EXHIBIT 19 Case Filed 07/31/15 Page 1 of 121 Document 4-19 STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT . MILWAUKEE COUNTY IN THE MATTER OF DOE PROCEEDING Case No. 10JD000007 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT-OF SEARCH WARRANTS STATE OF WISCONSIN SS. MILWAUKEE-COUNTY A. INTRODUCTION AND AFFIANT EXPERIENCE ire-lei- if) it"? 1: Hi I I Agra.? .., bunt! m-Ii-?erLizt 1. I am the District Attorney?s Chief Investigator. I submit this Affidavit= to as John Doe judge in the above?uncaptioned proceeding. 2. I have 25 years of experience as a law enforcement officer. For eight years, I worked. in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Drug Unit conducting drug investigations including the use of undercOVer investigators and confidential informants. I have also served in the DistriCt Attorney Crime Unit and'the General Criminal Investigations Unit.? I have been Chief Investigator since 1999; nevertheless-l have continued with-investigative I the work over much of the last-eleven years; Over these last'eleven years, I have overseen multiple investigations into police-involved shootings'and homicides on behalf Of the Milwaukee County District Attorney?s Office. I was one of two state case agents in the . federalinvestigation' and trial of the Milwaukee Police Department officers involved in the Frank Jude beating (2005 2007).- I have also worked on major public corruption investigations,including the Investigation of formerAlderman Michael McGee in 2007 and more recently, the matter involving Milwaukee Police Officers Royce Lockett and Paul Hill, who were charged in federal court in Milwaukee with drug crimes and money laundering. I 3. make this Affidavit in' Support of a Search Warrants. I have been authorized-by a "Secrecy order. to be made aware-of the eXistence of these-John Doe Proceedings. I 4. Irequest-that the coLIrt authorize the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) participation in the execution of the proposed search warrants. II have spoken with Supervisory Special Agent George Strong and Special Agent Sue Blish of the FBI, who indicatedto me that FBI is bOth'lwiIIingand able to assist in the execution of the. proposed search Warrants; respethuIIy submit that-the FBI will be able to-rende'r material assistanceto'the investigation so as to further legitimate law enforcement purposes. - Case Filed_O7/31/15 Page20f121 Document4-19 5. l'furt'her request that DA lnformation Technology Manager James Kruzeger be authorized to accompany the Milwaukee County District Attorney Investigators on Search Warrants that the court may authorize in connection with" this application. He, too, in my judgment will assist law enforcement in the identification of important evidence to be gained as a'result of these searches. 8. LOCATIONS FOR-WHICH AUTHORIZATION TO SEARCH IS SOUGHT 6. This Affidavit sets forth a basis for my belief that Wisconsin Statutes ??946.12, 946.13, 939.30, and 939.05 have been violated and that the courts of Milwaukee CoUnty have jurisdiction over these offenses. Further, this affidavit is in support of a request for a search warrant for the following locations, descriptions of which are based on the personal observations of fellow Milwaukee County District Attorney'lnvestigators Robert Stelter and Paul Bratonia, who are law enforcement officers: I a. The office ofJohn Hiiler at 10500 N. Port Washington Rd., Suite 203, City of County, Wisconsin, more particularly described as a three story multi-unit office building that has light tan brick walls with brown trim around the flat roof. The numbers 10500 are affixed to the west side of the building on' the south end and the numbers 10500 are affixed to the south end of the building above the entrance doors to 10500 N. Port Washington Rd. Suite?'03iis located'on the second floor and is accessed by going .in the entrance doors on the south end ofthe building and going up to the stairs to the second floor and turning west. The numbers 203 are affixed to the brown door and to_ the north of the door is a sign "Hiller Companies.?" At the-min entrance to 10500 Port Washington there is a building directory andSuite 203 is designated as Hiller Companies. Photographs of the exterior'of the above'building are attached and incorporated into this search warrant affidavit. (Exhibit N) b. The residence of John Hiller at 8949 N. Greenvale Rd., Village. of Bayside, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, more particularly described as a single story - fa'mily ranch style residence, with a tan lannon stone exterior and tan trim; there is an attached garage to the south of the residence. - There is a mailbox at the front of the residence that faces Greenvale Road; the mailbox has the numbers 8949 on it. Photographs ofthe above building are attached and-incorporated into this search warrant affidavit. (Exhibit N) Theperson of John Hiller, D.O.B. April 21 ,-1969; - d. Midwest Paralegal Services, inc. 7625 S. Howell Ave.., Oak Creek, - Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, more particularly described by Investigator Bratonia as a two story red and brown brick building, with glass windows; there is a large sign at the_front with Baily Building at the top'ofthe sign; the name "Midwest Paralegal SerVices" and ?Midwest underneath; - thefront door fo the building faces Howell Ave with the numbers ?7625? located to 'the-right'of the main door; the-re is also a tan colored single story building - Filed 07/32/15 Page 3 of 121 Document 4-19 attached to rear of main building; this building has large doorways to accommodate trucks. - Based-upon theiinformation set forth in this affidavit, I believe that probable caUse exists that evidence related to violations of Wisconsin Statutes ??946.12, 946.13, 039.30, and 939.05 may be found-tat 10500 M. Port Washington Rd. Mequon, WI. Suite 203, Ozaukee County, Wisconsin-where the office of is located and'the residence of John Hiller at 6949 N. Greenvale Rd, Village?of Bayside, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. C. OBJECTS OF THE SEARCH 7. I believe that probable cause exists that evidence related to violations of Wisconsin Statutes ??946.12, 946.13, 939.30, and 939.05 may-be found at the above locations consisting ofall documents, e?mails, records, correspondence, and information relating to a lease between the Boerke Company and Milwaukee County at 31.0 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, Wisconsin for the timeframe of January 1, 201 0 to December 31, 2010; John Hitler and the Boerke Company related to theabove property and the lease with Milwaukee- County; communications and documents related to the extension of said lease in 2010; as Well as all documents, records, correspondence, and information relating to MilWaukee County Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 6562. I request that the court issue a warrant to search theSe premises for all records and information relating to violations of sections Wisconsin Statutes ??946.12, 946.13, 939.30, and 939.05 the Wisconsin Statutes, Iviz., Solicitation to Commit Misconduct in Public Office, Misconduct in Public Of?ce (PTAC) and Private Interest in a Public Contract (PTAC). Use the. terms ?records? ?documents? and ?information? to include all items of evidence in whatever form and by whatever means they may have been created or stored, including any-form-of computer or electronic as hard disks, jump drives, -- CDs, DVDs, externalUSB drives-3.5? disks or other media that can store data); any handmade form (such as writing, drawing, painting); any mechanical form (such as'printing or typing); and any photographic form (such as microfilm, microfiche, prints, I slides, negativesfvi'deotapes,'miotion pictures, photocopiesrequest that the warrant extend to any computer (desktop or laptop). I 10, i request that-thewarrant exten'd'to- cell phones (including a BlackBerry). '-case 2:15ecv-00922-LA. Filed 07/39/15 Page 4 of 121 Document 4-.19' ?11. In my experience, I- request that the Court authorize a forensic examination of cell_ phones, computer equipment and peripheral devices seiZed during execution, as such forensic examinations are described below and by DA information Technology Manager James Krueger in his-Affidavits dated June 28, 2010 and July 1, 2010'. I also refer the court to the Affidavit of Brad Montgomery dated June 24,2010, especially its contents undertheheading of Computers Electronic Storage beginning at 1i8. note that-these Affidavit-s submitted by these Information Technology professionals support the proposition that relevant information may be found on a computer for extended periods of time after data is originally created, even to a point in time after the user believes that such data has I been "deleted D. SUMMARY OF PROBABLE CAUSE iN SUPPORT OF THE SEARCH WARRANT Private Interest in Public Contract 12. I respectfully submit that,- as Set forth in greater detail in the paragraphs below, there is probable cause to believe that a violatidn of Wisconsin Statutes and 939.052 has occurred in that: Wis. Stats. ?946.13(1) provides that it is a Class I felony for anyoneto do the following: in the officer's or employees private capacity, negotiates or bids for or enters into a - contract in which the officer or employee has a private pecuniary interest, direct or - indirect, if at the same time the officer .or employee is authorized or required by law to - participate in the of?cer's .or employee's capacity as such officer or employee- in the making of that contract or to perform in regard to that contract some of?cial function requiring the exercise of discretion on the officer's or employee's part; or in the officer'sor employee?s capacity as such officer or employee, participates in the making of a contract in which the officer o'r employee has a private pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, or perform in regard to that contract-some function requiring the exercise of disoretion on the officer's or employee's behalf. 2 Wis. stats ?939.05 provides: 1.) Whoever. is concerned in the Commission of a crime is a principal and may - be charged with and convicted of'the commiSsion of the 'crime although the person did not directly commit it and although the person who directly committed it has not been convicted or has been convicted of sOme other degree of the crime or of some other crime based on the same act. (2) A person is concerned in the commission of the crime if the person: Directly commits the crime; or intentionally aids and abets the commission of- it; or Is'a party to a conspiracy with another to commit-it or advises, hires, Case Filed 07/3f/15' Page 5 of 121 Document 4-19 a. The Friends of Scott Walker, according to' GAB filings, was comprised of I two principals, the candidate Scott Walker and the Treasurer John Hiller. b. During the Spring of2010, Scott Walker?s campaign Treasurer, John Hiller, negotiated for the extension of alease between Milwaukee County and the Boerke Company at the Reuss Plaza. This was space occupied by the offices of the" Milwaukee County Department on' Aging and the county Care Management Organization. ..The lease required renewal'on or before June 30,2010 and would expire at the end of 2010 in the absence of extension; c. John Hiller, as a person involved in'the lease renewal negotiations for his client, the Boerke Co., had a direct pecuniary interest in the lease contract. d. Scott Walker, who was 'both a public official and the candidate of the campaign committee, Friends of Scott Walker, had at leastan indirect pecuniary interest in the Boerke lease transaction in that: i. During-2009, Boerke Co. representatives contributed $4,250 to the Friends of Scott Walker, of which $3,750 came from David Boerke. ii. Negotiations for ?re-upping? (or extending) the lease commenced in late 2009 and continued until June 2010. Between May 12, 2010 and June 30,2010, David Boerke contributed an additional $5,250 to the Walker campaign and Andrew Jensen, also of the Boerke 0d, contributed an additional $350.00, e. The lease is.worth millions of dollars in gross revenues to the'clients of Boerke Co._ 7 I Solicitation to Commit?Misconduct in Public om?ca - 13. Further, I submit that there is probable cause to believe that John Hiller'solicited county employees to commit a felony, Lew-Misconduct in Public Office, 'violations of Wisconsin Statutes and 939.304 in that: counsels or otherwise procures another to commit it. Such a party is also 'conCerned in the commission of any other crime which is committed in pursuance of the intended crime and which under the circumstances is a natural and probabieconsequence of the intended crime. This paragraph does not apply. to a person who voluntarily changes his or her mind and no longer . desires that the crime-be committed and noti?es the'other parties-concerned _of her withdrawal within a reasonabie time before the commission of the crime so as to aiiow the others aiso to withdraw. - 3 Wisconsin Statutes ?94012 provides: Filed 07/31515' PageBof 121 Document 4-1921 On July 2, 2010, Request for Proposals (RFP) No. 6562 was published .in connection with an effort to provide office space for certain county agencies.- b. The designated county representative for the RFP was, Mr. Brian'Dranzik, Director of Operations for the Department ofTransportation- and Public Works. I I I c. The purpose of designating a single point of contact, as I understand is to assure the fair and equal distribution of. all relevant information. to all participating vendors. I I. d. The pre?approval procedures, including the process of disseminationof information relevant to the RFP, are' regulated by county ordinanCe. (Chapter 32) e. On July 27, 2010, rather than contacting the county?s designated point of contact, John Hillere?mailed Kelly Rindfleisch,'Depulty Chief of Staff forthe Office of the County Executive, asking her to obtain information pertinent to the open RFP process, prior to the close of the submission period -f0r proposals. f. On August 12, 2010, after the RFP process closed, but prior to a final decision, John Hiller directly contacted Scott Walker about the RFP via e- mail. See Exhibit K. _In that e?mail to Walker, Hiller proposed three options related to the RFP. one of the options proposed by Hiller asked Walkerto accept'the ?Federal Plaza?. bid (that of Boerke Company) as ?it wOn on all merits", with the issuance of a separate RFP that dealt with the'City Any public officer or public employee who does any of the foilow'ing is guilty of a Class 1 Felony: (2) in theofficer's or employees capacity as such officer or employee, does an act whichthe officer or empioy'ee knows is in excess of the. officer?s or employee?s lawful authority or which the . officer Or employee is forbidden .by law to do in theofficer's or employee's official capacity; or (3) Whether byact or commission or omission, in the officer's or employee?s capacity as such. officer or empl0yee exercises a discretionary power in a manner inconsistent with the duties of the officer?s oremployee?s of?ce'or employment or the rights of others and with intent to obtain a dishonest advantage for the of?cer or employee or another. in pertinentpart:. (1) . .whoever, with intent that-a feiony'be committed, advisesanOther-to commit that crime - under'circumstances that indicate unequivocally that he or she has the intent is guilty ofa - Class felonyFor. a solicitation to commit a Class felony, the actor is guilty of a Class I felony. 7 Page7of 121 Document-449 Campus coUntlyI-prOperty. The RFP contact remained Brian Dranzik. g. On August 2010, John Hiller directly contacted Scott Walker as afol-Iow- up to the August 12, 2010 e-mail. Hiller suggests that he could get someone, an attorney, to call Corporation Counsel to suggest that they ?scrap? the RFP and start over. Hiller suggests the use of ?David Halbrooks? so there would be 'no connection to Hiller. (Exhibit L.) E. -INFORMA TION IN SUPPORT OF PROBABLE CAUSE The Friends ofScott Walker I 14. I have reviewed on-Iine records related to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB) which contains campaign committee information filed with the GAB pursuant to state law. Said records reflect that ?Friends of Scott Walker? filed a campaign registration statement in 2009 related to the candidacy of Walker for - Governor of'the State of Wisconsin. Included .Iinthat statement was information related to . the Committee Treasurer; said statement named John J. Hiller as the Treasurer for the Personal Campaign Committee. Additionally, I know Scott Walker was the County Executive for Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, having been elected to that position and I taking office in 2002 and holding that office during 2010. As the treasurerfor Friends of Scott Walker, John J. Hiller is responsible for filing statements related to contributions from individuals and other entities in support of the campaign committee. The Reuss Plaza Lease Negotiations 15-. Except as otherwise noted, the information in this and the next section of the- affidavit came from Jerome Heer, theDirector of the Department of Audit for Milwaukee County. Jerome H_eer has served as'Audit Director for Milwaukee County since 1095, and has over 30 years experience conducting performance audits. Mr. Heer is knowledgeable- about the procesSused by Milwaukee County'to lease property for use by Milwaukee a I. County. have also reviewed documents provided by Jerome Heer as it relates: to the RFP described in?n28. and 29.? I have reviewed e-mail, correspondence,memorandum - I I). other IdoCuments between Milwaukee County, the Boerke Company, various. Milwaukee Coonty government, as well as statements from individuals. Filed 07/317/15 .Page8of 121 Document 4-19 .- related to the above lease and the development of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 6562 (discussed below) related to the office space needs of the Milwaukee County Department of?Aging (MCDA) and-the Care Management Organization (CMO) and Milwaukee County. Milwaukee County Department of Aging (MCDA) and the Care Management Organization were tenants. at the Reuss Federal Plazaunder a lease between Milwaukee-County and owners of Reuss Federal Plaza that was to expire at the end of - December, 2010. 17.Absent action to renew (or re?up) by the County Executive, the Reu'ss Plaza lease was-going to terminate at the end of December, 2010. 1'8iThe Boerke Company was'acting on behalf ofthe owners of?Reuss Federal PlaZa, located at 310 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, Wi. with respeCt to that lease in 2010. I 19.As indicated in other papers filed in th'is'John Doe investigation, Kelly Rindfleisch has provided statements to investigators pursuant to a ProfferAgreement._ In the course of an interview with Ms, Rindflesich, she identified the Boerke Company as a'client of John Hiller. - 20.I_know that John Hiller runs a business called J.M. HillerConsulting L.L.C. at an address of 10500 North Port Washington?Road Suite 203, Mequon, Wisconsin based upon. an examinationof recent=State of Wisconsin Limited Liability Corporation registration- records and information from Investigator Stelter. Further, I know that John Hiller runs a business known-1 as. Hiller Realty, Inc.lat the address of 10500 North Port Washington Road Suite 203, Mequon,'Wisconsin based-uponan examination of recent Wisconsin Domestic Corporation records-and information from Investigator Stelter. On February 24, .2011, Investigator Paul Braton'ja-Iconducted surveillance of John Hiller and observed him driving a 2006 Ford Freestyle, registered to Hiller at 8949 N. Greenvale, Village of was-followed from the area of the University School to 10500 N. Port Washington Rd., where he parked the?above vehicle at the east side_ ofthat - I entering that building. Therefore, based upon my training and expe'rience,'l believe it is reasonable to conclude that Hiller?s business records, including recOrds relating to his client, the Boerke Company-will be found at his business offices. 