Exclusive: Documents shed new light on 3-year ethics probe into WPB Mayor Keith James
Former city administrator says in deposition he took the fall to ensure mayor’s benefactor kept no-bid security contract
First of three parts
See Part 2 here and Part 3 here
This story is a 6-minute read.
A state ethics probe dating to one of West Palm Beach Mayor Keith James’ first acts in office in 2019 remains active even though an investigator has twice urged it be dismissed.
While details of a no-bid security contract awarded to a friend of James’ have not changed since the last ethics report more than a year ago, Stet has dug out more information on the mayor’s actions from the files of an unrelated lawsuit.
Investigative reports submitted to the Florida Commission on Ethics contain no references to the 2021 deposition of former City Administrator Jeff Green. In it, Green describes his own removal from office by James as a political calculation to keep a benefactor happy.
That benefactor, Willie Perez, is the local head of the security company that received the contract.
Ethics Commission interviews with Perez, James and Green indicated that all three were frequent drinking companions before a public brouhaha erupted over the contract, their socializing and the release of a sexually explicit photograph sent by Perez to a female city employee.
A Stet review of those 2020 interviews also reveals that while James said he didn’t know what Green was doing to assure Perez got the contract; Green said the mayor was involved every step of the way.
For James, recently given a second term without opposition, the lingering ethics probe threatens to revive a damaging scandal from more than three years ago, when a rash of headlines raised questions about his willingness to bend the rules to benefit a friend.
The still-active investigation could force the mayor to appear at a hearing before an administrative law judge, ushering in a new round of embarrassing disclosures that could prove harmful to his political legacy.
Or it could end in a fine or the most serious action available to the Ethics Commission: removal from office.
When asked why he hadn't tried to settle the matter, the mayor referred to the two recommendations to dismiss and said through a spokeswoman that he "is confident that he has not committed any ethical violations."
Ethics commission rejects calls to dismiss
At issue in the ethics probe is whether James awarded the $7.9 million contract to Perez’s company, Professional Security Consultants or PSC, for the good of the city, as he maintains, or to help his friend.
The Florida Commission on Ethics rejected a recommendation to dismiss the probe not once but twice, leaving intact its finding of probable cause that James “misused his position to urge the award of a no-bid security contract to a company operated by one of his friends.”
The case has been in limbo for more than a year, waiting for the next step: the case advocate, a lawyer who works for the Florida attorney general, to file a third report or take the matter before an administrative law judge for a full hearing.
James also can try to work out a settlement.
Twice the Ethics Commission voted on motions to dismiss, but four of the eight commissioners, including Don Gaetz, a former state Senate president and the father of Congressman Matt Gaetz, refused.
They argued that even though no witnesses testified to a crime, the facts of the case revealed serious ethical lapses.
But that doesn’t add up to corrupt intent, James’ lawyer, Ron Meyer, told them in April 2022, the last time the ethics board discussed the case.
“There’s no question that there were several city officials who socialized — I don’t know whether that means they’re bosom buddies or they showed up at a cocktail party — but they socialized with the regional director of the company that was awarded the contract,” Meyer said. “But so what? It doesn’t mean that there’s corruption simply stemming from the fact I may know you personally.
“The point is there’s nothing here.”
Sexually explicit text fallout
Adding a titillating dimension to the contract drama: Shara Esposito, a city employee about to be fired, disclosed that Perez had texted her pictures of a penis and that City Administrator Green had known about it.
Within days of the disclosure, Green resigned to take a private-sector job in Fort Myers. A competing security firm sued the city and in October 2019 filed a complaint with the Florida Commission on Ethics.
The city canceled the no-bid contract and put it out for competitive bid in December 2019 but let PSC keep the job in the interim. With the bidding reopened, rival bidder Giddens Security dropped its lawsuit.
PSC won the competitive bid in July 2020. It continues to hold the five-year contract covering downtown and Northwood. In fact, the city in March expanded PSC’s coverage area with a $205,000 contract for less than two years of work.
