The Fine Print

Bondi's silence amid questions about lobbying, the gift ban and free trips

Right before she was elected to a second term into office, a series of stories by the New York Times detailed the practice of law firms who were skilled at developing contacts and relationships with the top lawyers of various states - including Attorney General Pam Bondi. These firms helped out corporate clients whose businesses had been targeted by some states, but not others.

One of the stories also pointed out that Bondi allowed a lawyer from one of the firms to recuperate from surgery at Bondi's house.

Now 16 months later the matter has come to a quiet close - at least as it concerns Florida's ethics laws.

The Florida Commission on Ethics voted last week there was no probable cause to conclude that the now-defunct law firm Dickstein Shapiro - or one the lawyers who used to work at the firm, Bernard Nash - had broken the state's ethics laws. The finding was made public Wednesday.

The probe into their activities focused on two items: Was it a violation of Florida's gift ban for the firm and Nash to donate money to an organization that wound up paying for trips by Bondi? During her first four years in office Bondi accepted more than $51,000 worth of travel costs, hotels and meals to conferences and other events with other attorneys general. The trips to places such as California, Michigan and countries such as Mexico were picked up by groups such as the Republican Attorneys General Association.

The other part of the probe focused on whether activities by Nash and the firm constituted lobbying even though Nash and members of Dickstein Shapiro had not registered as lobbyists.

An outside lawyer brought in to help look into the case concluded in his report to the commission that in both instances the law had not been broken.

George Reeves argued that a contribution to RAGA was covered by a part of the lobbying law that makes it clear political contributions are not expenditures.

But during the commission meeting, Reeves acknowledged that the lobbying issue was a bit more complicated.

Lawyers are not considering lobbying if they are representing clients involved in a judicial proceeding. But in this instance Nash was reaching out to Florida on behalf of a client who was under investigation in another state. He called Bondi's then chief of staff, Carlos Muniz, and then sent him a follow up email about the issue.

Reeves told commissioners, according to audio that was released along with the files, that what Nash did was "very risky" and that others may be "well served" to register as a lobbyist but said in this instance there wasn't anything that should have prompted the commission to take action.

Yet a deeper look into the information does comes up with several interesting highlights:

1: Bondi herself was never questioned directly by investigators. The investigative report states "Her staff advised that due to her busy schedule and heavy workload she would be unavailable for an interview." Those close to Bondi contend that this may paint a somewhat inaccurate picture, arguing that after investigators interviewed Muniz they did not make it clear they wanted to talk to her.

2: During an hour-long recorded interview with Nash, he tells the commission investigator about how his firm would set up dinners and receptions where they would invite all attorney generals across the state to join them. He said that those from states with ethical restrictions would pay their own way. Nash is unsure if Bondi or Muniz, who usually accompanied her to some of the conferences, attended those dinners. But Nash said no log or register was ever kept of who attended the events. Nash was not asked if any receipts were kept to verify that attendees bound by ethical restrictions in fact paid.

Muniz told investigators that he is certain he and Bondi attended at least one of the meals and maybe more. He said both he and the attorney general always paid for their meals.

3: Nash explained the rationale behind the dinners as a way for his clients to deal directly with attorneys general: "It's an opportunity for them to hear them directly, not filtered through me, what AG’s are saying."

4: Nash downplayed a Bondi fundraiser that Dickstein Shapiro hosted at Mar-A-Lago, the club owned by GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. He said that his firm was listed because it agreed to give a certain amount. "If you contribute less, you are just an ordinary peon."

5: The investigative report points out that Nash denied that he or any of the Dickstein Shapiro employees lobbied. But Reeves in his recommendations to the commission concluded that there was "insufficient evidence" to determine if the other employees  _ including Lori Kalani, the attorney who stayed at Bondi's house, had lobbied Bondi's office. He noted that these employees had called or emailed Bondi's staff regarding issues involving several clients "yet the report of investigation does not elaborate on the substance of these communications and specifically whether matters of policy were discussed."

He added: "This is a very delicate area in which it seems that the line between advocating concerning "policy" and advocating the facts of a specific case could get very blurry," Reeves wrote. "Certainly it seems as though the safer practice would be for such an attorney to register as a lobbyist and then freely advocate for his client regarding the specific facts and policy without concern. However, such safer practice cannot create probable cause where it does not otherwise exist."

Even though Bondi was subjected to scrutiny over her free trips two years ago, she has continued to accept them since she was re-elected.