21.? Based upon information from fellow Investigator Paul Bratonja, also know that John Hiller resides at .8949 N. Greenvale: Rd-i Village'OtBayside, MilwaUkee 001mm .- 'IWisco'nsin. Investigator Bratonja observed John Hiller (who he identified from a . - Filed-0731315 .Page90f 121 Document 4-19 photograph) leaving the above property on February 23, 2011 driving a 2006 Ford- Freestyle, registered to Hiller at that address. investigator Bratonja previously observed a 2004 Expedition at the above residence on February 14, 2011 and .the vehicle registered to John' Hiller-at'the above address. On February 23, 2011, Investigator Bratonja observed John Hiller in the garage of the above residence-subsequently leaving the driveway of the residence driving the above 2006 Ford Freestyle.? Investigator Bratonja has also-reviewed a Trustee?s Deed and Mortgage for the property at 8949 N. Greenvale of Bayside, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin that reflects the purchaser is. John J. Hiller and Karen M. Hiller on__July 7, 2000. The return address forthe Trustee?s Deed is to JOhn Hiller at 10500 North Port Washington Road Suite 203, Mequon, Wisconsin, the location of'Hiller Realty. John Hiller has a date of birth of April 21, 1969 per Wisconsin Department of Transportation records. I 22. Investigator Robert Stelter and I conducted an interview of Steven Kreklow. Until the end-of2010, Kreklow was the Fiscal and Budget Administrator for Milwaukee County. As such, he worked for the Department of Administration. While not himself a Department Head, Kreklow did report to County Executive Scott Walker. 23. Kreklow stated -to Investigator Stelter that he had meetings during the early months of 2010 with the Boerke Company concerning the renewal of .the lease at The Reuss Plaza. In May 2010, Kreklow stated that he was present during a meeting ofthe Boerke I Company-and Milwaukee County officials. The purpose of this meeting was'to discuss the Re'uss Plaza lease with Milwaukee County. Kreklow stated that John Hiller appeared at this'meetin?g and Hiller stated he was there representing the Boerke Company. 24. Kreklow has advised your affiant 'that typically. the management company (Boerke Company) onld receive a percentage or a fixed amount of money in conjunction with their work on this lease. I 25. Attached to this Affidavit as Exhibit is a copy of an e?_mail dated April 26, 2010 from John Hiller to Tim Russell that includes a memorandum to Scott walker (with copy- to Thomas Nardelli) regarding the Department of Aging/ FederalPlaza lease. issue. Tim Russell at that time was the Directorof Housing and Thomas Nardelli was the Chief of. Staff-in .the'County Executive?s office. The _e-mail was recovered from the documents produced by .Google Gmail in responsefto 'the John Doe search warrant served. in' connection'with the timrussellwi@qmail.com account. This e-mail is noteworthy for several _-cas_e -Filed.O7/31915 Page 10 of 121 Document4?19_ reasons, including: a. It demonstrates that_ John Hiller was advancing the interests of the Boerke Co. In other words, Hiller, who was also the Treasurer of the Friends of Scott walker campaign, was advocating for the Boerke Company and the extension of the Reuss Plaza lease. - I b. These discussions were occurring in the April 2010' time frame and according to the e?mail attachment, ?started at the end 2-6; Attached to this Affidavit as Exhibit is a copy of an e?mail dated May-10, 2010 from Cindy Archer, Director of the Department of Administrative Services to Scott Walker and Thomas Nardelli, the Chief of Staff of the Of?ce of the County Executive. It is' taken from e?mails prodUced as a resUlt of a search warrant served on Gmail for the aCcount kmrindflesiCh@qmail.com. The e-mail relates to the Department of Aging and the lease at Reuss Plaza. It is noteworthy for a number of reasons, including the following. a. The e?mail reflects the fact thatScott Walker was aware of the Reuss Plaza. lease negotiations involving the Boerke Co. . Based on statements from - Steven'Kreklow, Walker was aware that his campaign treasurer John Hiller was involved in these negotiations.'A principal of the Boerke Co. (David Boerke) was also a major campaign contributor to the Walker campaign fund. b. Specifically, in Exhibit. C, Archer responded to walker-?s ianiry, ?Did Steve review those numbers?? c. Based upon an interview with Steven Kreklow conduCted by myself and Investigator Robert Stelter, I believe the referenCe in this e-mail to ?Steve? to be a reference _to' ?Steve Kreklow.? 1 further believe the-reference to ?numbers? to be a Comparison .of figures concerning the county?s calculations of the expense of a Reuss PlaZa lease and the Boerke calculationsof that same County expense. (in The email indicates the-fact that walker was considering renewing (or re? upping) thelease. ?Where We stand now is' that you told Steve to work with 'Heer-to . develop and [sic] RFP that could result in Cheaper'space' for Aging elsewhere. 'But then you said you were not sure and that you-may I 'Filed 07/317015 Page 11 or_'1__21 Document-4919 iust 're?up? the lease at-Reuss." (Emphasis added.) e. In fact, Archer warns Walker about the conseq.uences_of renewing the lease and creating a ?huge political firestorm? that may result in ?open records requests and somemeeting notes with folks that make me nervous.? 27. Attached to this'Affidavit as Exhibit is a copy of a print?out from the Wisconsin- Democracy Campaign website, a site which tracks political contributions and which has been successfully usedby this investigation in the past. The print?out indicates: a. During 2009, David c. Boerke of the Boerke co. donated $3,750 to the Friends of Scott walker. I - b. During 2009, other persons associated with the Boerke Co. donated an additional $500 to the Friends of Scott Walker. c. Between May 12, 2010 andJune 30, 2010, David Boerke contributed an additional $5,250 to the Friends of Scott Walker. I - d. Between May 12, 2010 and June 30, 2010, Andrew Jensen, also of the Boerke Co., contributed an additional $350.00. 28. On the day before David Boerke?s $5,000 contribution was recorded by the Friends of ScOtt walker (June 29, 2010), John Hiller sent an e?mail to Tim Russell with a proposed" ?Draft of memo in response to Auditor.? See Exhibit F. By this time, Jerome Heer, the County Auditor, had taken _a-pos_ition against simple lease extension and in favor of a Request for Proposal process. See Exhibit-E and footnote 5. The-Hiller e?mail isisent to Scott walker and- Jim Villa, a former Walker. Chief of Staff and campaign advisor. The Hiller draft memo (Exhibit-F) toUted renewal of the Reuss lease as the ?best option.? In that e?mail, Hiller wrote: What is the chance to get a quick meeting with [Hjeer to reviewthe proposal. I wonder if he reviewed it if we could get him to support? Hillef?further wrote: I wrote the memo -as_ if it came from Stephanie [the Director of the Department on Aging] or somedne at county to you. It is reasonable to believe based upon this e?mail (Exhibit F) that was recovered from the I I . account e?mails, that-Hiller intended Scott Walkerto pretend to received the Memofrom a county employeeas a means to convince Jerome Heerto I I Support theextension Of theReuss lease. The RFP for O??ice-Space' I - 5 - Case Filed 07/311123 Page 12 of 121' Document 4-19 . forwarded a memorandum from Jerome Heer, Direc 29. Due to the development of a number of circumstances, the Countydecided against simply renewing or re?upping the lease.5 Rather, it was'decided that the county would employ a Request for-Proposal process.- 30. Obtained from County Auditor-Jerome Heer, attached to this Affidavit as Exhibit A is a copy of the Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 6562 made public on July 2, 2010 as it relates to the Department of Aging/City Campus." . 3.1. The ReqUest'for Proposal (RFP) No. 6562 included three_?0ptions for potential vendors, one of which was to provide lease space to Milwaukee County. Theother options I related to the use or disposition ofCounty-owned building named ?City Campus? at 2711 . W. Wells St. 32. According to Mr. Heer, the core requirements of the RFP process are embodied in Chapter of the Milwaukee CoUnty Ordinances. Those provisions include: 1) procedures and policies concerning the preparation and issuance or requests fOr an 2) the requirement that the purchasing administrator furnish identical information concerning a I proposed acquisition to all prospective vendors; 3) the designation of a purchasing administrator or representative to conduct any pre?proposal conference, as well as furnishing identical information concerning a proposed acquisition to all prospective vendors regarding the acquisition of services; 4) the establishment of the procedure forthe receipt and handlingof bids; 5) and the use of the designated purchasing administrator or representative, or other specifically authorized person to transmit information and conduct discussions with vendors, with the understanding that no vendor shall be provided with I informationthat would afford -a vendor with an advantage over another. See generally - Milwaukee County ordinance et seq. 33. As relevant to this particular application, Ordinance ?32.47(2) requires that only the authorized county representative may-distribute information to vendors. Moreover, the ordinance- prohibits the selective"dissemination of relevant proposal infOrmation to one - vendor in preference to Other vendOrs. It states: I a. ?During the 'pre-aWard or pre?a?cceptance period of ainegotiated' l' 5 See,- EXhibit E. On June 27, 2010 Kelly Rindfleish, Deputy Chief of Staff for Scott Walker, tor of Audits. That memorandum was addressed? to I 3 Supervisor L'ee Holloway arid dealt With the issue of property management and included ajdiscussion of- I the leased space by MCDA and CMO at Reuss Plaza. Rindfleish sent the document to Scott Walker, but - alsosent the document to Tim Russeil and Jim Villa.- The memorandum from Heer indicated that the - - . extension ofthe Reuss_Lease_?was not in the County?s best interest.? Case Filed 07/317253 Page 13 of'121 Document-419". procurement, only the purchasing administrator of (sic) designee, and other specifically authorized shall transmit techniCal or other information and conduct discussions with prospective vendors. lnformationshall not be. furnished to'a prespective vendor if, alone or together with other information, it may afford the prospective vendor an advantage over others. However, I general information that is not'prejudicial to others maybe furnished upon' request.? I I 34. In fact,.as published in the RFP No. 6562 (Exhibit page 13), all vendors, including Boerke Co., were advised. ?The County requests that individuals orfirms limit their contacts to the Office of DTPW?Director_ of Operations in the interest of maintaining consistency of response and fairness to all respondents.? 35. Brian Dranzik was the designated Director of Operations forthe Milwaukee County Department of Transportation and Public Works in the RFP, and as such he" was the person designated -as the" Milwaukee County contact for purposes of the RFP. 36, The RFP (No. 6562) was issued on July 2, 2010. See EkhribitA. 37. Proposals were due July 30, 2010 and a recommended vendor was to be selected by August 20, 2010. 38. Jerome Heer-advises that Boerke Co. submitted a preposal in response to RFP No. 6562. That proposal was dated. July 30, 2010. 39. On July 6, 2010, John Hiller directed a e-mail to Scott Walker, Cindy Archer (at a non-county private e-mail), Jim Villa (not a county employee), Kelly Rindfleish (at a non- county-private e-mail), Tom _-Nardelli (at a private non-County e-mail) and Tim' Russell (at a non-county private e?mail) stating want to be sure that the cormmunicatiOns that the - Federal Plaza representatives have had with the. county on the renewal are kept I confidential and aren?t available to bidders that may now be bidding against us.? (emphasis added.) Hiller used the- e-mail acCount, iohnhiller@hillerrealty.com. See Exhibit G. 40. On July 24, 2010, John Hiller sent'an e?mail (using the . I account) to Tim Russell, asking whether he had a-phone number for ?Joe.? Based on the context 'of there-mail, '_ __berlieve he was-referring to Milwaukee County Supervisor Joseph I Sanfelirppot'Hillerasks Russell in thee-mail if_'Russell'has. talkedto him (Sanfelippo) about I I the Federal Plaza/Aging deal} See Exhibit 4t. .- Attached to this Af?davit as Exhibit 1 is a copy of an e?mail-datedJuly 27, 2010 I - Filed'07/31135 Pags 14 ot121 Document 4-19 in which John Hiller contacts Kelly Rindfleish asking for informationabout the RFP, including who is going to be on the evaantion committee. That e-mail provided: I Hi Kelly Could you check on three things for me on the office space 1?Who is going .to be on the evaluation committee 2-Is there a scoring system? 3-Will they'go to a Best and Final offer proce'dUre? it is reasonable to believe that a response would provide an unfair advantage-to Boerke Company, Hiller?s client. However,-based upon information availableto the investigation at this time, it is unclear 'what if any information was provided to John Hiller in'response tothis e-ma'il. Such a response may be maintained as part Of the records and information that are kept at the Hiller offices, or on a laptop or BlackBerry (or cell phone). See Exhibit J. 42. Afterthe RFP process closed On July 30, 2010 but priorto any final decision on a vendor," on August12, 2010 John Hiller directly contacted Scott Walker about the RFP via e-mail. See Exhibit K. In that e-mail to Walker, Hiller prOposed three options related to the RFP. One of the Options proposed by Hiller asked Walker to accept the ?Federal Plaza? bid (that of Boerke Company) as ?it won on all merits", with the issuance cf'a - separate RFP that dealt with the City Campus county property. Based upon-the investigation it isunknown who provided Hiller with information. about whetherth?e Boerke Company response was the ?winning proposal."- Hiller also forwarded a copy of that e?mail to Villa, associated with the Walker Gubernatorial campaign, as well as Tim Russell, the former Chief of Staff within; the County E'xchtive office, and at that tirne Administrator ofthe Division of Housing for Milwaukee County. At the time-Hiller wrote this e-mail, Brian Dranzik of the Milwaukee County Department of Transportation and Public Workswas still the'authorized representative for the Countyfor the RFP. 43'. "On August '18, 2010 Hiller directs an e?mail to Scott Walker as a follow-up to'the above e-mail of August 12, 2010._ See Exhibit L. .In this e-mail, Hiller warns Walker that the -?Federal Plaza? folks are contemplating legal action if the RFP process continues. Hiiler suggests that they could use David HalbrOOks (an-attorney and former-Milwaukee . City Attorney)'to call corporation counsel (attorneys for fOr Milwaukee-County) to suggest that they scrap the RFP because of problems and technical issues. Hiller-suggests the use I cf Halbrooks- because . there is no connectiontovme and he actually verygodd on .I these things." Milwaukee County ultimately accept-ed none of the proposals submitted by the} Filed 07/311315 Page 15' of 121- Document 4-]19 vendorsin conneCtiOn with RFP No. 6562. The Department on Aging and the Care Management Organization were relocated to existing county facilities. I I Based on_a review of e-mailcorrespondence-,and based upon my training and experience, I am aware that computer equipment was used to generate, store, and print I documents used .in the RFP process as well as in communications that Hiller had with I - members ofthe Milwaukee County Executive staff, including but not limited to e?mail. John Hiller used the e?mail addresses and iohnhiller@hillerrealty.com. . ln an'e-mail dated April 7, 2010, Hiller makes reference to a-computer with e-mail saved in the sent mail folder on_the Webmail. In that e?mail, Hiller indicated that he deleted those e- 'mails at that time. Hiller also indicated he sent e?mails using a BlackBerry. See Exhibit M. Hiller also indicates in an 'e?mail dated Marsh 24, 2010 that he could not get into a proposed-response on his phone, and that Hiller would have to examine it on hislaptop. See Exhibit Accordingly, there is reason to believe that there is a computer system, and/or laptop, and BlackBerry phone currently located 'at the place of business of John Hiller at 10500 N._Port Washington Rd, Suite 203, City of Mequon, Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, or at the residence of John Hiller at 8949 N. Greenvale, Village of Bayside, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, or with John Hiller based upon the portability ofthe laptop and BlackBerry and documents in an electronicldigital format. 46. Per information from Assistant District Attorney Robles, Midwest Paralegal Services (in conjunction with compliance with ;a separate subpoena in this John Doe), is in poSsession 'of a laptop computer belonging to John Hiller (as of February 28,2011). Per information public records and Investigator Bratonja, Midwest Paralegal Services, Inc is ocated' at 7625 S. Howell Ave., City of Oak Creek, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. Midwest-Paralegal Services has beenexamining said computer for the production ofe-mail related to a separate John Doe subpoena. - 47.- Againreferring to the Affidavit of Brad Montgomery dated June 24, 2010 and . especially its contents under the heading of Storage beginning at 118 and the information detailed below, I request that the court- authorize a forensic examination of cell phones, computer equipment and peripheral devices-seized during _'executioin. Information Technology professionals support the prOposition that releVant . informatiOn maybe?. foundon a computer "for extended periods of timeafter data is: originally. created I-evento a_ point in time after the user believes that such data has been .. i . . ._Ci'ase Page 16 Of 121 Document4-19 I ?deleted.? 48. I Based upon my knowledge, as well as' knowledge from law enforcement personal trained and experienced in the recovery of. evidence on'computers and in electronic storage, I know that searching for information stored in computers often requires agents to seize most or all electronic storage devices to be searched later by a qualified computer expert in a laboratory or'other controlled environment. I This is often necessary to ensure the-accuracy. and completeness ofsuch data, and to prevent the loss of the data either from accidental or intentional destruction. Additionally, to properly examine those storage devices in a' laboratory setting, it is often necessary that some computer equipment, peripherals, instructions, and software be seized and examined in the laboratory setting. This is true because of the following: a. The volume of evidence. Computer storage devices (like hard disks or ROMs) can store the equivalent of'millions of pagesof information. Additionally, a suspect may try to conceal criminal evidence; he or she might store it'in random order with deceptive file names. This may require - searching authorities to peruse all- the stored data to d_etermine which particular files are evidence or instrumentalities of crime. This sorting . process can take weeks or months, depending on the volume ofdata stored, and it would be impractical and invasive to attempt this kind of data search on?site. b. Technical requirements. Searching for criminal evidence sometimes requires highly technical processes'reqUiring expert skill and. properly Controlled environment. The vast array of computer hardware and software available requires even computer experts to. specialize? in some systems and applications, so it is difficult to know before a search which expert is qualified to analyze the system and its data. In any event, however, -- I data search protocols are exacting scientific procedures designed to protect- the integrity 'of.the evidence and to recover even ?hidden,? erased,' - . compressed, password?protected,- Or files. Because computer evidence is vulnerable to for destruction (both from external-sources or from destructive code imbedded .