Inquiry: Official broke no laws
Lunches, golf outings and vacations involving a Palm Beach County official and government contractors created a potential perception of favoritism in awarding $9 million in publicly funded work, according to the county’s inspector general.
The inquiry raised questions about Deputy County Engineer Tanya McConnell’s role in directing county contracts to three firms represented by people she described as “friends.”
While Inspector General John Carey found no laws were broken, he did call for changes to the county’s contracting process. He also forwarded the case to the county’s Ethics Commission for further review, which rules on potential violations of the county’s ethics code.
“Just because certain actions may not be illegal does not make those actions right,” according to the inspector general’s report, issued Thursday. “When situations like this come to light, corrective measures must be taken.”
A perception of favoritism in county contracting decisions “is not acceptable,” County Administrator Robert Weisman said.
In the future, county employees will be expected to recuse themselves from contracting decisions that involve friends, Weisman said. McConnell this week was removed from the contractor selection process and will not be involved, at least while the county reviews the inspector general’s report.
“It’s a big perception concern,” Weisman said. “We are going to change the process to keep this from happening again.”
McConnell, through her secretary, declined comment on Thursday.
According to the report, McConnell told investigators that she didn’t show favoritism in contract decisions and didn’t attempt to intimidate subordinates into steering county work to her friends. Also, McConnell likened many of the concerns — stemming from an anonymous complaint to the inspector general — as “the rant of a disgruntled employee,” according to the report.
The investigation, which started in June, involved contracts for engineering work on road, bridge and drainage designs for county construction projects.
State rules require local governments to rank proposals from engineering companies vying for contracts before deciding which company to choose.
More than a dozen engineering companies are typically in the running for county projects, Weisman said.
McConnell has long headed the “short list committee” responsible for determining the finalists for the contract. The committee is made up of other top engineering department employees who work in the department.
McConnell made her personal associations with contractors known to her fellow committee members, which some interpreted as at least an indirect attempt to influence, according to the report.
She would make comments such as, “You always go against my friends, you have something against me” and ask committee members why they didn’t vote for her “friends,” the report stated.
The inspector general’s office reviewed county engineering contracts considered between July 2011 and August 2014. During that three-year period, 25 projects went before the short list committee McConnell led.
The three companies with close personal ties to McConnell were in the running for 18 county projects during that time period and 17 times McConnell voted to keep them in consideration, the report said.
According to the inspector general, the three people close to McConnell whose companies were often vying for county contracts include:
Ron Last, of Last Devenport Inc., whom McConnell said she has had lunch with each week for about 20 years. The report also says McConnell plays golf with Last in engineering association tournaments.
Brian Rheault, of Bridge Design Associates, whom McConnell said she has weekly lunches with and her family used to spend Christmas Eve with Rheault’s family. She said until 2003 her family used to take a yearly vacation together with Rheault’s family, with Rheault paying for lodging.
David Wantman, of Want- man Group Inc, whom McConnell said she eats lunch with two or three times a year. She also said McConnell and Wantman’s families are also long-time friends.
None of the three company representatives could be reached for comment Thursday despite attempts by phone.
McConnell and the short list committee didn’t have the final say on which company ends up getting a contract.
A second committee, which Weisman said usually doesn’t include McConnell, takes the short list and recommends which company to pick. Then it’s up to the County Commission to approve the contract, but Weisman said commissioners typically follow the department’s recommendation.
This isn’t the first time the inspector general’s office has raised concerns about how the county chooses contractors.
In 2013, then-Inspector General Sheryl Steckler found county officials should be ranking and more closely evaluating bids from engineers, architects and others seeking “professional services” contracts, instead of relying on a committee discussion to narrow the list and ranking finalists later.
Steckler at the time said an initial ranking would ensure “fair and open competition” and reduce the “appearance and opportunity for favoritism,” according to Steckler’s report.
“We uncovered significant issues for which corrective actions must be taken,” Carey’s report stated.