Letter Draws Letter Reprimands

Five judges have been given a written reprimand by the Florida Supreme Court

we approve the parties’ stipulation that during a competitive procurement process, the respondents improperly submitted a letter to the Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF), encouraging DCF to award a contract to a particular vendor. Moreover, we approve the JQC’s finding that this misconduct violated Canons 1, 2, and 4 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and we also approve the stipulated discipline of a written reprimand via publication of this written opinion.

The facts

In March 2018, DCF initiated a competitive procurement process to award a contract to become the “Lead Agency for Community-Based Care for the Southern Region of Florida-Dade and Monroe Counties.” The lead agency contract was potentially worth more than $500 million over a five-year period beginning in July 2019.

During the process, also known as an “invitation to negotiate,” two nonprofit corporations submitted proposals to DCF: Our Kids of Miami-Dade and Monroe, Inc. (Our Kids), and Citrus Health Network. Our Kids previously held the lead agency contract with DCF and served as the lead agency over the preceding several years.

In September 2018, Judge Lederman drafted language for a letter that she intended to send to DCF, advocating for the selection of Our Kids as the lead agency. She emailed the language to multiple recipients, including the respondents, seeking additional signatories for the letter. After initially receiving a few responses of intent to co-sign the letter, Judge Lederman emailed the recipients twice more, attempting to garner more support.

Ultimately, a letter dated September 18, 2018, written on Judge Lederman’s judicial letterhead and signed by the respondents, was sent to the interim director of DCF and the managing director of the southern region of DCF. The letter endorsed Our Kids and concluded with the following pointed statement: “We have worked with Our Kids and we have complete faith only in the Our Kids model of leadership. When you select the agency please keep our voices in mind.”

In February 2019, the letter was mentioned in a local newspaper article entitled “Alleged conflicts of interest roil $500 million child welfare fight.” DCF terminated the competitive procurement process that began in March 2018 and restarted the process in early 2019; however, there was no evidence that the respondents’ letter affected DCF’s decision to do so. Again, Our Kids and Citrus Health Network were the only two competitors. In April 2019, DCF awarded the lead agency contract to Citrus Health Network.

Sanction

We agree with the JQC’s findings of fact and generally agree with the stipulated discipline. Each respondent fully cooperated with the JQC. Each respondent took responsibility for the misconduct and acknowledged that it should not have happened. The respondents’ letter was not intended to promote the financial interests of themselves or others. Moreover, each respondent has an otherwise unblemished disciplinary history.

Thus, we agree with the stipulated discipline of reprimand by publication of this written opinion. We emphasize though, with respect to Judge Lederman’s distinct role in generating the letter and recruiting other judges to support it, this  Court has consistently held that such misconduct warrants a public reprimand. However, in light of Judge Lederman’s retirement, this Court approves the stipulated discipline of a written reprimand.

(Mike Frisch)