- I I. Page Not: Do'CUment'4-19 in the system as a "booby trapl?), a controlled'environment may be necessary to complete an accurate analysis. in light of these concerns, l_hereby request the Court?s permission to seize the computer Ihardware_(and_' associated peripherals) that are believed to contain some or all of the evidence described in the warrant, and to co'nduCt an off?site search of the hardware for the evidence described. 'With respect to the search of JM. Hiller Consulting L.L.C. and Hiller Realty CONSULTING L.L.C. AND HILLER REALTY, I recognize that L.L.C. AND HILLER REALTY are functioning companies With employees, and-that a seizure 'of the business computers may have'the unintended effect of limiting the business? ability to provide service to its legitimate cUstomers. In response to these concerns, the agents who execute the search anticipate the execution of the search warrant in "a manner that will have'a minimal impact upon the business operations. F. CONCLUSION 49. As detailed above, the campaign treasurerfor the Friends of Scott Walker gubernatorial'campaign fund Joh?n Hiller, maintained contact directly with members 'of the Milwaukee County Executive office including Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker, seeking the extension ofthe Reuss Plaza lease and response to RFP 6562 in which John Hiller had a pecuniary interest; at this. same time Scott Walker had a pecuniary interest, - - direct or indirect, created as a result'of Hiller?s status as walker?s campaign treasurer, as well as a result of campaign COntributions from individuals from the Boerke Company, I involved in the- lease extension and RFP on behalf of the owners of the Reuss Plaza. For all the reasons set forth in the foreg'Oing paragraphs, I believe that probable cause-exists Filed-O7/317ZL5 Page 18 Of_121_ that Wisconsin Statutes ??94a.12, 943.13, 939.30, and 939.05 have been ?violated' and that the courts of MilWaukeeCounty have jurisdiction over thes'e offenses. I Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin'on this g5 day of February, 2011. David Budde Chief-Investigator I - - - . Milwaukee County DistriCt Attorney's Office Subscribed and sworn to before me - at Milwaukee, Wisconsin on this Zf??ijay of February, 201:] 3, ?lm; Net??/ Public; ?Milwaukee -. State of Wisconsin gee My commission is perman?gntfe case Filed 97/311815 Page 19lo_f'12'_1_ Document 4-19- 07/3?/?c15; Document 4-19 OFFICIAL NOTICE N0, 6562 - REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Office Space Leasing and Sale of City Campus Of?ce Comp?ex July 2030 Case Filed 07/31/15 Page 21 of ?Document 4-19. estate TabIe of Conten'ts PURPOSE TECHNICAL. CONTACT - OOE DATES GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSAL RFP FOR LEASED OFFICE SPACE RFP FOR PURCHASE OF cm CAMPUS NmOnA-Aww - Case 2-:15-cv-009223LA File-d 07/31/15 Page 22 of 121 Occur-nean Section II RFP Overview Introduction Milwaukee County is in the process of examining andirecontigaring its of?ce space use for several departments With the goals of reducing costs, maximising ef?ciency and liquidating excess, vacant. facilities and space. The County?s cost analysis and a consultant report-on countywide space allocation has determined that the County?s City Campus facility, located at 2711 W. Wells Street, Milwaukee, WI (City Campus), is not currently being used in an ef?cient manner. The facility includes approximately 265,000 gross square'feet. This includes approximately 130,000 square feet of usable office space, 90,000 of which is? currently used by County departments, with 30,0003quare feet presently vacant. The area for sale also includes two parking lots with a total of approximately 225' parking spaces. Conversely, the County leases approximately 49,000 square feet from a private downtown Milwaukee to house its Department on Aging. This facility is a modern office building that suits the Department well and the lease payment is funded by third-party revenue sources. The lease at this facility expires at the end of calendar 2010. The County is in a position where two options would result in more efficient use of space and significant cost reductions: a The Department on Aging could move into City Campus, ?lling City Campus to capacity, thereby taking advantage of third-party revenue sources. Or, The County could lease space in a private facility for the Department on Aging, and departments currently located at City Campus, and sell the City Campus facility to a party that is interested in developing the property. Purpose The-purpose of this request for proposals (REP) is to gather information on the practicality and cost effectiveness of either of the above options. Interested parties are invited to respond to this RFP in any of three ways: . 1. Provide leased space'to theCounty based on its needs, as identi?ed in Section II 2. Purchase'the City Campus facility, as identi?ed in Section lit 3 Respond to both Sections 11 and Ill Please Note: MilWaukee County is seeking satisfactory bids, not necessarily from the same vendor, for both Options 1 and 2 on page 5. However, if another scenario is proposed, the County may pursue another Opportunity if it is deemed most advantageous he County may, after judging and analyzing the responses, choose instead to keep the City Campus facility, till it to capacity, and decline to lease space for its departments. Any partyinterested in proposing to purchase the City Ca pus facility and . Filed'O7/31/15 Page 23 leasethe space back to Milwaukee County is welcometo do so. Pleaserespond tinder Option 3 on page 5. Any party interested in purchasing and developing another parcel of vacant or under?utilized preperty currently owned by the County (seen as land located at 6th and State Streets or. the Community Correctional Center at low and State Streets) and leasing that development to the County is encouraged to do so Please respond to Option 1 on page 5 if interested. - Technical Contact The technical contact for this RFP is: aThrengh Any proposal received at the designated location alter the required time and date speci?ed for receipt shall be considered late and menaresponsive. Any. late proposals will not be evaluated for award. '__Case Filedo7/31/15 Pag?'24 of 121 Document-4-19? Guidelines for Proposal interested parties, are invited to respond to this. proposal by one of three Options: 1. Proposal to provide leased of?ce space to the County only 2. Proposal to purchase the City Campus facility only . 3. Proposal to both purchase City Campus and provide leased office space in City Campus or a private facility Option 1 en; the following REP in Section Il'and provide a If interested in responding to option 1 only please revi onses to all items, in order, contained in Section response to each item. The response must include resp iI. Option 2 - if interested in option 2, please review the following RFP in Section ill and provide a response to each - item. The response must include responses to all items, in order, contained in Section Ill. 9911er if interested in option 3, please reyiew both RFPS in Sections and Ill and provide a response to'each item. The response must include responses to all items, in order, contained in Sections ii and Hi. If you are interested in purchasing City Campus and leasing the space back to the County, please campiete both Sections 11 and Ill. - Filed 07/31/15 'Page'25'0f121?? Document 4-19" Section II OFFICE SPACE LEASE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS: Milwaukee County is soliciting proposals to identify the availability of of?ce space within . Milwaukee County, for several Milwaukee County departments (?Tenant?). Proposals must be received in the of?ce of the DTPW?Director of Operations, 2711 W. Wells Street, Milvvaukee, WI 53208, RoomGlS, no later than 4:00 p.111, Friday, July 30, 2810. . Please take into consideration and respond to each of the speci?c items listed below: Building: Please state the building name, if any, and address. Owner/Landlord: I Please state the legal name of the ownership entity. Building Size/Mia: Please state the building size and what type of other uses (ie; retail, commercial, residential, etc.) are located Within the Building. in addition please note if the parking that serves the Building is attached or off-site; Initial Term; Milwaukee County is seeking an initial term of ?ve (5) years, with two ?ve year renewal options. Premiseszi .. The Tenant requires approximately 56,000 rentable square feet (?Premises?), as Outlined in the attached Program Documents. The Program Document for thel'County?s Aging and Care Management Organization departments notes two space speci?cation requirements tetaling 38,789 square I t?eet.? Separated space and entrances are reguired for each organization. Six other organizations: the Department of Transportation Public Works (4 Divisions), Departments of Audit and Community Business Development Partners will share the balance of the space, 16,365 square feet. Final square footage needed depends on the ?oor plate size/con?guration and ultimate space pianof the Premises. The Program Documents identify the number of employees that will occupy the Premises, the'type and size?of the space needed, including of workstations and - private of?ces. Please note the Ancillary Areas identi?ed in the Program Documents; If some of these areas, such as a board room-or large conference room'can be accommodated within the Building, but outside the leased space please identify the'availability and cost, if any, of this space and note the reduction in'the Premises square footage and resulting rental savings. Pleaseid'entify the location of the Premises in the Building, and include with your proposal ?as-built? floor plans of the Premises. Filed 07/31/15 Pagej26fof 121 Document 449* Premises Use: General-purpose of?ce space and special use areas for approximately 325 professionals and support staff for the Tenant. The Tenant?s Department on Aging and Care Management Organization carries a Federal designation of an Area Agency on Aging. These departments hold the State designation of An Aging Resource Center, therefore, ahighly visible, well signed lobby entrance is critical, as 'older clients and their families will often visit for counseling and information. Public meetings of various kinds are. frequently held within the Premises, The Department on Aging and the CMQhave Governing Boards that need access to a large conference room that con accommodate the I - - lomember board and at least 35 ?public? guests. The room _n;r_tr_s_t be Disability and Aging accessible. State law requires that the Aging and CMO divisions not be located Within an open floor plan without - i a permanent wall between them. As the Program Documents note, program space needs are varied in nature; In addition to general of?ce space, comprising private of?ces, workstations, conference rooms, tile/copy/mail/traming/ storage/lunch break rooms, etc., the Premises must accommodate a Call Center for approximately twelve social workers, one Supervisor and one clerical staff. The Call Center must be separated/enclosed to-accommodate the telephone counseling of elders. The Call Center requires a separate telephone trunk from the general telephone service for the Premise space. A Resource Library is part of the Call Center and acts as private space for meeting with elders and their families. The Premises will house an information server and up to three information Technology professionals to operate the care management system of the Tenant?s Care Management Organization. Environmental control of the area housing the information server is necessary. As de?ned in the Program Document, conference and board- room space need is varied. Early Access: . . Tenant and for Tenant?s contractors shall be allowed access to the Premise during normal business hours two weeks prior to the occupancy date in order to install-trade fixtures, furniture, if necessary, as well as cabling and telecommunications, if required. - January 1,2011.? Rental Rate: I II - 7 I Please provide Tenant with an aggressive rental rate for a ti ve?3:ea1' initial lease term and option I periods. Please quote a lease rate if the Tenant supplies the workstations outlined in the Program Documents or if the Owner/Landlord provides the workstations. The quoted rental rate(s) shall be full service, gross rent, including, but not limited to, real estate taxes (fully assessed), the required parking, janitorial service ?ve days per week within the Premises, exterior and common area maintenance, including landScaping and snow removal of parking and pedestrian-ways, card?key access/security to the parking and Building/Premises, HVAC, 24 hour access, waterisevvcr and all other usual operational expenses for a commercial office building. Please outline whether electricity for lightsand outlets in the Premises is included in the gross rental rate or separately metered. Copies of the last three (3) years of Operating expenses fer the Building and other property, if any, that are included in the rental rate (ie; off-site parking) sherrld be made available upon request. . Filed 07/31/15. Page 27 of 7121 DoCumen-t-4-19 I I Security Deposit: Security lDeposit shall be waived. TenantAllowancesz- - . The Ownen?Landlord proposal shall-provide the Tenant the following allowances. However, the Owner/Landlord may offer additional or increased allowances or incentives, if so desired: imp 'rovement AlloWance 95 30.09 per rentable square foot. . Should actual Tenant improvements to construct the space be less than the quoted allowance, Tenant shall be allowed to use this money as additional concession to either pay rent or use to offset moving expenses. Should the Tenant improvements exceed 30.00-1361? rentable square feet, please outline Owner/Landlord?s willingness and proposal toamcrtize additional costs as part of the rental rate. Please Specify the interest rate be utilized in the amortization. Moving Allowance: The Owner/ Landlord shall provide the Tenant a moving allowance of 3.50 per rentable square foot. Cabling Allowance: . The OwneriLandlord shall provide the Tenant 2.00 per rentable square foot. Option-to Renew: - Tenant shall have tWo (5) year option periods to renew the Lease upon the same terms and conditions of the initial term. Tenant shall provide written notice to OwnerfLandlord of its intention to exercise the option(s) to renew the Lease not more than nine (9) months and not less than six (6) months prior to the expiration of the initial term or ?rst extension term. Option to Expand: . . During the Lease the Tenant hail have a continuous right of first refusal on all space contiguous to the Premises or any space on the same floor of the Premises (?Refusal Space?). The Refusal Space term shall be coterminous with the Lease term. Tenant shall have forty?five (45) days from the date Tenant receives OwnerfLandl?ord?s written notice of the availability of the Refusal Space. Owner/Landlord?s notice shall include all terms and conditions for leasing such space. If Tenant rejects Owner/Landlord?s proposed terms for the Refusal Space, then within the next 90 days after the date :of Tenants" rejection, OwnerfLandlord may not lease the Refusal Space to a third party on terms more favorable than. that offered to Tenant. After suCh 90-day period, and in each instance thereafter, before Comer/Landlord may offer the Refusal Space to a thirdparty, Ohmsr/Landlord'must offer the RefrzSal Space to Tenant. OwnerfLandlord must offer the Refusal Space to Tenant. . - Parkingti'l- I . - . I. Tenant will redoire access to three hundred and twenty (320) parking spaces, including forty (40) spaces reserved spaces in close proximity to the i?rcm'i'ses. Due to the elderly and disabled nature of the-Tenant?s Aging-85 CMO clientele, twenty (20) spaces shall hedesignated as handicapped and . Page 28 of 121 Document 4-19 -. twenty (20) Spaces as reserved visitor and the Tenantwill pay a prearranged price for each hour the Tenants clientele uses the spaces designated thru a ticketing validation system and will pay the amount due each month. The balance of two hundred and eighty {280) spaces shall be located within a reasonable distance to the Premises. Please indicate the locationand approximate rates of these spaces with your proposal. The Tenant does not envision providing parking for employees, so - please do not include these 280 spaces in the pricing proposal. Bus Service: - Dueto the nature of the Tenant?s clientele, it is critical that the Building be well served by the Milwaukee County Transit Bus system. Please detail the location(s) of the bus stops that serve the Building, inclizding the bus route numbers. . Ass-ignmen?Sublease: - Tenant shall have the right to sublease all or any portion of the Premises or assign the Lease to any subsidiary or af?liate of Tenant, without the prior written consent of Owner/Landlord. Tenant shall provide reasonable notice to Ownerz?Landlord if Tenant assigns or subleases all or a portion of the Premises to any subsidiary or af?liate, but shall not be required to gain OwnerfLandlord approval for such transfer. insurance: Tenant shall have the right to self?insure its personal property. Relocation: Owner/ Landlord shall not have the right to relocate the Tenant. Hazardous Substances: Owner/Landlord shall warrant that the Premises and any portion of the Building that is exposed to the Premises have no asbestos or other hazardous materials. OwnerfLandlord will indemnify Tenant . - against all hazardous material not introduced by Tenant in the Premises and/or Building. Building Sendees/Amcnities: - Provide a description of all services and amenities available to the Tenants of the Building, including the cleaning speci?cations and frequencies, food or vending facilities, cabling (computer and telephone), ?ber pptics, mail delivery, shippingfreceiving/deliveries, etc. Services shall be?t a ?rst- class of?ce building. Please note if the fOOdfvending service, if any, is available to the Tenant before or after normal office hours. - Building Business Hours: . - . Provide the Building?s normal Operating hours and availability of access to the Building/Pietnises; Tenant?s operating hours are generally from 7:00 6:30 p.111. Manda t-Friday. Tenant has staff that --worl{ on Banndays and Sundays, exclusive of observed legal holidays. in the eyent of a community emergency, certain Tenant staff may need access at any time, so 24?hour access to the should be'avaiiable, when needed. Air quality and temperature control for the Premises should .be suitable for a commercial office?building environment when Tenant occupied. 