White raises money, flags

Hillsborough County Commissioner Kevin White intervened in a county bidding process in June, persuading his fellow commissioners to award a $2 million contract to AlliedBarton Security Services.

The June 17 vote was unusual because it went against recommendations from county staff and an independent evaluation committee, both of which had given a higher rating to another company, Allegiance Security Group.

"I can't say that is something that happens often," said Lula Banks, the county's director of procurement. "In my eight years here, I don't ever remember an incident where the board overturned a recommendation."

The attorney representing AlliedBarton that day was David Mechanik, one of White's longtime financial boosters. On Tuesday, Mechanik hosted a fundraiser for White at the Columbia Restaurant.

White says the two events were not connected. The first-term commissioner, who faces a re-election challenge next year from former state Sen. Les Miller, said the fundraiser was planned long before he went to bat for Mechanik's client.

"David has been a supporter of mine for a number of years, since I was on the Tampa city council," White said, adding that he doesn't "do quid pro quos."

Campaign finance reports show that Mechanik, his law firm and a law partner have given $3,250 to White's two commission campaigns since 2005. Joe Rizzo, an executive with AlliedBarton's Tampa office, gave White's campaign $500 in June.

In addition to being a successful land-use lawyer, Mechanik for years has been a high-profile player in Tampa political circles. He is president of the city's streetcar board, is on the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority board and has been on the Tampa Sports Authority board and the Super Bowl Task Force.

Mechanik did not return several phone calls or respond to an in-person request for comment. Rizzo said he could not comment.

In a written statement to the Tribune, AlliedBarton officials said, "The company did not make, nor did it authorize any political donation to Commissioner White; however, our employees do have the right to make donations and participate in the political process on their own time. The company is continuing to gather further information on the matter."

These events illustrate the dilemma for politicians who must raise money to run campaigns and then rule on issues affecting their contributors.

Abstaining from voting is not an option, a local professor said. Unless a vote would yield a direct financial benefit to him, White would be shirking his legal responsibility if he did not vote on the bids, said Scott Paine, a government professor at the University of Tampa and former Tampa city councilman.

Mechanik's fundraiser wasn't the only recent event for White held by someone who benefited from his actions on the commission. On June 27, developer Stephen Dibbs threw a meet-and-greet at his home for White.

White aided Dibbs' efforts to eliminate the county wetlands protection program in 2007 by making the motion to dismantle the division. Environmentalists were caught off-guard by the move and were surprised that White, never known for strong stands on environmental issues, made the motion.

Reward for White?

To local Sierra Club spokeswoman Mariella Smith, who remembers chasing White out of the room asking if he realized what he had done, the fundraiser seems like a reward for White's actions two years ago.

"Right away I can see the connection: Kevin White did this for Stephen Dibbs, who was pushing for this, and the other developers in the area who always wanted this," Smith said when told about Dibbs' party for White.

Dibbs wouldn't answer directly when asked whether he held the get-together to reward White for his motion on the wetlands agency.

"I like him," Dibbs said of White. "I think he's an honest man."

In a follow-up e-mail, Dibbs called White "fair-minded and an independent thinker."

"He approaches decisions from a business perspective and with common sense - rather than caving in to partisan or special interest perspectives," Dibbs wrote.

In the absence of a direct conflict, White is required by law to vote on the security contract, said Paine, the University of Tampa professor.

Nor could White get another commissioner to bring the matter up without violating Sunshine laws, Paine said.

Still, Paine said, the events create a perception of political back-scratching.

"It's an appearance problem that persists because of the funding system we have," Paine said. "But nobody's come up with a better way to do this."

Even the appearance of political influence peddling can sap county staff morale and erode public support for the government, said Fred Karl, a former Hillsborough County administrator and county attorney.

"Anything like that damages the reputation of the county because if the people don't have confidence, they won't support the county and you can't do a good job without public support," said Karl, also a former state supreme court justice and state lawmaker. "It's not a payoff, but it smacks of that."

White, said Paine, "seems to attract ethics trouble for whatever reason."

In 2007, the Florida Elections Commission fined White $9,500 in a settlement for using campaign money to buy tailored suits and ties. And he faces an Aug. 17 civil trial on accusations of sexual harassment filed by a former aide.

Paine pointed out that White didn't overturn the county staff recommendations on his own. He persuaded four other commissioners to vote for AlliedBarton.

One of those four, Al Higginbotham, said the commission should challenge staff recommendations.

"As the legislative side that has to vote on these issues, I think it's our job," Higginbotham said. "We shouldn't be a rubber stamp and we should ask questions."

At the meeting, White questioned representatives of both companies and county staff about the differences between the bids. He honed in on AlliedBarton's lower bid price and the bonus points the company won for using a certified Minority Business Enterprise subcontractor.

AlliedBarton bid $27,000 less for the contract than Allegiance, scoring 47.27 out of the maximum 50 points the county awards for price in a request for proposals.

"My question was, why did we end up choosing the company that we went with when we're again talking about we're in such tight budgetary times?" White said at the meeting.

Minority's license expired

Commissioner Jim Norman, who seconded White's motion on behalf of the company, said AlliedBarton's credit for minority subcontractor influenced his decision.

"There was the argument that the MBE aspect was not addressed" by Allegiance, Norman said.

What commissioners didn't know, however, was that AlliedBarton's minority subcontractor, Angel Security, hasn't had a valid Florida license since November, according to state records. And the state fined the company $500 in September for operating without a license between Sept. 29 and Nov. 2, 2007.

Gene Gray, director of the county Economic Development Department, which certifies companies as minority business enterprises, said his employees did not know Angel Security's license had lapsed when they awarded bonus points for MBE participation. Nor were they aware of the lapse when commissioners discussed the contract June 17.

"We just did not know at the time," Gray said. "It was brought to our attention after the fact."

AlliedBarton officials, in their statement, also said they were unaware of the licensing issue at the time. The company plans to find a replacement minority contractor, the statement said.

Allegiance's proposal did include a minority subcontractor, but the bid did not get bonus points because of a technicality: The information from the subcontractor, Iron Eagle Security, was not on Iron Eagle stationery and letterhead, as required.

Norman said he might have voted differently if he had known Angel Security didn't have a license.

"It would have played into my thought process more," Norman said, "and not having staff be able to respond to a very important question was very disturbing."

Consensus on Allegiance

When the commission chose AlliedBarton over Allegiance, no one was more surprised than Scott Dunlap, director of county security services. Dunlap chaired a five-member committee that evaluated the nine proposals from companies seeking the security contract. "We went through every single one of them," Dunlap said, holding up a 4-inch-thick binder submitted by one of the companies. "Then we sat down and had an evaluation meeting where we had a consensus of scores. So we were a little surprised."

When local governments request proposals for professional services, price is only one factor. Though AlliedBarton bid a lower price, Allegiance scored higher for qualifications and technical approaches to providing security for county buildings and equipment.

AlliedBarton lost points for not supplying information specifically required in the county's request for proposals, Dunlap said. For instance, the company did not say how much it would pay its officers or how much health care benefits would cost. Dunlap said low pay and poor benefits equal a lower-quality officer and a high turnover rate.

Also important to committee members was that Allegiance was a known entity. The company bought Fox Security in February 2008. Together, the companies held the county security contract for seven years. The committee members, who were directors of agencies and departments that had experience with Fox and Allegiance, liked what they saw.

"Allegiance, being a current provider of security, could have hurt their score, but it didn't," Dunlap said. "The members of the committee, all of whom have had experience with Allegiance, said they had been very flexible and proactive with their service."