By JENNIFER SORENTRUE and ANDREW ABRAMSON
Palm Beach County Inspector General Sheryl Steckler would lose the power to conduct audits in all of the county’s 38 cities and towns under a settlement proposed to end a lawsuit filed by 14 municipalities that have refused to pay for her anti-corruption oversight.
The settlement, first proposed by West Palm Beach officials two weeks ago, also would change the way cities pay for Steckler’s services. It would create a countywide fee that would be levied on many government contracts — a shift that ultimately could reduce the amount of money Steckler’s office receives.
County Administrator Bob Weisman abruptly announced the proposal during a heated county commission meeting Tuesday where nearly two dozen residents spoke out against the cities’ lawsuit. The group also was upset over Weisman’s growing criticism of Steckler’s job performance.
“If you all want to let the cities off the hook, we can settle this case in two weeks,” Weisman told the commission. Weisman said he would ask it to consider the settlement May 21.
Steckler said she learned about the offer as she watched Tuesday’s meeting on television. The proposal, she said, would cut at the heart of her corruption-fighting mission to ferret out fraud, waste and abuse.
“The fundamental tenet of an office of inspector general is audit and investigations,” Steckler said. “If someone is talking about eliminating audits … you might as well just shut the doors and go home.”
The proposal came from former County Commissioner Karen Marcus and Palm Beach Gardens Councilman Joe Russo, West Palm Beach spokesman Elliot Cohen said. They gave it to West Palm Beach officials, who took the offer to the county.
Steckler said many cities and towns do not have internal auditors. She pointed to a scathing audit released by her office on South Bay finances under former City Manager Corey Alston, who has been indicted on grand theft charges.
“We ran the audit to get in there and find out what was going on,” Steckler said. “If you don’t have the ability to do that, who is going to be looking out for the people? Who is going to be watching the government?”
The proposal would alter the way Steckler’s office is financed. A countywide fee would be levied on many government contracts. The fee would be equal to one quarter of 1 percent of the contract amount.
The county currently calculates how much each city and town pays with a formula based on the expenses the cities report to the state Department of Financial Services.
Under the proposal, cities could hire the inspector general specifically to conduct audits.
Many residents who spoke at Tuesday’s meeting urged commissioners to find a way to finance Steckler’s office, which is currently receiving about $1.6 million of its $3 million budget.
“Your reputations are on the line here,” Century Village resident Honey Sager said. “Do you really want to be continued to be told that you are representing Corruption County?”’
The comments drew fire from Commissioner Shelley Vana, who said she was tired of being linked to the misdeeds of three former commissioners who went to federal prison before her election. “I am tired of being accused of being Corruption County, when I wasn’t here,” Vana said.
Vana said it was “curious” that many of those in Tuesday’s crowd lived in County Commissioner Jess Santamaria’s district. Santamaria is a strong supporter of Steckler’s office.
“I have supported the inspector general from Day 1,” Vana said. “Our staff and our attorney have been trying to do the right thing.”
Santamaria criticized the county attorney’s office, alleging it has not done a good job representing Steckler in the suit filed by the cities.
“In my opinion today the inspector general’s office is not independent,” Santamaria said. “One obstacle after another has been put before the office. … In the case of these lawsuits, I am going to tell you my own personal experience is the defense that the office is getting is mediocre at best.”
Weisman defended the county and said no one has gotten in Steckler’s way. “When she does reports, if they were good reports, I would have no problem,” Weisman said. “She is finding fault with county employees doing honest work.”
Two commissioners — Vana and Priscilla Taylor — said they would consider creating a special taxing district to pay for Steckler’s office. The commissioners said it was the only way to ensure Steckler has complete independence from the county.
The meeting became so heated that Vana walked out.
The inspector general was created in 2009 as part of an ethics reform package to help the county shed its corruption-tainted image. An amendment to the county charter, overwhelming approved by voters in 2010, extended the office’s reach to all 38 cities and towns.
Fifteen cities sued in 2011, arguing that a requirement that each locality must pay a fee was unconstitutional. Wellington later dropped out.
The county is defending itself in the suit, and by extension, Steckler’s office. County administrators say the inspector general’s post is essentially a county department and does not have the power to sue or be sued. Steckler challenged that position in court and lost.
Steckler argues the county attorney’s office is not looking out for her office’s best interest.
“The county attorney has not shared any settlement proposal with me,” Steckler said. “If we are truly their client, why didn’t I know about it?”