9 07/31/15 Of'izfl Document Filed 07/31/15 Page 30 Decument4419 After Hears HVAC: Provide the Building after- hours HVAC charges, if any, and any other charges Tenant could incur daring its occupancy. PleaSe specify if there are additional charges for after?hours electrical and/or lighting consumption; - ADA Compliance: . Except for alterations'performe responsible for compliance with the Americans Building. by Tenant, Owner/Landlord, at its own cost and expense, shall be with Disabilities Act (ADA) for the Premises and - Satellite Terminal: - Tenant shall have the right to install, with Owner/Landlord speci?cations, a satellite terminal using its standard equipment, if needed. Building Tenants: Provide a list of all current tenants. Sccurit?y: Provide a detailed deseript system, if any. ion of the Buildings security system, guard services and card~l Subject: This message is intended for the sole use of the individual and entity.to which it is addressed, and may contain information_that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended.addressee, nor authorized to receive for the intended addressee, you are hereby_notified that you may not use, Copy,- disclose or distribute to anyone the message or any information contained in the.message. If you have received this message in error, pleaSe immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete the message. COUNTY OF 1 inter-Office Communication Date: June 2010 To: . Supervisor Lee E. Holloway, County Board Chairman From: _._Jerome JrHeer, Director of Audits subject;- Stgategic Property Management I I On Monday, June 28,2010, the Milwaukee County Long Range Strategic Planning Steering- Committee will be discussing taCility of?ce space issues. The administration is evaluating several options to reduce overall Space costs to the County, including the issuance _of'a request for . proposalto address space needs for departments located at, or that may be'relocated to, City Campus. it is eXpectedl that the administration will co_ncurrently_'evaluate_ pessible' options concerning the space needs for the Of?ce on Aging (Aging) and the related "Care'Management . Organization (CMO). Both currently lease office space at the Henry Reuss FederatPlaza Building, 310 West Wisconsin Avenue under a joint lease that is set to expire at the end of 2010. . Background In September 1999, theDepartm-ent of Audit issued a report on Milwaukee County?s property I management. The audit concluded that a comprehensive inventory of. County facilities did not eXist. Further, management of space utilization occurred?primarily in "a decentralized manner; at the departmental level andfat times even lower organizational units within the larger departments. As a result, decisions regarding space utilization mayhave been reached- based on limited alternatives, inadequate information','or without c0nsideration given to-appropriate policy objectives or sound economic principles.-._ This highlighted the need. for a" formalized space'management - process with coordination at a central point within the County. Since that audit, the County. Has-improired its ability to identify all County building and other property assets. Key. to'this wasthe purchase of an asset management system, along with assessingthe, Condition'of County facilities to identify immediate and longterrn building repairs and maintenance. Also,.the Department of Administrative Services began reouiring 'COunty departments to "submit a . . Plan (FSUNP) as part of the annual budget?process, beginning with . the .2001 budget: are reduired to report current staff-levels and associated Space 'ne"eds,"and projectthose needs over the next five years. - - - However, neither ofthese efforts reached-their full. potential. dlnitial assessments of'ali County b.9930:in .2001} - Further, subsequent__'assessments of (facilities. initially have Pramt-31331more has not. been" suf??t?ht i0 address both speci?c repair needs as .well as preventative maintenance items identi?ed, -- I . by the assessments. Similarly,.the bene?ts that the not been used to help address theCounty?scurrentjan'd . future to is '2 party Departments; as__i_'nitially- .. '7enVisione'df ,for't'he'tormj, nor-"does require: its __in__C_lu_sio_n.7j inf-developing t'O'iSiJace if} Supervisor Lee Holloway, Chairman, MilWaukee County Board of Supervisors June 25, 2010 . - Page 2 - . Reactive vs. Proactive 7 .- -- . Lacking a structuredstrategic approach, the County?s approach to facility planning has been one of reacting to-specific short?term departmental needs rather than proactively Considering a long?term Countywide approach. This lack of a planfor program space became an issue during 2009 deliberations'onrelocation of. the Behavioral'l?lealth Division,?and again in discussions on the 2010 recommended budget item related-to vacating City Campus. As a result of these deliberations, we conducted a review to determine the extent _to _which the County has implemented the recommendations of our previous audit, including developing. a strategic approach to space} management; This includes examining existing ongoing ?les and records documenting the County?s available space, how it is being used, and the associated cost data to maintain that space. Findings . As noted previously, effort to implement our previous report recommendations were good initially, but Was not sustained. As a result, only limited progress in developing a strategic property management approach was-achieved. We also noted that overall property management continues to be fragmented. Several freestanding programs having their own facilities, such as the Airport, HOus'e of'CorreCtion, Parks, generally manage their space needs within their own locations. It should be noted that the office space used by most of these programs are limited and sometimes specialized in' nature, not lending themselves to sharing space with programs outside their con?nes. - The bulk of the remaining facilities with space that could be subject to Consolidation and sharing by multiple departments are. managed by two'units. DTPweFacilities Management Division oVersees the majority of County facilities, including the Courthouse Complex and City Campus. However, facilities 'used predominantly by the'Department' of'l-luman Services (DHS) are managed by DHS. personnel. This includes the Behavioral Health Division?s Mental Health'Complex, and-the Coggs" Ce?nter. we noted . that each of these two facility management; units 'operate- "relatively autonomOusly, with little coordination betirveen? the two when performing day?to~day tasks, or when special needs arise in coilrse.of business. - - . Tabled summarizes the amount Of usable offiCe/program space for facilities managed by Facilities} Management and DHS, along with the amount of space?leased by the County to outside entities,. andvacant of?ce space. It should be noted that thereisino central location from which this information can be obtained. While __dat'a onthe amount" of' usable space can'be found from a numberof sources, we found that the data was often inconsistent: AcOnsultant report'issued' - . 2009 provideda good'starting point for our. research, but; even that. contained some inconsistencies. We supplemented informatiOn included in? that report with data from other'sources, discussions with fa'cility managers and onsite-tours as needed. - - - 3 I 'Supervisor?Le-e Helloway, Chairman, June 25, 2010 Page 3 Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors Courthouse Complex? Criminal Justice Safety Buiiding . . Comm-unity CorreCtion Center City Campus- CATC Children?s Court Center Mental Health-Complex . 4? Coggs Center I Total (in'square feet) Table1 - (in square-feet) Count'y? Occupied Space 476,683 . 340,662 399,219 26,912 89,703 31,755 214,573 549,130 133 151- 2,261,766 Vacant LS 309 382 0 100,000 69,476. 31,106 0 .0 .0 0. 200,965 General PurposeIOf?ce'Space Inventory Space Owned by Milwaukee County '_Leased SQ ace . 3,786 -0 2,165 0 3,300? 122,164 2,288? 41,870 . '75 343- 250,956 I Ttotal7 Sgace- 460,851 - 340,662 501,404 96,367 124,111 163,939 216,661 I 591,000- 206-494 issue" that; affects potehtiat; this alternative" 13.66 high 6631., of"_operating the: I T'Campus? facility; 3 The alternatives_._lthatl' inv0 ve5jsetling _-C_ity - 2,713,709. Note: Vacant spacelocated at the Safety Building (former jail'space) and the Community Correbtion Center are considered Linusabie without extensive capitai expenditures. - Source: Management and DHS facilities management staff The amount of vacant space has decreased signi?cantly within the past year dueto a nUmber of newleases with outside agencies and the relocation'ot- Wisconsin Extension-to the CATC complex, The Vast majority of lease aCtivity involve. CATC, the Mental Heaith Compiex and the Except for City Campus-there are no viable with signi?cant usable-vacant space available that could be. used 'to house County? programs. . The__only' of?celptogramgspace of signi?cant size that the County currently leases from outside vendors is the-- 48,8_08 sq; ft. leased by'Aging/CMO atReus'sPlaza. . . . . . T-ablef?l shows that the County is leasing out about-250,000 sq.- ft. .of space to ofLits_ide.vend0rs. This is important to"_note' concerning City Campus and Aging/(3M0, 'With-the__ -. initial termof Aging/CMO?s contract ending in_'December 2010,.County administration has been into less-expensive.alternathtes to the $763,356 'paid annually -to an 'oUtside vendor;- This . includes moving-AgingICMQ'to available Countyfacilities, Campu'si?ind footing-affected Other avaiiableCountytecatian?.and 196861956606; .f - . .. - Supervisor Lee Holloway, Chairman, Milwaukee County Board OfSupervisors June 25, 2010- I Page 4 a The amount that the County maybe willing to invest in making City Campus a'viable alternative- to leasing fromoutside vendors. The facility 'is old, is not easily adapted to ef?cient of?ce - space usage, and needs extensive repairs to maintain the status quo.. To reduce energycosts, the HVAC system needsto be replaced. it is expected that the cost of making the facility energy ef?cient will have a payback in about eight years. I - - a Considering the use of office space currently leased to outside vendors at CATC, BHD and the Coggs Center, if the alternative involves leasing spacefrom other outside vendors Factors that need to be considered include the cost of operating those buildings, the revenUe generated by the leases, and the potential cost of leasing from an outside vendor. Positive Movement ToWard Strategic Planning In spite of the challenges noted inour review, there are three encouraging indications that these I conditions wiil be addressed. The ?rst is the completion of a study authorized by the .COunty Board as part of the 2009 Adopted Budget for $50,000 for consultant services to assist DTPW Facilities . Management in tormalizing a countywide approach to the strategic?use of its sp'ace,'facilities consolidation and sale of assets. That report provides a good reference point- of where the] County's-available. office space is located and how it is being used. .It also reinforces the inefficiencies associated with converting buildings notoriginally designed for of?Ce use. It 'shows. . how'many departments have signi?cantly more space than needed, often due to. the building iayout; The second is the attention that has been brought to the subject by the Long Range Strategic Planning Steering Committee. .That Committee,. by undertaking a discussion of County-facilities, . recognizes the signi?cant value of our assets, the role that- operating costs play in maintaining?scal health and the importance of facilities as a resource" in providing service to our citizens. -- - The third positive sign is the activities of aworkgroup of County staff that is developing-a r'eqLiest for] proposals'for addressing the high cost of providing space at City Campus, as well as- c0ming Up with'a iong?term solution for space n'eeds Of the Office on Aging and the related Membersof the workgroup, chaired by the DAB Fiscal Budget Administrator, include the Director, Directorofi Operations, and Real Estate. Services Manager,? DAS Assistant Fiscal Budget Administrator, a County Board Fiscal Budget Analyst, and the Director-of Audits. The is- inviting interested parties to come up.w_ith creative solutions to address the aboveissues'in one of . three ways: a . Proposal to purchase thejCity Campus facility only", . . . 2. Preposaltoprovide leased office space to the County only; or . - 3. Proposal to both purchase City Campus and, provide leased office Spacein CW camp-??5 Org-:- I a private facility, . City._Campus_ I . The building'known currently 3as City Campus was formerlya hospital consisting'of a nine story and 1 - . a Minimum". remodeling convertedeXisting patientrooms into offices. .la'rge'hOSpitaicorridors, in.? . ?addition to_;_public ones; The Wisconsin Preservation Fund acquired City'Campu's' in 1990 th?_r0ugh?a . [$15.9 millionreVenue- bond renovated. and leased. it toMilwaukee County. _ln'1993, the . - 5 II County purchasedthe-building from the fund for $1.8 Closed I .. 5 'the_'most reasonable costof occupancy, .3. -- Supervisor Lee Holloway, Chairman, Milwaukee County Board of- Supervisors June 25, 2010 . - Page-5 its operation at the facility in 1995/98, when treatment of mental health patients moved from in? house facilities to the community with the assistance of outpatient Clinics. City Campuscosts million to operat'e, much of the cost due to 'the heating and ventilation system designed for a hospital setting. As a result, the cost per square foot is about $25 per square foot otoccupied space. This contrasts with the-Courthouse, which costs to - - operate. Whiiesstil-li?a substantial cost compared -to today?s energy ef?cient buildings", 'it is still much iess'than City Campus. Further, Facilities Management administration indicated that it could obtain a lease rate ft., given the-current economy and the high supply of available space. This combination has led administration to consider City Campus in an attempt to reduce operatingcosts. - .. Reuss Plaza . - . I . Concurrent with this development is the end-of the lease at ReussPlaza. Of?ce on .- Aging moved to Reuss Plaza from its- previous location at Schlitz Park ir1_2008. This current . iocation was selected from proposals submitted by ?ve'vendors in response to ,a request for proposal. The Of?ceon Aging/CMO is currently in the final year of a five-year lease that allows for a subsequent three~year extension, followed by a five?year extension?(total of eight-years). The current contract provides Aging/CMO with 48,808. sq._ ft.- of space for $783,358 for 2009' This translates into $15.84/sq. ft. However, the net square footage available to AginngMO is actually 38,488, resulting in a'signi?cantiy higher. cost per square foot ft}. These differences become important. when comparing rates between vendors, as well as comparing internal facility Costs per quare foot. I . . in reviewing the contract, it is clear- that extending the current lease is not in the County?s best - interest. it is unlikely a negotiated extension rate would result in a better' rate_than soliciting . cOmpr?atition from other?vendors.' Working against an extension _is the requirement for the leasefto . convert to a ?triple net" lease.- This requires Aging and the CMO to pay its fairshare of operating expenses and taxes for the entire buildings based on square footage. This Would be injaddition-to' - the rental rate per square foOt'that would be determined-during the complex negOtiation-proces's - prescribed in the current contract. . - - - - The end ?of'the current lease at Reuss Plaza has put the County in" a positionwhe'retwooptions noted in the prbposed request for proposal-wouid result in' more ef?cient use of space.?and . signi?cant- cost reductions:__ i. The Office on Aging could move into- 101in Campus and other departments c_ouid'move_'_into .- other filling City Cam-pus to capacity, thereby taking advantage .of third?party revenue 7 . . 1 2. The-County could lease spa-Ce in a private facility ifor'_'d'epartment's_ at'City . i - {Campus, and_ City' Campus facility to aparty that is__ . _'property-. the inf-City- Campus-and .initiaIfSte'p Should beconstr'uctive' in" helping policy makers, make future decisionsiabout'the most SupervisOr Lee Holioway, Chairman, MiiwaUke'e" Coonty Board of Supervisors June 25, 2010 - - Page 8- we have been informed that the five year tease for County" programs loCated at ReussPiaza will not be renewed pending the; results of the RFP process. .While the RFP may not address-other major challenges like the long term future of the vacant Community C'orrectionai- Center, the viability and future of the Safety Building, a long?term Solution tothe deterioration of the structures that house the Behavioral Health Division, the location of Chiidren?s Court and other facility issues, it is a - signi?cant start. Conclusion - - - I tn'general, a formalized property management function would help resolve many of the costly issues that face the County. 'Among these-issues are the question of what should be done with some of the buildings located owned by Milwaukee CoUnty. A'number of these buiidings are old and in a deteriorating .s-tate. Some may be worth renovating, while others should perhaps be sold or demolished. . I - A formalized property management process established at a centratized point-wouid previde: a Better overall knowledge and consideration of the availability of and demand for space, allowing for effective matching of space needs across departmental boundaries; a Standardization of the space planning process; and - - Establishment of space utilization standards. The existence of vacant space is costly. Likewise, any activity relating-to property utilization'?he purchase, renovation, construction, maintenance, or leasing of buildings) involve significant moneta?ry'outlays. -Conceptualiy, this-foundation atone suggests that property management decisions should'result from a process in which strategicplanning has taken place, avaitabie - alternatives. are identi?ed and analyzed, and that conclusions are reached based on reliable (current, complete and accurate) information, appropriate policy considerations, :and sound. economic principleslook forward to working with you and- other members'lof the County Board as we 'address the facility issues facing Milwaukee _County__gOvernment.- -- - Jerome __Heer Haunt/ash cc: Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors Scott Walker .- Archer, Director, Department of Administrative Services . - . Steven Kreklow, _Fiscai_& Budget Administrator, Department of Administrative services John Ruginni, Assistant Budget Administrator, Department of Administrative-Servicesg :Jack Takerian, o?r Transportation Pubtic Works . -. I- 'Bria'n Dranzik, DirectOr of Operations, Transportation &'Pubi_ic Works . - . Craig 'Dillman,_. Reai Estate &_Pubiic works - Stephen C'ady, .- -- __P_age 1 61432 From: John Hitler Sent;' Monday, June 28, 2010 1:14 PM To: I ?Tim Russell" Subject: FW: draft of a memo in response to auditor Attachm ants?5M EMU. o?n auditor 'reportdoc What-is the chance to get a'quick meeting with heer to review the proposal. i wonder if he revievlired it if we could get him to support? - - - His reportis'w-r'ong on multiple fronts. i actualiy think you could move ahead with the cover that the proposal addresses the issues that he raised. 