BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Ashira Mohammed, Mayor, Town of Pembroke Park and Members, Town of Pembroke Park Town Commission From: John W. Scott, Inspector General Date: September 24, 2020 Subject: OIG Final Report Re: Electoral and Ethical Misconduct By the Mayor of the Town of Pembroke Park, Ref. OIG 20-001 Attached please find the final report of the Broward Office of the Inspector General (OIG) regarding the above-captioned matter. The OIG substantiated concerns that Pembroke Park Mayor Mohammed engaged in elections misconduct during her campaign for a seat in the state house as well as engaged in ethical misconduct by using the town’s resources and her official position to benefit her law firm, her campaign for another political office, and herself. During her campaign in the August 2020 election for a seat in House District 101, the mayor violated Florida’s “Little Hatch Act” by having a paid member of her campaign use the town’s Facebook page, as the mayor, to influence votes and affect the outcome of her campaign. This arrangement also constituted an ethical violation where the mayor wrongfully used her administrator privileges on the town’s Facebook page to secure this benefit for her campaign and herself. The mayor engaged in further electoral misconduct by failing to timely and properly resign her seat on the town commission before qualifying for state office, in violation of Florida’s resign to run law. Despite knowing that she failed to properly resign as directed by the resign to run law, the mayor then swore an oath that she had. This false oath amounted to another violation of the election code. Finally, we found that the mayor engaged in ethical misconduct unrelated to her campaign. Specifically, we found several incidents where the mayor wrongfully used the town’s resources, as well as her mayoral credentials, for the benefit of her law firm and herself but for no public purpose. In her response, the mayor made challenges to the report in the form of misstatements of the report’s findings, misstatements of the law, attacks on witnesses’ credibility, and questionable assertions. In particular, we note for the town her assertion that she submitted her resignation to the assistant town manager because the town has no deputy town clerk. Such an assertion was representative of the theme of the mayor’s response and failed to negate our findings. John W. Scott, Inspector General One North University Drive, Suite 111 • Plantation, Florida 33324 • (954) 357-7873 • Fax (954) 357-7857 www.browardig.org • (954) 357-TIPS On the other hand, we appreciate the steps the town has taken in response to the report’s findings, as they validate the importance of ensuring that public resources are always used for the public interest. Attachment cc: Hon. Barbara Sharief, Commissioner, Broward County Board of County Commissioners Juan C. Jimenez, Town Manager Christopher J. Ryan, Town Attorney Individuals previously provided a Preliminary Report (under separate cover) BROWARD OIG MEMORANDUM REF. OIG 20-001 PAGE 2 OF 2 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT =========================================================== OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Electoral and Ethical Misconduct By the Mayor of the Town of Pembroke Park BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK SUMMARY The Broward Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has concluded its investigation into whether Town of Pembroke Park Mayor Ashira Mohammed misused her public position to benefit herself and her law firm. We found that she did, substantiating ethical misconduct as well as electoral misconduct that she committed while campaigning for election during the investigation. 1 Mayor Mohammed, who was running for a seat in Florida House of Representatives District 101, violated Florida’s “Little Hatch Act” when she arranged for a paid member of her campaign to post as the mayor on the town’s Facebook page to increase her online presence and thus influence votes and affect the outcome of her campaign. Because the mayor also wrongfully used her official role as an administrator on the town’s Facebook page to secure this benefit for her campaign and herself, the post also amounted to a misuse of position, a violation of Florida’s ethics laws. We further determined that the mayor engaged in misconduct by failing to timely and properly resign her seat on the town commission before qualifying for state office, in violation of Florida’s resign to run law. Thereafter, she swore an oath that she had resigned pursuant to the law when in fact she knew she had not, further misconduct under the election code. We also confirmed our original concerns about whether the mayor misused resources in her trust and her official position when we established several incidents in which the mayor wrongfully used the town’s resources—that is, the town’s facilities, equipment, and personnel—for her law firm’s and her own benefit. Not only did she corruptly misuse the town’s resources, the mayor also corruptly misused her mayoral credentials to benefit her law firm and herself and for no public purpose. We offered the mayor several opportunities to interview with us, but she ultimately declined to do so. In accordance with our charter mandate, we are referring this matter to the Florida Elections Commission, the state’s Commission on Ethics, and the Broward State Attorney for whatever action those agencies deem appropriate. 1 Broward county created the Broward County Office of Inspector General (OIG) to investigate misconduct and gross mismanagement. Broward County Charter § 10.01 A.(1). The charter defines “misconduct” as “any violation of the state or federal constitution, any state or federal statute or code, any county or municipal ordinance or code; or conduct involving fraud, corruption, or abuse.” § 10.01 A.(2). OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 1 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK OIG CHARTER AUTHORITY Section 10.01 of the Charter of Broward County empowers the Broward Office of the Inspector General to investigate misconduct and gross mismanagement within the Charter Government of Broward County and all of its municipalities. This authority extends to all elected and appointed officials, employees and all providers of goods and services to the county and the municipalities. On his own initiative, or based on a signed complaint, the Inspector General shall commence an investigation upon a finding of good cause. As part of any investigation, the Inspector General shall have the power to subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, require the production of documents and records, and audit any program, contract, and the operations of any division of the county, its municipalities, and any providers. The Broward Office of the Inspector General is also empowered to issue reports, including recommendations, and to require officials to provide reports regarding the implementation of those recommendations. ENTITIES AND INDIVIDUALS COVERED IN THIS REPORT Ashira Mohammed Voters of the town first elected Ashira Mohammed to the town commission in 2003. The commission first selected her as the town’s mayor in 2011. She has been a member of the Florida Bar since 2011. She ran for Florida House of Representatives District 101 in the August 18, 2020, primary. Ashira Mohammed, P.L.L.C. Ashira Mohammed, P.L.L.C., was a professional limited liability company registered with the Florida Department of State’s Division of Corporations from March 8, 2013, to April 30, 2015, when it was voluntarily dissolved. Its principal address and mailing address were in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Mayor Mohammed was the company’s registered agent and sole manager. Law Office of Ashira Mohammed, P.L.L.C. Law Office of Ashira Mohammed, P.L.L.C., is a professional limited liability company registered with the state Division of Corporations since September 18, 2019. Its principal address is in Delray Beach, Florida, and in March 2020 its mailing address was changed to a homesteaded residence in Pembroke Park that is co-owned by the mayor. Mayor Mohammed is the company’s registered agent and sole manager. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 2 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK RELEVANT GOVERNING AUTHORITIES Florida Statutes § 99.012 (1) Restrictions on individuals qualifying for public office.— As used in this section: (a) . . . With respect to a municipality, the term “officer” means a person, whether elected or appointed, who has the authority to exercise municipal power as provided by the State Constitution, state laws, or municipal charter. . . . (3) (a) No officer may qualify as a candidate for another state, district, county, or municipal public office if the terms or any part thereof run concurrently with each other without resigning from the office he or she presently holds. (b) The resignation is irrevocable. (c) The written resignation must be submitted at least 10 days prior to the first day of qualifying for the office he or she intends to seek. (d) The resignation must be effective no later than the earlier of the following dates: 1. The date the officer would take office, if elected; or 2. The date the officer’s successor is required to take office. (e) 1. An elected district, county, or municipal officer must submit his or her resignation to the officer before whom he or she qualified for the office he or she holds, with a copy to the Governor and the Department of State. . . . (f) 1. With regard to an elective office, the resignation creates a vacancy in office to be filled by election. Persons may qualify as candidates for nomination and election as if the public officer’s term were otherwise scheduled to expire. 2. With regard to an elective charter county office or elective municipal office, the vacancy created by the officer’s resignation may be filled for that portion of the officer’s unexpired term in a manner provided by the respective charter. The office is deemed vacant upon the effective date of the resignation submitted by the official in his or her letter of resignation. . . . OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 3 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK § 104.011 False swearing; submission of false voter registration information; prosecution prohibited.— (1) A person who willfully swears or affirms falsely to any oath or affirmation, or willfully procures another person to swear or affirm falsely to an oath or affirmation, in connection with or arising out of voting or elections commits a felony of the third degree . . . § 104.31 Political activities of state, county, and municipal officers and employees.— (1) No officer or employee of the state, or of any county or municipality thereof, except as hereinafter exempted from provisions hereof, shall: (a) Use his or her official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with an election or a nomination of office or coercing or influencing another person’s vote or affecting the result thereof. . . . The provisions of paragraph (a) shall not be construed so as to limit the political activity in a general, special, primary, bond, referendum, or other election of any kind or nature, of elected officials or candidates for public office in the state or of any county or municipality thereof . . . (3) Any person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. . . . § 112.313 Standards of conduct for public officers, employees of agencies, and local government attorneys.— . . . (6) MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION.—No public officer, employee of an agency, or local government attorney shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or her official position or any property or resource which may be within his or her trust, or perform his or her official duties, to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for himself, herself, or others. This section shall not be construed to conflict with s. 104.31. . . . § 112.312 Definitions.— As used in this part . . . , unless the context otherwise requires . . . (9) “Corruptly” means done with a wrongful intent and for the purpose of obtaining, or compensating or receiving compensation for, any benefit resulting from some act or omission of a public servant which is inconsistent with the proper performance of his or her public duties. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 4 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK Town of Pembroke Park Charter Sec. 9. - Town Commission. Election of Commissioners: The government of the Town of Pembroke Park shall be vested in a Commission consisting of five (5) members elected from five (5) separate geographic districts…. Any individual seeking election as a Commissioner shall file with the Town Clerk a written notice of candidacy stating the designated district to which the individual seeks to be elected…. The Commission shall be composed of a Mayor-Commissioner, Vice-Mayor Commissioner, Clerk-Commissioner, and two (2) other Commissioners. At the first regular meeting of the Commission following every election as herein provided, the Commission shall, by Resolution, appoint one of its members as and to be Mayor of said municipality and another of its members as and to be Vice-Mayor of said municipality, and another of its members as and to be ClerkCommissioner of said municipality…. Town of Pembroke Park Code Sec. 2-176. - Position of coordinator established. There is hereby established the position of Coordinator on behalf of the Town of efforts to comply with the provisions of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, including the resolution of complaints of alleged discrimination on the basis of handicapped status, which individual shall be a Deputy Town Clerk of the Town. Such individual shall be designated by the Town Commission by resolution to serve at the pleasure of the Town Commission. Sec. 8-35. - Certification of qualifying candidates. (a) The Clerk-Commissioner shall certify to the Town Commission the names of all candidates duly qualified for the office of Town Commissioner within three (3) days of the closing date for qualifying. (b) Only those candidates who have duly qualified with the Clerk-Commissioner, in accordance with the Charter and ordinances thereto appertaining, shall have their names printed on the official ballot for use in the general election. Sec. 8-67. - Oath or affirmation. Candidates for the office of Town Commissioner shall qualify with the Clerk-Commissioner by filing an oath or affirmation in writing in which he shall state the title of the office for which he is a candidate, that he is a qualified elector of Pembroke Park, that he has paid the filing fee for candidates for the office he seeks, and that he has taken the oath as required by Florida Statutes. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 5 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK Sec. 8-69. - Certification of names. The Clerk-Commissioner shall certify to the Town Commission the names of all candidates duly qualified for the office of Town Commissioner within five (5) days of the closing date for qualifying. INVESTIGATION Investigation Overview This investigation originated after the OIG received information suggesting that Mayor Mohammed may have misused her public position by using the town’s resources as well as her mayoral credentials to secure a special benefit for her law firm and herself. We substantiated that the mayor did misuse her public position and resources in her trust, and we also determined that she engaged in electoral misconduct while campaigning for a state representative seat. The OIG’s investigation involved the review of substantial documentation including, but not limited to, emails, Facebook records, Mayor Mohammed’s prior qualifying papers for her current town commissioner seat, her qualifying papers for her candidacy for Florida House of Representatives District 101, and letters from the mayor to the governor and the Florida Division of Elections. OIG staff also interviewed several current and former town employees, as well as a member of the mayor’s campaign. The Mayor Engaged in Misconduct During an Election Campaign While this investigation was ongoing, Mayor Mohammed was running for state house district seat 101, and we became aware that she engaged in conduct that went to the very heart of state prohibitions that regulate a public officer’s conduct while in office and during a campaign. Specifically, we found that the mayor misused her official position to improperly influence votes and the outcome of an election, failed to properly resign her official position ten days prior to the qualifying period for the state office she sought, and executed a false oath saying that she had resigned pursuant to the law. 1. The Mayor Used Her Official Authority to Influence Votes by Using the Town’s Social Media Platform to Advertise Her Campaign During our investigation, we learned that, in order to fulfill her own desire to increase her social media presence ahead of the election, Mayor Mohammed arranged for a paid worker on her election campaign to routinely post, as the mayor, on all her social media pages. This arrangement resulted in the campaign worker using the administrator access the town provided to the mayor in her official capacity to post a campaign advertisement on the town’s Facebook page. Given the circumstances we describe below, the OIG found probable cause to believe that the mayor violated election law and ethics law. 2 2 The courts define probable cause as a reasonable ground of suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to warrant a cautious person in the belief that the person committed the violation charged. Schmitt v. State, 590 So.2d 404, 409 (Fla. 1991). Probable cause is based on the totality of the circumstances. Ill. v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983). OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 6 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK On April 8, 2020, a thank you message relating to the COVID-19 pandemic appeared on the town’s official Facebook page. The contents of the post was a thank you message from the mayor in her capacity as a candidate for office. The upper part of the post was marked, “Town of Pembroke Park” and contained the town’s official seal; the bottom left corner showed a photograph of the mayor; and the bottom right corner was marked, “Mayor Ashira Mohammed for House District 101,” as follows: OIG Figure 1: Mayor Mohammed’s campaign advertisement posted on the town’s Facebook page on April 8, 2020, as viewed by the public. This post was concerning, considering existing authority that regulates public officers and employees’ general conduct as well as their conduct while campaigning for elective office. Florida’s “Little Hatch Act” regulates public officers’ and public employees’ political activity. Of relevance here, that law provides, “No officer or employee of the state, or of any county or municipality thereof . . . shall: (a) Use his or her official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with an election or a nomination of office or coercing or influencing another person’s vote or affecting the result thereof. . . .” F.S. § 104.31(1). A violation of this provision constitutes a misdemeanor of the first degree. F.S. § 104.31(3). Chapter 112 of the Florida Statutes also regulates public officers and employees’ conduct, stating, “It is essential to the proper conduct and operation of government that public officials be independent and impartial and that public office not be used for private gain . . . .” F.S. § OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 7 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK 112.311(1). To that end, the legal standard is that “[n]o public officer . . . shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or her official position or any . . . resource which may be within his or her trust . . . to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for himself, herself, or others.” F.S. § 112.313(6). The purpose of Mayor Mohammed’s campaign ad on the town’s Facebook page was to influence votes and the outcome of the election. Indeed, it was a post casting the mayor in a favorable light as a candidate. It was the mayor, “Mayor Ashira Mohammed for House District 101”—not a member of the public, a non-public-servant candidate, or the town—who thanked members of the community for its response to the COVID-19 pandemic in an attempt to influence voters in and the outcome of the 2020 House District 101 election. The flyer included the language, “Political advertisement paid for and approved by Ashira Mohammed Democrat for State Representative, District 101” in very small print. 