTOBER 24, COX'S ALREADY OCTOBER 16, 2013 CASTED WARC VOTE IS A PUBLIC RECORD, AND INHERENTLY ALLOWS HIS FELLOW CRA BOARD MEMBERS TO KNOW WHOM HE VOTED FOR AND WHY, PRIOR TO THE CRA BOARD MEETING ON THE NIGHT OF OCTOBER 24, IT ALSO MEANS THAT COX HAD THE DISTINCTION OF BEING THE ONLY CRA BOARD MEMBER TO INFLUENCE THE VOTES ON TWO (2) BOARDS ON THE SAME MATTER FOR JONES/NEW URBAN. COX'S EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS DURING THE WARC CONE OF SILENCE INCLUDES DISCUSSING THE PROPOSER'S OFERINGS WITH CHUCK RIDLEY, BEFORE RAPIDLY NOMINATING AND VOTING FOR HIM AS A NEWLY APPOINTMENT TO THE WARC BOARD ON OCTOBER 9, THE EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS VIOLATED THE CONE OF SILENCE, INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS, AND GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE WITH RIDLEY, A NEW WARC BOARD MEMBER. COX FAILED AS THE CHAIR OF THE WARC BOARD TO MAKE ANY PUBLIC DISCLOSURES TO HIS NUMEROUS FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS, TEXTS, S, AND CELL PHONE CALLS WITH RIDLEY DISCUSSING THE RFP AND THE PROPOSER'S OFFERINGS, DATING BACK TO MAY 26,2013, BEFORE 2

5 RAPIDLY NOMINATING AND VOTING FOR RIDLEY'SAPPPOINTMENT TO THE WARC BOARD ON OCTOBER 9, COX'S EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH RIDLEY REQUIRED HIM TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM VOTING AS THE WARC BOARD CHAIR TO RECOMMEND JONES/ NEW URBAN TO THE CRA BOARD ON THE NIGHT OF OCTOBER 24, COX AND RIDLEY ETHICAL AND PROCUREMENT VIOLATIONS RIDLEY'S EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS DURING WARe'S CONE OF SILENCE STARTING MAY 26, 2013 WITH COX, ALSO INCLUDES DISCUSSING THE PROPOSERS' OFFERINGS DIRECTLY WITH ALL THREE (3) PROPOSERS, AND COMMUNICATING THE DETAILS OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS AS A THIRD PARTY AGENT FOR JONES/NEW URBAN TO COX; BEFORE WARC BOARD CHAIR COX NOMINATED AND VOTED FOR HIS RAPID APPOINTMENT TO THE WARC BOARD ON OCTOBER 9, THE EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS VIOLATED COX'S CONE OF SILENCE AS DUAL BOARD MEMBER OF CRA AND WARC, AND HIGHLY DIMINISHED THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS, AND GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE PRIOR TO RIDLEY'S APPOINTMENT TO THE WARC BOARD. RIDLEY FAILED AS A NEW MEMBER OF THE WARC BOARD TO MAKE ANY PUBLIC DISCLOSURES TO HIS NUMEROUS FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS, TEXTS, S AND CELL PHONE CALLS WITH COX, AND All THREE (3) PROPOSERS DISCUSSING THE RFP AND PROPOSED OFFERINGS, BEFORE ACCEPTING THE NOMINATION BY COX AND APPOINTMENT TO THE WARC BOARD ON OCTOBER 9, RIDLEY'S EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH COX AND THE THREE (3) PROPOSERS PRIOR TO HIS APPOINTMENT REQUIRED HIM TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM VOTING AS A WARC BOARD MEMBER, WHO VOTED TO RECOMMEND JONES/NEW URBAN TO THE CRA BOARD ON THE NIGHT OF OCTOBER 24, RIDLEY'S EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTLY (FACE TO FACE) WITH THE THREE (3) PROPOSERS AND COX, DISCUSSING THEIR OFFERINGS AS WELL AS PROPOSING HOW THE OFFERINGS COULD BE AlTERED TO INCLUDE COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND MEMBERS FROM ONE TEAM JOINING JONES/NEW URBAN'S TEAM, BEFORE HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE WARC BOARD ON OCTOBER 9, 2013, COMPROMISED THE 3