Gift disclosure forms show that since the fall of 2014 Bondi has received airfare, hotel and meals worth nearly $51,000, including more than $11,000 donated by the government of Taiwan during an eight-day visit in October of last year that appears to have been organized by the National Association of Attorneys General. She has also taken several trips paid by the Rule of Law Defense Fund - a group that bills itself as a "forum for Republican attorneys general to study, discuss and engage on important policy affecting the states and their citizens."

 

Bondi's fantasy dilemma

It's only been a few short months since the start of football season - which is what helped bring the ever-expanding world of daily fantasy sports into the spotlight.

Now with the Super Bowl right around the corner - and a new legislative session about to commence - one key question remains:

What, if anything, does Attorney General Pam Bondi plan to do about the murky legality surrounding fantasy sports in Florida.

Let's scroll back.

It was back during the summer that the big players in daily fantasy - FanDuel and DraftKings _ started hiring lobbyists in Tallahassee as the same time they were starting a huge national ad campaign. Their moves came as a legal theory began to emerge that fantasy sports - the idea of selecting players in various sports and winning money based on their performance - was not allowed under Florida law.

This theory - which has been explored by South Florida attorney Daniel Wallach and further expanded in a paper penned by Wallach and Tallahassee attorney/lobbyist Marc Dunbar - says a key impediment is a 1991 opinion authored by then-Attorney General Bob Butterworth that concluded spending $100 on a season-long fantasy football team was illegal gambling.

It was shortly afterwards - some of it sparked by national reports of a DFS employee participating in a contest on a rival's website - that a backlash began to mount for the two big companies in other parts of the country. Nevada ruled that fantasy websites needed to shut down or be licensed, while the attorney general in New York said they were illegal gambling and is trying to shutter them.

Move to Florida and there are apparent signs of some prosecutors getting involved, namely that U.S. Attorney Lee Bentley in Tampa has reportedly launched his own investigation according to Wallach and others. There are also civil lawsuits being filed. And there was a key development in that arena when Law360 reported earlier this week that State Attorney Bernie McCabe has taken an interest in the issue.

McCabe, whose jurisdiction includes Pasco and Pinellas counties, filed a memo supporting an effort to remand the case against FanDuel and DraftKings back into state court because he asserted that the state was in fact the "real party of interest" in this case.

But it's hard to pin Bondi or her office down on how the state's top legal officer (and whose office houses the statewide prosecutor) views the evolving situation even as other law-enforcement officials take action.

Bondi has said she still supports the 1991 Butterworth opinion and has made no moves to rescind it or repeal it. But beyond that Bondi and her office continue to defer questions.

"Our office engaged in extensive discussions with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and we both agreed the matter should be handled federally,'' said Bondi spokesman Whitney Ray late last year "Also, our office is in regular contact with U.S. Attorney Lee Bentley, and we have full confidence that the U.S. Attorney's Office will handle the matter appropriately."

Additionally, so far Bondi has remained fairly quiet about whether she supports efforts by the fantasy effort to put in laws that would regulate the industry. Sen. Joe Negron and Rep. Matt Gaetz have sponsored bills to do so for the upcoming session that kicks off next Tuesday and FanDuel is increasing its workforce in anticipation of the new law being put in place reported the Orlando Sentinel.

(It's worth pointing out that even though the Negron and Gaetz bills directly affect his agency, Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam has also not been exactly clear whether he's a fan or not of either version.)

The big giants in the fantasy sports industry are being primarily represented in Florida by mega-lobbyist Brian Ballard and his firm. Ballard is of course a big-time fundraiser who is now supporting Marco Rubio for president and also lobbies on behalf of Donald Trump.

But late last August one of the other lobbyists who signed up to represent the fantasy companies was well-known GOP consultant Marc Reichelderfer. He is friends with Bondi and has done campaign work on her behalf.

When asked about it directly last fall, Bondi said she was unaware that Reichelderfer had begun representing the fantasy sports industry.

Some of Bondi's interactions with lawyers, lobbyists and how her office has handled such cases has drawn scrutiny, most notably in articles that appeared in the New York Times. So it can be argued that it's important for voters and citizens to know what her office is - or isn't doing on this.

Bondi during her five-year stint in office been very selective about what issues she will - or won't - engage in.

She once took a stance against casino gambling, but yet other times she has refused to take a position on bills even if they directly impact her agency operations. Bondi is also as of now remaining fairly quiet about what she thinks about the $3 billion compact negotiated between Gov. Rick Scott and the tribe (and which could allow a new casino in South Florida.)