6' There has been extensive negotiation a The renewal terms in NOT Triple Net a You Save in first year plus $55k this year. a No Moving expense. iwrote the memo as if to'come from Stephanie or someone at county to you. MEMO . . . . ., This is a quick memoto respond to-the issues raise in the auditor report relative to the Department of Aging lease at Federal Plaza andthe potential extension ofthe lease. Since this is an important issue and we did not wantto wait until the last minute, we have intact been in . extensive negotiations over the last 6 months with the landlord. We do not believe thattheiauditor was aware of those negotiations nor the terms of the proposed extension.-.. I We have negotiated a reduced rental'rate that is very competitive in the market. In negotiated. a reduction in the current-year rental rate that Will give usan additional savings of $55,000 Bystaying in plate we also will not incur moving expensesjth-at could be 5400;000; the lease renewal that was negotiated is notj?triple ne't" as'indicated'in the auditor report. it is a modified gross rental'rate. Operating expenses are included in the rent and will not increase during the five-yearperiodp I I I I . Electrici'tycostswerepulled out ofthe rental rate forcomparison purposes but the landlord has agreed tofi'x the_co.st forth'ejfive'year term of the lease-ibis locks in our. costs and. . - eliminates the-uncertainty ofelectricity rate fluctuationsThe annual cost of our space'at FederaiPlaza is currently $763356. The'renewal'option cost for__2011 Would be's 528,590.64 a.sa_vingsof 2323:6548. in?addition we Will get a credit toward this year?s rent'ifvve exercise therenewaIQ .d - .- . The Federal Plaza building is very efficient space._Contrary ofthe 48308 squa'refeet . I. I of rentable?spaice We have 44,-903-Square feet usable The city campus buildi?g. is extremely i_n_efficient, "moving the_48,808 oil-space to city campus . require almost 70,000 soft of city campus Space. There isn'otthat'm'uchispace. available at City campus. I. Time-islet the don?t believe that there is time 'to go thru an have a _decision-:' I I - I- ins-Place ti'm?io move o-riDeG-iemberf31x2010-? -. '1 HM rim/m i Page2' of? For at Of these reasons we believe that exercising the-Option to renew in the ekisting' lease" is the best'option and in the best interest of the Milwaukee County'Department on Aging. 6? Competitive renewal rate I $55,000 credit toward rent for this year- 0 No moving expenses 0 Efficient space MEMO Thisis a quick memo to respond to the issues raise in the auditor report relative to the Department of Aging lease at Federal PlaZa and thepOtential extensiOn of'the lease. Since this-is an important issue and "we did not want-to wait until the last minute, we have in fact been in extensive negotiations over the last 6 months-with the landlord. We do not believe that the auditor was aware of those negotiations nor the terms of the proposed extension. We have negotiated a reduced rental ratethat is very competitive in the market. in addition, we have negotiated a reduction in the current year rental rate'that will give us an'additional savings of$55,000. 8y staying in place wealso will nOt incur moving expenses that could be $400,000. The lease renewal that was negotiated is'not ?triple net? as indicated'in the auditor report. it is a modified gross rental rate. Operating expenses are included in the rent and will not increase during the ?ve year period. Electricity costs were pulled out ofthe rental rate for comparison purposes but the landlord hasagreed to ?x the cost of electricity at $.61/sq.ft. for the five year term of the lease. This locks in our costs and eliminates the uncertainty of electricity rate fluctuations. The'annual costof our space at Federal Plaza is currently $763,356. The renewal option cost for 2011 . would be 528,590.64 a savings of 234,766.48. in addition we will get a credit of $55,000 toward this I years rent it we exercise the renewal. The Federal Plaza building is very efficient space. Contrary tothe audit report ofthe 48,808 square feet of'rentable space we have 44,903 Square feet. of usable space. The city campus building extremely inefficient, moving the 48,808 'sq.ft. of space to city campus-would require almost 70,000 sqft. of city Campus space. There is not that much spate available at City Campus. I - - Tim'e'is of the essence, we don?t believe that there istime to go thru an RFP process and-have a dlecis'iOn in place-in time to move on December 31, 2010-. I I all of these reasons we believe that exercising the option to renew in the existing lease is the best a Option and inthe best interest of the MilWaukee County Department on Aging. I Co_m_petitive_renewal rate .Ia' -. $55,000 credit toWard rent forthis year I moving expenses I I Efficient space. . a Year?s 'rentif we exercise theirenewal. 3 Page-1&2 - From: John Hitler .sr-lr1rrm1n .. Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 1:15 PM . To: -- Subject.? FW: draft of a memo in response to auditor Attachments: MEMO on auditor reportdoc ill Kelly lust looping ydu in on this. Froszohn Hiller sent; Monday,? June 28,, 2010 1:03 PM - To: Jim Villa Subject: draft of a memo in response to auditor What is the chance to get a quick meeting with heer to review the proposal. I wonder if he reviewed it if we eduld get him to suppert? l-lis report is wr_ong__on_multip e fronts. I actually think-you could move ahead with the cover that the proposal addresses theissues that he raised. There has been extensive negotiation a The renewal terms in NOT Triple Net a You Save in first year plus $55k this year. a No Moving expense. l'wrote the memo as it to come from Stephanie or someone at county to you.? - MEMO. . This .is a quick memo to respond .to the issues raise in the auditor report relativeto the. Department of Aging leaseat Federal Plaz_a_and_'the'potentia extension of thelease. - . . Since?this is an important issue and we did not want to wait until the last minute, we'have in fact been in" extensive negotiations over the last 6 mOnths with the landlord?. We do not believe that the auditor. was aware of those negotiations nor the termsoic the prdposed extension .- - - - ?We have negotiated a reduced rental rate that isver'y competitive-inthe market. In addition, negotiated a reduction in the currentvear rental-rate that will give us an additional savings of $55,000_' ?By staying in place we al'sowill not incur moving expenses that could I .- The lease renewal that Was negotiated isnot ?triple net? as indicatedin the auditorreport. It is a. - - modified gross rental rate. Operating expenses are included in the rent and Will__'not_increaSeduring theElectricity costs Werepulled Out of the-rental "rate for comparison purposes hilt-the landlord has agreed. . to fix the c_ost'_of electricity'at 5:61/quft. for thefive year term of locks in our costs and; -. I eliminates the-uncertainty ofelectricity rate.fluctuationsThe annual coSt of Our space at FederaiPlazais cUrrentlv $63,356. The renevval option cost'for 201i .. would be $528,590.64 a savings of 234,76648.injadditiOn Wejwill get _a'Credit-ot $55,000t'oward this? i i . The Federal Plaza building is very. efficient spate.'Contrary to the audit report of the 48,808 square feet of . rentable space we have 44,903 square feet of usable space. - - The city campus building is extremely inefficient, moving the 48,808 sq.ft._of Space to city campus would require almost 70,000 ofcitv campus space. There is not that much space available atCitvC?ampus. Time is of the-essence, we don?t believe that there is time to go thru an RFP'process and have a decision in piace in time to move on December 31, .2010these reasons we believe that exercising the option to renew in the existing lease is the best option and in the best interest ofthe Milwaukee Countv Department on Aging. is Competitive renewal rate . .m .. . a $55,000 credit toward rent for this year I a No moving expenses 9 Efficient space Filed 07/311715! Page - _Page10f2i_l. -- John Hille'r [johnhilIer@hillerrealty.com] From: Sent: . Tuesday, July 06, 2010 10:04 AM . To: Jim Viila; kmrindfleisch@gmaii.00m; Tim Russeli . Cc: I Scott Walker Subject: FW: Fwd: HEADS UP RFP?Of?cial Notice No. 6562Aging/City Campus RFP i w?a?t to be sure that the communications that the Federal Plaza iepresentatiVes haize had with the. county on the renewal are kept con?deiitial and aren't available to bidders that may now be bidding against us. - - Sent Via BlackBeH?y by From: jv@jimvi11a.com . . Date: Tue; 6' 5.112010 07:29:11 ?0500 To: 01111 - - . Subject: Fwd: HEADS UP REP?Of?cial Notice No. 6562Aging/City Campus REP Sent bymy iPhonei Begin forwarded message: - 'iAgin From; ?camber? Date: July 6, 2010 CDT . . To: "?Jim Villa'" 'imvi?aeom? "Tim Russell? ?Scott-Walker? "Kelly Rind?eisch? Subject: HEADS UP m- RFP-Of?cial Notice No. 6562Aginngity Campus-REP RFP for?pgce issiied and on county Website FYI: Original-Message aFrom: Craig Dillmann . Sent: 07/02/2010 04:57 PM CDT To: Josh Fudge; SteVen*KreklOw; 'Cc: Gerald Baker; Debra~L10ydi s'izbject'iREP?Of?cial Notice No.. g/City Campus RFP Today appro'ximately 350 copies of Of?cial Notice Ala-6562; Which announcesthe ?Solicitation of the RFP, has been sent to commercial realestatebrekers, m'ultietenaht- . Jack.Takefian; Brian-Dranzik office" pfeperty management ?rms; architects,constructionfirmsg j" .. f'Fi'e-di 07/31/1553 Page 6.9. :0f1211- f-DOCUmerlt- 4i19'; - 1nH'dMnih Page 2on .- developers, WHEDA a'ffo'rdabie housing developer-applicants and the City of Milwaukee. The Officiai Not-ice wiil be posted in a variety of newspapers Starting next week.' The RFP is now posted on the County Procurement website. For the 7/15 pre?submittal meeting, we Should decide what County staff members should attend, seeing the questions concerning leasing space and/or City Campus may be diverse in nature. - Thanks to everyone for their input. Craig I I messageis intended for the sole use of the individual and entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, con?dential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended addressee, nor authorized to receive for the intended addressee, you are hereby noti?ed that you may not use, copy, disclose or distribute to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received this message in error, pleaSe immediately advise the sender by reply email. and delete the message. 'i i .i mam-m" I Page 13-015 From: John Hiller sent: - Saturday, July 24, - 'To: 'Tim Rassell' Subject: sanfelljpo Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Stat-us: . Green .. Do you. havea number for line? Or have you talked tea-him about the Fed Plaza/Aging deal? - 1' Filed. .- .- Page hi 1' I From; 'John Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 To: kmrind?eisoh@gmaillcolm Cc: Jim Villa . . subject: I I HIE-Kelly I . Couidryou check on thtee things for me on the office spate Who is going to be oh the evaluation committee 2- is there a scoring system? - 3- Wilt they go to a Best and Real offer procedure? Do'?'u?me'nt' -- I . Pagelof-l. From: I Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 5:29 PM I I To: John Hilier Subject: Re: . . . Sorry. - it?s bee? a day. I know you don?t have the answers cause I just talked to jack. It sounds like those things haven?t really been determined. I?ll let you know What they decide. Sent from my US. Cellular BlackBetTy? smartphone From: "John Hiller" Date: Tue,.27 Jul 2010 12:51:34 ?0500 To: Cc: Jim Subject: Hi Kelly I . . - Could you check on three things for me on the of?ce space 1- Who is geing to be on the evaluation committee 2~ is there a scoring system? 3- Will they go to'a Best and Final offer procedure? Case page its?; Bums-flog .. P?gs'lon - 2/ _Frbm: .John I Sent; Thursday, August 12, 2010 12:49 PM i To:- 'Tim - - - . Subject; FW: follow up I Follow Up Flag?: Follow up Flag Status:- Green From; John Hiller Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 12:47 PM To: ?skw@scottWalker.0rg? Subject: follow up Scott - was_thinking thru the situation with the RFP. 1 think that Riemann?s involvement has tainted the process. if he has all of the bid information and now they are gOing to a final and best the other bidders are at a distinct disadvantage. it opens up the County to a serious lawsuit, it puts Riemann in a very bad place(may be criminal}, and opens you to big problem. This final and best proceszre'is changing the rules. Regardless of Greg?s involvement, it is unfair to the bidders and opens the county to scrutiny. I think quietly eliminating the final and bestmitigates the risk that Greg has created. Here are some suggested remedies 1- Rescind the final and beSt'offer procedure. 3 Reasons why? . - a. i asked Jack specifically on the phone prior to the due date if they Were going to a final and best -. .. procedure and was told'n'o. I b. _lt_is unfair to the other bidders if one party has access to the?other bid info because of. Greg. c. _The RFP was in 3 sections/options. You could bid on l?just office spaCe, 2?just buy City campus . or 3- cOmbination. Each Option had its own weighting/criteria.The three finalist only bid on. office space they should not be allowed to now respond'to a different section 'of the RFP. 2- Revise the final and best and only allow bidders to submit a re?bids on the original option that they bid -?they_Can?t bid on buying the bLiiIding if they did not include that in their original bid. ACcept the Federal Plaza bid asiit won on all merits-and issue a new RFP just for the pUrchaSe of the." building; have said ail?along that this is a two step process, i think you-need to get the Aging office space set, then get the other'users outof city campus, then try to sell City Campus. Here is another-majorconcern i would have for youfcounty. If one ofthe bidders does'bid on the purchase of . "the blinding: and thW'W-i? the bidxi aisume?the. buyer WOUIdhave sbme due diligence and contingencies. What I . happens if the winning bidderfbuyer discovers .so'mething'about the building they don?t like or'they can ?nance .. f' it and-they baCk Wt?- Thisis Vet?Y common in tOday?s market. Even-with goo-d building's many transactiOns are"; I I I - unable to will the county do then? i think it exposes you to a big risk. - 07/31/15. 7 - I. Page of2 aiso think that the criteria now that they have to sell the building in order to'iease the office space changes the RFP process. If that was a criteria it should have been stated that way in the RFP. if the proposals are now going to be evaiuated based on whether or not you buy the building, that is compieteiv different then'the way the RFP was written. John lease22?is?cwoo922?LAI ?79 (Di-121.7 fDo?ijfme'rit 4-19} 1 'Pagel of2 From: John Hiller [John@JMHiller.com] I Sent: - Wednesday,'August 18, 2010 7:27 AM To: . Scott Walker Cc: Torn Nardelli Subject: FW: follow up Follow Up Flag: Follow up I Flag Statue: Red Scott? . - . haven?t heard? if there has been any movement on this. The Federal Plaza folks are contemplating legal action if this process moves ahead under the current . circumstances. While I can?t blamethem -l have to date successfully talked them out'of it. It would not be good for anyone. - - in addition to the remedies I suggested below I have one other idea. There are several technical issues with the RFP which 1 think could render it open to appeal by any of the vendors. issues that do not relate to Greg or involve the administration. 1 could have someone like David Halbrooks call Corp Counsel and walk them_thru the problems and suggest that they scrap the RFP and start over. I would guess corp counsel would call Jack and discuss with him as well. If he agreesthen the RFP can be thrown out and restarted. I would use Halbrooks because there is no connection to me and he is actually very good on these things. - It appears that your administration reps on the committee are pushing to keep CityCampus open and move Aging'into City Campus. Economically this is the worst possible outcome. . Give me a call when you have a moment. - From: 'John' Hiller Sent: Thursday, August 12, .2010 12:47 PM To: Subject: follow up - Scott. I . .. - was thinking thru the Situation with the RFP. itth that Riemann-n?s involvement has tainted the process. If he has-tall of the b'idinformation and now they are going to a final andbest the other'bidders are-at a distinCt disadvantage. lt'opens up the County to 'a serious lawsuit, it puts Riemann in a very bad placelm'ay be opens you to big problem. This ?nal and best procedure is-changing' the-rules. it _isiunfa?ir to the - - bidders and__opens the countyto scrutiny. lt?hinkq uietly eliminating the final and best-mitigates the risk - Here are some suggested remedies I . Rescind the fin-aland best offerprocedure. 3' Reasons why? I 1 o-mthm 1 3 Page 2 of2 a. I asked Jack specifically on the phone prior to the due date if they were going to 'a final and best. procedure and was told no. - it is unfair to the other bidders if one party has access to the other bid info because of Greg. The RFP was in 3 sections/options. You could bid on 1- just office space, 2? just buy City-campus . or 3- combination. Each option had its own weighting/criteria. The three finalist only bid on office space they should- not be allowed to now respond to a different section of the RFP. 2- Revise the final and best and only allow bidders to submit are-bids on'the original option that they bid on. i.e. - they can?t bid on buying the building if they?did not include that in their original bid. 3~ AcCept the Federal Plaza bid as it won on all merits and issue a new RFPjust for the purchase of the bUilding. I have said all along that_this is a two Step process, I think you need to get the Aging office . space set, then get the_other users out of city campus, then try to sell City Campus. Here is another major concern I would have for you/county. if one of the bidders does bid on the purchase of the building and they win the bid, I assume the buyer would have some due diligence and contingencies. What happens if the winning bidder/buyer discovers something about the building they don?t like or they can finance it and they back out. This is very common in today?s market. Even with good buildings many transactions are unable to cloSe. What will the county do then? i think it exposes you to a big riSk. I also think that the criteria now thatthey have to sell the building in order to lease the office space changes the RFP process. If that was a criteria it should have been stated that way in the RFP. If the proposals are now going to be evaluated based on whether or not you will buy the building, that is completely different thenthe way the RFP was written. John Page [82' Document 4495 .nrn1rnh'1 1 I I. 'P_jage .1 ofi From: . Tim Russell Sent: 1 Wednesday, April 07, AM To: I - Subject: Re: Hillerrealty.com Follow Up Flag: Follow up I F139 Status; Green . . . . With the iPhone it's a mail setting whether to save them 'on serVer,? phone or neither Sent from my iPhone On? Apr 7,10, at 7:40 AM, "John Hiller? <3ohnhiller?hillerrealtv.com> wrote: I also discovered that emailsthat sent, either from the blackberry or computer were being saved in the sent mail folder on' the web mail. There were over 3000 emails in . there. 1 deleted-all of those and that seemed to take care of as Well; Sent Via BlaekBerry by r0111: Tim Russell . :3 Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 20:46:30 ?0500 . To: Hiller, I- Subject: Hillerrealtveom . . I JohnYour previous statements about having a lot of disk usage'but not having email in - I . . I your aecount perplexed me, so I looked into it. The base account is hillerre there is more than 25MB of email in that account. You should be able to log in to webmai-l for that account, change the View to 500 to - be able to look through them and delete them relatively (quickly.