3 Although the post’s contents suggested that the mayor was the individual who posted it, we endeavored to independently determine its origin. On April 30, 2020, after observing the April 8, 2020, political post, which was still active, we requested the town to produce records regarding the identity of all the administrators for the town’s Facebook page and the administrator who put up the post. The town’s production, which included administrator details for posts on its page, reflected that Mayor Mohammed was the administrator who uploaded the April 8, 2020, post, as shown below: OIG Figure 2: Mayor Mohammed’s campaign advertisement posted on the town’s Facebook page on April 8, 2020, with administrator details. 3 Although not discernible in OIG Figure 1 or 2, the disclaimer is in white lettering within the black bottom border. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 8 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK On June 18, 2020, several days after we offered the mayor an opportunity to interview but received no response, the town attorney forwarded us an email from the mayor to him dated the same day of our records request, April 30, 2020. In this email, which included a snapshot of the post, the mayor explained to the town attorney: I think I found the reason why the OIG requested the administrators of Facebook. I have two different social media people handling my personal Facebook page because I am social media illiterate. A while back someone linked me to the Town’s Facebook page where I have the ability to post on it. When my social media person (Doing Good In The Hood president) posted she accidentally posted to my fb page and my political page, my twitter page and the town’s page. She immediately removed it but screenshotted it before deleting it. I explained to her not to post anything political to the town’s page. I left a message to my other administrator as well. I apologize for the mistake and take full responsibility for it and it will never happen again. Any questions please let me know. Thank you. (Exhibit 1) The town attorney explained to us that he received the mayor’s April 30, 2020, email explaining the circumstances surrounding her April 8 post without any prompting from him. While he heard about the post in passing, he did not see the post himself because he did not have Facebook. As he did not receive any direction through the email or otherwise, he did not do anything with the mayor’s email. On June 18, 2020, while on a call with the mayor on another matter, she asked if he forwarded the April 30 email to the OIG like she requested. The town attorney informed the mayor that he did not forward the email to us because she did not ask him to do so but agreed to forward it to us, and he did so that day. We also learned that the mayor’s explanation to the town attorney was not entirely forthcoming. In her email, she suggested that the improper post was unintentional, not of her own doing, and fleeting. After all, she claimed, she had no social media savvy, her role with the town’s Facebook page was a passing one in which “someone” linked her, and her “social media person” accidentally posted the ad and “immediately” removed it. However, our investigation revealed differently. The OIG discovered that, contrary to her proclamation that she was “social media illiterate,” the mayor was involved in the administration of the town’s Facebook page since its creation in approximately 2016 to 2017. In fact, a town code enforcement officer told us that the town’s social media, including the town’s Facebook page, was Mayor Mohammed’s project and that the mayor and she were the page’s original administrators. 4 4 Those with administrator roles were able to change the Facebook page, including additions and deletions. Each administrator had his or her own credentials to log into the page. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 9 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK Our investigation also determined that at one point the town Facebook page had four administrators: the mayor’s executive assistant, the town’s information technology (I.T.) director, the mayor, and the town code enforcement officer. But by April 2020, as far as the town knew, the mayor had full control of what appeared on the page, as she had to approve whatever the town posted there. Other than the mayor, the town code enforcement officer was the only one who posted on the page. However, she was not permitted to post at will. When the former deputy town clerk was still with the town, she had to get her and Mayor Mohammed’s approval. After the former deputy town clerk left in October 2019, 5 she only had to get the mayor’s approval. 6, 7 There was one other person with administrator access to the town’s Facebook page—and she did not have to get the mayor’s approval before posting there. That person was K.J., a paid worker on the mayor’s campaign. 8 Even though the mayor, in her email to the town attorney, sought to dismiss the post as an accidental error by her campaign staff, the post was actually part of her ongoing effort, dating back to at least January 2020, aimed at benefiting her campaign for state office by increasing her online presence. The person whom the mayor identified in her email as her “social media person,” K.J., explained to the OIG that she worked on the mayor’s campaign and helped by uploading posts, under the mayor’s name, to the mayor’s social media accounts and, as the mayor, to the town’s Facebook page. The mayor created a password that K.J. could remember so that K.J. could log onto the mayor’s Facebook account as the mayor. By logging on to Facebook as the mayor, K.J. had access to all accounts on which the mayor was an administrator, such as her personal page, her campaign page, and the town’s page. Using this access, K.J. routinely posted as the mayor on all the pages, including the town’s page. At times, she posted on the town’s page, as the mayor, at the mayor’s direction. Other times, K.J. posted on the town’s page, as the mayor, on her own. But, unlike the town code enforcement officer, she did not have to get prior approval from the mayor before posting on the town’s page. K.J. started posting as the mayor on the town’s Facebook page around the holidays of 2019 and the start of January 2020. The mayor told K.J. that she was not very good with social media and wanted to increase her online presence, so K.J., as the mayor, started posting on the mayor’s social media pages, including the town’s Facebook page, to keep her pages active for the campaign and to let people know what was going on in the town. She said, for instance, that she posted about the food drives, the turkey giveaway, and the December holiday toy giveaway event. 9 5 The former deputy town clerk was on administrative leave effective October 4, 2019. According to her separation agreement with the town, her last date of employment was December 31, 2019. 6 Posts uploaded by the town code enforcement officer appeared as posted by “Town Pembroke Park.” 7 We made numerous unsuccessful attempts to contact the former deputy town clerk to interview her for this investigation. 8 While K.J. described herself as a volunteer on the mayor’s campaign, we noted and she acknowledged that she received a $300 payment from the campaign on December 23, 2019, for “Social Media.” K.J. described the payment as a “love offering” from the campaign when she first started creating flyers for it. 9 Mayor Mohammed’s profile posted two posts on the town’s Facebook page, from November 22 to 24, 2019, promoting the town’s turkey giveaway on November 25, 2019; two posts dated December 15, 2019, promoting the town’s holiday toy OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 10 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK Sometimes the mayor provided material to post and at other times K.J. found her own material to post. Most of the times when she posted on the town’s page as the mayor, it was material that the mayor told her to post, such as flyers for events such as food drives. When K.J. generated the material to post, she used generic messages that she posted to all the mayor’s social media platforms, including the town’s Facebook page. She said that the mayor never gave her any rules on what she could post. While K.J. originally indicated in an OIG interview that she did not know whether she could post campaign material on the town’s page but was “supposed to know,” she later clarified she knew that she could not post campaign material to the page. However, while she knew not to identify the mayor’s campaign on the posts she uploaded to the town’s page, she could not remember how she knew. As such, while the generic messages she posted on the town’s Facebook page did not identify the mayor’s campaign, the ones she posted on the same dates on the mayor’s personal and campaign Facebook pages—with the same or very similar messages but different images—did. During her interview with the OIG, K.J. was initially confused about which post we were seeking information and described mistakenly leaving the campaign’s logo on one of her posts to the town’s page. However, she ultimately realized that we were asking about the post that appeared on the town’s Facebook page on April 8, 2020. Although she confirmed that she uploaded that image to the town’s Facebook page as the mayor, she made clear that she did not create the flyer. Instead, the mayor provided K.J. the flyer that appeared on the post and asked her to post it. Most of the times that the mayor provided K.J. something to post, it was material that K.J. was supposed to post to the town’s page—as the mayor—as well. The mayor did not tell her not to post it on the town’s page. K.J. posted it across all the mayor’s social media platforms, including the town’s page, as she routinely did with all the material the mayor gave her. According to K.J., she did not notice that the image identified the campaign. Sometime later, the mayor called K.J. and told her that she should not have posted the image to the town’s Facebook page because it identified the mayor’s campaign. K.J. immediately deleted the post. When K.J. told the mayor that she deleted the post to correct the problem, the mayor told her, “No, don’t delete it,” and explained that if it stayed up, the mayor would just need to “tell them” about it. 10 After realizing that K.J. already deleted the post, the mayor told her not to re-post it—and that she should “just leave it” next time. The town’s I.T. director told the OIG that the mayor’s April 8, 2020, post was removed within an hour of the town’s receipt of the OIG’s April 30, 2020, request for records about the town’s Facebook page administrators. Based on what we know now, it was K.J. who removed it. The I.T. director also revoked the mayor’s administrator role around May 1 or May 2, 2020, after he giveaway; one post dated March 20, 2020, promoting the town’s food giveaway on March 21, 2020; and one post dated March 23, 2020, sharing pictures from the town’s March 21, 2020 food giveaway. 10 Although the mayor did not explain whom she needed to tell about the post, she emailed an explanation about it to the town attorney the same day. (Exhibit 1) OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 11 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK learned from the mayor that a member of her campaign staff uploaded a political flyer to the town’s Facebook page by using the mayor’s log-in credentials. 11 The OIG concluded that Mayor Mohammed violated the Little Hatch Act as well as misused her position. She arranged for a paid member of her campaign to use the town’s Facebook page to increase her online exposure and thus influence votes for her election to the state House of Representatives. That member, K.J., was able to pose as the mayor on the town’s page because the mayor provided K.J. with the username and password for administrator access—the mayor knew that K.J. used this privilege to access and post on the town’s page at the mayor’s direction or with her full assent. Most of the time that K.J. posted on the town’s page, it was material that the mayor furnished her to post on all her social media. The mayor gave K.J. the campaign ad that K.J. posted to the town’s Facebook page on April 8, 2020. Despite knowing that K.J. routinely posted the material that she provided K.J. on the town’s Facebook page, the mayor did not caution her against doing so on this occasion. We also considered the mayor’s conduct after we began our investigation into the post at issue. When the mayor learned that the OIG inquired about the campaign ad, 22 days after it was posted, she did not take it down or even request K.J. to take it down, thus assenting to the posting of the ad as it was. After the mayor called K.J. and told her she posted a political flyer to the town’s page, K.J. then deleted the post. When K.J. told the mayor that she deleted the post to correct the problem, the mayor revealed her corrupt intent and replied, “No, don’t delete it,” and explained that if it stayed up, the mayor would just need to “tell them” about it. After realizing that K.J. already deleted the post, the mayor told K.J. that she should “just leave it” next time. The mayor then told the city attorney about it and attempted to cast the post as a fleeting mistake for which she accepted “full responsibility.” These circumstances showed that the mayor was cognizant that the post was improper and appreciated her role in its appearance on the town’s Facebook page. Our investigation showed that Mayor Mohammed facilitated the arrangement that led to this post under circumstances that proved that she knowingly and wrongfully used her position and towngranted access to the town’s official Facebook page to benefit her campaign and herself and to influence votes and the outcome of the election. The posting of the campaign ad on the town’s social media served no public purpose and did not merely incidentally benefit the mayor and her campaign in any carrying out of her official duties. Accordingly, the OIG found that the mayor engaged in a violation of the Little Hatch Act as well as a state ethics code violation of misuse of position. 11 The town would have cause for concern about the appearance of impropriety, given the disclaimer on the post that it was a paid political advertisement in combination with Section 106.113, Florida Statutes, titled, “Expenditures by local governments.” That section proscribes any municipality from expending or authorizing the expenditure of public funds for a political advertisement. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 12 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK 2. The Mayor Did Not Properly Resign Her Mayoral Office to Run for Another Office We also determined that Mayor Mohammed violated Florida’s “resign to run” law by failing to submit a written resignation to the town’s clerk-commissioner ten days before the qualifying period for the race for House District Seat 101. In fact, no one in the town ever received a resignation from Mayor Mohammed addressed to the clerk-commissioner or the deputy town clerk. The only letters the deputy town clerk received, just seven days before the qualifying period, were copies of resignations that the mayor addressed to state officials. This was despite the mayor’s independent knowledge of what she needed to do to comply with the law. Florida Statutes Section 99.012, known as the state’s resign to run law, prohibits a public officer from qualifying as a candidate for another public office without timely resigning from the office she presently holds, if any part of the terms run concurrently with each other. Through this prohibition, the legislature meant to address the inherent unfairness of allowing “an elected official . . . holding office to use the prestige and power of that office in seeking election to a higher or different office . . . ” as well as to spare the people of Florida the costs associated with special elections. Chapter 70-80, Laws of Florida. Accordingly, among the papers a candidate must file in order to qualify to appear on the ballot for the office she seeks is a candidate oath form on which she must affirm that, among having other qualifications, she “resigned from any office from which [she is] required to resign pursuant to Section 99.012, Florida Statutes . . . .” (Exhibit 2) To properly resign to run for another elective office, an elected official must submit an irrevocable, written resignation to the qualifying officer for the office she holds, with a copy to the governor and Florida Department of State, at least ten days prior to the first day of the qualifying period for the office she intends to seek. F.S. § 99.012(3)(c), (e); Division of Elections Op. 82-11 (June 15, 1982); Florida Op. Atty. Gen., 070-74 (June 23, 1970). 12 The resignation must be effective no later than the earlier of the date the officer would take office if elected or the date her successor would take office. F.S. § 99.012(3)(b), (d). If a final court order determines that a person did not comply with the resign to run law, the person “shall not be qualified as a candidate for election and his or her name may not appear on the ballot.” F.S. § 99.012(6). The qualifying period for state representative was noon, Monday, June 8, 2020, through noon, Friday, June 12, 2020. Accordingly, the law required Mayor Mohammed to have submitted a resignation of her commission seat to the town’s qualifying officer on or by Friday, May 29, 2020. Section 9 of the town’s municipal charter specifies that the town commission is composed of a mayorcommissioner, vice-mayor commissioner, clerk-commissioner, and two other commissioners. The charter further provides that, at the first regular meeting following every election, the commissioners appoint the mayor-, vice-mayor-, and clerk-commissioners from among themselves. The town code 12 Compare Lambeth v. Gluckler, 302 So. 2d 429 (4th DCA 1974) (city commissioner, who was also mayor of town, submitted resignation letter addressed to the town clerk one day before expiration of qualifying period, violating the resign to run law) with State ex rel. Shevin v. Stone¸ 279 So. 17 (Fla. 1972) (elected officials resigned prior to the time required, but provided resignation letter copies to the governor and the secretary of state after statutory deadline to resign, without violating the law). OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 13 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK provides, “Candidates for the office of Town Commissioner shall qualify with the Clerk-Commissioner . . . .” Pembroke Park Code § 8-67. It is the clerk-commissioner who certifies the names of all candidates who qualify for the commission seats, and only those candidates who duly qualify with the clerk-commissioner will appear on the ballot. Code §§ 8-35, 8-69.13 To help administer the election and fulfill other duties of the clerk-commissioner, the town has established the position of deputy town clerk, who is the day-to-day operator of the town clerk’s office, has functions assigned by the town’s code, and fulfills many of the functions of clerk-commissioner on a delegated basis. It is the commission that designates the deputy town clerk by resolution, and the deputy town clerk serves at the pleasure of the commission. Code § 2-176. Thus, the proper officer—the officer before whom Mayor Mohammed qualified for her current office—was the clerk-commissioner or, in the alternative, the deputy town clerk. 