6 INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS, AND SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED BY THE PALM BEACH COUNTY OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AND PALM BEACH ETHICS COMMISSION. RIDLEY SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HIMSELF FROM VOTING AS A WARC BOARD MEMBER ON OCTOBER 16, 2013, WHO VOTED TO RECOMMEND THE JONES/NEW URBAN PROPOSAL TO THE CRA BOARD TO VOTE ON THE NIGHT OF OCTOBER 24, COX AND RIDLEY ETHICAL AND PROCUREMENT VIOLATIONS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR CRA BOARD MEMBER REGGIE COX TO HAVE HONORED THE MANDATORY CONE OF SILENCE IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHAIR OF WARC AND CRA BOARD MEMBER IN HIS DISCUSSIONS WITH RIDLEY ABOUT THE PROPOSERS AND THEIR OFFERINGS; KNOWING THAT RIDLEY HAD MEETINGS AND NUMEROUS CELL PHONE CALLS WITH All THREE (3) PROPOSERS AND WITH ONE (1) JONES/NEW URBAN MEMBER ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. IT IS ALSO TROUBLING THATWARC CHAIR AND CRA BOARD MEMBER COX, HAD DISCUSSED THE PROS AND CONS OF THE THREE (3) PROPOSERS IN THE SHADE WITH NEWLY APPOINTED WARC BOARD MEMBER RIDLEY, PRIOR TO NOMINATING RIDLEY WITHOUT ANY ADVERTISEMENT OR NOTIFICATION THAT WARC WAS SOLICITING APPLICATIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE, IN WHICH WARC SERVES TO FlU A VACANT SEAT ON OCTOBER 9, A PROCESS AND CONE OF SILENCE THAT EXISTED SINCE MAY 26, 2013, AND FIVE (5) MONTHS BEFORE RIDLEY'S SWIFT APPOINTMENT TO THE WARC BOARD. COX AND RIDLEY'S PERSONAL AND BUSINESS CELL PHONE RECORDS, S, TEXTS AND MEETING CALENDARS WILL DOCUMENT THEIR NUMEROUS BREACHES. IN CLOSING, DUE TO THE MANY ETHICAL, PROCUREMENT AND GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE SUNSHINE VIOLATIONS, COX SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE All OF HIS EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH RIDLEY AS AN AGENT FOR JONES/NEW URBAN DURING THE CONE OF SILENCE AND SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES SHOULD BE IMPOSED UPON REGGIE COX FOR HIS DELIBERATE AND WILLFUL INVOLVEMENT WITH REGARD TO ETHICS BREACHES. Sin~ely, V" C'-9 )'- ") (} I Yl ~ :j-1,/, Jos Smith, Jr. Ed. D. 4

7 CRA PROJECT NO.: CRA REISSUED REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS WEST ATLANTIC AVENUE PROPERTIES A REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY IN DOWNTOWN DELRAY BEACH itcra DELRAY BEACH COMMUN ITY AlDlYlLOPIIlNT AGENCY RELEASE DATE: May SUBMISSION DEADLINE: July @ 2:00pm THE OELRA Y BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Howard Lewis, Chair Peter Arts, Vice-Chair Cathy Balestriere, First Vice Chair William "Bill" Branning, Treasurer Veronica Covington Herman Stevens Annette Gray

