R9H-Discuss Consideration Of Written Report Of Debarment InvestigatorMIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachll.gov
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Philip Levine and Members
FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
DATE: February 12, 2014
SUBJECT: THE MAYOR AND CITY COMM SION'S CONSIDERATION OF THE
WRITTEN REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE DEBARMENT
INVESTIGATOR
BACKGROUND
The City Attorney's Office notified the City Manager that Robert Meyers may be retained to
investigate the allegations contained in Commissioner Wolfson's July 10, 2013, Request for
Debarment concerning the activities of Robert Wennet, principle of UIA Management, LLC,
who was alleged to have engaged in unregistered lobbying in the City of Miami Beach. The
request for debarment further alleged that a fraudulent affidavit was submitted to the City of
Miami Beach, regarding the convention center project.
Pursuant to Section 2-405(b) of the City of Miami Beach Code upon completion of the
investigation surrounding the request for debarment completed by Robert Meyers, the City
Manager shall forward the report to the Mayor and City Commission at a regularly scheduled
meeting. Accordingly, attached is the report and recommendations provided by Mr. Meyers.
RECOMMENDATION
The mayor and city commission shall consider the Investigator's written report and
recommendation and determine whether:
(1) A hearing for debarment or suspension should be conducted; or
(2) No probable cause exists for the allegations in the written request for debarment or
suspension and the matter should be dismissed; or
(3) Further investigation should be made prior to considering whether a hearing should be
conducted or the matter should be dismissed; or
(4) Other action, as may be appropriate, should be taken.
If the Mayor and City Commission determine that a hearing should be conducted, the Mayor
and City Commission shall forward the report to the Debarment Committee or, at its option and
by majority vote, the Mayor and City Commission may elect to hear the matter as the trier of
fact instead of the Debarment Committee.
JLM I KGB I AD
T:IAGENDA\2014\February\ProcurementlConsideraton of Recommendation of Debarment Investigator.doc
908
Agenda Item R C,/t
Date 1-""/2~/l(
Memo
Weiss Serota Heitman Pastoriza Cole
& Boniske, P.L.
To: Jimmy Morales, City Manager, City of Miami Beach
From: Robert Meyers, Esq.
Date: November 5, 2013
Re: Wolfson Request for Debarment of UIA Management, LLC and Affiliates
Background:
City Commissioner Jonah M. Wolfson provided you with correspondence dated July 10, 2013 wherein he
requested debarment of UIA Management, LLC and its Affiliates, alleging that Robert Wennett as a
principal of UIA Management engaged in unregistered lobbying on at least three separate occasions and
further alleges that Mr. Wennett was untruthful in an affidavit that he submitted in his company's
response to the redevelopment of the Convention Center RFQ. In consultation with the Office of the
City Attorney, your office retained my services to investigate the allegations contained in Commissioner
Wolfson's July 10, 2013 letter and to make a recommendation concerning the claim that Mr. Wennett's
actions warrant debarment.
Timeline:
1) On January 25, 2007, Robert Wennett, the President of UIA Management LLC, filed a lobbyist
registration form with the City Clerk, paid a fee of $150 and listed 1111 Lincoln Road as the
specific lobbying issue.
2) Robert Wennett, as President of UIA Management, and the City of Miami Beach entered into a
Development Agreement with UIA on April 11, 2007 for the Pedestrian Mall on the 1100 Block
of Lincoln Road.
3) On September 2, 2008, Robert Wen nett and Jeffrey Weinstein, also a principal of UIA, paid the
City Clerk's Office $250. The receipt noted that such payment was for Lobbyist Registration
Renewal 2008-09.
4) On December 29, 2009, City Manager Jorge Gonzalez informed the City Commission that he
created the Convention Center Expansion and Enhancement Steering Committee to advise the
City and Arquitectonica with recommendations for any enhancements and expansion of the
909
convention center and to assist in guiding the master planning process. Robert Wennett was
identified as one of the appointees to this committee.
5} In accordance with the Development Agreement, the City and UIA entered into a Management
Agreement of the 1100 Block of Lincoln Road on January 11, 2010, defined as the Lincoln Road
Maintenance Agreement.
6) On January 5, 2011, Robert Wennett and Jeffrey Weinstein made a payment to the City Clerk's
Office of $1000 covering lobbying activities from October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011. The
receipt was made out to Robert Wen nett and Jeffrey Weinstein, UIA Management.