14 On June 10, 2020, Mayor Mohammed filed with the Florida Department of State her candidate oath form as part of her qualifying papers to run for state office. In this oath, she swore or affirmed that she resigned pursuant to Section 99.012, Florida Statutes. (Exhibit 4) But she had not submitted her resignation on time or to the clerk-commissioner or the deputy town clerk as directed by the law. Instead, she sent two letters dated May 28, 2020, one addressed to the Department of State’s election records chief and one addressed to the “Honorable Rick Scott, Governor.” In both letters, she resigned her position as Pembroke Park District 5 Commissioner, effective November 4, 2020. The letters were copied to the town commission “c/o” the assistant town manager in addition to state officials. The envelope containing the letter addressed to the governor’s office and a copy of the letter to the Department of State bore a postmark date of June 1, 2020. (Exhibit 5) On June 4, 2020, the Department of State received its letter and a copy of the governor’s letter. (Composite Exhibit 6) The town’s clerk-commissioner confirmed that he never received any communication from Mayor Mohammed concerning her resignation. He learned about it from the deputy town clerk. The deputy town clerk herself did not receive anything resembling a written resignation until three days after the statutory deadline, Monday, June 1, 2020, and not even that document was addressed to the clerk-commissioner or the deputy town clerk. In fact, she answered both yes and no to our question about whether the mayor submitted the necessary resignation. She explained that on Friday, May 29, 2020—the date the resignation was due—she emailed the mayor, with a copy to the town attorney, stating that she spoke to the town attorney about the mayor’s candidacy for state representative and that it was her understanding that there were “documents which need to be filed.” (Exhibit 7) As she needed to officially inform the commission of the mayor’s resignation, the deputy town clerk requested that the mayor provide her with a “copy of the documents,” 13 It is also the clerk-commissioner who notices the election to the public, who prepares the ballot for each town election, and who tabulates and certifies the results of the election to determine who is duly seated as a commissioner. Code §§ 8-31, 8-36, 8-37, 8-70. 14 At the very least, Mayor Mohammed knew that the town clerk’s office, through the deputy town clerk, was where she filed her qualifying papers for the town’s March 2019 election. (Composite Exhibit 3) OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 14 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK adding that, as the elections supervisor for the town, she wanted to start preparing for any special election. 15 The mayor did not respond. On Sunday, May 31, 2020, the mayor texted her on other town business. The deputy town clerk called the mayor for clarification and, on that call, the mayor told the deputy town clerk that she left a copy of her resignation in the assistant town manager’s mailbox at town hall. The mayor told the deputy town clerk that anything that she (the mayor) needed to do with respect to running for office was between her (the mayor) and the state. The next day, Monday, June 1, 2020, which was three days after the mayor’s resignation was due to the qualifying official for the mayor’s current position, the deputy town clerk took copies of the two resignation letters from the assistant town manager’s mailbox and noted that one was addressed to Governor Rick Scott and the other was addressed to the Florida Division of Elections. The town clerk’s office never date stamped either copy. (Exhibit 8) The deputy town clerk contacted the mayor again when she realized the mayor did not sign one of the letters. The mayor told her that she sent the signed versions to the state and that the unsigned copy was enough for the town. In summary, Mayor Mohammed signed a candidate oath form swearing or affirming that she complied with the resign to run law. That form put her on notice about her statutory obligation to tender a resignation and the statute put her on notice about when, how, and where to submit that resignation. She cited her obligation to resign to run in her letters to the department of state and the governor. Finally, the deputy town clerk personally and timely emailed the mayor, with a copy to the town attorney, about the need to file a resignation. Given these circumstances, at best, the mayor was willfully blind 16 to the proper procedure to resign pursuant to the statute. Although the deputy town clerk told the OIG that the mayor did not submit her resignation on or by Friday, May 29, 2020, the best proof that Mayor Mohammed did not resign on time is the lack of a date stamp on the town’s copies of her resignation letters. By not timely submitting a written resignation to the clerk-commissioner or deputy town clerk, the mayor engaged in misconduct and jeopardized her run for state office. In failing to timely and properly resign prior to qualifying as a candidate for state office, the mayor exposed herself to a private cause of action to remove her name from the ballot pursuant to F.S. § 99.012(6). It also laid the foundation for a separate violation as we discuss below. 15 The resign to run law provides that a resignation from an elective municipal office creates a vacancy for the remaining, unexpired term, to be filled as provided by the municipal charter. F.S. § 99.012(3)(f). 16 In the law, the willful blindness doctrine dictates “that if a party has his suspicion aroused but then deliberately omits to make further inquiries, because he wishes to remain in ignorance, he is deemed to have knowledge.” Salomon v. State, 126 So.3d 1185, 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)(citing Hallman v. State, 633 So.2d 1116, 1117 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)). OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 15 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK 3. The Mayor Executed A False Candidate Oath We also determined that Mayor Mohammed engaged in another instance of misconduct when she submitted her candidate oath for her run for state office, because she swore or affirmed that she resigned to pursuant to Section 99.012, Florida Statutes, when she knew or should have known that she had not. F.S. § 104.011. As explained above, among the qualifying papers a candidate must file to qualify for the office she seeks is a candidate oath form affirming that, among having other qualifications, she “resigned from any office from which [she is] required to resign pursuant to Section 99.012, Florida Statutes . . . .” (Exhibit 2) A candidate must exercise caution in executing the oath, as the willful swearing of a false oath in connection with or arising out of elections is a third degree felony. F.S. § 104.011. On June 10, 2020, the mayor filed with the Department of State her candidate oath as part of her qualifying papers to run for state office. In this candidate oath, she swore or affirmed that she resigned pursuant to Section 99.012, Florida Statutes, and the mayor’s executive assistant notarized the oath on June 9, 2020, as follows: ... ... OIG Figure 3: Relevant excerpts from Exhibit 4, the Candidate Oath that Mayor Mohammed swore or affirmed on June 9, 2020. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 16 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK The Department of State received it the next day. (Exhibit 4) But, as discussed above, our investigation showed that, when the mayor executed this oath and filed it with the state, she knew or would have known but for willful blindness that she had not resigned pursuant to the resign to run law because she had not timely filed a resignation with the appropriate qualifying officer. There is no information from any source that rebuts the facts and inferences our investigation yielded. Accordingly, we determined that Mayor Mohammed willfully swore a false oath in violation of Section 104.011, Florida Statutes. The Mayor Used Town Resources to Wrongfully Benefit Her Law Firm and Herself In addition to misusing her public position to benefit her campaign, she also misused her official position to benefit herself and her law firm. Our investigation determined that Mayor Mohammed routinely misappropriated the town’s resources for her law firm and herself, and she also misused her official position to bolster the credibility of her law firm, with a wrongful intent, inconsistent with the proper performance of her public duties, and without any public purpose. 1. Mayor Mohammed Used Town Staff and Property to Benefit Her Law Firm and Herself We determined that Mayor Mohammed repeatedly and corruptly used the town’s resources to secure a special benefit for herself and her law firm. While the town entrusted her with its resources to perform her official duties, she continuously abused that trust by using town employees, the town’s facilities, and the town’s equipment for purposes unrelated to her official capacity or any public purpose. Mayor Mohammed has been a member of The Florida Bar since August 2011. At the bar’s website as of August 2020, her email address was mayormohammed@townofpembrokepark.com 17 and her mailing address was with the firm of Rumrell, Bate, McLeod & Brock, 18 at the mayor’s residence within the town. The mailing address that Law Office of Ashira Mohammed, P.L.L.C. listed with the state Division of Corporations is also at the mayor’s residence within the town. 19, 20 Her campaign website, voteashira.com, states, “I’m also a successful lawyer who has worked in the areas of immigration, insurance subrogation, admiralty, maritime, EEOC discrimination.” During our investigation, former town employees told us that the mayor used the town’s resources, to include their services, for her law firm during work hours. One of the employees, J.G., worked for the town from September 2011 to June 2018. From September 2011 until January 2014, she 17 The mayor has a second town email address that does not identify her official position, amohammed@townofpembrokepark.com. 18 We do not assert, nor does the evidence we obtained suggest, that the mayor’s conduct was on behalf of or benefited Rumwell, Bate, McLeod & Brock. 19 The house number and street number of Law Office of Ashira Mohammed match the mayor’s homesteaded property in Pembroke Park, although the firm’s March 17, 2020, annual report registered the same street address but in Hollywood. 20 At the July 27, 2020, commission meeting, during which the commission took up the question of whether to approve a contract for the mayor’s legal fees related to the OIG investigation, the mayor stated in part, “I do not practice law in the Town of Pembroke Park, nor does my bar license have anything to do with the Town of Pembroke Park.” OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 17 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK was the assistant to the former deputy town clerk in the clerk’s office. In January 2014, she transferred to administration, where she was an administrative assistant. When J.G. worked in the clerk’s office, she observed the mayor use the town copier for her schoolwork while she was in law school and later for her law practice. In fact, on many occasions, the former deputy town clerk sent J.G. home during the workday because the mayor needed to use the copier, which was in J.G.’s office. 21 The mayor also used copiers in the administration department and building department to make copies for her law firm. The mayor also had J.G. make copies for her law practice when J.G. worked in the administration department. She recalled copying laws out of the state statutes. The mayor told her the copies were for a client on a case she was working. J.G. performed tasks for the mayor’s law practice approximately two to three times—all during town work hours. J.G. believed that the mayor and former deputy town clerk could tell that she felt uncomfortable working on the mayor’s law firmrelated tasks, so the former deputy town clerk did most of them for the mayor. The mayor also used the commission chambers area for work related to her law firm, as well as received phone calls for her law firm at town hall. Reception forwarded the commissioners’ calls to J.G. at the clerk’s office. J.G. recalled one or two calls from people asking for the mayor because they needed help with a case. J.G. took a message and let the former deputy town clerk know about the call. We also spoke to T.C. In April 2014, the town hired her to succeed J.G. as the assistant to the former deputy town clerk. T.C. worked in the clerk’s office until September 2017, when she transferred to the finance department. T.C. left the town in March 2018. T.C. advised us that she frequently observed the mayor work on her law practice while at town hall. On approximately seven occasions, she saw the mayor scan and copy documents for her legal practice using the town copier, toner, and paper. The scanned images went to T.C.’s town email and T.C., in turn, forwarded the images to the mayor’s personal account. T.C. recalled one occasion when more than 200 pages of the mayor’s law firm documents jammed the town copier. The mayor was making copies for a disclosure packet. 22 On another occasion, right before the mayor left on maternity leave, T.C. saw the mayor use the town copier to make copies of her law practice’s case files. It was her understanding that the mayor copied the case files to provide to another attorney while the mayor was out on leave. Additionally, the mayor repeatedly asked T.C. to perform tasks for the mayor’s law firm because T.C. had experience working as a court reporter and working in a clerk of court office. T.C. performed these tasks, on town time and without additional compensation, at least until she left the town clerk’s office in September 2017. The mayor stood over T.C.’s shoulder while T.C. looked 21 J.G. told us that, when this happened, although the former deputy town clerk did not tell her to, J.G. put in for leave to cover herself. 22 Prior to certain transactions, the law may require one party to provide another party with disclosures or a “disclosure packet” to reveal significant or material information which, if known, might affect whether the second party will engage in the transaction. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 18 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK up materials for the mayor, and then the mayor directed her to email the information to the mayor’s personal email account. The tasks included scanning and printing documents using the town’s copiers, researching legal documents, and obtaining and emailing, from her town address, templates for pleadings. These documents related to family law and immigration cases and not to town business. In response to a records request, the town provided us with several town emails that supported T.C.’s descriptions of the work she did for the mayor. (Composite Exhibit 9) 23 In several May 2014 emails, T.C. either forwarded templates for legal pleadings to the mayor’s personal email address or reported to the mayor the results of the research she did into those templates. In a Friday, May 30, 2014, email from T.C.’s official town email address to the mayor’s personal address, time stamped 3:23 p.m., 24 T.C. apologized for being unable to “find any of the eviction people I used to work with” and offered to research the issue further over the weekend. To that end, T.C. asked the mayor to send to T.C.’s private email “the title of the exact types of motions that are needed . . . .” (Composite Exhibit 9, at p. 9) A Wednesday, June 15, 2016, 4:05 p.m. email showed that T.C. forwarded from her town email address to the mayor’s personal email address a PDF file with immigration-related documents. (Composite Exhibit 9, at pp. 10-21) We were particularly dismayed when T.C. told us that the mayor arranged for clients to meet her for consultations at town hall during work hours. She said this happened approximately three to four times, and mostly during the mayor’s pregnancy and right after her child’s birth. 25 T.C. escorted the prospective clients to the back office next to commission chambers to wait for the mayor. 26 T.C. described that, at one point, the former deputy town clerk even suggested to the mayor that she pay a business tax and rent office space in town hall for her business. The mayor did not take this advice. 27 The PDF document that T.C. forwarded to the mayor’s personal email address on June 15, 2016, included several letters from the mayor, in her capacity as a private attorney and on behalf of a private client, to various immigration agencies. While nothing in those letters identified her as the mayor of the Town of Pembroke Park, the mayor notably used the town’s address of 3150 S.W. 52nd Ave, Pembroke Park, FL 33023 as her or her firm’s return address in several of the letters. (Composite Exhibit 9, at pp. 10-21) 23 While T.C’s emails amounted to 73 pages of material, we limited this exhibit to the material that was relevant to our findings. 24 The town’s business hours were Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 25 The Town of Pembroke Park’s Fall 2015 newsletter announced that the mayor gave birth to her son on June 3, 2015. Accordingly, these meetings would have taken place in the 2015-2016 time frame. 26 Although T.C. described that, at times, the mayor’s guests signed the town’s visitors log, she could not remember any of their names. Accordingly, we did not endeavor to obtain the logs during the relevant timeframe. 27 As we explain below, Mayor Mohammed did not interview with us. However, during a July 20, 2020, virtual town commission meeting, she made several statements touching on her law practice and business tax receipts. Specifically, the mayor offered that “I don’t practice anything from my house. I don’t have a business located in the town” and lamented that “[w]hoever sent the OIG whatever frivolous information that they sent, they sent them information regarding my law practice, which is in Boca Raton by the way.” The mayor then informed the audience that her firm’s business tax receipts were filed in Boca Raton and had nothing to do with the town. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 19 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK Although the mayor did not interview with us, she made public statements regarding her use of town resources for tasks that were unrelated to town business. At a commission meeting on July 27, 2020, during which the commission denied the approval of a contract for the mayor’s legal fees in the OIG investigation, the mayor stated that her law practice has never been in Pembroke Park and that she gave up her law practice five years ago. 28 In denying town hall rumors that she was using town staff to work on her campaign, she also said that “the people who have been here for a long time know that I’ve never used staff to do anything on any personal level.” With this statement, the mayor clearly demonstrated that she understood the wrongfulness of putting employees to work on anything other than town business. While Mayor Mohammed was at liberty to practice law as well as serve as a town commissioner, she was not at liberty to use town staff on town time or otherwise wrongfully use town property or resources when they benefited her law firm and herself and there was no public purpose in doing so. The mayor’s misuse of the town facilities, property, and personnel that were within her trust amounted to additional misconduct under Florida’s ethics code. 2. Mayor Mohammed Used Her Official Position to Benefit Her Law Firm and Herself The emails that the OIG obtained from the town revealed further misconduct, because they also showed that Mayor Mohammed corruptly used the weight of her official position to secure special benefits for her law firm and herself by using her official title and the town’s official address when conducting private business. By doing so, Mayor Mohammed misused her official position. Among the documents that we obtained from the town was a January 23, 2017, email from the mayor’s personal email address to the Miami Gardens city attorney requesting that a hearing on a notice of intent to lien property located within Miami Gardens be rescheduled. (Composite Exhibit 9, at p. 23) However, the signature block of Mayor Mohammed’s email used or attempted to use the prestige and power of her title, as seen below: OIG Figure 4: Signature Block from Mayor Mohammed’s January 23, 2017, personal email regarding law firm business to Miami Gardens city attorney 28 As of August 2020, her mailing address with The Florida Bar was with the law firm of Rumrell, Bate, McLeod & Brock, at the mayor’s residence within the town. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 20 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK On January 25, 2017, the mayor, again from her personal email address, emailed the former deputy town clerk at her town address, with the subject line, “Letter for Miami Gardens hearing.” (Composite Exhibit 9, at pp. 25-26) Within the body of this email was a draft letter to be sent to the city of Miami Gardens, in which the mayor followed up on her January 23, 2017, request to reschedule a hearing on a notice of intent to lien property. The return address on this letter was the “Law Office of Ashira Mohammed” with the city’s address. Again, the mayor ended this letter with her official title as featured in OIG Figure 3. A certain prestige and power comes with holding public office. To that end, it is imperative that public officers do not wrongfully use that prestige and power for their private gain. The Florida Commission on Ethics has previously opined that, if a municipal official were to use a municipal business card to promote the official’s “personal profit, gain, or business,” it would create a prohibited conflict of interest in violation of Section 112.313(6).29 Similarly, a city official’s use of the city seal, her official title, and the name of the city—even on personal stationery that the official paid for with her personal funds— would constitute a misuse of position where there is no public purpose for such use.30 Here, Mayor Mohammed created a signature block for her personal emails that included her name, official title, the name of the town, and the address of town hall, giving her law firm and herself the inherent power and prestige afforded by her public office. At least twice, she then conducted business for her law firm using that signature block. In this way, the mayor corruptly used her public office to directly benefit her law firm and herself and for no public purpose. This amounted to additional misuse of position under the state’s ethics code. Mayor Mohammed Declined to Interview With the OIG As an implicated party in the investigation, Mayor Mohammed had the right to provide an interview to the OIG pursuant to Section 10.01 B.(10) of the Broward County Charter. Thus, we attempted to contact her to schedule such an interview. Between June 9, 2020, and June 12, 2020, we left two voice mails on the mayor’s town-issued cell phone and sent an email to both her personal and town email addresses inviting her to contact us. 31 (Composite Exhibit 11) The phone calls and emails went unanswered. We sent another email, again to both email addresses, on June 16, 2020, advising the mayor of her charter right to an interview as an implicated party and recounting our unsuccessful efforts to contact her during the previous week. Accordingly, we requested her to contact us by 3:30 p.m. on Monday, 29 Florida Commission on Ethics Opinion (CEO) 02-13 (June 11, 2002) (but there would be no conflict of interest if a mayor or commissioner used city business card for a public purpose and there was merely an incidental private or business benefit to the official). 30 CEO 91-38 (July 19, 1991) (informing of the official’s public position in a writing may be appropriate, such as in a political context, or inappropriate, such as in a letter being sent to settle a strictly private legal dispute). 31 The mayor failed to return our calls despite her own establishment of a “telephone and email protocol” on April 18, 2019, in an email addressed to all town staff. In this protocol, the mayor directed staff to return voicemails and to open and respond to emails within 48 hours. The email closed with, “Those failing to comply will be disciplined, failure to repeatedly comply will result in termination.” (Exhibit 10) OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 21 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK June 22, 2020, to either schedule or decline an interview. We further informed her that, if she did not respond by the deadline, the OIG would consider her to have waived her right to give an interview. (Composite Exhibit 11) On June 22, 2020, at 4:04 p.m., the mayor replied that she would have her attorney contact us as soon as she secured payment for him. 32 (Composite Exhibit 11) We replied by email the next morning, on June 23, 2020, stating that, as the mayor had failed to timely respond to our multiple requests to schedule an interview, we were proceeding with our investigation. We also stated that, if she secured counsel prior to the distribution of any product related to the investigation, she should have the attorney contact us to discuss the feasibility of her interviewing at that time. (Composite Exhibit 11) The mayor did not reply to our June 23, 2020, email. She did, however, put an item before the commission on June 25, 2020, asking the town to pay attorney L.W. to represent the mayor in the pending matters with the OIG. The motion passed, subject to approval of a contract. A proposed resolution authorizing the town to enter into such a contract with L.W. came before the commission on July 20, 2020, and again on July 27, 2020, 33 at which time the resolution yielded a tie vote and died without approval. We did not hear from Mayor Mohammed again. 34 INTERVIEW SUMMARIES As a part of the investigation, OIG Special Agents conducted several interviews. The statements made in the significant interviews are summarized below. 1. Interviews of K.J. K.J. was the founder, CEO, and president of Doing Good in the Hood, Inc. (DGITH). She moved from Atlanta to South Florida in August 2019 and started a job as a teacher at a local preschool in October 2019. She first met Mayor Mohammed in October 2019 through the mayor’s son, who attended the preschool, where the mayor passed out flyers about events at the town. K.J. began to help and volunteer through her non-profit DGITH in the fall of 2019. K.J. was good at working social media platforms and “posting stuff,” so she started working with the mayor on her political campaign. The mayor told K.J. she was not very social media literate and wanted to do better with posting things on her pages to make them active, so K.J. “log[ged] on to her [the mayor’s] information” to help get the word out on whatever was going on. 32 In this email, the mayor copied two email addresses at the law offices of attorney L.W. Because the item’s attachments were not uploaded for public review in time to comply with the 48-hour notice requirement of the county charter (see Broward County Charter § 1.07), the commission scheduled another special meeting for July 27, 2020, to vote on the item. 34 In the mayor’s response to the OIG’s preliminary report, she requested an immediate interview. See a summary of her response and the OIG’s reply on pp. 29-30 below, as well as her response at Appendix B. 33 OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 22 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK The mayor gave K.J. her (the mayor’s) personal log-in name and password for all of her social media accounts so that K.J. could log in as if she were the mayor. The mayor changed her password to make it something easy for K.J. to remember. The town’s Facebook page was attached to the mayor’s regular Facebook page. When she logged on to the mayor’s Facebook profile, she could access the mayor’s personal page and the other pages on her account, including the mayor’s campaign page. K.J. posted things on behalf of the mayor, including on the town’s Facebook page. K.J. believed she started posting items for the mayor around the 2019 holidays and the start of January 2020 but was not sure. She posted flyers for the town’s turkey giveaway and Christmas toy giveaway. The mayor allowed K.J. to post, on her own initiative, to the town’s Facebook page and the mayor’s accounts, without having to consult the mayor. She also posted items that the mayor asked her to post. K.J. was trying to keep the mayor’s pages active for her campaign and to let people know what was going on in the town. K.J.’s posts were “generic” in nature, such as, “Have a nice day,” “Happy Easter,” “Happy New Year,” and “Vote.” She also posted flyers and information on town events and festivals on the town’s Facebook page. K.J. found generic images to post on the mayor’s accounts, including the town’s account. She added the campaign logo to some of the graphics but did not add the campaign logo to those items she planned to post on the town’s page. Although K.J. originally indicated she did not know whether she could post campaign material on the town’s page but was “supposed to know,” she later clarified she knew that she could not post campaign material to the page but could not remember how she knew. The mayor made her aware of an incident where she posted a flyer on the wrong page. She posted one of the mayor’s campaign flyers to the town’s Facebook page. The flyer was up for a while before the mayor contacted her. K.J. told the mayor she did not know there was a problem and was sorry. During the interview, K.J. first recalled the post not being anything political—it was her recollection that the message said something along the lines of “be safe” and described accidentally applying the mayor’s campaign logo to it. K.J. then recalled the flyer in question. It was a generic thank you to those people on the front line of the COVID epidemic. She neither created it nor applied the campaign logo to it. She posted that flyer at the mayor’s request. She believed she posted it in April 2020. The mayor provided K.J. the flyer to post as she had done with other items in the past. Most of the time the mayor gave her flyers to post, they were flyers for the mayor’s personal pages and the town’s page. When the mayor gave her the flyer, she did not tell her not to post it on the town’s page. As she did not notice the mayor’s campaign logo on the bottom of the flyer, she posted it, as the mayor, to all the mayor’s linked Facebook pages and Instagram. The mayor later called K.J. and told her she posted a political flyer to the town’s page. K.J. immediately deleted the post. When K.J. told the mayor that she deleted the post to correct the problem, the mayor told her, “No, don’t delete it,” and explained that if it stayed up, the mayor OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 23 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK would just need to “tell them” about it. After realizing that K.J. already deleted the post, the mayor told her not to repost it and that she should “just leave it” next time. K.J. did not post to the mayor’s personal accounts and the town’s account after the incident. It made her uncomfortable to have access to all of the mayor’s personal accounts because she is not a politician and really did not understand the rules and regulations. The mayor did not provide K.J. with information on the rules and regulations associated with the campaign and social media when she started helping her campaign. K.J. used Facebook for fun and was just trying to help the mayor. She did not want to be cause of ruining someone’s opportunity or career. According to K.J., the campaign did not pay her. She was a volunteer. However, when K.J. first started doing flyers for the mayor, she did receive a check from the campaign as a “love offering.” 2. Interviews of the Code Enforcement Officer The code enforcement officer was an administrator on the town’s Facebook page. As the social media for the town and the town’s Facebook page was Mayor Mohammed’s project, only the mayor and she were the original administrators on the page. The town’s I.T. director was also an administrator. And, after the mayor hired her executive assistant, the mayor arranged to add her as a Facebook page administrator. The code enforcement officer had to get approval from the mayor and the former deputy town clerk to post on the town’s Facebook page. After the former deputy town clerk left the town in October 2019, she only had to get the mayor’s approval. Other than posting items pertaining to town events and town holiday closures, the code enforcement officer did not post. Because the mayor’s executive assistant had difficulty using Facebook, she only recently began posting items. For instance, the executive assistant posted the community flyer appearing on the town’s page the week of May 4, 2020. If someone wanted to have an item posted on the town’s Facebook page, the code enforcement officer required that the person send her the information in an email. Those with administrator privileges could see who uploaded a post. She did not post the mayor’s political flyer on April 8, 2020. According to the administrator screen on the post, the mayor did so. On April 30, 2020, the I.T. director had the code enforcement officer look up information about the April 8 post. She took a screen shot and provided it to him. While on the phone with him, he commented that he had seen the post but while looking back for it, he found it had been taken down. Neither she nor the I.T. director took the post down. It was removed on April 30, but there was no indication of who took it down. Only an administrator could do so. On May 8, 2020, the I.T. director asked the code enforcement officer to remove the mayor as an administrator from the town’s Facebook page at the mayor’s request, but she did not want to be the one to do it. Ultimately, the I.T. director removed the mayor. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 24 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK The mayor told the code enforcement officer she was going to resign from her position in August to run for another office. 3. Interview of Information Technology (I.T.) Director The I.T. director had been with the town since approximately 2004. He was responsible for all I.T.-related issues for the town. He initially set up the town’s Facebook page in 2016 or 2017 and worked with the code enforcement officer on that project. He was a page administrator so he could use administrator access to assist with technical issues if they arose. He did not post on the page and was not in the post approval process. Four town employees had administrator status: the code enforcement officer, the mayor, the mayor’s executive assistant, and he. The I.T. director did not know when the mayor and her assistant were added as administrators or who added them. A page administrator could add and delete people and posts. The code enforcement officer handled most of the management of the page. Each administrator had their own sign-in credentials. It was the I.T. director’s understanding that the face of Facebook posts reflected the identity of the administrator who uploaded it, but he needed to verify that. The code enforcement officer put up the posts that reflected “Town Pembroke Park.” No one was allowed to post political advertisements or information on the town’s Facebook page. No one registered with the town, applied to the town, or paid the town to post a political ad. The I.T. director did not become aware of the mayor’s political flyer that appeared on the town’s Facebook page on April 8, 2020, until the OIG filed a request for Facebook records on April 30, 2020. He provided the OIG with the requested Facebook information that same day. Within an hour of the OIG request, the post that had “political messages” was taken down. He did not know who took it down, as the administrator section of the page did not retain that information. Facebook reflected Ashira Mohammed was the person who posted the April 8, 2020, political flyer to the town’s Facebook page. A day or two after receiving the OIG’s request, the I.T. director removed the mayor as an administrator on the town’s page after a conversation he had with her. He was on a phone call with her regarding a different issue when the mayor brought up the post on the town’s page. The mayor volunteered that “a lady” who worked social media for her campaign posted the flyer on the page. He decided to remove the mayor as an administrator based on what happened. He discussed the issue with town management in order to develop a policy concerning the town’s Facebook page. As the town’s I.T. director, it was concerning to him that a non-town employee had access to the town’s Facebook account. This was one of the reasons he removed the mayor as an administrator, as no one outside of the town should have access to the town account. 4. Interview of the Mayor’s Executive Assistant Although the mayor’s executive assistant was an administrator on the town’s Facebook page, she never directly posted anything. She sent commission-approved food distribution event OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 25 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK flyers to the code enforcement officer to post. She was not familiar with how to work social media and Facebook, so she did not post or remove items on the town’s Facebook page. She neither posted nor removed a political flyer on the town’s Facebook page for the mayor. She did not know of anyone outside the town having administrative access to the town’s Facebook page. 5. Interview of the Clerk-Commissioner The mayor did not submit her resignation to the clerk-commissioner through any means. The deputy town clerk made him aware of the mayor’s resignation; however, he had neither seen nor read the resignation letter. 