Esposito sued the city over her firing. She accepted a $220,000 payout in September 2022, but not before she and several city workers gave depositions spelling out weekly bar outings involving the mayor, the city administrator, Perez and city employees.
‘Willie raises a lot of money’
Green’s reasons for resigning remained confidential until he spelled them out in a September 2021 deposition over Esposito’s firing. Green told her attorney, Sid Garcia, that he resigned “to protect Mr. Perez against losing his security contract.”
“And what would be in it for the mayor in terms of Willie keeping his contract?” Garcia asked.
“Willie Perez raises funds for every commissioner and has lots of contacts and raised lots of funds for the mayor as well as other commissioners,” Green said. “That’s why.”
Did the mayor ever discuss Perez’s political influence?
“Sure,” Green said.
“What would he say?”
“That Willie raises a lot of money for candidates; and that's a good thing for him, for the mayor.”
Under further questioning, Green disclosed “the deal” he and the mayor discussed. It called for Green to take the fall.
“It was, you know, this (lurid text) is going to be a problem for you and for Willie and for me, and we need to solve it. So I offered up, well, then I’ll just resign; pay my severance out; see if you can work out a settlement with (Esposito). That was the decision.”
When asked to elaborate, Green said the mayor had been pressured by Perez, who didn’t want to jeopardize his contract.
“OK. So Perez was contacting the mayor about how this, the exposure, of the text message was impacting his security contract?”
“I don’t know if he talked to him directly,” Green said. “But I’m sure indirectly that message got to the mayor because he relayed it to me.”
‘Mr. Green handled that’
Green used his authority as the head of the city administration, answering directly to the mayor, to make the no-bid contract happen, Ethics Commission interviews reveal.
But he said he did it with the support and knowledge of the mayor.
That’s not how James remembered it under oath in a January 2020 interview with ethics investigator Kathleen Mann.
Mayor Keith James explains in January 2020 interview that he wanted PSC to win the security contract but he did not push for it.
“Listen, I made no bones about the fact that I wanted PSC,” James said. “Some have said it was because of my friendship with Willie Perez. It went beyond that.
“Yes, I was friends with Mr. Perez, but I was familiar with their work. … I knew they were a good company, a good security company. So, um, as to the details of how it got on the agenda, Mr. Green handled that.
“I think he knew that I wanted it, but I wasn’t pushing for it.”
James said he had no hand in a decision two weeks after he took office as mayor in April 2019 to cancel competitive bidding for two security contracts started under his predecessor, Jeri Muoio.
Competitive bidding was halted just three days after the city’s procurement officer had thrown out PSC’s bid on one of the two contracts.
Green scoffed at James’ statement that he, Green, had acted on his own.
Green said he, the mayor and Deputy Police Chief Rick Morris met shortly after the mayor took office to discuss the security contracts. They concluded that the bidding needed to stop because the approach wouldn’t solve an underlying problem: two security firms serving downtown.
PSC held the contract to patrol CityPlace and parts of downtown for the Downtown Development Authority but Giddens Security held the contract to patrol city-owned garages, City Hall and the library.
Jeff Green explains in January 2020 interview why the city needed a single security company.
“It was confusing to the residents,” Green said in his interview. “It was confusing to us. It was confusing to the police.”
But competitive bidding would not assure just one security contractor for all of downtown, he said.
To open it up to competitive bidding, under those circumstances, would have looked worse than a no-bid contract because it would have looked like the bid had been rigged to deliver the job to PSC, Green told investigators.
No other bidder held the other two prongs of downtown security: the DDA, which is separate from the city, and CityPlace, which is privately owned.
“I think that would be much worse than the way we went,” Green said.
However, Green said he did not act alone.
Jeff Green disputes mayor’s contention about what he knew and when he knew it. Nancy Urcheck is the deputy city attorney.
“The mayor was in on all these conversations. I’ve seen it in the press where he said he didn’t know anything about it. He was there from Day One,” Green said.
The investigator asked, why would James lie?
“Because politically it looks like this was some sort of setup. And it’s easy to blame me. I'm not there anymore,” Green replied.