State of Florida Commission on Ethics

POB 15701 Clearwater, FL 33766 TX: (727) 902-7689

January 4, 2010

State of Florida Commission on Ethics PO Drawer 15709 Tallahassee, FL 32317-5709

To Whom It May Concern:

I file this complaint in good faith based on information contained in published news articles.

As I understand, a Florida Commission on Ethics (FCE) complaint was filed with the FCE against PSC Lisa Edgar back on April 17th, 2009. After the investigation of this complaint was completed, news articles were published revealing that an audio tape showed inconsistencies with statements that had been gathered during the investigation. Further, it was revealed that the FCE never listened to the audio tape.

The FCE has stated that the investigation will not be reopened unless a new FCE complaint is filed.

I would like to file a new complaint based on new evidence ( audio tape ) that was not previously considered during the original complaint. I understand the FCE has the audio tape in question in their possession. In addition, I would ask that the FCE incorporate by reference any and all information regarding the first complaint into this new complaint.

It has been reported that FCE investigators failed to match up a utility regulator's story with the record, raising questions about whether the ethics charges should be renewed. This is a matter of great public importance that needs to be thoroughly investigated.

Further, I am asking the FCE to determine if the individuals interviewed in this case committed perjury during the original investigation. If such a determination is beyond the scope and/or jurisdiction of the FCE, then I would ask you to inform me of this fact and notify the appropriate authorities.

Further, I would ask the FCE to determine whether the individuals who were interviewed by the FCE had discussed their testimony with each other before the FCE interviews. Please include this issue in your final report.

Further, if the audio tape reveals that the email in question did not involve the issue that Edgar, Bass, and Hoffman have claimed, please include the content of the email in question in your final report.

Sincerely,

Doc Tomkiel

1 Probe of cleared PSC commissioner called incomplete Ethics investigators failed to match up a utility regulator's story with the record, raising questions about whether the ethics charges should be renewed.

BY MARY ELLEN KLAS Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau

TALLAHASSEE -- Although Public Service Commissioner Lisa Edgar was cleared of ethics charges that she improperly communicated with a utility lobbyist about a pending case, the man who filed the complaint says her recollection doesn't match the audiotape and transcript of the hearing.

Ethics Commission Executive Director Philip Claypool acknowledged Friday that investigators did not review the audiotape of the Nov. 6 hearing to see whether the time of the communication in the records matched the claims of Edgar and her aide, Roberta Bass. ``I didn't realize there was an audiotape recording that could be matched up,'' he said. Until he looks into it, he added, he can't say whether there would have been ``enough evidence to meet the burden of proof'' that she engaged in an unethical discussion.

HEARING ROOM

Tallahassee businessman Steve Stewart filed the complaint against Edgar, alleging that during a fuel- adjustment hearing, Florida Power & Light lobbyist Ken Hoffman called Bass out of the hearing room.

Bass then sent Edgar an e-mail stating ``Need to talk to you,'' followed by one that said ``Just talked with Ken.'' Edgar responded: ``Come to the corner . . . please.''

PENDING CASE

State ethics laws forbid commissioners from directly communicating with utility officials on any pending case before them and prohibits aides from serving as intermediaries for that communication.

The Ethics Commission determined two weeks ago that since the discussion did not relate to the pending fuel case -- but instead was a procedural issue relating to a disgruntled FPL worker who drilled a hole in a nuclear reactor -- Edgar did not violate ethics laws.

It released the final report of the investigation last week, making public a summary of testimony from Edgar, Bass and Hoffman taken under oath as part of the investigation.

Stewart said the report raised questions about Bass' story because the time stamp on the e-mail didn't match the order in which issues were discussed during the hearing.

According to the time stamp on the e-mail, Bass first e-mailed Edgar at 9:48 a.m., 10 minutes into the hearing and long before the hole-drilling issue came up. The audiotape indicates the hole-drilling discussion began at 10:38 a.m.

``I'm outraged that they didn't listen to the audiotape to match up the timing,'' Stewart said. ``It would be hard to believe that an investigator wouldn't find some outside source to corroborate stories and just relied upon the parties that are being accused. I think it's an incomplete investigation.''

2 According to the report, Bass alleges that the e-mail message to Edgar was to tell Edgar that Hoffman had suggested a way to handle keeping the hole-drilling report confidential. The report also says that Lorena Holley, the aide to Katrina McMurrian, was part of the conversation.

`IT IS IMPLAUSIBLE'

Stewart believes ``it is possible that the discussion between Hoffman, Holley and Bass took place, but it is implausible that's what the e-mail was about.''

Edgar's testimony ``mirrored that of Ms. Bass' concerning the details of the meeting, their e-mails, and the subsequent short discussion she had with Ms. Bass during the meeting in question,'' the report said.

PSC Executive Director Mary Bane also told investigators that she was watching the proceedings from her office on closed-circuit television and confirmed that the hole-drilling discussion took place as described by the others.

Neither Edgar, Bass nor Bane returned calls for comment.

Claypool said even if investigators had listened to the audiotape or reviewed the video, they may not have provided the proof needed to pursue charges.

The Ethics Commission won't reopen the case unless someone files a new complaint alleging new information, Claypool said.

Stewart said he is considering reopening the complaint unless the inconsistencies can be explained adequately.