6. Interview of the Current Deputy Town Clerk In answering the question of whether she knew if the mayor provided her with official notice of her (the mayor’s) resignation pursuant to the resign to run law, the deputy town clerk replied, “Yes and no.” On Friday, May 29, 2020, at 6:03 p.m., the deputy town clerk sent an email to the mayor regarding the filing of required documents to the town; the mayor did not respond to her email. On Sunday, May 31, the mayor texted the deputy town clerk asking her to draft a declaration. As the request was vague, she called the mayor for clarification. During the conversation, the mayor told the deputy town clerk that she left a copy of her resignation letter in the assistant town manager’s mailbox at town hall. The mayor further said that everything she (the mayor) needed to do to run for office was between her and the state so everything she (the mayor) was doing was going to the state. On Monday, June 1, the deputy town clerk took the documents out of the assistant town manager’s mailbox. There were two letters, one addressed to the Florida Division of Elections and the other to Governor Rick Scott. The deputy town clerk again contacted the mayor because one of the letters was not signed. The mayor told her that the signed original went to the state and the unsigned version was enough for the town. Neither resignation letter was addressed to either the deputy town clerk or the clerk-commissioner. 7. Interview of J.G. J.G. worked with the town from September 2011 to June 2018. The town hired her as the assistant to the former deputy town clerk in the clerk’s office. She worked in the clerk’s office until January 2014, when she transferred to administration as an administrative assistant. She worked in administration office from January 2014 until June 2018. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 26 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK The clerk’s office is located on the second floor of town hall across from the code enforcement office. J.G. worked in the first office on the right of the clerk’s office. There was a large copier in her office that she used for her work tasks. The mayor used the copier for tasks related to her law practice. There were many times the former deputy town clerk would tell J.G. the mayor needed to use the copier during the workday and send J.G. home so that she would not be in the office when the mayor arrived. Although the former deputy town clerk would not tell her to take leave when she sent J.G. home, she took leave anyway to cover herself. J.G. observed the mayor use the town copier for tasks relating to her law school then later for her law practice. The mayor tried to come to J.G.’s office while J.G. was away on a lunch break or helping in commission chambers. The mayor also used copiers in the administration and building departments to make copies for her law practice. On a couple of occasions, the mayor asked J.G. to make copies for her law practice when J.G. worked in the administration office. Some of the things she copied were laws out of the state statutes. The mayor told her they were for “a client” on a case she was working. J.G. did work for the mayor’s law practice approximately two to three times—all during town work hours. The mayor and former deputy town clerk could tell she was not comfortable working on the mayor’s tasks for her law practice. As such, the former deputy town clerk did most of the work related to the mayor’s law practice related work. The mayor also used the commission chambers area for work related to her law practice, as well as received phone calls for her law practice at town hall. Reception forwarded the commissioners’ calls to J.G. at the clerk’s office. There were one or two calls that were from people asking for the mayor because they needed help with a case. J.G. took messages and let the former deputy town clerk know about the call. 8. Interviews of T.C. T.C. worked with the town for approximately four years, from April 2014 to March 2018. The town hired her as the assistant to the former deputy town clerk, who was also the assistant town manager. She worked in that position through September 2017. In September 2017, the town transferred her to the permits section of the building department. In October 2017, the town transferred her to the finance department, where she stayed until she left the town in March 2018. When she was the assistant to the former deputy town clerk, T.C’s duties were to provide the clerk with administrative and clerical support. T.C. worked in the clerk’s office space directly across from the code enforcement office on the second floor. The mayor was friends with the former deputy town clerk and came into the clerk’s office all the time. When T.C. started working with the town, the mayor was working for a law firm in Boca Raton. The mayor also worked on her law practice while at town hall. The mayor asked T.C. about legal documents and drafts of certain pleadings, as T.C. had experience with court documents from her time as a court reporter and working in the clerk of courts office. Specifically, the mayor asked OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 27 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK T.C. if she had copies of pleadings she could provide the mayor to use as a template for her personal work. The mayor stood over T.C.’s shoulder while she looked up materials for the mayor, and the mayor had T.C. email the materials to the mayor’s personal email account. The mayor had T.C. scan and print documents on the town copiers for the mayor’s law practice. T.C. knew the materials she was handling for the mayor were not town business-related, because the documents were related to family law cases and immigration cases. When T.C. scanned documents for the mayor, the scan job went directly to T.C.’s email. T.C. then forwarded such an email with the scan job to the mayor’s personal email. The mayor herself copied and scanned her documents for her law firm from town hall as well. T.C. witnessed the mayor make copies. The copier was in T.C.’s office. One time the mayor copied over 200 documents to provide for a disclosure packet that looked like coffee had spilled on them. The copies were dry and kept jamming in the copier. T.C. estimated that she saw the mayor use the copier for her law practice seven different times. T.C. recalled an occasion, right before the mayor gave birth to her son, when the mayor used the copier in the clerk’s office to make copies of her law practice’s case files. The mayor had large, three-ring binders full of documents she was copying. T.C. heard that the mayor was copying the case files to provide to another attorney while the mayor was out on maternity leave. The mayor used the town copier, toner, and paper. The mayor used town hall for client consultation meetings. The clients sometimes signed in. When a client for the mayor arrived at town hall, the town receptionist called T.C. to let her know someone was there to meet with the mayor. T.C. then called the mayor to make her aware that someone was there to see her. The mayor explained the visitors were there for a “legal consultation” and directed T.C. to have them wait for her in “her office.” The mayor used the meeting-conference room at the back of the commission chambers on the first floor as her office. Although T.C. did not recall the names of the mayor’s visitors, she recalled that most were there for immigration-related issues. The meetings occurred in the afternoon between 2 p.m. and 5 p.m. Accordingly, during the workday, T.C. picked up the mayor’s visitors, escorted them to the office, and waited with them until the mayor arrived. T.C. recalled these consultations happening three or four times with most occurring during the mayor’s pregnancy and right after she gave birth to her son. The former deputy town clerk told the mayor that she should pay a business tax receipt and rent an office space in town hall to use for her personal business. As far as T.C. knew, the mayor did not follow that guidance. T.C. used town work time and town resources to complete the mayor’s tasks. T.C. kept a detailed “daily log” in a running word document on her town computer. This log covered approximately three years of her time at the town from 2014 to September 2017, which was the time she worked in the clerk’s office. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 28 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK In approximately March 2017, the mayor brought a large amount of “stuff” from her house to store in the clerk’s office area while renovations were being done at her home. The mayor explained to T.C. that her son needed a room at their house. The approximately eight to ten large boxes took two cart loads to bring into the clerk’s office. The boxes contained all kinds of the mayor’s personal items such as law books, photos, awards, certificates, and used toys. The boxes were stacked two high on the sofa in the file cabinet area of the clerk’s office and stacked up against the window. The mayor’s boxes were still in the clerk’s office when T.C. transferred to the building department in approximately September 2017. RESPONSES TO THE PRELIMINARY REPORT AND OIG COMMENT In accordance with Section 10.01(D)(2)(a) of the Charter of Broward County, preliminary copies of this report were provided to the municipality and the implicated party for their discretionary written responses. The OIG received a response from the town and Mayor Mohammed. Both are attached and incorporated herein as Appendix A and Appendix B. We appreciate receiving the responses. 1. Response of the Town In its response, the town acknowledged our findings and informed us as to the steps it has taken to ensure that town employees only use town resources for town business. Specifically, the town implemented a policy restricting the number of employees authorized to access the town’s social media platforms. Furthermore, the town wrote that it is reviewing its Employee Code of Conduct to determine whether there is a need to clarify and strengthen the guidelines in Sec. 2-26 of its code—the section prohibiting elected officials and town employees from misusing the town’s resources. 35 In addition, the town is updating its Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual and intends to conduct education sessions with staff to review these updates. We appreciate the steps the town has taken in response to our findings, but we observe that the law and policies already in place put Mayor Mohammed on irrefutable notice that she could not properly use town resources and personnel for her private interests. 2. Response of Mayor Ashira Mohammed The mayor concedes that we extended several offers to interview and that she ultimately responded that she was in the process of “securing counsel.” But now she writes that, after being delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic and personal matters, she “now has counsel in place” and wants the OIG to arrange a prompt interview. This request to be interviewed was first communicated to the OIG in the mayor’s written response to the preliminary report, on September 21, 2020, which, by our count, was at least 33 days after 35 Pembroke Park Code Sec. 2-26 was not published as of the date of this report. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 29 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK the mayor secured counsel and took her opportunity to review all preliminary findings from this investigation. Mayor Mohammed omits key details about her prior rejection of our offers to interview. We agree, as we described in our report, that the mayor informed us that she would have her attorney contact us as soon as she secured payment for him. 36 Indeed, in our final email to her on June 23, 2020, we replied that, as she had failed to timely respond to our multiple requests to schedule an interview, we were proceeding with our investigation. We added that, if she secured counsel prior to the distribution of any product related to the investigation, she should have the attorney contact us to discuss the feasibility of her interviewing at that time. (Composite Exhibit 11) We did not hear back from the mayor until she filed her response to our preliminary report. The mayor subsequently secured counsel, at the latest, by August 19, 2020. (Exhibit 12) Two days before her response to our preliminary report was due, we received notice that the mayor secured another attorney to replace the one who contacted us on August 19. Neither counsel approached us about an interview. Thus, to the extent that the mayor suggests that she is now prepared to interview because she “now has counsel in place,” that basis is belied by the facts. Turning to her challenges of our findings, the mayor denies all wrongdoing by ignoring key details, misstating the findings, and misstating the law contained in our report. The mayor also takes aim at several of the witnesses’ credibility using her own, unsworn assertions and misleading exhibits, all in a failed effort to challenge our investigation. To begin with, the mayor admits that she knows that political posts are not permitted on the town’s page; she contends that her political post on the town’s Facebook page did not amount to a misuse of position. According to the mayor, it was a one-time, inadvertent upload by K.J., the campaign worker she tasked to assist with social media. In an effort to dispute K.J.’s credibility, the mayor writes that K.J. was “confused” and attaches exhibits to her response which she claims show that it was not K.J. who uploaded the posts to the town’s Facebook page, but that it was the Code Enforcement Officer, instead. However, the mayor’s exhibits do nothing to challenge K.J.’s credibility. The mayor’s Exhibit 3 is a March 25, 2020, email from the code enforcement officer, with no attachment, that indicated that she posted a flyer for the drive-through food giveaway to “the Town website, Facebook and Instagram.” Apparently, the mayor believes that this email somehow proves that K.J. did not upload posts about drive-through food giveaways. But the town had several food giveaways. As reported in footnote 9 of this report, it was Mayor Mohammed’s profile that K.J. used to upload a March 20, 2020, post, promoting the town’s food giveaway on March 21, 2020, and another post dated March 23, 2020, sharing pictures from the town’s March 21, 2020, food giveaway. (Exhibit 36 The town commission considered, and rejected, the mayor’s request for the town to pay attorney L.W. to represent her in the OIG’s investigation. A draft contract between the town and attorney L.W. was presented for the town commission’s consideration on July 20, 2020. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 30 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK 13) 37 That the code enforcement officer may have uploaded a food giveaway away flyer on March 25, 2020, did nothing to negate K.J.’s sworn statement to the OIG. Nor does Exhibit 4 of the mayor’s response affect our finding. In this exhibit, the mayor includes a screenshot of a November 24, 2019, post to the town’s Facebook page that lacked administrator details, featuring a turkey giveaway flyer and a November 4, 2019, email from the code enforcement officer to the town commission purportedly attaching “a copy of the Thanksgiving Flyer 2019” and advising that the flyer would be distributed “to the community and [posted] on the website.” There is nothing in the exhibit that ties the Facebook post to the email. Nonetheless, the exhibit, on its face, again fails to negate K.J.’s sworn statement. The administrator details of the two posts on the town’s Facebook page, from November 22 to 24, 2019, that promoted the town’s turkey giveaway on November 25, 2019—missing from the mayor’s exhibit—identified that they were actually from Mayor Mohammed’s profile, to which only the mayor and K.J. had access. (Exhibit 13) After all, the code enforcement officer had her own log-in credentials. The fact that the code enforcement officer also had the flyer is explained by her email, in which she stated that she was posting it on the town’s internet website. The mayor’s Exhibit 5 also fails to affect our finding. In this exhibit, the mayor includes (1) a screenshot of a December 15, 2019, post to the town’s Facebook page—again lacking administrator details—which featured a flyer promoting the town’s holiday toy giveaway and (2) a November 13, 2019, email from the code enforcement officer that featured the same flyer, in which the code enforcement officer advised that she would be posting the flyer on the website. The inference, of course, is that the code enforcement officer uploaded the flyer on December 15, 2019. But she did not. While the Town of Pembroke Park added an event using that flyer on December 6, 2019 (Exhibit 14), the administrator details of the two posts dated December 15, 2019, reflected that they were indeed uploaded using the mayor’s profile (Exhibit 13). The mayor’s position also disregards key details. For instance, the mayor ignores the fact that she created a password for K.J. to log into the mayor’s Facebook account under the mayor’s credentials. She (the mayor) also ignores the facts that she was fully aware that K.J. was posting on the town’s Facebook page, that she gave K.J. material to post, and that she also allowed K.J. to upload posts to the town’s Facebook page on her own volition. Most importantly, the mayor ignores the fact that, according to K.J., whenever the mayor gave her material to post, it was material the mayor wanted to her to upload on all her social media platforms, including the town’s Facebook page. The mayor gave K.J. the campaign flyer to post and did not instruct her to refrain from posting it to the town’s Facebook page. To the extent that the mayor alleges in her response that we reported that she ordered K.J. to remove the post, we made no such statement. To the contrary, we reported that the mayor told K.J. to leave the post on the town’s Facebook page—a post we assert was illegal and a misuse of position. We observe that, in making this false allegation, the mayor freely admits to both the illegality of the post and her desire to keep the illegal post on the town’s page. 37 While we did not include the snapshots of these posts with administrator details in our preliminary report, considering the exhibits the mayor included in her response, we now include them in the final report. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 31 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK In summary, contrary to the mayor’s suggestion, the unlawful post was not the product of a confused campaign worker who erroneously uploaded one political post to the town’s Facebook. Instead, it was an intentional post by the mayor’s campaign worker of a campaign flyer that the mayor provided her to post it on all the mayor’s social media pages, including the town’s Facebook page, as she routinely did to increase the mayor’s online presence ahead of the election. The mayor next maintains that she did not violate the resign to run law where, according to her, she resigned “to the proper Town designated entity to receive such notice,” the assistant town manager. The mayor contends—surely to the town’s and deputy town clerk’s surprise—that the town has no deputy town clerk. The extension of that argument is that there is no qualifying officer for town elections. As we explained in our report, the resign to run law requires the subject officer to submit the requisite resignation to the qualifying official for the position the subject officer presently holds. In an attack of Deputy Town Clerk M.M.’s position, the mayor says that Code § 2-176 directed the town to designate the deputy town clerk by resolution and claims that no resolution existed doing so. According to the mayor, the only resolution that existed was resolution 2020-063 “which promoted” M.M. from deputy town clerk to administrative services director on, or about, May 27, 2020. This contention is disappointingly disingenuous. To begin with, although Code § 2-176 did not direct the town to designate its deputy town clerk through resolution, such is inconsequential where the commission, including the mayor, voted unanimously to adopt resolution 19-12-04, a resolution the mayor signed entering into an agreement with M.M. for interim deputy town clerk services on December 11, 2019. (Exhibit 15) Furthermore, while the mayor attempts to cast resolution 2020-063 as one promoting M.M. to the position of administrative services director, again her suggestion is disputed by the actual resolution that did not promote her but instead acknowledged that the town did retain her as an interim deputy town clerk and “appoint” her to administrative services director. (Exhibit 16) We note that the administrative services director position includes oversight of the clerk’s office. In addition to the mayor’s illogic in attempting to defend her conduct of giving her resignation to the assistant town manager, there is another reason to reject this defense. The mayor’s defense neglects a key fact outlined the report, namely, the fact that M.M. herself, using her deputy town clerk email and signature block, contacted the mayor on the date the resignation was due to remind the mayor that she (M.M.) needed to receive the appropriate documentation from the mayor, inform the commission of the mayor’s resignation, and prepare for a possible special election. At that point, if the mayor genuinely believed that M.M. was not the correct qualifying official, she should have protested that M.M. was not the deputy town clerk. And, as the town’s mayor, at any point in time since May, she should have acted on this fatal flaw in the town’s legal construct to protect the town’s interests. Rather, she simply ignored the deputy town clerk’s email. The mayor also criticizes the OIG for its erroneous finding that, because she violated the resign to run law, she forfeited her office. But we made no such finding or suggestion. We determined that the mayor failed to properly resign pursuant to the resign to the law. As the failure to do so OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 32 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK amounted to a violation of the law, it was misconduct. The only other finding we made about her failure to properly resign was that she also executed a false oath swearing or affirming that she correctly resigned, which false oath is a separate violation that carries with it separate penalties. We stand by this finding—indeed, now more so, given the mayor’s hollow rationale for why she did not submit a resignation to the qualifying officer. Finally, the mayor denied that she used town staff, town property, and her own credentials to benefit her law firm or herself. The thrust of her denial is based on her own assertions as well as her contention that, as she became a lawyer one month before the town hired J.G., J.G. could not have seen her make copies for her law school. We reject the mayor’s position that this fact alone was fatal to all J.G.’s credibility, as it ignored (1) J.G.’s statements that she also made copies for the mayor’s law practice after law school and observed the mayor making copies for her law practice as well and (2) the fact T.C. stated she observed the mayor doing the same and produced ample records that clearly corroborated her statements. Given our observations as described above, we wholly reject the mayor’s explanations and defense of her misconduct as described in this report. CONCLUSIONS The OIG has concluded its investigation into a number of concerns about whether Pembroke Park Mayor Mohammed committed ethics and elections misconduct by using the town’s resources and her official position to benefit her law firm, her campaign for another political office, and herself. We substantiated these concerns. While running for a seat in the state house in the August 2020 election, the mayor violated Florida’s “Little Hatch Act” when she arranged for a paid member of her campaign to use the town’s Facebook page, as the mayor, to influence votes and affect the outcome of her campaign. The mayor wrongfully used her administrator privileges on the town’s Facebook page to secure this benefit for her campaign and herself; thus, she also engaged in misuse of position, a violation of Florida’s ethics laws. The investigation also uncovered that the mayor engaged in misconduct by failing to timely and properly resign her seat on the town commission before qualifying for state office, in violation of Florida’s resign to run law. But as or more concerning was that, thereafter, she swore an oath that she had resigned pursuant to the law when she knew she had not. This was further misconduct under the election code. We also substantiated the original allegations when we found several incidents in which the mayor wrongfully used the town’s resources—that is, the town’s facilities, equipment, and personnel—and her mayoral credentials for the benefit of her law firm and herself but for no public purpose. The town acknowledged our findings and informed us as to the steps it has taken to ensure that town employees only use town resources for town business, including the implementation of a policy to restrict the number of employees with access to the town’s social media pages as well as the review of the town’s employee code of conduct to determine whether to clarify its guidelines. We value these OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 33 of 34 BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT RE: ELECTORAL AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT BY THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK efforts, as they demonstrate the town’s appreciation for the proper use of its resources for the public interest. In her response, the mayor made assertions about the report’s findings, the law, witnesses’ credibility, and facts. In one representative example, she asserted that, in trying to fulfill the mandates of the resign to run law, she submitted her resignation to the wrong official because the town has no deputy town clerk—and thus no qualifying official for election filing purposes. Notwithstanding the mayor’s various assertions and defenses, the response did not negate our findings. In accordance with our charter mandate, we are referring this matter to the Florida Elections Commission, the Florida Commission on Ethics, and the Broward State Attorney for whatever action those agencies deem appropriate. OIG 20-001 September 24, 2020 Page 34 of 34 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 1 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Breece, Carol "Chris Ryan" Ashira Mohammed RE: OIG Request Thursday, June 18, 2020 12:34:26 PM image001.png image003.png Good afternoon, Mr. Ryan:   This is to acknowledge receipt of your email below.   Sincerely,   Carol "Jodie" Breece General Counsel Broward Office of the Inspector General 1 N. University Drive, Suite 111 Plantation, Fla.  33324 Direct:  954-357-7815 Main:  954-357-7873 www.browardIG.org OIG Ethics Home Page 954-357-TIPS (8477)         From: Chris Ryan Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 11:28 AM To: Breece, Carol Cc: Ashira Mohammed Subject: FW: OIG Request     External Email Warning:  This email originated from outside the Broward County email system. Do not reply, click links, or open attachments unless you recognize the sender’s email address (not just the name) as legitimate and know the content is safe.  Report any suspicious emails to ETSSecurity@broward.org. Good morning, Mayor Ashira Mohammed requested that I forward the email below relating to a posting on Facebook to you. Mayor Mohammed stated that she requested that I send the email to you on April 30, 2020, however, apparently there was a miscommunication between the Mayor and me regarding her request. Thank you. Chris   Christopher J. Ryan Ryan & Ryan, LLC 700 East Dania Beach Boulevard Third Floor Dania Beach, FL 33004 Phone: (954) 920-2921 Fax: (954) 921-1247 Email: cjr@ryanlawfl.com   Board Certified City, County and Local Government Law   THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY REPLY E-MAIL AND DELETE THIS MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.   From: ashira mohammed [mailto:ashira.ann@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 4:09 PM To: Chris Ryan Subject: OIG Request       Hi Chris,   I think I found the reason why the OIG requested the administrators of Facebook. I have two different social media people handling my personal Facebook page because I am social media illiterate. A while back someone linked me to the Town’s Facebook page where I have the ability to post on it.  When my social media person ( Doing Good In The Hood president) posted she accidentally posted to my fb page and my political page, my twitter page and the town’s page. She immediately removed it but screenshotted it before deleting it. I explained to her not to post anything political to the town’s page. I left a message to my other administrator as well. I apologize for the mistake and take full responsibility for it and it will never happen again. Any questions please let me know. Thank you. OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 2 CANDIDATE OATH STATE AND LOCAL PARTISAN OFFICE Check applicable one: Candidate with party affiliation Candidate with no party affiliation Write-in candidate OFFICE USE ONLY Candidate Oath (Section 99.021(1)(a), Florida Statutes) I, (Print name above as you wish it to appear on the ballot. If your last name consists of two or more names but has no hyphen, check box . (See page 2 - Compound Last Names). No change can be made after the end of qualifying. Although a write-in candidate’s name is not printed on the ballot, the name must be printed above for oath purposes.) am a candidate for the office of , (Office) , , (District #) ; I am a qualified elector of (Circuit #) County, Florida; I am qualified (Group or Seat #) under the Constitution and the Laws of Florida to hold the office to which I desire to be nominated or elected; I have qualified for no other public office in the state, the term of which office or any part thereof runs concurrent with the office I seek; and I have resigned from any office from which I am required to resign pursuant to Section 99.012, Florida Statutes; and I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida. Statement of Party (Section 99.021(1)(b), Florida Statutes) (Complete Statement of Party only if you are seeking to qualify for nomination as a party candidate.) I am a member of the _______________________________ Party; I have not been a registered member of any other political party for 365 days before the beginning of qualifying preceding the general election for which I seek to qualify; and I have paid the assessment levied against me, if any, as a candidate for said office by the executive committee of the political party, of which I am a member. Candidate’s Florida Voter Registration Number (located on your voter information card): ______________________________ Phonetic spelling for audio ballot: Print name phonetically on the line below as you wish it to be pronounced on the audio ballot as may be used by persons with disabilities (see instructions on page 2 of this form): [Not applicable to write-in candidates.] ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ X ( ) Signature of Candidate Telephone Number Address City STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF _____________ Email Address State ZIP Code ______________________________________________ Signature of Notary Public Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public below: Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this_______ day of __________________, 20_____. Personally Known: ______ or Produced Identification: ______ Type of Identification Produced: _____________________________ DS-DE 301SL (Rev. 11/17) Rule 1S-2.0001, F.A.C. Compound Last Names If your last name consists of two or more names and has no hyphen, check the box in the Candidate Oath section. If you fail to check the box, your name will be listed with the name appearing last on the line. Example: John Jones Smith – If the last name has no hyphen and you do not check the box, the last name on the ballot would be “Smith”. If you check the box, your last name would be listed on the ballot as “Jones Smith.” If you have a hyphen within your last name, the last name would be listed as “Jones-Smith”. Guide for Designating Phonetic Spelling of Candidate’s Name for Audio Ballot 1. 2. 3. 4. Use tables below. Use upper case for “stressed” syllables. Use lower case for “unstressed” syllables. Use dashes (-) to separate syllables. Add any notes such as rhyming examples, silent letters, etc. Vowels Stressed Vowel Sounds (FEET) feet EE (FIT) fit I (BED) bed E (KAT) cat (KAD) cad A (FAH-thur) father (PAHR) par AH (HAHT) hot (TAH-dee) toddy AH (FUHJ) fudge (FLUHD) flood UH (CHUHRCH) church UH (FAWN) fawn AW (FUL) full U (FOOD) food OO (FOUND) found OU (FO) foe O (FEIT) fight EI (FAIT) fate AI (FOIL) foil OI (FYOOR-ee-uhs) furious YOO Unstressed Vowel Sounds (SO-fuh) sofa (FING-guhr) finger uh Certain Vowel Sounds with R (PAHR) par AHR (PER) pair ER (PIR) peer IR (POR) pour OR (POOR) poor OOR (PUHR) purr UHR Consonants B D F G H HW J K L M N NG P (BED) bed (DET) debt (FED) fed (GET) get (HED) head (HWICH) which (JUHG) jug (KAD) cad (LAIM) lame (MAT) mat (NET) net (SING-uhr) singer (PET) pet R S T V Y W CH SH TS TH TH ZH Z (RED) red (SET) set (TEN) ten (VET) vet (YET) yet (WICH) witch (CHUCRCH) church (SHEEP) sheep (ITS) its (PITS-feeld) Pittsfield (THEI) Thigh (THEI) Thy (A-zhuhr) azure (VI-zhuhn) vision (GOODZ) goods (HUH-buhz-tuhn) Hubbardston Examples of Phonetically Spelled Names NAME ON BALLOT PRONOUNCED AS Mishaud mee-SHO (‘d’ is silent) Jahn HAHN (rhyme: fawn) Beauprez boo-PRAI (rhyme: hooray) Maniscalco man-uh-SKAL-ko Tangipahoa TAN-ji-pah-HO-uh Monte Mahn-TAI Tanya TAWN-yuh (not TAN) Do not submit this page to the filing officer. DS-DE 301SL (Rev. 11/17) Rule 1S-2.0001, F.A.C. OIG 20-001 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 3 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 4 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 5 OIG 20-001 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 6 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 7   Good afternoon Mayor,   I spoke with the Town Attorney regarding your candidacy as State Representative.   If you are moving forward with qualifying for the seat, it is my understanding there is a qualifying period and documents which need to be filed.  I would also need to officially inform the Commission of your written resignation.  At your convenience please provide me with a copy of the documents to have available for the Commission and entered into public records.    As the Elections Supervisor for the Town, if need be, I would like to start preparing for a possible special election.   Wishing you much success in future endeavors.    Regards, Marlen D. Martell, MPA, CFM Deputy Town Clerk     Town of Pembroke Park 3150 SW 52 Avenue Pembroke Park, FL  33023 (954) 966-4600 x:235 (Office) (954) 966-5186 (Fax)   Let’s move our Town forward           From: Michele Jenkins-Devito [mailto:MJenkins-Devito@browardsoe.org] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 12:02 PM To: Town Clerk Subject: 2020 Elections - Q050 - Q051   Dear Facility Manager:   On behalf of the voters of Broward County, we sincerely thank you for the use of your facility during our election cycles.  Using your facility allows us to accommodate voters in your neighborhood.   As we prepare for the upcoming Election Cycle, we would like to know if there have been any changes to your facility and to make sure the following dates on your calendar have already been reserved: Primary Election - August 18, 2020   General Election - November 3, 2020  As an aid in helping us prepare for these elections, we would appreciate you taking your time to review this information and inform us via telephone, email or fax of any changes that have occurred.   Michele Jenkins-DeVito (email: mjenkins-devito@browardsoe.org or fax: 954-587-6763).  She may be reached at 954-712-1924 to address any concerns. Again, thank you for your commitment and continuing cooperation with our office and to the voters, making 2020 another successful Election Year.                     Sincerely,                 Broward County Supervisor of Elections Office       Thank you, Michele Jenkins-DeVito Precinct Coordinator Broward County Supervisor of Elections Office 1501 NW 40th Ave. Lauderhill, FL 33313 (954) 712-1924 Office (954) 770-3841 Cell (954) 587-6763 Fax mjenkins-devito@browardsoe.org      Under Florida law, most e-mail messages to or from Broward County Supervisor of Elections Office are public records available to inspect or copy upon request. Therefore, any e-mail message made or received by the Supervisor’s Office, inclusive of any e-mail address contained therein, may be subject to public disclosure.   /******************* EMAIL DISCLAIMER *******************/ Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from Town Officials and employees regarding Town business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure. OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 8 OIG 20-001 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 9 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 10 6/12/2020 Mayor telephone and email protocol.txt From: Ashira Mohammed Subject: telephone and email protocol Date: April 18, 2019 at 7:24:30 AM EDT To: Natasha Joseph Cc: Chris Ryan , swoodbury@townofpembrokepark.com To all staff: Pease be advised that after receiving numerous complaints from the public, as well as, other staff members this memo is to be circulated to all staff members and to go into effect immediately�.Maintaining high standards in business communication is a sign of professionalism. Poorly structured and untimely responses � whether via email, postal mail or voicemail � make people feel underappreciated and undervalued and makes us look unprofessional. We are professionals and represent a government agency and need to conduct ourselves accordingly. Telephone protocol : Please answer the phone by the third ring. When communicating with the public always be courteous. � Use respectful and considerate words and phrases, such as: ? "I'm sorry.� ? "Thank you.� ? "Please.� ? "May I take a message?� ? "Would you like to leave your number?� ? "May I put you on hold?� ? "I'm sorry to keep you waiting.� ? "He's away from his desk. May I have him return your call?� � Don't use words and phrases such as: ? "Huh?� ? "Yeah.� ? "I don't know where he is.� ? "She's at lunch. Call back later.� ? "He's not here.� ? "I don't know where he is or when he'll be back.� Voicemail Please return calls within 48 hours. In the event that the voice message comes in on a Friday please respond by the end of business on Monday. If someone is on vacation please set an auto response to respond advising that said person is out of the office for the duration of time and if this item needs responding to before then who they should contact. If a response requires time to investigate please acknowledge the message by returning the call and informing the person that it will take time to complete the request and give an estimate of how long it will take to complete the task. Please keep voicemail boxes free to receive additional messages. Under no circumstances should mailboxes be full and unable to accept a message. This is very unprofessional for a business. Email protocol: Please open and respond to all emails within 48 hours is good etiquette. In the event that the email comes in on a Friday please respond by the end of business on Monday. If someone is on vacation please set an auto response to respond advising that said person is out of the office for the duration of time and if this item needs responding to before then who they should contact. If a response requires time to investigate please acknowledge the email by replying that it will take to complete the request and give an estimate of how long it will take to complete the task. Email � Subject Line Use an appropriate heading in the email subject line. A heading that is specific to the customer's concerns lets him know you have crafted an individual response rather than sending along a form letter. For example, the heading "response time issues" works better than "your recent concerns.