- Let me know if you have questions. Tim . . .- Fired 07/31/15.? I . 15, they sat'on it and did nothing until last week. "Certainly net our fault. --Page_ of?- From: - John Sent: Friday; March 26, 2010 9:46 AM Te; 'Tim Russeii' I I I I Subject: I FW: Letter - Follew Up Flag: Follow up' Flag Status: Yellow Review this and the other'email'l sent with the attached letter. i - .- From: Ed Aprahamian Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 5:40 PM Subject: Re: Letter I John, After I Spent all day composing this 5 page letter,_lirn felt that it may just get Gary Wound up. He suggested calling Gary to set up a meeting immediately: to address hisconcems and when he I con?rrns all is "well send that he is satis?ed With everything. - So Betty called him. She said she was very surprised about theletter and that she really wanted to meet asap to address all of his-many concerns. He said it waSn't necessary to meet because eyerythinghas already been taken eareof. Betty said she really wanted to meet to go thrOugh the letter._line by line to addess any problems. He said "well-its not- really Something lfcan Show you. . Gary then said that what this is all about is he and Jack are concerned about the Illegal Alien thing. He said" Do you know what would happen if the superyisors found out about that.?_ (So let?s put out a three page-letter and distribute it around town. that will keep-it quiet) 80 [think this whdle thing was a CYA for Jack and Gary over the Illegal alien. Not really about cleaning. I I ..- think their concern is that after we did our background check and handed the info to them on Dec Villa-thought that is why Jack let this letter As it shows 5 page diatribe we did everything completely by the book and did a thorough checkof the guy and he came up clean. There is only so much you can do- .- My?concern is that'perCep_tio'n Will be among thosewho See the. letter, including Scott, thatwe . are doing-a poorjob which is completely false; - . . . . Villa said he has a can into'Jack'and would?speak to scoa. 1' The letterwill give.an goodbackgroulnd info-.. ThanksEd . I - 0:1 Weds/24210, J?hn HiH?'r mam: . in 1 inn?i't' From: John Hiller Subject: Re: Letter 1 3?0: ?Ed Aprahamian" .. Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 4:33 PM I For some reaso?l can?t Open on my phone: 1 will hate to look at when I get to my laptop Sent Via BlaekBerry by . -- - From: Ed 'Aprahamian Date: Wed,'24 Mar 2010 13:28:05 ?0700 (PDT) . . TO: 01111 Hiller .1 . - Subject: Letter Attached is my proposed response. It is framed as a memo to me from Betty, my General Manager. We tried to go easy on Gary. Thanks Page. 2 - -- . Fired -- I'xi'im-i i' 5 Bag; 1 o'f-i - From} John Hitler [john@jmhiller.com] Sent: - Friday. March 26,2010 9:45 AM- To? Russell?- Subject: - . FW: Letter Foli'oW-Up Flag: Foliow Up I Flag Status: - Green - - Attachr?entSb Milwaukee County Letterdocx I This was nave-risent. See the next emaii as weli From: Ed Aprahamian Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 3:28 PM To: John Hilier; John Hiller;r Subject: Letter Attached is my propose-d response. It is framed as a memo to me from Betty, my General Manager. We, tried to g9 easy on Gar-y. Thanks 1f11f?1?1?l Ed The letter we received from Gary was very-surprising to me. The buildings are?in good shape and are 1000% cleaner than when we-took over. We still spend a go-Od deal of-labor hour's Cleaning meSsesthat have not been addreSsed inyears. have enjoyed working with Gary and he has been very helpful. 'Again lam IsUrprisedl . . I - Gary correctly pointed out-that the were in need of attention. I agreed, and they were addressed that-night and continue to be a focus. . As youknow, am involved. in Operations of all of oUr major accounts. I had. asked Gary to keepme inthe middleo'fcommunication with Nate On Site This did not happenin the first few weeks and at the Feb 16"Ch meeting] again asked Gary to cc me on all communication with Nate so that -- could keep track ofwhat was-going on. Afterthat meeting Gary did begin includingme on the emails. . Gary said in his letter that, starting February 6th, the Facilities Management staff performed inspections usingour Quality Assurance inspection form. Neither Nate nor have'seen these inspections and did not even know they'were being done until it was m'entiOne'd at our March 16th meeting. If we are-all workingtogether to provide great service why wouldn?t those inspection be shared with 'us when they were done?? mn- I Below are' responSes to'somle of?the major issues. MoSt of the issues are. old and were rectified long ago or they are-just. misstated. I I Background Checks I We consider the security 'of'the' County?uil_dings to .be our top priority. assertion that we failed backgroundtl?r'eek Mid American staff-before placing them in 1S. lust'false.. - Background ch'eckst'hrfou'gh' Back-ground I I 1 - Checkere- dene bravery emperer befOr?Ithev areQSubmitted It'd .. 1 j. 5 Of theSO or so people we have hadchecked by the County, these are the four that have so greatly threatened the security of the County facilities. Gary in theoriginal list of staff you-included an individual who had a Pea'dlng felony conviction.? The individual referenced is Christopher Wright. He was hired in December when? we were asked to come and cover forthe County Custodians that stopped coming to Work. We hired people in a hurry and were told that we could Start people while the background checks were being completed. Based upon our background check, we notified Gary that Chris had a pending court case but that he told us that in February it would be expunged from the record. We told Gary that we would pull him out. of the County. Gary said he could returnwhen the case Was cleared. QofebruarylZ it was expunged and he was put back into the building where he works today as a lead cleaner. Gary wrote ?Also, two Mid American employees had open warrants; 'one was takensintocustody while working in the Courthouse.? The woman taken into custody is Carmelita Arteaga.-She had an outstanding warrant for unpaid traffic violations. Neither her CCAP nor background. checks showed_it.7 She tookca re of'the'ticket, was cleared and currently__works for us at the County I asa cleaner.- - - John Jones is the seCond employee that had a warrant. Again, this did not show I up _on_ CCAP or'a background Check; Hiswarrant was also forCan'unpai'dt'raffic violation?.3_ I He took-care of the ticket and was cleared and continues'towork for us as clean'_er in the Wauwatosa' facilities. personzmentioned.asan illegal alien isFrancis'co Hernandez. We ran," bac'.kglround'Chleck (WhiCh includes SSlti'yerification). have a Copy I i if Fi'I'ed'o7/3'1/1Si Page-"8910f 1.21 his Social'Security Card and his Permanent Resident Card on file. 'There is nothing- _.more we could legally have done to determine his validity. Obviously the County__ has moreadvanced resources that we do. Regarding the ?less than newly hired private security firm has been sweeping the 101?h street entrance because of the condition?. spoke -to the Wackenhut guards to askthat if they-feel the entrance needs cleaning to let our daystaff know and we 'Will take care of it. They told me that they were not cleaning because they felt things were dirty'b'ut that frequently n'eatening their? area is'part of their company required tasks. I - Floor Work Our floor'crew is working its way through all of the County buildings. The works is progressing slower than anticipated because of the tremendOLis neglect the f oOrs over the last 20 years. in many cases we are having to strip off 20 coats of-wax to' get to the original surface. This is very-time consuming and we are adding extra staff to speed upthe work. Lee Ne-wson, our lead floor person, has been with the County for over 20 years and'has told us we are working on some floors that have not- been done in 10 to 15 years. Once-we have gotten through all the floors once, it will be much easier to maintain them ata high'leyel. The floors we have complete look Spectacular - Re: Felzjruaryl?th meeting- Gary. called with We sched'uledameeting, Consumables Credit: At the meeting 'G'a'ry informed me that he and Nate. had agreed. that we would use up the remaining papery etc.) that the County'had on hand. ofthi-s, therefore the January 'in.y_o.i.ce.had for the county Supplies we had I Used;- L: -. After the meeting we did an inventory ofthe supplies we had'used'inJanuary and what remained of the County supplies. We then submitted a revised January invoice with a credit of $7062 for the supplies used and agreed that a credit for $3299 would be applied'to the February invoice to compensate the County for the remaining supplies. made-Gary aware that need to-be told of any Situation regarding invoicing such as-this.. There'was no attempt to overbilli. The agreement'between Nate and?Gary? regarding using up the remaining supplies was simply not communicated to me or our billing department. _We made the adjustment as soon as we were made I aware. To be clear, no reduction for lack or performance was made. Gary expressed concerns-about the hours'vve had in the building. l'toldih'im we were notigpliy putting in__ the hours required ineurproposal-but to insure a smooth start?up (which we achieved) we Were overstaffed throughout'the month. I provided Gary with a labor report for January. (See below) JanuaryZOlODaily Labor Repert Milwaukee County Below are the daily labor hours fo?lrlanuary. More hours Were required torthe first few weeks of'the start-up to insure a smooth transition and account for the - unusually large cleaning and trash baCklog; (Hourtotals include night labor+ day_ porter+ ?oor car-e. Supervision hours are not included-in thetotals.) Per Proposal - . - .- Wee'k Budgeted Hours Actual Hours Over/Under_Budget - 1167.5- -- 71271 _j10-3.50ver.z' --1157.57 1239} 7 _371'.5 3. . ail-1.67.5.1] 1 305 4 4167.5,- - 1181.1. - G'ary'ex'pressed cOncern about the lack of experience-of our cleaners. All of our crieaners, most with previous cleaning experience, receivedext'ensive cleaning I training-from'Betco Products and in addition we had an' experienced supervisor wOrking with each ICrew totrain and insure quality. .The start?up went-smoothly. Complaints were minimal. The building was brought up to a level of cleaning that had not been seen in recent memory and it was done'for a huge saving. Most of the few complaints were for propping open doors. This was 'due to the fact that we were not provided acceSs to parts of the - building fOr at least the first three weeks. By the end of January we .did have access to most areas I 'l At this meeting ltold Gary that I would like to walk?through ir?i'spections with county Facilities personnel aswedo at our State and City facilities. This allows us to determine any problems we may be unaware of and allow us to rectify them immediately. asked' again to do this at the March 16th building. We wi?li'fina'll'yl'be'doing one at the end of this month. Regarding the comments about general cleaning, these arejust false. ?There are rest-rooms that weyhav'e" brought to your attention that have not been cleaned for gsmonth's.? The p'roblem'isithlat Gary receives an email from a disgruntledCo'unty em-plloyee with'an out'l-andishl'claim; He f_ires off an. email to us. We immediatelyl- have day staff check out the area. Upon investigation 99%oftimethe complaint is either'com'pletely 'ov.erbl.o_wn orthere is a reasoner it that is beyond our I control. Gary does not 'havetime to Check these situations out personally. We keepihim informed of the o'utCome but apparently all he remembers is the complaint if there is a; restroom that has not been cleaned for 2 'm'o'nth'sit would'_ only be, becausewe do not know it""eXiStsTurnover: Unlike the-County we do not pay S14/hr "plus benefits for janito-rs. In planningto'staff the Claunty facilities wegexpectedtohir?e existing-? __caunt-starr. When only 3 'appiiedg-we large; grcup ar individuals 31'] - . 'makingearou__nd_f$_9 per-hour}. When hiring-in that play range it necessary to ove'rl'l- 1 hit? aft-?13. the? 'O'Utru?illrougetdown to acore 'g'roupforpma-uaive cleaners- a that will be'with us for years. At that wage rate you cannot know how person will perform Until they are actually on the job. The weeding out process is ongoing. Once we get the Core group you will see turnover reduce-greatly. This is a fundamental difference betWeen Contract Cleaning and in?house employees. We have had great success with this strategy. I. Gary. had requested a Hazardous Com-munication'orogram. Nate emailed to him on March 5th. I Betty Stacks. General manager I i 07/311915; 7 4'case 2 Filed-073.1% 'Ddcumen._tf4_.19; STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT IN THE MATTER OF A JOHN DOE PROCEEDING MILWAUKEE COUNTY Case No. 10JD000007 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF A SUBPOENA FOR DlpelOJMJ::trr STATE OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE COUNTY A. ) ) ss. ) SEp 73 2071: INTRODUCTION AND AFFIANT EXPERIENCE JOHNB~ _ _ Cle,. f ~ RFIETT a eireUI"I COUrt 1. I am the District Attorney's Chief Investigator. I submit this Affidavit to assist t e John Doe jUdge in the above-captioned proceeding. 2. I have 25 years of experience as a law enforcement officer. For eight years, I worked in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Drug Unit conducting drug investigations including the use of undercover investigators and confidential informants. I have also served in the District Attorney White Collar Crime Unit and the General Criminal Investigations Unit. I have been Chief Investigator since 1999; nevertheless I have continued with investigative work over much of the last eleven years. Over these last eleven years, I have overseen multiple investigations into police-involved shootings and homicides on behalf of the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office. I was one of two state case agents in the federal investigation and trial of the Milwaukee Police Department officers involved in the Frank Jude beating (2005 - 2007). I have also worked on major public corruption investigations, including the investigation of former Alderman Michael McGee in 2007 and more recently, the matter involving City of Milwaukee Police Officers Royce Lockett and Paul Hill, who were charged in federal court in Milwaukee with drug crimes and money laundering. I make this Affidavit in support of a subpoena for documents for records in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive. I have been authorized by a secrecy order to be made aware of the existence of these John Doe Proceedings. B. RECORDS SOUGHT IN SUBPOENA FOR DOCUMENTS This Affidavit sets forth the basis for my belief that the Wisconsin Statutes identified herein have been violated and that the courts of Milwaukee County have jurisdiction over these offenses. 3. I believe that probable cause exists that individuals within 'the jurisdiction of this Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 99 of 121 Document 4-19 court have violated Wisconsin Statutes §§946.12, 946.13, 19.59, 11.36, 11.61,939.30, and 939.05 and that the documents and records identified below may provide evidence of the above described violations: a. All documents, folders, personnel files and records of any kind, either in digital or physical format, maintained by the Office of the County Executive, for former staff of the Milwaukee County Executive Office and other appointees of the County Executive, including Cindy Archer, Jim Villa, Tim Russell, Kelly Rindfleisch, Fran McLaughlin, Thomas Nardelli, Darlene Wink, Jon Myhre, Cheryl Berdan, and Dorothy Moore, and interns of the Office of the County Executive for the timeframe of 2002 to 2010. b. All records or documents, e-mails, correspondence, spreadsheets, databases and records of any kind, either in digital or physical format, relating to Operation Freedom, including and documents, records, inquires, responses, and opinions relating to fundraising by Milwaukee County employees related to Operation Freedom, for the timeframe of 2005 to 2010. c. All Records or documents held in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive or Corporation Counsel related to Corporation Counsel opinions, notes, documents, e-mails, correspondence, spreadsheets, databases and records of any kind, either in digital or physical format, relating to the following: i. The original lease between Milwaukee County and Reuss Federal Plaza; the extension of that lease; and Request for Proposal (hereafter RFP) 6562; negotiations, requests for proposals, bids, and discussions including and documents, records, inquires, responses, and opinions related to the above, including records related to any of the participants in the negotiations, discussions, related to said original lease between Milwaukee County and Reuss Federal Plaza, the extension of that lease, and RFP 6562 from 2005 to 2010. ii. A contract, negotiations, requests for proposals, bids and discussions between Milwaukee County and Mid-American Cleaning, including and documents, records, inquires, responses following said contract, for the timeframe of 2008 to 2010. d. All Corporation Counsel notes, documents, e-mails, correspondence, spreadsheets, databases and records of any kind, either in digital or physical format, relating to discussions, records, inquires, responses, and opinions pertaining to interaction between the employees of Milwaukee County, staff of the Office of the County Executive, and the County Executive, and the Friends of Scott Walker - including staff members (ie., campaign manager, treasurer, etc.) of the Friends of Scott Walker. e. All documents, e-mails, records, correspondence, memorandum requests and responses related to the Open Records requests, Wisconsin Stats. 2 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 100 of 121 Document 4-19 §§19.31 to 19.39 in the possession of the Corporation Counsel or the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive related to the timeframe of January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2010. 4. I request that the court issue a sUbpoena for documents as the above records constitute evidence related to violations of sections Wisconsin Statutes §§946.12, 946.13, 19.59, 11.36, 11.61,939.30, and 939.05, viz., Solicitation to Commit Misconduct in Public Office, Misconduct in Public Office (PTAC) and Private Interest in a Public Contract (PTAC), Ethics Violations, and Political Solicitation involving Public Officials and Employees (PTAC). 