With another session dawning, it will be interesting to watch whether or not the state's top legal officer weighs in on the various legal issues that surrounding gambling or gaming. Or if she will remain in a neutral (and silent) corner.

(This post has been updated to note that FanDuel is expanding its workforce in Florida.)

The slow fading light of a Scott initiative

Sorry for the delay - time for another installment of Inside the Tallahassee bubble news

Three years ago this May Gov. Rick Scott unveiled an initiative that he said would help citizens hold their government accountable.

Project Sunburst as it was called was described as a way to increase access to public records held by the Scott administration - while at the same time helping cut down on the number of record requests constantly flowing in for emails from both the governor and his staff.

When it started the initiative included the emails of Scott and members of his leadership team (although noticeably absent were the emails of his budget chief and general counsel.)

And when asked about other records, such as correspondence and letters written by Scott, then-Chief of Staff Steve MacNamara promised that would be added as well.

Let's flash forward and see what's there now.

Letters? That never really got going. All that is on is the site are 11 letters written in June 2012.

Ok, so what about emails?

Well, there are more folders associated with former employees than people working there now.

There are four deputy chiefs of staff reporting to Melissa Sellers, Scott's chief of staff and campaign manager for his re-election. None of them have their emails included in Sunburst. Nor does Scott's current cabinet affairs director - an area that has been the source of consternation in recent months since the forced dismissal of Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Gerald Bailey.

Emails going into an account for Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera appear to have stopped going into Sunburst this past January.

There is still traffic in Sellers account - but it mainly consists of her schedule and emails she receives. She appears to have adopted the same policy as her predecessor and refrains from using her state account to send anything out.

Sunburst does still show Scott's own email account although the great bulk of that account are emails received to his public account from citizens around the state. The site also does include the emails of Scott communications director Jackie Schutz although her account hasn't been updated since May 7.

Another legal battle brewing over taxpayer-helped campaigns

Former State Rep. Perry Thurston lost his bid last year to become the state's top legal affairs officer.

But Thurston is embarking on a legal challenge that could affect future statewide campaigns.

The unsuccessful Democratic candidate for attorney general and his attorney Mark Herron are asserting that the Department of State improperly denied his request last summer for matching funds.

To refresh everyone's memory: Matching funds are taxpayer money that is made available to statewide candidates based on certain eligibility criteria. Those who meet the criteria receive an initial two-for-one match for contributions from Florida residents followed by additional distributions at a one for one match.

The Legislature tried to repeal the program but voters turned down a proposed amendment to get rid of the money.

Thurston asserts he cleared the thresholds needed to get the matching funds including raising at least $100,000.

But in its filing with the Florida Elections Commission attorneys who work for Secretary of State Ken Detzner maintain that the documentation submitted by Thurston in August 2014 put him at slightly more than $99,000 - or below the threshold. They contend that the Thurston campaign did not question the omission of other documentation until after he has lost the Democratic primary to George Sheldon and by then it was too late because he was no longer a candidate.

"If individuals were permitted to submit supplementary documentation to establish the $100,000 threshold for eligibility at any time, even after being eliminated as a candidate, there would be no limiting principle to achieve finality,'' states the filing by then-department general counsel J. Andrew Atkinson.

Thurston appealed the finding to the commission but the panel last week voted against him.

Herron says his client plans to take the case to the 1st District Court of Appeal. He contends that this is an important case because the division used minor issues - the fact that a copy of the check was partially turned down and hid part of an address - to deny Thurston's submission. If the division had counted these checks then Thurston would have been eligible. The October submission was merely resubmitting the same information with new copies of the checks.

The amount of money that Thurston could be eligible for if he wins the case would not be unsubstantial. The division itself acknowledges that if Thurston had been crossed the initial threshold he would have been entitled to roughly $75,000.

In its filing division attorneys assert it is pointless to pay the money now because under law it would have be returned to the state's general revenue account. Herron disputes that as well.

Now that the party is over: Reflections on Florida's convention

The Republican National Convention ended late last night in Tampa with the coronation of Mitt Romney as the GOP nominee.

Here's a few reflections and quick takeaways on what the first convention held in Florida since 1972 means for the state.

1. Enjoy the feeling Floridians. Given the close brush near the convention by Hurricane Isaac, one has to wonder when Florida will get the chance to host another convention. While the convention went off without any large scale problems the fact that the storm forced planners to cancel a day of events may leave future party leaders skeptical about a return to the Sunshine State.