� When sending email both internal and external from the copy machine always include a relevant subject line �send data from MFP11839410� is not a relevant subject line. https://townofpembrokepark.civicweb.net/document/11928 1/2 6/12/2020 Mayor telephone and email protocol.txt Email or Letter Content Open the letter or email with an expression of thanks, such as "Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding ... ." This lets a sender know you read his note and sets the stage for a reasoned response. It also conveys gratitude that the sender took the time to write to us. Next, get straight to the point, addressing the sender's concern directly and succinctly. Provide any explanation as to why the sender encountered a problem, or what steps are necessary to complete his request and timeframe to complete request. Close the letter by thanking the sender for his input and providing a phone number or email address to which he can forward further concerns or follow up regarding his request. Those failing to comply will be disciplined, failure to repeatedly comply will result in termination. /******************* EMAIL DISCLAIMER *******************/ Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from Town Officials and employees regarding Town business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure. https://townofpembrokepark.civicweb.net/document/11928 2/2 OIG 20-001 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 11 From: To: Bcc: Subject: Date: Importance: Schmidt, Amy "amohammed@townofpembrokepark.com"; "ashira.ann@gmail.com" McIntire, Katherine Please Contact Friday, June 12, 2020 2:21:43 PM High Mayor Mohammed, Good afternoon.  I have been trying to contact you.  Could you please give me a call or respond to this email.  I would like to schedule an interview with you. My contact information is listed below. Thank you, Amy Schmidt, Special Agent Broward Office of the Inspector General One North University Drive, Suite 111 Plantation, Florida, 33324 Phone: 954-357-7893 Fax: 954-357-7857 aschmidt@broward.org www.browardig.org REPORT FRAUD 954-357-TIPS From: To: Bcc: Subject: Date: Schmidt, Amy "amohammed@townofpembrokepark.com"; "ashira.ann@gmail.com" McIntire, Katherine; Breece, Carol; Winfield, Robert Request for Interview Tuesday, June 16, 2020 3:37:50 PM Good afternoon, Mayor Mohammed: I have been trying to reach you through your email and your cell phone since June 9, 2020.  The Charter of Broward County, at Section 10.01(B)(10), directs our office to interview all persons “implicated” during an OIG investigation.  Our investigation has identified you as an implicated person.  Accordingly, the Broward Office of the Inspector General (OIG) requests to interview you in connection with the investigation.  Please notify me at 954-906-0219 or aschmidt@broward.org by 3:30 p.m. on Monday, June 22, 2020, to arrange a date and time for an interview to take place the week of June 22, 2020 or to convey your declination of our offer. If you do not respond by 3:30 p.m. on Monday, June 22, 2020, the OIG will consider you to have waived any protections the Charter affords you. Amy Schmidt, Special Agent Broward Office of the Inspector General One North University Drive, Suite 111 Plantation, Florida, 33324 Phone: 954-357-7893 Fax: 954-357-7857 aschmidt@broward.org www.browardig.org REPORT FRAUD 954-357-TIPS From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: ashira mohammed Schmidt, Amy Levi Williams; chad@leviwilliamslaw.com Re: Request for Interview Monday, June 22, 2020 4:04:54 PM External Email Warning:  This email originated from outside the Broward County email system. Do not reply, click links, or open attachments unless you recognize the sender’s email address (not just the name) as legitimate and know the content is safe.  Report any suspicious emails to ETSSecurity@broward.org. Good afternoon Ms. Schmidt, I am in receipt of your two emails, one dated 6/12, as well as 6/16. I am currently in the process of securing payment for counsel as you have indicated that I am an implicated person and will not make an appearance without counsel. As, soon as this is secured he will be contacting you. If you have any other questions please feel free to email me or him. Thank you.  From: "Schmidt, Amy" Date: June 16, 2020 at 3:37:50 PM EDT To: "amohammed@townofpembrokepark.com" , "ashira.ann@gmail.com" Subject: Request for Interview Good afternoon, Mayor Mohammed:   I have been trying to reach you through your email and your cell phone since June 9, 2020.  The Charter of Broward County, at Section 10.01(B) (10), directs our office to interview all persons “implicated” during an OIG investigation.  Our investigation has identified you as an implicated person.  Accordingly, the Broward Office of the Inspector General (OIG) requests to interview you in connection with the investigation.    Please notify me at 954-906-0219 or aschmidt@broward.org by 3:30 p.m. on Monday, June 22, 2020, to arrange a date and time for an interview to take place the week of June 22, 2020 or to convey your declination of our offer.   If you do not respond by 3:30 p.m. on Monday, June 22, 2020, the OIG will consider you to have waived any protections the Charter affords you.       Amy Schmidt, Special Agent Broward Office of the Inspector General One North University Drive, Suite 111 Plantation, Florida, 33324 Phone: 954-357-7893 Fax: 954-357-7857 aschmidt@broward.org www.browardig.org REPORT FRAUD 954-357-TIPS   Under Florida law, most e-mail messages to or from Broward County employees or officials are public records, available to any person upon request, absent an exemption. Therefore, any e-mail message to or from the County, inclusive of e-mail addresses contained therein, may be subject to public disclosure. From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: McIntire, Katherine "ashira.ann@gmail.com" Schmidt, Amy Re: Request for Interview Tuesday, June 23, 2020 11:22:27 AM Good morning, Mayor Mohammed:   I am in receipt of your June 22,2020 email to Special Agent Amy Schmidt, time stamped 4:05 p.m., wherein you inform that you are in the process of securing payment for counsel.  It is my understanding that we have made multiple attempts to contact you since June 9, 2020.  It is also my understanding that, in our latest attempt, we asked that you respond by 3:30 p.m. on Monday, June 22, 2020 to either convey your declination of our offer to interview or to schedule an interview to take place this week, the week of June 22, 2020.   As you have done neither, we will continue with our investigation using the information we have available.  Should you secure counsel prior to the distribution of any product that we may prepare in conjunction with our investigation, please have him or her contact me in a timely fashion so that we may discuss the possibility of conducting your interview at that point.   Sincerely,         Katherine Yzquierdo McIntire, Senior Assistant Legal Counsel Broward Office of the Inspector General One North University Drive, Suite 111 Plantation, Florida 33324 Phone: 954-357-7812 Fax: 954-357-7857 www.browardig.org   REPORT FRAUD 954-357-TIPS (8477)     OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 12 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Importance: Chad Marcus Schmidt, Amy; McIntire, Katherine Levi Williams; Assistant Two 1196.00 OIG 20-001: Mayor Ashira Mohammed Wednesday, August 19, 2020 3:04:27 PM High External Email Warning:  This email originated from outside the Broward County email system. Do not reply, click links, or open attachments unless you recognize the sender’s email address (not just the name) as legitimate and know the content is safe.  Report any suspicious emails to ETSSecurity@broward.org. Good day,   I hope all is well and everyone is staying safe. Please be advised that the undersigned firm has been retained by Mayor Mohammed in regards to OIG 20-001. Please send all communications to our office from this point forward. Further, we are in receipt of the Preliminary Report dated August 19, 2019 and are in the process of reviewing. We may need an extension to respond and will keep you apprised. If you could please send us a PDF version that would be greatly appreciated.   We look forward to working with your office and resolving this matter amicably for all parties involved.   Thanks   _______________________________     “…the building blocks of success” Chad Marcus,Esq. Attorney at Law Law Offices of Levi Williams, P.A. Legacy Bank Building 12 S.E. 7th Street Suite 710 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 (Ph:) 954-463-1626 (Fax) 954-463-1630 http://www.leviwilliamslaw.com chad@leviwilliamslaw.com     NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message may be PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed since it may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material.  Any review, reproduction, distribution, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this email by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is unlawful, unauthorized, and prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, printing, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately reply to the sender that you received this communication in error and then delete it from all computers. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the Law Offices of Levi Williams, P.A.   IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: Please note that, unless expressly indicated, the views expressed herein or in any attachments hereto are not intended to constitute a “reliance opinion” under applicable Treasury Regulations and accordingly are not intended or written to be used, and may not be used or relied upon, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, or (ii)  promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matters addressed herein.     OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 13 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 14 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 15 OIG 20-001 EXHIBIT 16 9/22/2020 2020-063 Admin Service Directo Deputy Town Clerk Marlen Martell RESOLUTION 2020-063 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK, FLORIDA, APPOINTING MARLEN MARTELL AS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR; SUPERSEDING CONFLICTING RESOLUTIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Town retained the services of Marlen Martell to serve as Interim Deputy Town Clerk on an independent contractor basis on December 11, 2019; and WHEREAS, Marlen Martell has demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the duties and responsibilities of the office of municipal clerk; and WHEREAS, Marlen Martell has devoted exceptional energy and diligence to organize the Town municipal clerk records and to implement procedures for the orderly operation of the Town clerk’s office; and WHEREAS, the Town Commission desires to appoint Marlen Martell to the position of Administrative Services Director. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK, FLORIDA: Section 1: The Town Commission does hereby appoint Marlen Martell to serve as Administrative Services Director for the Town of Pembroke Park, and she is directed to undertake the duties and responsibilities of Administrative Services Director as set forth in Section 2-99, Pembroke Park Code of Ordinances. Section 2: That Marlen Martell shall serve in the office of Administrative Services Director at the pleasure of the Town Commission, and shall be paid such compensation as may be authorized by the Town Commission. Section 3: That all Resolutions or parts of Resolutions in conflict herewith be and the same are superseded to the extent of such conflict. Section 4: That this Resolution shall be in force and take effect immediately upon its passage and adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2020. ATTEST: ____________________________________ ASHIRA A. MOHAMMED Mayor-Commissioner GEOFFREY JACOBS Clerk-Commissioner L:\Lissette\Chris\Town of Pembroke Park\Resolutions\2020\Resolution N0. 2020- Marlen Martell.FN24657E.docx 1 https://townofpembrokepark.civicweb.net/document/13008 1/1 OIG 20-001 APPENDIX A OIG 20-001 APPENDIX B Joseph S. Geller, Partner PNC Building 200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1800 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Phone: 954.491.1120 Fax: 954.771.9264 Direct Phone: 954.331.2036 Direct Fax: 954.331.2037 Email: joseph.geller@gmlaw.com RESPONSE BY MAYOR ASHIRA MOHAMMED The Preliminary Report of the OIG Regarding the Mayor of Pembroke Park relies on unreliable witnesses, misconstrues certain facts and statutory authorities, and should be Recalled for further proceedings. Introduction The Preliminary Report of the OIG (Report) relies on a few witnesses, but some of their testimony is shown to be unreliable by the very contents of the Report itself. They demonstrate that these witnesses cannot have actual knowledge of c4ertain matters to which they testify. Moreover, the Report reaches some of its conclusions based on assumptions as to certain facts, which are unwarranted based on the actual evidence adduced, and are contrary to objective reality. Some of these conclusions are based on mere speculation. In addition, the Report misconstrues the effect of certain Florida Statutes (such as the Resignto-Run Law and the “Little Hatch Act” in a way that leads to incorrect conclusions of law. Finally, the Report states that the “declined” to interview with the OIG. Although no interview was conducted, despite several offers by the OIG, the Mayor ultimately responded (albeit a few hours past a deadline set by the OIG) that she was willing to interview, but had to arrange for counsel to represent her, which was delayed both by the Covid pandemic and by certain personal matters which occupied the Mayor’s attention. As she now has counsel in place, the Mayor requests the recall of the Preliminary Report, and that a prompt interview be arranged (virtually, of course), to consider the matters raised herein, and other information the Mayor can provide, to insure that the interests of justice are served, and to clear up some obvious misconceptions and erroneous conclusions reached in the Preliminary Report. I. The Mayor Engaged in Misconduct During an Election Campaign 1. The Mayor Used Her Official Authority to Influence Votes by Using the Town’s Social Media Platform to Advertise Her Campaign Response: The town’s Facebook post of April 13, 2020 (herein after referred to as the “Post”), thanking essential workers for their hard work during the pandemic, was not a misuse of the Page 1 of 12 Mayor’s official authority. The Post was inadvertently and erroneously posted to the Town’s Facebook page1. Mayor Mohammed is aware that political posts are not permitted on the town’s Facebook page.2 The Post itself was not improper but for the erroneous inclusion of the Mayor’s campaign logo on the lower right hand corner of the Post. No campaign message or political exhortation was included with the text, only the logo containing the candidate’s name and the office she was seeking. This one-time inadvertent mistake was certainly unauthorized, but was a never-repeated unintentional error. The Town of Pembroke Park’s Facebook page was created on January 16, 2013. Exhibit 2. This is one of many inaccurate statements of fact contained in the Report, as the Report states that said page was created in “approximately 2016 to 2017.” The Report also states that because Mayor Mohammed was involved in the administration of the town’s Facebook page, she is deemed “literate in social media”, an unwarranted assumption.. Mayor Mohammed was involved in the brainstorming of the page with other town officials, just as she is in many other Town projects. That does not make Mayor Mohammed “literate in social media”, as the Report concludes. In fact, K.J., a witness interviewed by the OIG,stated that Mayor Mohammed told her that she was not very social media literate. Mayor Mohammed stated the same to Town Attorney Chris Ryan,, when she explained the accidental and unintentional political post to the Town’s Facebook page. Rpt. Ex. 1, pg. The email attached hereto as Exhibit 3, clearly evidences that Joseline Ramirez, Code Enforcement Officer, posted the flyer for the food drive give away. Additionally, Town emails indicate that Ms. Ramirez also posted the 2019 turkey giveaway and holiday toy giveaway 1 The Post was also posted to Mayor Mohammed’s personal Facebook page, Mayor Mohammed’s campaign Facebook page and Mayor Mohammed’s Instagram. Exhibit 1. 2 In her interview, K.J. told the OIG that she knew that she could not post campaign material to the page. Page 2 of 12 events3, a fact about which witness K.J. was apparently confused. . Exhibits 4, 5. Further, it is also unclear from the evidence adduced as to who was in fact the person that was responsible for the postings described in footnote 9 of the Report. The Report concludes that the Post was actually part of Mayor Mohammed’s ongoing effort, dating back to at least January 2020, aimed at benefiting her campaign for state office by increasing her online presence. It appears that the OIG believes that any public official who is a candidate for office can never inform the public as to any of their accomplishments in office, or express their views in any manner, in any official capacity, lest the public decide that they agree with the public official, and conclude that they want to see the official elected to office again. To decide to thank first responders is a perfectly appropriate, and indeed laudable, thing for a Mayor to do, and to post that on a Town page is entirely appropriate. The mere fact that some citizens may appreciate the gesture, and reinforce their favorable opinion of the Mayor and their support of her candidacy for higher office, is not indicative of any misconduct; rather, it is called doing your job. But for the erroneous inclusion of the campaign logo,, there would be no issue with the Post. Further, as stated above, Mayor Mohammed utilizes three (3) other social media platforms in which she legally and lawfully posts political advertisements. There is no dispute that K.J. was tasked by Mayor Mohammed’s campaign team with assisting with social media. The mere fact that one (1) post was inadvertently posted to the town’s Facebook page does not indicate that Mayor Mohammed intentionally used the town’s Facebook page to benefit her campaign. There were no other instances in which Mayor Mohammed posted a political advertisement on the Town’s Facebook page or any of the Town’s other social media platforms. This one-time mistake further evidences a lack of intent on the part of Mayor Mohammed. 