Florida's Financial Disclosure Watchdog Doesn't Bark

Trust
(Image by Pixabay: LisaLove2Dance)   Details   DMCA

By Steve Schneider

Introduction to Financial Disclosure Requirements

Florida's Commission on Ethics publishes a clear, concise online explanation of why certain people must file a financial disclosure form. It says, "Financial disclosure is required of public officials and employees because it enables the public to evaluate potential conflicts of interest, deters corruption, and increases public confidence in government." This sounds good. It makes sense. But I soon learned that things get cloudy real fast.

For starters, some folks must submit a Form 1, while others are required by state law to turn in a Form 6. The Form 6 requires people to provide much more detailed information about their net worth, and liabilities, for example. In fact, a recent state law mandating that more people file a Form 6 led to lawsuits in circuit court and federal court. A federal judge appointed by President Joe Biden temporarily blocked the expansion of the Form 6 requirement after many local officials either quit or filed suit. However, even the easier to complete Form 1 isn't always cut-and-dried for people who must complete it or enforce state law.

I found that Form 1 can be challenging for both those who complete it and those who enforce the law after getting a tip about a member of the Hollywood Planning and Development Board. This member also serves as president of a local civic association that promotes development in an older neighborhood adjacent to booming downtown Hollywood. Kenneth Crawford is the name of the Board member who also operates as president of the Parkside Civic Association. And he owns and runs an interior design firm, and owns property in Broward County, according to public records.

Crawford's association with two groups that promote development led me to an issue that I think is much more important. So I'll use the Hollywood Planning and Development Board to make my point. The even bigger point, I think, involves how people understand state financial disclosure requirements, and how laws governing such disclosure get enforced.

An example of the foregoing is that many members of the nine-member Hollywood Planning and Development Board had submitted their 2023 Form 1 by the time I started my reporting. Beginning this year people who complete the report must do so electronically. And what they turn in is a public record that can be viewed here. However, the financial disclosure form for Richard Blattner, a former Hollywood City Commissioner and citizen Board member, wasn't online. When I contacted him, though, he was transparent. He wrote, "Filed last week. Must have missed the reminder." Blattner also offered to show me a copy of his Form 1.

The state Commission on Ethics online public search also told me that Mena Morgan hadn't submitted a form. Morgan sits on the Hollywood Planning and Development Board as a design member. But she responded to my email, saying she had sent her Form 1 electronically as is now required by law. Morgan backed up her statement with a screenshot. It showed she submitted her form on July 22.

I learned in a phone interview with Kerrie Stillman, the executive director for the state Commission on Ethics, that Morgan is complying with state requirements. Morgan is a new member of the Hollywood Planning and Development Board, therefore people must search for her form differently on the state website, according to Stillman. I looked up filers by their name, which works for people who have filed disclosure forms before. But I did not know to conduct a search by organization of filer or organization type.

Stillman also helped me understand where Hollywood Planning and Development Board member Steven Morales stands. My online search showed he hadn't given the state his Form 1. He is a design member on the Board. So, Stillman checked for me. As someone who has previously submitted a Form 1, Morales was required by state law to turn in his financial disclosure form by July 1. But Stillman said the law gives filers a grace period until Sept. 3, at which time fines start to get assessed.

Finally, I discovered that the newest member of the Planning and Development Board hadn't turned in his Form 1. Like Blattner and Morgan, Bob Glickman was transparent when I contacted him. In an email, Glickman explained he wasn't on the Board in 2023, having been appointed towards the end of June this year. He also didn't think the City of Hollywood told him about the Form 1 requirement in paperwork it gave him after his appointment. But, Glickman added, "I was notified by the state on July 26, that I had to file Form 1 and I believe they gave me until sometime in September to file it." New to the process, he also "confirmed with City of Hollywood this past week if indeed I had to file Form 1, and they confirmed I did, which I will."

So, out of the members who completed a Form 1, only one member answered N/A to all questions dealing with finances and real estate holdings. Crawford did this even though there is ample evidence online that he runs an interior design firm. Also, Broward County property records link his name to the ownership of two properties. Concerned, I contacted City of Hollywood officials and Crawford, who did not respond to my emails. But Raelin Storey, an Assistant City Manager, replied.

According to this manager, "Financial disclosure via a 'Form 1' (or Form 6 for elected officials/candidates) is a requirement for certain public officials and employees. The list of those officials/employees is determined by the Florida Commission on Ethics. In fact, the City's role in this process is simply to ensure that the official/employee is notified of their requirement to complete their respective form and to follow up to make sure it is completed and submitted."

Storey's answer is interesting. The city is responsible for making sure that people they notify "complete their respective form and to follow up to make sure it is completed and submitted". Immediately, though, a subtle distinction appears. The city checks if the form is completed and submitted. But it doesn't determine whether the form is completed according to state law. That's up to the state Commission on Ethics. And again, gaps in the law show how it is possible for someone to avoid filling out the financial disclosure form completely.

"Unfortunately, I cannot offer you specifics or an opinion regarding an official's conduct. Only the public officer or employee whose conduct is at issue can request an opinion from the Commission regarding their conduct," wrote Lynn Blais of the State Commission on Ethics. Of course, Kenneth Crawford didn't answer the questions that I sent him. So that makes me wonder if it's likely he will ask the state if it's ok that he wrote N/A on his Form 1 disclosure document.

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).