You are here
MILLER'S CROSSING
February 3, 2009
This cover story is reproduced with permission from Folioweekly magazine
See: www.folioweekly.com
CARLA MILLER was appointed to reform Jacksonville’s ethics. The fact that she’s being squeezed out suggests she may be doing her job too well.
When Mayor John Peyton decided to hire Carla Miller as Jacksonville’s Ethics Officer in 2007, the city was in crisis. A grand jury was investigating violations of state open-meeting laws by nearly every member of the former City Council. The FBI had begun sniffing around JaxPort, probing dubious contracts and allegations of influence peddling. The city had spent $36.5 million to develop the old Shipyards site, with nothing to show for it. It had spent another $26.8 million on the courthouse with similar results.
The mayor himself was embroiled in scandal. City Hall cynics who believed local government operates on a system of patronage and paybacks got their proof when it came to light that two close friends of Peyton’s had been awarded lucrative city contracts without submitting proper bids. Peyton’s former chief of staff and close friend Scott Teagle had gotten more than $500,000 in contracts, even though his company wasn’t qualified to compete for the work. Another Peyton friend received a $64,100 no-bid consulting job, for little more than helping city employees organize their desks.
The wave of ethical violations and bad decisions threatened to swamp the Peyton Administration. Public outcry was fierce. State Attorney Harry Shorstein was openly critical. The mayor responded. In an open letter to the public in August 2007, Peyton aplogized for the lapses that led to the hiring of his friends, calling it a "failure" that eroded public trust. To restore the public’s faith, Peyton proposed hiring an Ethics Officer, establishing a hotline for the reporting of ethics violations and appointing a veteran of the Council Auditor’s Office as Inspector General to help investigate complaints.
One measure of how seriously Peyton regarded the dustup was his
choice
of Carla Miller for the job of Ethics Officer. A former federal
prosecutor who’d helped take down a corrupt state senator in
Jacksonville in the 1980s, Miller had
served as chair of the city’s Ethics Commission,
authored much of city’s Ethics Code,
and was an internationally recognized expert
on ethics, serving as president of a nonprofit
organization devoted to helping local
governments reform corrupt systems. She
was so dedicated to making Jacksonville’s
Ethics Code work that after it was adopted
in 1999, she served as the city’s voluntary
Ethics Officer for eight years.
Peyton considered Miller an essential part of the ethics overhaul and assigned her a broad slate of responsibilities. In addition to duties outlined in the Ethics Code — teaching ethics law to elected officials and city employees, monitoring compliance with gift reporting and lobbyist registration, and instituting the hotline — Peyton specifically charged Miller with bringing greater transparency and accountability to the procurement process, the business of bids and contracts that proved such an embarrassment to his administration.
But despite the sweeping reform Peyton proposed, the structure of the position constrained inquiry. Simply put, Miller is in the unenviable position of reporting to the very people who oversee the bureaucracy she’s tasked with watchdogging: She answers to both the mayor and the City Council president.
The ethics hotline has a similar problem. Although Miller is responsible for handling preliminary inquiries, ethics complaints that merit investigation are referred to either the administration’s Inspector General or the City Council Auditor. Those probes typically examine whether an action followed city protocol or if any laws have been broken, but they rarely examine whether city laws or procedures themselves need to be modified. Broader issues of how contracts are awarded or whether the purchasing code is transparent aren’t addressed unless they’re specifically taken up by Miller or the Ethics Commission.
Miller’s biggest obstacle, though, is internal resistance. Her reform efforts have raised the hackles of influential lobbyists and infuriated some City Councilmembers. The blowback has been fierce, both through official channels and in the media. Several councilmembers, most notably Stephen Joost and Jay Jabour, openly balked at granting Miller a part-time wage of $85 an hour — a starting salary in legal circles — even though she agreed to forego salary increases, health insurance and pension benefits. She’s been treated with open hostility by lobbyists, who accuse her of overreaching, and by some officials, who think her investigations have embarrassed the city.
A little more than a year into the job,
Miller believes she’s accomplished much. She
trained more than 1,000 city employees. She
established a protocol for the ethics hotline.
She strengthened lobbyist disclosure requirements
and made a wide range of ethics
reports available on the Ethics Office website.
Miller’s not at all certain she’ll still have a
job a year from now. Even if she does, she
fears the position of Ethics Officer will be so
reduced it may not be worth having. Plenty
of City Hall observers agree. Unless and
until the city creates a truly independent
Ethics Office, insiders say, the future of the
position will always be in peril.