8 Proposals submitted to the CRA in response to this RFP shall be considered irrevocable until after a bidder is selected to enter into contract with the CRA. Withdrawal during this period or a failure to participate in the requirements of the bid process shall result in a forfeiture of the deposit. Any and all decisions by the CRA to modify the schedule described herein, requests for additional information, reject insufficient or unclear proposals, formulate an objective point system for review, rate and rank proposals, negotiate agreements, abandon negotiations, approve agreements, etc., shall be at the CRA's sole and absolute discretion and no protests whatsoever shall be considered by the CRA. Submittal of a reply to this solicitation on the part of any and all proposers constitutes acceptance of this policy. T. Right to Withdraw Chapter requires that once a contract is negotiated, the same must be filed with the City of Delray Beach Clerk with the Notice of Intent to Award such contract thirty (30) days prior to the execution of such contract. The CRA specifically reserves the right to refrain from awarding a contract for the sale of any or all of the subject property to any persons and to withdraw from the process and/or negotiations at any time at its sole and absolute discretion. The CRA reserves the right to enter into a contract with any of the proposers on the basis of the impact on redevelopment by the proposed project at the CRA's sole and absolute discretion and not necessarily to the proposer offering the highest purchase price. The CRA expressly reserves the right to obtain economic feasibility studies or third party evaluation with regard to any part of the subject proposals. No Lobbying/Contact Permitted v. As to any matter relating to this RFP, any Proposer, team member, or anyone representing a Proposer is advised that they are prohibited from contacting or lobbying the CRA Chair, any CRA Commissioner, CRA staff, or any other person working on behalf of the CRA on any matter related to or involved with this RFP. For purposes of clarification, a team's representatives shall indude, but not be limited to, the Proposer's employees, partners, attorneys, officers, directors, consultants, lobbyists, or any actual or potential subcontractor or consultant of the Proposer and the Proposer's team. All oral or written inquiries are to be directed to the Procurement Official. Any violation of this condition may result in rejection and/or disqualification of the Proposer. This "No Lobbying Provision" is in effect from the date of publication of the RFP and shall terminate at the time the CRA selects a proposal, rejects all proposals, or otherwise takes action which ends the solicitation process. Questions Questions and inquiries concerning the proposal and specifications of the solicitation shall be submitted in writing and directed to the City of Delray Beach Purchasing 13

9 Division, 100 N.W Avenue, Delray Beach, FL (or at nadal@mydelraybeach.com) for receipt no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the date set for receiving proposals. Oral explanations, information and instructions shall not be considered binding on the CRA. All prospective proposers are encouraged to independently verify the accuracy of any information provided. Neither the CRA nor any of its agents or employees shall be responsible for the accuracy of any oral information provided to any proposer. W. Minimum Offer As indicated in Section "I" above, an appraisal of the subject properties was completed in March 2012, and is available in electronic form upon written request to the City of Delray Beach Purchasing Division. Any offers to lease or acquire the property for less than the appraised value must indicate the value of other items of a public benefit, such as creation of jobs, parking and open space, provision of affordable housing, etc as well as stating the specific benefits that the proposed project would bring to the surrounding area. Pursuant to Section (2), Florida Statutes, offers for the acquisition of the properties for less than fair value shall require approval by the Delray Beach City Commission. 14

10 Anticipated Schedule for RFP RFP Advertised: May 26, 2013 Pre-submittal meeting: June 3, 2:00 pm, Delray Beach City Hall, First Floor Conference Room, 100 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL (Attendance is on a voluntary basis. PLEASE NOTE: This will be the only opportunity for applicants to directly address CRA staff regarding the RFP.) RFP Response Deadline: July 12, 2013@ 2:00 pm, City of Delray Beach Purchasing Division office located at 100 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL Review. ranking. and selection of top respondents by Selection Committee no later than: August 2, 2013 Presentations made by top respondents to CRA Board of Commissioners: Starting at 6:00pm August 8, Delray Beach City Hall, City Commission Chambers, 100 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL Approval of selected respondent by the CRA Board of Commissioners no later than: August 22, (Note: Dates above are subject to change-registered bidders will be notified by of changes, if any.) 15