7) On February 8, 2012 payment was made to the City Clerk's Office in the amount of $1,000 and
represented the annual registration payment for both Wennett and Weinstein for the period
from October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012. The form did not list the issue or the name of the
client.
8) The Convention Center RFQ was advertised in February 8, 2012 and the City Cone of Silence
took effect on that date.
9) On October 22, 2012, a Lobbyist Registration Form was completed by Robert Wennett and filed
with the City Clerk in the amount of $1,550. The receipt prepared by the Clerk's Office indicated
that the payment represented annual renewal and also listed the following issues: RFP 14-
11/12 (The Lincoln Road RFP); RFQ 22-11/12 (Convention Center) and the Lincoln Road
Maintenance RFP.
10} The City Commission selected the Tishman Group to serve as the Master Development Team on
July 17, 2013 for the Miami Beach Convention Center Redevelopment Project. UIA
Management was part of the submittal and is one of the team members.
Relevant Laws/Opinions/Reports:
1} Sections 2-397 -2-406 of the City Code (Division 5 -Debarment of Contractors from City Work)
2) Sections 2-481-2-485.3 of the City Code (Division 3 -Lobbyists}
3) Section 2-11.l(s) of the Miami-Dade County Code --Lobbyist Registration and Reporting
Ordinance
4) Section 2-486 of City Code (Cone of Silence)
5) Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust RQO 05-114
6) Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust Investigative Report K 12-093
Discussion:
I will examine each allegation separately:
1} The February 24, 2011 meeting of the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (hereinafter
"FCWPC") included a discussion of the Lincoln Road Maintenance Agreement (Agenda Item 6).
An individual identifying himself as Robert Wennett made a presentation to the Committee
910
concerning the Lincoln Road Maintenance Agreement. Since he was clearly encouraging the
Committee to take action with respect to this item, his appearance would otherwise represent a
lobbying activity. The City of Miami Beach defines a lobbyist in Section 2-481 of the City Code
and includes within the definition of lobbyist all persons employed or retained by a principal
who seek to encourage the passage, defeat or modification of any action, decision,
recommendation of any city board or committee. Under the circumstances, Mr. Wennett meets
the definition of a lobbyist. However, an opinion from the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics
and Public Trust reaches a different conclusion when the advocacy is tied to an existing
agreement with the government In RQO 05-114, the Ethics Commission opined that a company
or its representative may not be required to register as a lobbyist to negotiate extensions or
amendments to an existing contract that are contemplated under the original agreement, but
would be required to register to discuss issues that are deemed to be substantive in nature and
not covered by the original agreement.
In the Development Agreement entered into by Wennett on behalf of UIA and the City of Miami
Beach, the parties agreed that the scope of the Lincoln Road Maintenance Agreement could be
expanded to cover the management of the maintenance of other sections of Lincoln Road
beyond the 1100 Block. Moreover, in memorandum from the City Manager to the members of
the FCWPC prior to the February 24, 2011 meeting regarding the Lincoln Road Maintenance
Agreement, the City Manager by way of background advised the Committee that the parties
were permitted to expand the type of services provided on the 1100 Block of Lincoln Road and
further advised the Committee that the City was in discussions with UIA to expand the services
provided on the 1100 block to the remainder of Lincoln Road from Collins Avenue to the Bay.
Thus, it is apparent from the actions of the parties, the language contained in the original
development agreement and the scope of work being considered by FCWPC at its February 24,
2011 meeting, Mr. Wennett was not required to register as a lobbyist when speaking to the
Committee on the issue of expansion of the Lincoln Road Maintenance agreement for the same
type of services to other portions of Lincoln Road. Since it is my opinion that Mr. Wennett did
not need to register when presenting on Agenda Item 6, I will not address the question of
whether or not he was registered for this matter when he appeared before the Committee on
February 24, 2011.
2) A second claim of unregistered lobbying allegedly occurred at the same meeting. The
contention is that Mr. Wen nett was not properly registered with he lobbied the Committee with
respect to Agenda Item 2 (redevelopment of Miami Beach Convention Center}. The threshold
question is whether Mr. Wennett was required to register when he presented to the Committee
on February 24, 2011 to address the Committee on the Convention Center item.