“She is really in an impossible situation,”
says Ethics Commissioner Pat Sher. “How
can she relate to the public as their advocate
at the same time she … reports to the mayor
and the [council president]?”
Former State Attorney Harry Shorstein agrees. “The need for an ethics commission and ethics officer is greater today than ever in Jacksonville history,” he says. “[But] the effectiveness of the Ethics Commission and the Ethics Officer will always depend on their independence and insulation from political influence.”
Carla Miller was born in 1951 in Philadelphia. A private-school student throughout her childhood, Miller grew up sheltered and somewhat idealistic. She attended Florida State University in the 1960s, and told The Florida Times-Union in a 2007 interview that as a young woman, she’d worn “dresses, complete with pantyhose and white gloves, to football games.”
In 1979, she earned her law degree from
the University of Florida, then went to work
for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle
District of Florida. Her interest in ethics
grew out of her years as a federal prosecutor.
She was involved in 15 white-collar criminal
cases right out of college and wondered
whether the culture surrounding elected
officials encouraged corruption or could
help prevent it.
Miller became familiar with the underbelly of Northeast Florida politics during a major investigation into corruption in Jacksonville City Hall. She helped convict former state Sen. Dan Scarborough, of Jacksonville, along with a state lobbyist and local lawyer, for conspiring to obtain an illegal liquor license for a local bar. Since 1983, Miller has been in private practice, a partner in the personal injury law firm of Miller and Skinner, P.A. She also founded the consulting agency City Ethics, through which she helps municipalities around the world establish ethics programs. After Mayor John Delaney ran on a platform of ethical reform, Miller volunteered to help fashion the city’s Ethics Code, then volunteered to be the Ethics Officer.
Miller took Peyton’s offer of a job aware
of the funding, staffing and independence
limitations — she was a part-time employee
with no full-time support staff — but eager
to make it work.
“Here was the dilemma: Do I take a part-time position and really try to make it work with the limited resources because I care enough about it?” she asks. “Or do I say, ‘With the limited resources you’ve given me, I can’t really take this on.’ Maybe I just had to do it that way for a year in order to understand what really needed to be done.”
What needs to be done, Miller believes,
is to establish a truly independent ethics
function, with the hotline and either the
Inspector General or another investigative
unit attached to an independent ethics
commission. The structure would be similar
to those found in Miami, Atlanta and
Philadelphia, cities where ethics commissions
have the authority to investigate violations
and mete out punishment. They can subpoena witnesses, levy fines, and
have large budgets. And they aren’t shy
about going after elected officials.
The Miami-Dade Commission on
Ethics and Public Trust has an annual
budget of $2 million, five board members,
an executive director and six investigators.
In 2007, the commission investigated
Mayor Manny Diaz and a former Miami
Commissioner, and found both had violated city ethics laws when they
formed a real estate company with the city manager
and purchased land near a major capital
improvement project. The commissioner
(no longer in office) paid a $750 fine; Diaz
was fined $250 and given a formal letter of
reprimand from the commission.
The Atlanta Board of Ethics has a
smaller budget — about $350,000 —
but no less power. Just last month, two
Atlanta City Councilmembers agreed to
pay nearly $27,000 in fines and penalties
related to the misuse of their city council
expense accounts, after the citizenappointed
ethics board found they’d spent
the money inappropriately.
In Jacksonville, by comparison, the
total annual budget for the Ethics Office
is about $90,000 — including Miller’s
$75,000 salary. The Ethics Commission has
no power to subpoena witness and although
it can issue reprimands, it cannot levy fines.
In most cases, local ethics probes take a backseat to formal
investigations where
there is a possibility of criminal wrongdoing.
For instance, a grand jury investigated
the 2001 Shipyards deal, in which the
Delaney administration crafted a flawed
contract that allowed developers with
almost no large-scale project experience to
receive $36.5 million in city money. The
money was ostensibly for public improvements,
but the contract placed few restrictions
on when or how that money would be
spent. (Some of it went to buy football tickets
to woo potential investors.) The public
improvements — like the rest of the Shipyards
project — were never completed. The
city was left with nothing but piles of dirt.
A grand jury investigation found fault
with city attorneys, and a lot of wasted
money, but no evidence of a crime. Aside
from a scathing report, there was no punishment
for those involved. But just because no
criminal violations were found doesn’t mean
that there weren't ethical ones — violations
an empowered Ethics Commission might
have pursued and punished.