5. I use the terms "records" "documents" and "information" to include all items of evidence in whatever form and by whatever means they may have been created or stored, including any form of computer or electronic storage (such as hard disks, jump drives, thumb drives, CDs, DVDs, external USB drives, 3.5" disks or other media that can store data); any handmade form (such as writing, drawing, painting); any mechanical form (such as printing or typing); and any photographic form (such as microfilm, microfiche, prints, slides, negatives, videotapes, motion pictures, photocopies. C. SUMMARY AND INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF PROBABLE CAUSE FOR THE SUBPOENA FOR DOCUMENTS 6. I incorporate by reference the files, records, and testimony that has been taken to date in the above John Doe, as well as other affidavits specifically referenced in this document. Based upon interviews of witnesses, information from fellow law enforcement officers, testimony taken during the John Doe proceedings, review of subpoenaed records, emails and other documents, I know the following: a. Jill Bader was the Communications Director with the Friends of Scott Walker gubernatorial campaign. Her current, post-election employment is with the national Girl Scouts office in Washington D.C. b. Keith Gilkes was the campaign manager for the Friends of Scott Walker (FOSW). Gilkes is the now the Chief of Staff for the Office of the Governor. c. Brett Davis is the former Assemblyman from the 80th Assembly District for the State of Wisconsin. He left office January 3,2011 after representing the 80th Assembly District for three terms. He did not run for another term in 2010, choosing instead to run for lieutenant governor. He did not emerge 3 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 101 of 121 Document 4-19 from the Republican Primary election in September 201 0, losing to Rebecca Kleefisch, the current Lt. Governor. d. Emily Loe served as a campaign manager for the committee "Brett Davis for Lt. Governor." She was succeeded by Cullen Werwie. She is the legislative aide to Wisconsin State Assembly member Paul Farrow. e. Cullen Werwie was the successor campaign manager for Brett Davis during· his campaign for Wisconsin Lieutenant Governor and he is identified as such even to this day at http://votebrettdavis.com. Werwie is the current Press Secretary for the Office of the Governor. f. John Hiller was the campaign treasurer for the Friends of Scott Walker gubernatorial campaign committee during the timeframe of 2006 to 2011 when Scott Walker ran for Governor. Hiller also served as the Transition Director for the Office of Governor-Elect Scott Walker and was so employed with the office of the Governor from approximately November 5, 2010 to January 12, 2011. Hiller was also self-employed as a consultant with JM Hiller Consulting and Hiller Realty in the 2009 to 2011 timeframe. g. Fran McLaughlin was the former Communications Director for the Office of the County Executive. McLaughlin was employed in the County Executive's Office from in 2009 and 2010. She is presently employed in the Milwaukee County Sheriff's Department. h. Darlene Wink was the former staff person assigned to provide "constituent services" and to handle citizen inquiries in the office ofthe County Executive from 2002 to 2010. Wink has been regularly identified in John Doe papers and has been named as a person whose conduct is within the scope of this investigation. Wink terminated her employment in May 2010 after admitting that she was posting "blogs" on behalf of Scott Walker for Governor during hours while employed in the Office of the County Executive for Milwaukee County. i. Tim Russell was the former Deputy Chief of Staff for the Office of the County Executive. Russell was terminated in December 2010 as the Milwaukee County Housing Director. Russell was employed in the Office of 4 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 102 of 121 Document 4-19 the County Executive from 2002 to approximately March 2010, at which time he continued to be involved with decision-making in the County Executive's office until the election of Scott Walker as Governor. His present employment is unknown. Russell has been regularly identified in John Doe papers and has been named as a person whose conduct is within the scope of this investigation. j. Kelly Rindflieisch was the former Deputy Chief of Staff for the Office of the County Executive, having succeeded Tim Russell in March 2010 when Russell was given a job as Housing Administrator. Rindflieisch was employed in the Office of the County Executive from January 2010 to December 2010. I am informed that Rindfleisch currently works for the Republican Party of Wisconsin. Rindfleisch has been identified in John Doe papers as a person whose conduct is within the scope of this investigation. k. Thomas Nardelli was the former Chief of Staff for the Office of the County Executive, who was employed in that capacity from 2007 to 2010. He recently retired from Milwaukee County. Nardelli has been identified in John Doe papers as a person whose conduct is within the scope of this investigation. Nardelli held an executive position with the State of Wisconsin until August 2011. I. Cindy Archer was the former director of the Department of Administration for Milwaukee County and was so employed during 2009 and 2010. Archer was also involved as a member of the Open Records committee in 2009 and 2010 with other staff of the Office of the County Executive, Assistant (and later Acting) Corporation Counsel Timothy Schoewe, and other Milwaukee County employees. Archer has been identified in John Doe papers as a person whose conduct is within the scope of this investigation. m. James Villa was the former Chief of Staff for Scott Walker in the County Executive's Office from 2002 to 2007. Villa continued to communicate with members of the County Executive's office after leaving that position. Villa is presently employed as a realtor in Milwaukee County and is the President of the Commercial Association of Realtors-Wisconsin. n. Cheryl Berdan was an employee in the Office of the Milwaukee County 5 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 103 of 121 Document 4-19 Executive who shared responsibility for Open Records requests in 2010. She is presently employed with Milwaukee office of the Governor of the State of Wisconsin. o. Dorothy Moore was an employee in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive who was responsible for the schedule of County Executive Scott Walker in 2009 and 2010. She is presently employed in the office of the Governor of the State of Wisconsin. p. Jon Myhre was an employee in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive who was hired as a research analyst in 2010. q. Interns in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive were employed within that office and assigned various responsibilities by staff of the County Executive, including conducting research on issues and responding to constituent inquiries. r. Scott Walker is the present Governor of the State of Wisconsin who was elected to that position on November 3, 2010. Prior to his election as Governor, he was the County Executive for Milwaukee County from 2002 to 2010. The Friends of Scott Walker 7. I have reviewed on-line records related to the Wisconsin GovernmentAccountability Board (GAB) which contains campaign committee information filed with the GAB pursuant to state law. Said records reflect that "Friends of Scott Walker" filed a campaign registration statement in 2009 related to the candidacy of Scott Walker for Governor ofthe State of Wisconsin. Included in that statement was information related to the Committee Treasurer; the statement named John Hiller as the Treasurer for the Personal Campaign Committee. Additionally, I know Scott Walker was the County Executive for Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, having been elected to that position and taking office in 2002 and holding that office through 2010. As the treasurer for Friends of Scott Walker campaign committee, John Hiller is responsible for filing statements related to contributions from individuals and other entities in support of the campaign committee. 8. With respect to political activity conducted in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive by Darlene Wink and Tim Russell, I incorporate by reference the affidavit and exhibits of Chief Investigator David Budde dated August 6,2010. With respect to Darlene 6 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 104 of 121 Document 4-19 Wink, I incorporate the affidavits and exhibits of Jeff Doss dated May 10, 2010 and May 14, 2010, and the affidavit and exhibits of James Krueger dated July 1, 2010. 9. With respect to political activity conducted in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive by Tim Russell, I incorporate by reference the affidavit and exhibits Chief Investigator David Budde dated August 20, 2010; the affidavits and exhibits of Chief Investigator David Budde dated October 19, 2010, December 3, and December 6, 2010; and the affidavits and exhibits of Investigator Robert Stelter dated April 27, 2011 and June 13, 2011. 10. With respect to political activity conducted in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive by Kelly Rindfleish, I incorporate by reference the affidavits and exhibits of Chief Investigator David Budde dated August 6, 2010, and October 19, 2010; also the affidavit and exhibits of Investigator Robert Stelter dated April 28, 2011 with respect to the Brett Davis residence and Iphone. 11. With respect to political activity conducted in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive, I incorporate by reference the affidavit of Chief Investigator David Budde dated August 20, 2010 with respect to the activity of Tim Russell and Kelly Rindfleisch. 12. With respect to political activity conducted in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive by Cindy Archer, I incorporate by reference the affidavit of Chief Investigator David Budde dated December 17, 2010. 13. With respect to political activity conducted in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive by Kelly Rindfleisch, Thomas Nardelli, Fran McLaughlin, Dorothy Moore, Tim Russell, and Darlene Wink, I incorporate by reference the testimony of Chief Investigator David Budde taken on November 1, 2010 and the affidavit and exhibits of Investigator Robert Stelter dated May 12, 2011; and the affidavit and exhibits of Chief Investigator David Budde dated January 24, 2011 with respect to Kelly Rindfleisch, Thomas Nardelli, Fran McLaughlin, Tim Russell, Darlene Wink, Cheryl Berdan, John Myhre, Dorothy Moore, and Scott Walker. Operation Freedom 14. With respect to the activities of Darlene Wink and Timothy Russell in the Office of the County Executive involving "Operation Freedom," I incorporate by reference the . affidavits and exhibits of Jeff Doss dated May 10, 2010 and May 14, 2010; the affidavit of Assistant District Attorney Hanna Kolberg dated September 2, 2010 and referenced 7 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 105 of 121 Document 4-19 testimony; Reuss Federal Plaza 15. I incorporate by reference the three affidavits and attached exhibits of Chief Investigator David Budde dated February 28, 2011, first with respect to the a search warrant for e-mail accounts related to John Hiller, second with respect to a search warrant for the Hiller residence, and third with respect to a subpoena for documents related to the Boerke Company. I also incorporate by reference the affidavit and attached exhibits of Investigator Robert Stelter dated JUly 11,2011 with respect to John Hiller. The referenced affidavits describe the activities of John Hiller, Jim Villa, Cindy Archer, Thomas Nardelli, Kelly Rindfleish, Timothy Russell, and Scott Walker in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive with respect to negotiations for the extension of the Reuss Federal Plaza lease in 2009-2010; the request for a temporary lease extension in June 2010; the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) 6562 in July 2010, and consideration of proposals submitted by vendors in 2010 with respect to RFP 6562 and a "best and final offer." Mid American Cleaning 16. I incorporate by reference the affidavits and exhibits of Robert Stelter dated May 5, 2011 and September 13, 2011. Corporation Counsel 17. With respect to records related to ~3(d), the Office of the Milwaukee County Corporation Counsel was involved in the solicitation of a legal opinion with respect to contributions and the Reuss RFP. See the affidavit of Robert Stelter dated July 11, 2011, ~51 and Exhibit 43 (attached), and an e-mail dated December 30,2010 from John Hiller (Exhibit 1) referencing soliciting an opinion from then Corporation Counsel Bill Domina; also an e-mail dated January 22,2010 referencing a memo to be issued by Corporation Counsel William Domina. (Exhibit 2) Open Records 18. Based upon a review of subpoenaed records and documents during the course of this John Doe investigation, during the 2010 campaign of Scott Walker for Governor the Milwaukee County Office of the County Executive was regularly involved in the review and compliance with "open records" requests submitted to pursuant to Wisconsin Stats. §§19.31 to 19.39. Records received to date establish that a committee was formed to review, provide input, coordinate and evaluate the requests. The open records requests 8 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 106 of 121 Document 4-19 came from various entities, and as examples entities such as "Mark Neumann for Governor", One Wisconsin Now, a private citizen (Sherri Chmielecki), and County Supervisor John Weishan. Cindy Archer was a member of the Open Records review group and regularly circulated requests and responses to members within Milwaukee County government, as well as submitting the requests to individuals associated with and directly involved with the Walker for Governor campaign, such as R.J. Johnson, Jim Villa, Jill Bader, and Keith Gilkes. Cheryl Berdan was involved in the review and responding to "Open Record" requests. The Friends of Scott Walker campaign solicited and were provided with information and records maintained by Milwaukee County on a regUlar basis on demand rather than in the same manner other requests were handled under Wis. Stats. §19.35. 19. A review of e-mail reflects that Assistant (and later acting) Corporation Counsel Tim Schoewe was a member of the "Open Records committee involved in the review of open record requests during the timeframe of 2009 to 2010, when individuals with the Friends of Scott Walker campaign actively sought and received information from staff of the Office of the County Executive. During this timeframe other organizations filed open records requests with Milwaukee County and the Office of the County Executive.' A review of records obtained during the investigation reflect that employees of the County Executive's Office, as well as other Milwaukee County employees responded to the campaign requests for information from individuals with the Friends of Scott Walker in a dissimilar manner than other open records requests made under Wis. Stats §19.35. D. CONCLUSION 20. I respectfully submit that, as set forth in greater detail in the paragraphs above, there is probable cause to believe that a violation of Wisconsin Statutes §§946.13(1)2 and 1 See Wisconsin Stats §11.36(6) that provides: "This section does not apply to response by a legal custodian or subordinate of the custodian to a request to locate, reproduce or inspect a record under !:h 19.35, if the request is processed in the same manner as the custodian or subordinate responds to other requests to locate, reproduce or inspect a record under s. 19.35. 2 Wis. Stats. §946.13(1) provides that it is a Class I felony for anyone to do the follOWing: (a) In the officer's or employee's private capacity, negotiates or bids for or enters into a contract in which the officer or employee has a private pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, if at the same time the officer or employee is authorized or required by law to participate in the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee in the making of that contract or to perform in regard to that contract some official function requiring the exercise of discretion on the officer's or employee's part; or 9 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 107 of 121 Document 4-19 3 939.31, and 939.05 have occurred; violations of Wisconsin Statutes §§§946.124 and 5 939.30 and 939.05 have occurred; violations of §§11.36 5 and 11.61 have occurred; and (b) In the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee, participates in the making of a contract in which the officer or employee has a private pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, or perform in regard to that contract some function requiring the exercise of discretion on the officer's or employee's behalf. 3 Wis. Stats §939.05 provides: 1) Whoever is concerned in the commission of a crime is a principal and may be charged with and convicted of the commission of the crime although the person did not directly cornmit it and although the person who directly committed it has not been convicted or has been convicted of some other degree of the crime or of some other crime based on the same act. (2) A person is concerned in the commission of the crime if the person: (a) Directly commits the crime; or (b) Intentionally aids and abets the commission of it; or (c) Is a party to a conspiracy with another to commit it or advises, hires, counsels or otherwise procures another to commit it. Such a party is also concerned in the commission of any other crime which is committed in pursuance of the intended crime and which under the circumstances is a natural and probable consequence ofthe intended crime. This paragraph does not apply to a person who voluntarily changes his or her mind and no longer desires that the crime be committed and notifies the other parties concerned of his or her withdrawal within a reasonable time before the commission of the crime so as to allow the others also to withdraw. 4 Wisconsin Statutes §946. 12 provides: Any public officer or public employee who does any of the following is guilty of a Class I Felony: (2) In the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee, does an act which the officer or employee knows is in excess of the officer's or employee's lawful authority or which the officer or employee is forbidden by law to do in the officer's or employee's official capacity; or (3) Whether by act or commission or omission, in the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee exercises a discretionary power in a manner inconsistent with the duties of the officer's or employee's office or employment or the rights of others and with intent to obtain a dishonest advantage for the officer or employee or another. 4 Wisconsin Statutes §939.30 provides in pertinent part: (1) ...whoever, with intent that a felony be committed, advises another to commit that crime under circumstances that indicate unequivocally that he or she has the intent is guilty of a Class H felony. (2) ... For a solicitation to commit a Class I felony, the actor is guilty of a Class I felony. 6 Wisconsin Statutes §11.36(2) provides in pertinent part: (2) No person may solicit or receive from any officer or employee of a political subdivision of this state any contribution or service for any political purpose during established hours of employment 10 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 108 of 121 Document 4-19 violations of Wis. Stats. Sec. 19.597 : a. As detailed above and in the referenced affidavits, individuals in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive were involved in political activity and related fund raising activity in the office during work hours in the 2009-201 0 timeframe. Additionally individuals identified in '1115 were involved in activity related to providing information to a single vendor during the consideration of proposals submitted as a result of the issuance of RFP 6562. Any personnel records maintained by the Office of the County Executive for former County Executive employees or appointees are relevant as to their employment status with Milvyaukee County, job descriptions, hours, duties and responsibilities, any notice or information with respect to permitted and prohibited activities are relevant to this investigation.. Based on this investigation, I am also aware that interns were employed in the Office of the County Executive during the timeframe that the above-described political actiVity was taking place, and therefore may have knowledge of those activities, so the identity and information related to the interns would be relevant to this investigation. Accordingly, I believe that probable cause exists that Wisconsin Statutes §§946.12, 946.13, 11.36, 11.61, 19.59, 939.30 and 939.05 have been violated and that the courts of Milwaukee County have jurisdiction over these offenses, and the records identified in '113(a) as identified in the attached subpoena for documents are relevant to this investigation. b. As detailed above and in the referenced affidavits, individuals in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive such as Darlene Wink, Tim Russell, and Thomas Nardelli were involved in fund raising activity related to Operation Freedom in the 2009-2010 timeframe. Accordingly, I believe that probable or while the officer or employee is engaged in his or her official duties. 