According to City records, RFQ 22-11/12 (Redevelopment of the Miami Beach Convention
Center District) was advertised on February 8, 2012 -at which time the City's Cone of Silence
took effect. It is worth noting that Mr. Wen nett and UIA were part of a proposal team that was
eventually selected by the City Commission on July 17, 2013 to serve as the master development
team for this project. Although it is conceivable that lobbying could have occurred prior to the
advertisement of the abovementioned RFQ, the sole claim of unauthorized lobbying allegedly
took place at the February 24, 2011 meeting. The facts do not support a finding that Mr.
Wennett was engaging in unregistered lobbying when he presented at the Committee meeting
on this issue.
911
Miami Beach Code Section 2-483(a) states that a public officer, employee or appointee or any
person in contractual privity with the city who only appears in his official capacity shall not be
required to register as a lobbyist. The City Manager appointed Mr. Wennett to the Convention
Center Expansion and Enhancement Steering Committee in 2009. The audio tape of the
February 24, 2011 meeting confirms that when the Convention Center item was discussed, Mr.
Wen nett identified himself as a member of the Convention Center Expansion and Enhancement
Steering Committee before he presented to the FCWPC. As such, he falls within the exception
to the lobbying registration requirement because he was appearing before the Committee as an
appointee of another city committee. Moreover, the discussions at the meeting concerning the
Convention Center were at a relatively preliminary stage at that time and there was no RPQ or
other competitive solicitation in place in February 2011, so in effect, Mr. Wennett would not
meet the definition of a lobbyist with respect to that matter even if the "public
official/appointee" exception is disregarded. Consequently, I find that Mr. Wennett was not
required by the City Code to register as a lobbyist when he appeared before the Committee
concerning the Convention Center item.
3) The third instance of unauthorized lobbying alleged by Commissioner Wolfson was to have
taken place at the February 8, 2012 City Commission meeting during a discussion of the Lincoln
Road Maintencmce Agreement (Agenda Item R7F). Based on the City's actions leading up to this
date -the Manager's recommendation and the recommendation of the FCWPC -the matter
before the City Commission was virtually identical to the item considered by other City decision-
makers and entities, that is, to expand the scope of services contemplated by the Development
Agreement. As stated above, a person is not required to register as a lobbyist when presenting
on a matter covered under the original agreement. Therefore, Mr. Wen nett was not improperly
lobbying when he appeared at the City Commission meeting on February 8, 2012 to address the
Lincoln Road Maintenance Agreement item.
4} The final allegation against Mr. Wennett as a representative of UIA is that he was untruthful in
an affidavit that he supplied the City in connection with the Convention Center Redevelopment
RFQ when he asserted that he has not engaged in any lobbying activities regarding the RQO in
violation of the City's Lobbyists Laws. The evidence presented by Commissioner Wolfson is the
audio of the February 24, 2011 FCWPC meeting at which Mr. Wennett purportedly lobbied
regarding the development of the Miami Beach Convention Center. My report considered the
allegations of improper lobbying as to the Miami Beach Convention Center in a previous section
and reached the conclusion that Mr. Wennett complied with the City's Lobbying Laws.
Consequently, I find that Mr. Wennett's ilssertions contained in the affidavit concerning
adherence to the City's Lobbying Laws are in fact truthful.
Lastly, I find it is within the scope of this report to comment on whether the allegations if proven to be
true would be grounds for the City to move forward with a debarment action against UIA. The
allegations contained in Commissioner Wolfson's letter of July 10, 2013 are within the scope of the
debarment ordinance because unregistered lobbying is a violation of a city ordinance and such
ordinance contains a penalty section that permits a debarment action against the violator (see City Code
Section 2-485.1} However, separate and apart from my conclusions that no city ordinance was violilted
by Mr. Wennett or UIA, Section 2-404 of the City Code (Causes for Debarment} states a debarment
action against a city contractor can only proceed if a violation of a city ordinance is found. Based upon
912
my review, the City of Miami Beach lacks the authority to find a party has violated its own lobbying
ordinance. Rather, such authority resides with the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust.
Absent an order from the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics finding such a violation or an admission by
the party that he violated the City's lobbying rules, I find that the causes for debarment under the city
ordinance do not exist and a debarment action against UIA Management should not proceed.
913