The grand jury also pointed out that in
2003, the former director of the Jacksonville
Economic Development Commission,
Mike Weinstein, accepted a $25,000
consulting fee from the Shipyards group to
help the company market its property during
the Super Bowl. Weinstein, who was
later named Super Bowl Host Committee
Chair, had been in charge at JEDC when
the lucrative Shipyards deal went through.
The grand jury report in 2005 concluded
Weinstein had violated city rules that prohibit
a former city official from acting as a
representative for a party on any matter in
which the city or the official had a direct or
substantial interest. The grand jury merely
noted the violation, however, and the state
attorney didn’t prosecute it. (The Ethics
Code was expanded in 2007 to include
restrictions on post-city employment.)
Weinstein, far from being punished, has
prospered. In November, he was elected
state representative.
Perhaps the best case for more stringent
ethics oversight is the January 2008 grand
jury report into violations of the Sunshine
and open-meetings laws on the part of City
Councilmembers. Although the grand jury
didn’t find criminal violations, it did find myriad non-criminal
violations. But
Shorstein declined to prosecute, noting that
punishment for any non-criminal violations
— a maximum fine of $500 — would be
miniscule relative to the time and money it
would take to prosecute them.
Shorstein’s decision may have been fiscally
prudent, but the message it sent to
lawmakers was troubling. Basically, it
affirmed their ability to violate the law with
impunity. The council attempted to salve
community outrage by passing the Jacksonville
Sunshine Law Compliance Act, but
the law did little more than reiterate what
state laws already stated. And it’s no easier to
make lawmakers comply with the local law
than it was with the state law. There’s simply
no enforcement function.
Newly elected City Councilmember John
Crescimbeni believes that the city’s ethics
office is the appropriate watchdog in that situation,
but is skeptical the office can assume
that role while it’s under the thumb of the
mayor and the council. He plans to introduce
legislation calling for a truly independent
Ethics Office and Ethics Commission. “I
want our city to operate responsibly and ethically.
I think they need to be an
autonomous organization that reports to
nobody but the citizens.”
In November, Carla Miller attended the
Transparency International anti-corruption
conference in Athens, Greece —
an event that drew ethics advocates from
around the world. Some of the people who
took part have been threatened or tortured
for their efforts to bring transparency to politics;
some of their colleagues have been
killed. Miller calls the conference “inspiring,”
but also helpful in keeping her own challenges
in perspective.
It’s perspective she’ll need this year. Even
as some ethics advocates call for strengthening
her role, administrative zeal for the
Ethics Office seems to be waning. Some
observers expect the city to chip away at
Miller’s authority and corral her influence.
Already she’s been chastised for raising questions
about the procurement process.
There’s also talk of shifting the hotline from
the Ethics Office and the Ethics Commission
to the Office of Inspector General, a move that would allow the
administration to exercise more control and might diminish
tipsters’ confidence that their information
will be protected from disclosure. If the
hotline is taken from the Ethics Office, it
would leave the Ethics Office to handle little
more than employee training and gift
reporting. Miller would be cut out of the
investigative process entirely.
Miller may also face a funding struggle in
next round of recession-era budget hearings.
City Councilmember Clay Yarborough predicts
she will have to fight for even the limited
money her office receives. Persuading
the council to fund an independent Ethics
Office and Ethics Commission, he says, is a
long shot.
Commissioner Sher is more optimistic.
She believes public support for an independent
board is stronger than elected
officials realize. “I think the general public
is solidly behind us,” she says. “I think
they’d rather we spend money on ethics
than on a cruise terminal.”
Part of that support, of course, depends
on the public perception that ethics watchdogs
get results. One of Miller’s biggest successes
in that area was the registration of lobbyists.
Soon after Peyton hired her, she
reviewed the entire ethics code with an eye
toward compliance issues, like gift reporting,
secondary employment and lobbyist registration.
She found compliance with lobbyist
registration laws particularly lax. Although
the Ethics Code required lobbyists to
register with the city and identify their
clients and issues, most provided only rote
disclosure, listing only “various issues and
clients” on the form. Miller found the rule
unacceptably vague and clearly designed to
benefit lobbyists.
At Miller’s request, the council approved a
more detailed lobbyist registration form, one
that required client names and professions,
the issue for which they would be lobbying
and whether the lobbyist had a financial
interest in the outcome of the legislation.
The law took effect Jan. 1, 2008, and
over the following few months, 50 lobbyists
sent updated information, although not all provided specific
information on the issues
upon which they were hired to lobby. Nine
didn’t comply. In April, Miller sent out letters
to the nine, informing them that if they
didn’t comply, their names would be
stricken from the list of legally registered
lobbyists. She noted it was a Class A offense
to lobby without proper registration, punishable
by a $25 fine or 10 days in jail. She
also notified the State Attorney’s Office that
some lobbyists weren’t in compliance.