2. Does the convention propel Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn into the conversation about Democrats who could run statewide? Buckhorn made the most out of being the chief ambassador for the region and he seemed to bask in the limelight that came with it. The fact that the convention was not marred by the serious protests and arrests that have occurred at other conventions could also help his reputation.

3. Did Hurricane Isaac help Gov. Rick Scott's image? Scott's decision to bypass convention events until the final night and instead focus on the state's response to Isaac brought praise from people like Buckhorn and Republicans such as Jeb Bush.

"It was smart of Gov. Scott to do his job of preparation and response,'' Bush said.

Bush is one person who knows that successfully handling hurricanes can help one's image. When he left office Bush remained immensely popular despite pushing policies that did not always poll well with voters. That popularity was due in part to the serious and organized way he dealt with the eight hurricanes that hit the state in 2004 and 2005.

Here's more on Scott's decision to focus on the storm and tourism instead of "yucking it up" at the convention.

 4. Was this Pam Bondi's one brief moment in the limelight?

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi got her time during the convention doing a tandem with Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens criticizing the federal health care overhaul pushed by President Barack Obama.

Some commentators found the presentation confusing and stilted, but it may be more important to note that this might be the last hurrah for Bondi on this issue. Florida's court case is now over. And it will be up to voters to decide whether or not the federal care overhaul should be repealed or kept in place since Romney has vowed to eliminate it if he gets in office.

Bondi made the health care lawsuit her primary focus during her first two years in office. While she has also gone after prescription drug abuse, it seems that there could be a bit of vacuum for Bondi now that the health care lawsuit is finished.

Bondi, for example, has not adopted the same populist outlook that characterized previous AG's such as Charlie Crist and Bob Butterworth. Both Crist and former Attorney General Bill McCollum battled utility companies over rate hikes but Bondi so far has chosen to "monitor" rate hike proposals and not fight them.

5. The convention only enhanced both the reputations of Bush and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio.

Rubio's speech introducing Romney touched on many of the same themes he pushed during his 2010 campaign, including American exceptionalism and how his own biography is a manifestation of the American dream.

Where Rubio goes from here remains to be seen. We still don't know if how he would stand up to a constant vettting by the national press. Stories about Rubio's finances that were written by the Florida media would likely resurface in a much more specatcular fashion if he were to run for President.

As for Bush a run for national office is there if he wants it. Some speculate that Bush will stay on the sidelines and allow a younger generation to step forward. Maybe. But judging from the way he was treated at the convention he would become an immediate frontrunner for 2016 if Romney were to lose.

Will Florida have a John Kerry moment on immigration?

Attorney General Bill McCollum and Rep. William Snyder are expected this morning to unveil proposed new legislation on immigration that is modeled after the controversial Arizona law that has drawn popular support but is opposed by the administration of President Barack Obama.

The key question for McCollum - who will be in Orlando to make the announcement - is just how close this new bill follows past immigration legislation that has gone nowhere in the Florida Legislature.

Snyder and other lawmakers have said there is a need to push immigration changes. McCollum, who has come under fire from GOP rival Rick Scott for changing his stance on the Arizona law, has also said something needs to be done.

But it's worth noting that back in 2008 - when Marco Rubio was House speaker and McCollum was already in office - that a major immigration bill sponsored by former Rep. Gayle Harrell never it made it beyond a committee workshop.

HB 821 specifically states that "if a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that a person arrested for a felony arrest is not legally present in the United States, the officer shall report that person to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office of the United States Department of Homeland Security."

The bill goes even further and states that correctional officers and judges who deal with a person arrested and convicted of felony must report them to federal authorities if they suspect them of being an illegal alien. The measure also requires law-enforcement agencies to provide notices to officers that it is their duty to cooperate with federal officials regarding enforcement. And the bill also directs Florida's Attorney General to "vigorously pursue" all opportunities for federal funds to reimburse the state for enforcing federal immigration laws.

The legislation, which was called unnecessary at the time by some Hispanic Republicans in the Legislature, also required verification of national identity in order to qualify for certain public benefits. The measure also required that if someone were arrested for a DUI that a "reasonable effort" be made in order to find out their citizenship status.

So the question is whether Florida lawmakers will now push for a bill that two years ago wasn't considered worthy enough to even vote for the first time. It will revive questions about Rubio's stance on immigration and whether he has altered them in connection with his run for the U.S. Senate.

Plus, it is also worth remembering that the Legislature this past session wound up rejecting immigration bills. The House, for example, approved a measure by Rep. Sandy Adams, that required contractors who work for the state to verify the citizenship status of their employees. The measure died because it was never taken up by the Florida Senate which is led by Senate President Jeff Atwater, R-North Palm Beach and a candidate for chief financial officer.