3 Each and every flyer posted to the town’s Facebook page is also contemporaneously posted to the town’s Instagram. The only flyer not posted on Instagram was the Post. Page 3 of 12 Mayor Mohammed did not knowingly and/or intentionally have the Post posted to the Town’s Facebook page. K.J. inadvertently posted the Post as she did not notice the mayor’s campaign logo on the bottom of the flyer. Mayor Mohammed only became aware of the problem with the Post when she was informed that the OIG had requested information concerning it., While the Report states that she immediately ordered that K.J. remove the Post from the town’s page, in fact, the Mayor told her to leave it up.. Although it appears that the OIG inadvertently overlooked this fact, Mayor Mohammed did not want the erroneous post deleted out of concern that to do so would be to destroy a public record. The Mayor only wanted the Post to be removed from public view, while being retained so that there was an accurate record of the mistake. Under all of these circumstances, it is apparent that there was no violation of the Little Hatch Act, Fla. Stat. § 112.311(1) and Fla. Stat. § 112.313(6).4 2. The Mayor Did Not Properly Resign Her Mayoral Office to Run for Another Office Response: The next issue is whether the Mayor’s tender of her “resign to run” notice was (1) given to the “officer before whom he or she qualified for the office he or she holds;” and (2) whether her tender to the designated entities under F.S. §99.012(3)(e) was timely, pursuant to F.S. §99.012(3)(c). At all times material hereto, the Mayor submitted her resignation in a good faith effort to substantially comply with the law. The Mayor maintains that she properly tendered her resign to run notice to the proper Town designated entity to receive such notice. The Mayor mailed her notice to the State and hand delivered a copy to the Town on May 29, 2020. The hand delivered Notice was placed in the Assistant Town Manager’s, Newall Page 4 of 12 Daughtrey, mailbox, as he was the Acting Town Manager at all times material hereto, due to the Town Manager’s position being vacated by Agatha Muse-Salters. Why the Assistant Town Manager? The Mayor will testify and affirm that in her seventeen years on the Commission, she had an opportunity to serve as the Clerk Commissioner and she never had the responsibility to take any action in qualifying candidates for election or certifying an election. This operational fact is in contradiction to the Town’s Code, Ch. 8, Art. II and Art. III, Sec. 8-31 et seq., and Sec. 8-35 in particular, but it is nonetheless the reality of how the Town operates. The Town’s ordinances are devoid of any provisions for any official performing election tasks other than the Clerk Commissioner. Even assuming that the duties of the Clerk Commissioner were delegated to the Deputy Town Clerk per Code §1-1, at the time of the Mayor’s submission there was not a designated Deputy Town Clerk. The previously properly designated Town Clerk was Natasha Joseph. Ms. Joseph’s employment ended with the Town on or about December 11, 2019. The Town’s Code §2-176 creates the position of Coordinator with an added duty as that of the Deputy Town Clerk. It states: Position of coordinator established: There is hereby established the position of Coordinator on behalf of the Town of efforts to comply with the provisions of section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, including the resolution of complaints of alleged discrimination on the basis of handicapped status, which individual shall be a Deputy Town Clerk of the Town. Such individual shall be designated by the Town Commission by resolution to serve at the pleasure of the Town Commission. The Town’s Code §2-176 requires the designation of the Deputy Town Clerk to be made by resolution. No such resolution existed prior to the Mayor’s submission of her notice to resign to run. As a matter of fact, the only relevant resolution adopted during this time was RESOLUTION 2020-063, which promoted Ms. Marlen Martell from the position of Deputy Town Clerk to the position of Administrative Services Director, on or about Wednesday, May 27, 2020. The Page 5 of 12 Administrative Services Director position under Code §2-99 provides for the following job description: The Administrative Services Director shall serve under the general supervision of the Town Manager and will provide support to the Town Manager by serving as a liaison on major projects; managing the oversight and effectiveness of including, but not limited to, the Administration, Clerk's Office, Code Enforcement, Finance and Budget, Human Resources, and Information Technology departments and other divisions as assigned; supervision and directing staff; and expediting resolution of certain matters. While this job description provides for “managing the oversight and effectiveness of …Clerk’s Office…”, it does not designate her as the Deputy Town Clerk, just as it does not designate her as the Code Enforcement Officer. Thus, effectively, the Town was at all times material hereto and to this date remains without a legally designated Coordinator or Deputy Town Clerk. On the other hand, Code §2-94(a) clearly designates to the Town Manager the following duty: The Town Manager is in charge of and responsible for overseeing the Town’s compliance with including, but not limited to, all federal, state, county and local laws. Statutes, ordinances, resolutions, policies and procedures. Further to the above, Code §2-99 states that the Administrative Service Director “…shall serve under the general supervision of the Town Manager…” Thus, considering the failure of the Town to pass a resolution to duly appoint or hire a Coordinator with the code assigned duties of the Deputy Town Clerk, the Mayor tendered her resign to run notice to the proper authority, the Acting Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager Newall Daughtery. Finally, we address the issue of timeliness. The last day that the Mayor had to tender her notice of her intent to resign was Friday, May 29, 2020. As previously stated herein, the Mayor tendered her notice of intent to resign to the Town by hand delivery on that date, May 29, 2020, and on the same date she mailed the Town, the Governor, and the Department of State her Page 6 of 12 notice as well. The Mayor had occasion to be in Town Hall on the evening of May 29, and left the resignation in the Assistant Town Manager’s office at that time. No information is provided as to when the Assistant Town Manager checked his mailbox during this time. The Report does note that Ms. Martell advised that on Sunday, May 31, 2020 the Mayor advised her via phone that “she left her resignation in the assistant town manager’s mailbox at town hall.” Ms. Martell, stated that she did not retrieve the resignation until Monday, June 1, 2020. Ms. Martell stated that she did not date stamp the copy she retrieved from the Assistant Manager’s mailbox as a public record, , so theallegations that the lack of a date stamp is the best evidence that the Mayor did not submit her notice on time is inaccurate. The fact that the Mayor verbally advised Ms. Martell of the fact that she had left the letter for the Assistant Town Manager, during their phone call on Sunday, May 31, further supports the mayor’s assertion. it should further be noted that in May of 2020, much of Florida was still shut down in dealing with the COVID 19 crisis. Consequently, The Mayor maintains that her notices to the Town, Governor, and the Department of State were timely under the law. Most importantly, the OIG misperceives the function and operation of the Resign to Run law. The law imposes no duty on officeholders as to their continued service in office, as doing so would be illegal. Rather, it imposes an additional qualification on candidates for other office, namely that they resign an office they already hold in order to qualify for another office with an overlapping term. Failure to so resign, properly and timely, does not constitute a forfeiture of office, nor does it in any way impair the validity of the officeholder’s actions while they continue in office. It is, purely and simply, a failure to meet all of the qualification requirements to be a Page 7 of 12 candidate for the new office. While the Mayor could have been challenged in Court as to whether she had properly qualified for State Representative based on the timeliness of her resignation (in fact, she was not, and such a challenge almost certainly would have failed, based on the above facts), the suggestion that some question as to her qualification constitutes a separate violation of some law is simply not in keeping with what the statute provides. Her purported failure to timely resign was an issue for her opponents to raise during the campaign. Their failure to do so renders the controversy moot. 3. The Mayor Executed a False Candidate Oath Response: In this section, the OIG utilizes its analysis in section 2 above under the assumption that the Mayor’s tendering of her notices to resign to run were untimely and known to her to be untimely, therefore tainting her submission of her Candidate Oath under F.S §104.11 as “misconduct” under the theory of “willful blindness.” For the reasons set forth above, this charge must fail, as the Mayor properly submitted her resign to run notice. Moreover, it should be noted that the Mayor was unaware of any allegations of violation at the time she tendered her Candidate Oath on June 9, 2020.e Any possible violation under this section, could not habe been a knowing violation, much less willful blindness. The analysis in section 2 outlines the fact that the Mayor’s tender of her notices of intent to resign to run to the Town, Governor and Department of State were each timely and appropriate under the law. II. The Mayor Used Town Resources to Wrongfully Benefit Her Law Firm and Herself 4. Mayor Mohammed Used Town Staff and Property to Benefit Her Law Firm and Herself Response: Mayor Mohammed did not corruptly use the Town’s resources to secure a special benefit for herself and her law firm. Page 8 of 12 Mayor Mohammed completed her law studies at St. Thomas University School of Law in December of 2010, officially graduated in December of 2010, took the bar in February 2011 and was admitted as an attorney in the state of Florida on August 17, 2011. All of these events predate witness J.G’s employment5 with the Town of Pembroke Park and is fatal to all of the allegations made by J.G. in the Report, as she stated that she saw the Mayor use Town Resources to assist her in her law school studies.. Additionally, the allegation that J.G. was sent home during the workday because the Mayor needed to use the copy machine, which was in J.G.’s office, is meritless and illogical. J.G. was sent home due to the fact that she completed her weekly hours and the Town did not want to pay her overtime6.These allegations from a disgruntled, and ultimately discharged, former Town employee are not even internally consistent, and are also incompetent, and should be disregarded entirely. Another allegation is that Mayor Mohammed used the commission chambers area for work related to her law firm, as well as received phone calls for her law practice at Town Hall. Mayor Mohammed strenuously denies said allegations. She asserts that she did not conduct private business at Town Hall, and that any incorrect assumptions to the contrary are speculative, and wrong. Additionally, the Report alleges that Mayor Mohammed created a signature block for her personal emails that included her name, official title, the name of the Town and the address of Town Hall. Rpt. Ex. 9, pgs. 10-21. During the one instance cited, Mayor Mohammed was out of town and sent said emails from her iPhone, which had some of her mayoral credentials instead of her standard personal law practice credentials. Rtp. Ex. 9, pgs. 22-26. Other than this one instance, 5 J.G. employment began with the town of Pembroke Park in September of 2011. Rpt. pg. 17. 6 Under the FLSA, "overtime" means "time actually worked beyond a prescribed threshold." 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. Page 9 of 12 each and every one of the emails pertaining to her private law practice that the OIG mentioned, did not have Mayor Mohammed’s mayoral credentials. In fact, the OIG’s own exhibits evidence that Mayor Mohammed’s letterhead and standard email signature does not include the title “Mayor” and shows a phone number of (954) 235-4422, and not her direct line at city hall, as alleged. Rtp. Ex. 9, pgs. 11-21. Lastly, Mayor Mohammed did not use the town’s equipment to copy and/or scan documents for her private law practice.7 Mayor Mohammed has never handled family law or foreclosure cases during her legal career. Mayor Mohammed did occasionally do some research on issues for residents that came to her seeking help, but those residents were then referred to various agencies for assistance based on the research conducted by Mayor Mohammed. Any allegation regarding meeting with clients at Town Hall has not been substantiated and remain a speculative hearsay allegation at best. It did not occur. The Report itself states that the OIG did not attempt to corroborate the information provided by T.C. Had the OIG obtained the Town’s visitor’s log, it would show no wrongdoing on the part of the Mayor. Any clients of the Mayor that visited Town Hall were not there for legal consultation but were there to apply for open positions with the town and/or to delivered, pertinent information to the Mayor regarding the Town’s building department licenses, or for some other legitimate Town or municipal function. In sum, Mayor Mohammed did not use the Town’s resources to benefit herself nor her practice. The Report is void of any verifiable evidence, but instead is based on allegations offered by J.G. and T.C., which are based purely on supposition and are incompetent and without a scintilla of merit. 7 Mayor Mohammed worked exclusively for Rumrell, Bate, McLeod & Brock, PLLC from February 2014 to September 2014. She worked for Donnette Russell Love from October 2014 until February 2015. Page 10 of 12 5. Mayor Mohammed Used Her Official Position to Benefit Her Law Firm and Herself Response: The allegations that Mayor Mohammed corruptly used the weight of her official position to secure special benefits for her law firm are discussed above in §II ¶4 and remain unverified and without merit. Once again, the Report fails to meet its burden that Mayor Mohammed had a wrongful intent when she mistakenly used her mayoral credentials instead of her personal credentials on a singular occasion. Conclusion In order for Mayor Mohammed to be found at fault for the allegations contained in the Report, Mayor Mohammed must be found to have acted corruptly and with wrongful intent. The Report fails to meet this burden as described hereinabove. The Report is devoid of meritorious or substantive evidence of any wrongful or unethical behavior or conduct by Mayor Mohammed. Many of the interviewees provided contradictory information, or just uninformed guesses, which is fatal to the allegations contained in the Report. In addition, the misperception of the effects and operation of the Little Hatch Act, and of the Resign to Run Law, also lead to erroneous conclusions. Recommendations Based on the foregoing, Mayor Mohammed requests that the OIG find no probable cause that: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Mayor Mohammed violated F.S. § 104.31(1), aka “Little Hatch Act”; Mayor Mohammed violated F.S. § 112.311(1); Mayor Mohammed violated F.S. § 112.313(6); Mayor Mohammed violated F.S. § 99.012(6), aka Florida’s Resign to Run Law; Mayor Mohammed violated F.S. § 104.011; and Mayor violated any state ethic codes. Page 11 of 12 In the alternative, Mayor Mohammed requests that the Report be Recalled for further proceedings and investigation, including a prompt interview with Mayor Mohammed. Respectfully submitted, Joseph S. Geller, Esq Greenspoon Marder, LLP 200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1800, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Joseph.geller@gmlaw.com 954 491-1120 Page 12 of 12 1 2 3 From: Subject: Date: To: Cc: Joseline Ramirez jramirez@townofpembrokepark.com RE: Food Drive thru Giveaway Flyer March 25, 2020 at 10:51 AM Stephanie Woodbury swoodbury@townofpembrokepark.com Joy Brown jbrown@townofpembrokepark.com, ashira mohammed ashira.ann@gmail.com Good morning Stephanie, Per your request, I posted the flyer on the website, Facebook and Instagram. Best regards, Joseline Ramirez Code Enforcement Officer Town of Pembroke Park 3150 SW 52nd Ave Pembroke Park, FL 33023 Ph: (954) 966-4600, Ext. 215 From: Stephanie Woodbury Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 9:37 AM To: Joseline Ramirez Subject: FW: Food Drive thru Giveaway Flyer Good morning! Please post the attached flyer to the Town website, Facebook and Instagram. Thanks! From: Joy Brown Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 8:51 AM To: Stephanie Woodbury Cc: ashira.ann@gmail.com Subject: Food Drive thru Giveaway Flyer Good Morning Stephanie, Attached is the flyer for the drive thru food giveaway. Give me a call later. Joy Brown Executive Administrative Assistant/ Events Coordinator Town of Pembroke Park 3150 SW 52nd Ave Pembroke Park FL, 33023 (954) 966-4600 x 236 Fax (954) 966-5186 jbrown@townofpembrokepark.com /******************* EMAIL DISCLAIMER *******************/ Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from Town Officials and employees regarding Town business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure. This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com 4 From: Subject: Date: To: Joseline Ramirez jramirez@townofpembrokepark.com Thanksgiving Registration Flyer November 4, 2019 at 10:43 AM Ashira Mohammed amohammed@townofpembrokepark.com, Ambassadorclark ambassadorclark@townofpembrokepark.com, Georgina Cohen gcohen@townofpembrokepark.com, Geoffrey Jacobs gjacobs@townofpembrokepark.com, Reynold Dieuveille rdieuveille@townofpembrokepark.com Cc: Joy Brown jbrown@townofpembrokepark.com, Dierdre Davis ddavis@townofpembrokepark.com Good afternoon Town Commission, Please find attached a copy of the Thanksgiving Flyer 2019. Please advise of any dispute or corrections. We will be distributing the flyers to the community and posting it on the website. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Regards, Joseline Ramirez Code Enforcement Officer Town of Pembroke Park 3150 SW 52nd Ave Pembroke Park, FL 33023 Ph: (954) 966-4600, Ext. 215 www.townofpembrokepark.com https://www.facebook.com/townofpembrokepark/ /******************* EMAIL DISCLAIMER *******************/ Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from Town Officials and employees regarding Town business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure. 5 From: Subject: Date: To: Joseline Ramirez jramirez@townofpembrokepark.com Toy Giveaway Flyer 2019 November 13, 2019 at 6:46 AM Ashira Mohammed amohammed@townofpembrokepark.com, Georgina Cohen gcohen@townofpembrokepark.com, Geoffrey Jacobs gjacobs@townofpembrokepark.com, Reynold Dieuveille rdieuveille@townofpembrokepark.com, Ambassadorclark ambassadorclark@townofpembrokepark.com Cc: Joy Brown jbrown@townofpembrokepark.com, Dierdre Davis ddavis@townofpembrokepark.com, jeffrey louis jlouis@townofpembrokepark.com Good morning Town Commission, Please find attached the Toy Giveaway Flyer 2019. This flyer will be distributed through the Town’s communities and posted on the website. Please advise of any changes or disputes. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Regards, Joseline Ramirez Code Enforcement Officer Town of Pembroke Park 3150 SW 52nd Ave Pembroke Park, FL 33023 Ph: (954) 966-4600, Ext. 215 www.townofpembrokepark.com https://www.facebook.com/townofpembrokepark/ /******************* EMAIL DISCLAIMER *******************/ Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from Town Officials and employees regarding Town business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.