That letter — and the implicit
threat —
didn’t sit well with omnipresent land-use
lobbyist Paul Harden, one of the nine who
didn’t comply. On April 7, Harden sent a
letter to Miller noting he’d been registering
the same way — “various issues and clients”
— for some 23 years, and he didn’t believe
he was compelled to change. He asserted
that Miller had no authority to strike his
name from the list of registered lobbyists.
Miller checked her position with the
city’s General Counsel’s Office to make sure
she was acting within her authority, and the
Ethics Commission backed her, asking
Harden to appear before them to discuss his
intransigence. In the end, he agreed to register,
although like most lobbyists, he still lists
only general land use and zoning as his
issues, and not the specific bill or property
he’s working on.
Miller concedes compliance with lobbyist
registration rules is still incomplete,
but even the partial victory cost her plenty. She was warned of
retribution, she says, and
was told she would be undermined for challenging
Harden. She was even told rumors
could be circulated about her, true or not.
Miller says she wasn’t fazed by the threats,
just disappointed. “What were they going to
say?” she laughs. “That I’m a Weight
Watcher’s dropout?”
Miller also encountered resistance when
she began raising questions about a new
contract for Trail Ridge Landfill on the
Westside. The Peyton Administration wants
to waive the city’s purchasing code in order
to give Waste Management a no-bid, 40-
year, $750 million contract to manage the
landfill. The deal’s critics note that it’s the
single-largest contract in city history, one
that deserves the scrutiny of a competitive
bid process. Miller was also concerned that
the bill seemed purposely vague, not saying
how much the contract would cost the city
or how long it would last. (Coincidentally,
the bill was being pushed through council
by land-use attorney Harden, who threatened
to sue the city “until the cows come
home” if the deal wasn’t signed.)
Miller’s concerns went beyond the specific
contract. She believes that any time the
bidding process is set aside, the reason —
and the amount of money involved —
should be abundantly clear to the public.
She began asking questions about how often
the purchasing code was waived and for
what reasons. But as she ventured deeper
into procurement matters, Miller says she
was told in no uncertain terms to back off
and stick to her area: the Ethics Code. The
Ethics Commission got a similar response
from the Chief Deputy of the General
Counsel’s Office Cindy Laquidara when it
began asking about the contract at a Sept. 30
meeting. Laquidara warned that the commission
was overstepping its responsibilities
and meddling in City Council business.
In an interview with Folio Weekly,
Laquidara clarified her statement, saying that
while questioning the procurement code
might be fertile ground for the Ethics Office
and the Ethics Commission, they must first
be educated about how the code functions.
“Then you actually might be able to bring some value to it,” Laquidara
says. “When
one stands up and says, ‘This particular bill
is not transparent,’ and you don’t know what
laws apply to it, it’s not very helpful.” She
adds, “Throwing grenades is real easy.”
Miller says she wasn’t grenade-throwing
and notes that the mayor signed an executive
order calling for the Ethics Officer “to
integrate ethics into procurement policies.”
“What does that mean?” she asks. “It
means asking questions about the procurement
process.” She adds with barely discernable
sarcasm, “If you’re waiving the procurement
process for what is close to $750 million,
that may be something that would
catch your attention.”
Miller concedes it would be easier —
and safer — to stick to boilerplate ethics.
But as a former prosecutor, she says that
when she senses her questions make people
skittish, she tends to want to know more.
“You can pick safe issues or you can pick
ones where people are skittish. Safe issues
would be: Let’s discuss whether or not
employees can get fruit baskets, and should
fruit baskets have chocolate in them, because
that might bring it up over the $100 limit.
Or do you say: The procurement code is
really interesting, and how does that work
and is it a fair and transparent system in
plain English for the citizens of Jacksonville
to understand?”
For Miller, the answer is a no-brainer.
She’s fully aware that making people uncomfortable
makes her job less secure. She doesn’t
think she’ll be fired — something she and
others say would be politically untenable.
But she does think that a minority inside
City Hall feels threatened.
Miller doesn’t care. “I don’t want to look
back and say, ‘Well, did I waste my time
here for the past 10 years? Did it really just
add up to making people think they had an
effective ethics program, or was it really an
effective program? Did it provide more
transparency? Did it save taxpayers’ money?
Or did it just have ‘ethics’ written on a door
and some brochures to hand out and make
people worried about taking gift baskets?’”
She doesn't answer her own question, but her meaning is transparent.