(UPDATE - The bill that was unveiled is a bit different from the Harrell legislation although it does include similar language that was included in Adams' bill from this year. But the bill does mandate that law enforcement try to determine the immigration status of someone if they have "reasonable suspicion" that they are in this country illegally.

When asked why McCollum is unveiling the legislation now, a spokeswoman for McCollum said that he has been involved in immigration enforcement efforts during his time as Attorney General. Sandi Copes also defended the timing of presenting the bill now, saying the Arizona controversy has reinforced the public's desire to do something about immigration at this time.)

McCollum's own staff didn't want to hire expert caught up in Rentboy scandal

The hiring of a now-disgraced psychologist to defend Florida's ban on gay adoption was done over the objections of the main attorney defending the case for the state, according to records made public Thursday.

Attorney General Bill McCollum pushed for the hiring of a critic of gay adoption over the objections of one of his subordinates.

Nevertheless, Attorney General Bill McCollum pushed for the hiring of the psychologist George Rekers, who was at the time a leading advocate for conservative social issues.

The controversy has emerged as an issue in the governor's race, in which McCollum is the leading Republican candidate. Gay rights advocates say it showed poor judgment on the part of McCollum and reflects the flawed efforts Republicans have made to keep gays from adopting.

Florida wound up paying more than $120,000 to hire Rekers, whose credibility was tarnished after he recently went on a European vacation with a gay male escort. The state's ban on gay adoption was declared unconstitutional by a Miami judge in late 2008 who criticized Rekers as "not credible."

The e-mails released Thursday show that an attorney in McCollum's own office warned against hiring Rekers, whose testimony had been deemed suspect in an earlier Arkansas lawsuit that challenged a ban on placing foster children in homes with gay parents.

Keep reading here.

Will Charlie today help or hurt McCollum's campaign for governor?

(Update: Gov. Charlie Crist on Friday evening announced that he signed HB 131 into law.)

While everyone is waiting to see what Gov. Charlie Crist does with the $70.4 billion budget there is another bill on his desk that could have a big impact on the upcoming elections.

Crist must also act Friday on HB 131, the lengthy elections bill. The bill contains several changes to law, including giving the power of the Secretary of State to order recounts and to make it clear that state election laws always trump local ordinances.

Crist, however, is apparently divided over what to do with the bill because it includes a provision he opposes.

The legislation delays from 2012 until 2016 a requirement that disabled voters have access to voting machines that use paper ballots. Former Secretary of State Kurt Browning testified to lawmakers that Crist did not like the delay but it was pushed by the state's election supervisors who don't want to incur the cost right now of buying new machines.

For candidates like Attorney General Bill McCollum the big provision in the bill, however, is the language that would re-regulate 527s after a federal court struck down the state's previous regulations.

Why? Because without the bill it could become illegal in Florida for campaigns to coordinate with third-party groups that launch attack ads.

This week a group known as Alliance for America's Future is launching ads that go after GOP rival Rick Scott. While McCollum's campaign has not acknowledged its involvement McCollum's own ad man is helping with the organization.

The elections bill would require such groups to register with the state and disclose finances if the groups runs ads 30 days before the primary and 60 days before the general election.

But just as importantly the bill would resolve issues raised last August by Tallahassee attorney Mark Herron, one of which is whether or not 527 groups can coordinate with candidates if the underlying law regulating these organizations is wiped out.

The Division of Elections has yet to issue a formal opinion dealing with Herron's questions. And Browning even said in April that the opinion has been put on hold pending final action by legislators.

Herron's 5-page letter also asked whether any ads run by 527 organizations is considered a contribution to a candidate's campaign if the 527 organization runs an ad that either attacks or supports a candidate in such a way that it is the "functional equivalent of express advocacy," which is a new definition cited recently in federal court decisions.

The upshot is that coordination will likely remain legal - and 527 ads won't count as contributions - if Crist signs HB 131. But if Crist vetoes the bill then 527 organizations - which are not bound by the same $500 limits as candidates - may not be able to do anything in concert with statewide candidates like McCollum or even legislative candidates. That could be a big deal during an election season when there are candidates using large amounts of their own money.

A spokeswoman for McCollum's campaign confirms that the Attorney General supports the bill.

So what do you have to do to earn nearly $121,000 from the state?