7 Wisconsin Stats. §19.59(1)(a) provides: (1)(a) No local public official may use his or her public position or office to obtain financial gain or anything of substantial value for the private benefit of himself or herself or his or her immediate family, or for an organization with which he or she is associated. 11 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 109 of 121 Document 4-19 cause exists that Wisconsin Statutes §§ 946.12, 939.30 and 939.05 have been violated and that the courts of Milwaukee County have jurisdiction over these offenses, and the records identified in '113(b) as identified in the attached subpoena for documents are relevant to this investigation. c. As detailed above and in the referenced affidavits, John Hiller solicited county employees to commit a felony, i.e., Misconduct in Public Office, violations of Wisconsin Statutes in that John Hiller maintained contact directly with members of the Milwaukee County Executive office and Milwaukee County, including Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker, seeking the extension of the Reuss Plaza lease and response to Request for Proposal (hereafter RFP) 6562 in which John Hiller had a pecuniary interest as a representative of RAIT, the owner of Reuss Plaza; at this same time Scott Walker had a pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, created as a result of Hiller's status as Walker's campaign treasurer, as well as a result of campaign contributions from individuals from the Boerke Company who were involved in the lease extension and RFP on behalf of the owners of the Reuss Plaza. During the timeframe the submitted proposals were being considered, Cindy Archer provided information to John Hiller, and this information was not provided to other vendors. Accordingly, I believe that probable cause exists that Wisconsin Statutes §§946.12, 946.13, 19.59, 939.30, and 939.05 have been violated and that the courts of Milwaukee County have jurisdiction over these offenses, and the records identified in '11'113(a), 3(c)(1), and 3(d) as identified in the attached subpoena for documents are relevant to this investigation. d. As detailed above and in the referenced affidavits, individuals identified in '1115 were involved in activity related to providing information to a single vendor during the consideration of proposals submitted as a result of the issuance of a request for proposal. Accordingly, I believe that probable cause exists that Wisconsin Statutes §§946.12, 946.13, 19.59,939.30, and 939.05 have been violated and that the communications and records described in '113(c)(2) and '113(c)(3) are relevant to this investigation. e. As detailed in above and in the referenced affidavits, individuals in the Office 12 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 110 of 121 Document 4-19 of the Milwaukee County Executive were involved in political activity and related fundraising activity in the office during work hours in the 2009-2010 timeframe. Accordingly, I believe that probable cause exists that Wisconsin Statutes §§946.12, 946.13,11.36,11.61,19.59, 939.30 and 939.05 have been violated and that the courts of Milwaukee County have jurisdiction over these offenses, and the records identified in 1I3(d) as identified in the attached subpoena for documents are relevant to this investigation in determining whether any discussions, records, inquires, responses, and opinions pertaining to interaction between the employees of Milwaukee County, staff of the Office of the County Executive, and the County Executive, and the Friends of Scott Walker - including staff members (ie., campaign manager, treasurer, etc.) of the Friends of Scott Walker occurred in the context of the above violations. f. As detailed above and in the referenced affidavits, individuals in the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive were involved in political activity in the office during work hours; as a consequence staff of the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive were often solicited to provide information and research issues for the Friends of Scott Walker gubernatorial campaign that did not relate to the duties of the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive and were not in conformity with the manner other open records requests were handled under Wis. Stats. Sec. 19.35. Accordingly, I believe that probable cause exists that Wisconsin Statutes §§946.12, 11.36, 11.61, 19.59, 939.30 and 939.05 have been violated and that the courts of Milwaukee County have jurisdiction over these offenses, and the records identified in 1I3(e) as identified in the attached subpoena for documents are relevant to this investigation 22. I respectfully request that the court issue the referenced subpoena for documents related to the Office of the Milwaukee County Executive and Milwaukee County Corporation Counsel. The production of any documents by either the County Executive's Office or Corporation Counsel related to any potentially privileged documents will be governed by the attached agreement dated May 6, 2011 between the Milwaukee County 13 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 111 of 121 Document 4-19 District Attorney's Office and the Office of the ~nty Executive. (Exhibit 3) Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin on this /.3 l::Iay of September, 2011. Gl-~{.~JA / ~dde Chief Investigator Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office Subscribed and sworn to before me at Milwaukee, Wisconsin on this /.r""aay of September, 2011. N Public, Milwaukee County State of Wisconsin My commission is permanent. 14 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 112 of 121 Document 4-19 .-...----------------- -From: Sent: Subject: Keith Gilkes - Friends of Scott Walker [kgilkes@scottwalker.org] Monday, August 30,20109:14 PM john@jmhiller.com RE: _ Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Red To: I checked with Corp Counsel on the latter - on a contribution while an option on a lease was present. He cleared specifically that - Kelly knew what I was asking about. Keith Gilkes ------ Fri ends-orscotE-wi>.lker-----------------------Office, u_ - - - --- --------------- -------------------------------------------- (414) 453-2010 -----Original Message----From: john@jmhiller.com [mailto:john@jmhiller.comJ Sent: Monday, August 3D, 2010 9:10 PM To: Keith Gilkes; Jim Villa Subject: I was thinking a little more on this. I know you checked with corp counsel. Did you check only specific to the RFP? I think we are fine on the RFP.but the code talks about negotiations where the official has autho~ity to act. There Were discussions going on prior to the RFP where the goal was to get skw to extend the lease. The decision was his. He . could have extended the lease on his own. I'do not think that we ever sent a formal request but 1 1 m not positive. The county sent us a request to extend for 6months which we rejected. There were contributions during this time period. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T 1 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 113 of 121 Document 4-19 Page 1 of2 "Wolfson, Greg" "John Hiller" Cc: "Andrew Jensen" ; "David PUdlosky" ; ; "Schaeffer, Scott" Sent: Thursday, December 31, 20098:46 PM Subject: Re: Federal Plaza I Milw County Dept on Aging Update Thank you for the update. Happy new year! From: To: Gregory P. Wolfson direct dial (215) 243-9080 On Dec 30, 2009, at 4:09 PM, "John Hiller" wrote: > Just a quick update on the status. > > Andrew submitted the proposal to Milwaukee County (via Jack > Talcarian, Acting > Director ofDPW) two weeks ago. > > Jack has received the proposal and has indicated to me that it looks > good. > " > What we are trying to do right now is determine if the lease can be > amended > without County Board approval. I am working with Jack and also County > Corporation Counsel Bill Domina on a determination. If we can avoid > the > Board approval process we can move this ahead quickly and have the > Executive > Branch process the paperwork. > > My opinion> If it is determined that Board approval is not needed, the > Department would > still have to notify the appropriate County Board Committees. There > is a > possibility that certain Supervisors will complain about this > approach and > that could generate a little negative press. At this point I do not > think > that it would be severe. > > Alternatively, if Board approval is deemed necessary we will move > ahead to > get this on the agenda with the February approval time frame that we > discussed originally still the goal. The various issues that we have > discussed will be brought up. > > I would hope that we would have a determination by next week. After >we get EXHIBIT I / -~..:---- Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 114 of 121 Document 4-19 8/15/2011 Page 20f2 > that information we should have a meeting/call. At that point I > would also > initiate some meetings with key members of the board. > > Please call 01' email me with any further questions. > > Happy New Year to all of you. > > John > > > DISCLAIMER: This e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the use ofthe individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential 01' legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying 01' other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete tlns message and any attachments. This is not an offer, or solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any security, investment or other product. Securities are only offered through RAIT Securities, LLC. Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 115 of 121 Document 4-19 8/15/2011 Page 1 of 1 From: To: Sent~ SUbject: "John Hiller" "'Andrew Jensen'" ; ; "Wolfson, Greg" ; "'David Pudlosky'" Friday, January 22, 2010 1:08 PM ' Aging/Fed Plaza update GentlemanSorry for the delay getting this out to you. I had some technology issues yesterday. 1 did give this information to Andrew via phone yesterday morning, so perhaps you all are aware already. After my discussions with Corp Counsel Bill Domina, he will be issuing a memo to Acting DPW Director Jack Takarian that the County can move ahead with a lease extension without County Board approval. That memo/determination will be delivered by next week. He raised one issue that he wanted to corrected. The enabling legislation for the lease includes a provision for a single five year extension. The lease had called for a five year and a three year extension. He would like the lease amendment document to conform the lease to the one five year extension language. I think we need to continue pressure to get this extension executed as soon as possible. With the state still uncertain if they are staying at Coggs Center or not, we want this done before anything would surface that creates space in that facility. I think the likely hood of that is slim. Once the document is executed with move ahead with phase 2, the additional space. I discussed this further with Tim Russell in the County Exec's office and also briefly with Andrew. I think we need to create a 'total cost' analysis of the options to stay at City Center or move to Fed Plaza. I am worried that using just the cost/sq.ft approach may be hard to justify the move. I think the real analysis should be what is the total cost to operate the City Campus building with the employees that are there now versus what is the total annual cost in Fed Plaza + the cost to maintain the City Campus building in an empty state. Using the total cost approach gets at the real cost of$25/sqft cost ofthat space and not the $13.75 or so that they are using now. Tim Russell thinks that they could sell that building in about a year and that we should do a 5 year analysis with the $500k moth ball number eliminate after year one. I also caution that if the proposal to close City Campus moves forward, that the County Board may require that an RFP be done for the replacement space. Because of this, we need to be cautious on what we put in writing and submit to the County. Please call or email with questions. John 414-333-9476 EXHIBIT Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 116 of 121 Document 4-19 8/18/2011 FILED AGREEMENT WHEREAS the Milwaukee County District Attorney ( e "I.:~J Clerk of Circuit CJ.;iwt undertaken an investigation accomplished in substantial part in the form of a John Doe proceeding presided over by the Honorable Neal Nettesheim, Milwaukee County Case No. lOJD000007, ("the JolmDoe proceeding") which proceeding is subject to a Secrecy Order; WHEREAS in the course of that investigation the District Attorney has amassed thousands of electronic mail docwnents (e-mails) in the form of both official Milwaukee County Lotus Notes and in the forriJ of private e-mail accounts created with Internet Service Providers ("ISP e-mail accounts") such as Time Warner Communications, Google Gmail and Yahoo; WHEREAS in the course of that investigation the District Attorney has also amassed l ! thousands of other types of digital docwnents from the Milwaukee County computer network i, and individual County workstations; .l WHEREAS the District Attorney has formed a "Filter Team" to screen e-mails to guard against disclosure of privileged Attorney-Client and/or Work Product information to the' I I "Investigative Team" of the District Attorney's Office; WHEREAS, in connection with the John Doe proceeding the District Attorney has I L requested the Milwaukee County Execntive (the "County Executive") to waive the AttorneyClient privilege and Attorney Work-Product privileges with respect to documents gathered as part ofthe John Doe proceeding, to the extent that SUell privilege may exist. WHEREAS, in order to cooperate with the District Attorney's investigation, the District Attorney and the County Executive hereby agree as follows: As used in this Agreement, the term "docwnents" refers to those pieces of I I docwnentary evidence, in physical and/or digital format, that have been gathered in connection I 1. 1 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 117 of 121 Document 4-19 i ~ F I, EXHIBIT with tbe John Doe proceeding pertaining to the persons identified below in this section. This evidence includes, but is not limited to, the subjects of interest in the categories set forth in this section below: (i) which were created within the time period beginning January I, 2002 and ending December 31, 2010; (ii) which were gathered from the Milwaukee County computer network (including individual workstations), the Milwaukee County Lotus Notes accounts and ISP e-mail accounts; and (iii) with respect to which, such docwnents contain CommlUlications involving one or more lawyer(s) acting as the attomey(s) for the County of Milwaukee (including but not limited to the Office of Corporation Counsel for Milwaukee County). a. Persons: - Scott Walker - Tom Nardelli - Kelly Rindleisch - Tim Russell - Fran McLaughlin -Bob Nenno - Cheryl Berdan - JonMhyre - Darlene Wink - Ed Eberle - Jim Villa - Cindy Archer - Barbara Pariseau - Laurie Panella b. SUbjects of Interest: i. General Matters: - Public Records I Open Meetings Law compliance ii. Events: - "Operation Freedom" - O'Donnell Park - Behavioral Health Division ("BRD") - Harley Ride 2 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 118 of 121 Document 4-19 iii. County Contracts and Agreements: - MidAmerican Cleaning - Wackenhut - Omnicare -Roeschen • Ruess Plaza and all matters relating to Milwaukee County Request for Proposals ("RFP") No. 6562 2. The John Doe proceeding has already gathered documents from the records (including electronic records) of Milwaukee County and from ISP e-mail accounts relating to persons identified in Paragraph I above. The "fuvestigative Team" of the District Attorney's Office has not reviewed the documents with respect to which an Attorney-Client or Work- I Product privilege may exist. 3. The parties at this point do not know which if any of the documents are protected by the Attorney-Client or Work-Product privileges nor whether the C01illty Executive will wish to waive or assert any privilege that might exist. 4. Accordingly, the parties agree that the District Attorney may review all the documents, including Attorney-Client and/or Work-Product Privilege documents, which the District Attorney would be prohibited from examining in the absence of this Agreement. The District Attorney shaH advise the C01illty Executive which potentially privileged documents the District Attorney wishes to use as part of the John Doe proceeding or otherwise, SUbject to the claw back provision in Paragraph 5. 5. Resolution of any issues related to claims that privileged documents and/or information have been disclosed shaH be governed by the procedures set forth here: a. Any disclosure of a privileged document or information, whether protected by the Attorney-Client or Work-Product privileges. shall not 3 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 119 of 121 Document 4-19 I constitute a waiver of that privilege or of the subject matter of those documents. b. When the County Executive reviews the potentiaIly privileged documents identified by the District Attorney pursuant to Paragraph 4 above, such documents will not be used for any purpose until resolution of any dispute as indicated in this Agreement. 6. After reviewing the potentially privileged documents identified by the District Attorney pursuant to Paragraph 4, the County Executive may then waive the Attorney-Client or Work-Product privilege as to any potentially privileged documents. If the County Executive refuses to waive any such privilege, and asserts it, the issue shall be resolved by the John Doe Judge in Milwaukee County Case No. 10JD000007. 7. The District Attorney intends, as part of the John Doe investigation, to ask certain persons identified in Paragraph La about legal advice, in verbal and/or written form, they may have received from lawyers representing Milwaukee County. These questions will relate to the specific topic of compliance with the Open Records laws during the time period of 2009 and I I 2010. The County Executive agrees to waive, and by subscription of this Agreement does f hereby waive, the Attorney-Client and/or the Work-Product privilege as to all such conununications. I, I i I r 4 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 120 of 121 Document 4-19 ! 8. All disclosures made pursuant to !his Agreement are subject to the Secrecy Order entered in Milwaukee County Case No. IOJD000007. Dated this h 'Titday of May, 2011. MILWAUKEE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY By: MILWAUKEE COUNTY EXECUTNE Christopher S. Abele 5 Case 2:15-cv-00922-LA Filed 07/31/15 Page 121 of 121 Document 4-19