Here's a belated posting of some of the documents that have provided by state agencies in connection to the hiring of George Rekers, one of the two expert witnesses hired by Attorney General Bill McCollum to defend Florida's ban on gay adoptions. Rekers as most people now know has become linked to the words Rentboy after it was revealed he hired a young man associated with the site to accompany him on a trip to Europe.

Download Rekers document

Rekers got paid at a rate of $300 an hour - or twice the rate paid to the other expert used in the trial. He eventually was paid close to $121,000 for his work.

These documents spell out what Rekers did for some of his money and what Walter Schumm did to earn his money from the state.

Rekers said he worked 402.31 hours on behalf of the state.

The first part of his work - which cost $60,900 - is documented here and includes: 30 hours of conducting research on books and journal articles pertinent to the case, 90 hours to "read relevant publications" and evaluate and critique methodological quality and reported findings of newer research, 18 hours to meet with McCollum's staff to prepare for deposition, 20 hours for being present at the actual circuit court trial on the ban (which the state lost).

These documents also show that McCollum's office in Feb. 2009 requested that the Department of Financial Services - which is under Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink - reimburse Rekers a total of nearly $60,000 "absent a written document."  That letter states that McCollum's office "accepts responsibility" for not obtaining a written document but that it is the state's best interest to "settle this claim."

There is a settlement agreement dated February 20, 2009 that notes that there was not a written agreement executed for the rest of the money due "to unforeseen circumstances" and that invoices were rejected because there was no formal contract in place.

It also notes that "this agreement is contingent upon approval of the Chief Financial Officer."

Last week Sink was highly critical of McCollum's decision to hire Rekers when she appeared on a Tampa Bay radio program. She called McCollum a "typical politician" who tried to "lay the blame" on someone else when he was responsible for hiring Rekers.

Sandi Copes, a spokeswoman for McCollum, explained that it was "not unusual" for estimated costs to require adjustment and that the second payment was made because Rekers exceeded his contracted hours and that "extra hours were decided merely by discussion, hence the necessity of the settlement agreement."

McCollum urged hiring of anti-gay activist involved in rentboy.com scandal

Attorney General Bill McCollum personally urged that the state hire George Rekers, the anti-gay psychologist whose recent European trip with a gay male escort has exploded into a furious media frenzy since it was first reported last week.

Rekers was paid more than $120,000 to help with the state’s defense of a more than 30-year old ban on gay adoption.

McCollum said on Monday that he “wouldn’t do it again” had he known more about Rekers, whose trip was first reported by the Miami New Times.

"We’ve been defending the constitutionality of the state law and we’ve been representing the Department of Children and Families, who hired him and paid him and needed expert witnesses and he was available and credentialed,’’ said McCollum."I wouldn’t do it again if I knew what I knew today but I didn't know that then and neither did anybody else.’’

Rekers has said he hired the man to carry his luggage for him on a trip to Europe, but Jo-vanni Roman, also known as Lucien, told CNN last week that he gave Rekers “sexual massages” on the trip. Rekers on his website says he did know about Roman’s ad on rentboy.com until after the trip was in progress and that he was not involved in any “illegal or sexual behavior’’ with him. He has also told The Miami Herald that he is "not gay" and never has been.

DCF was sued after it denied a South Florida gay man the right to adopt two young brothers who lived with him as foster children. The state agency turned to McCollum’s office to defend them in the lawsuit.

McCollum wrote a July 2007 letter to then DCF Secretary Bob Butterworth where he said his legal team “strongly” recommended the hiring of Rekers, a psychologist once on the faculty of the University of South Carolina and who helped found the Family Research Council back in the ‘80s.

“They believe that this expert and his testimony are necessary to ensure a successful result in this case,’’ wrote McCollum in the letter obtained by the Florida Tribune.

Read more here at the Florida Tribune.

Here's a copy of letters between McCollum and Butterworth: Download Rekers letters

Oil spill legal team leader says son's lobbying for BP is 'irrelevant'

One of the leaders of a newly created oil spill legal team for Florida says it is "irrelevant" that his son lobbies for BP America.

Jim Smith and Bob Butterworth, both former attorney generals, were named by Gov. Charlie Crist and Attorney General Bill McCollum on Monday to lead a pro bono legal advisory council. This council will identify law firms and help develop legal strategies in case the state needs to sue BP, the company that operated the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.

Smith's son, however, works for a Tallahassee lobbying firm that last year earned anywhere from $40,000 to $80,000 representing BP before the Legislature.

"The fact that he lobbies for BP is nothing in my equation,'' said Jim Smith. "That's irrelevant."

See more here at the Florida Tribune.