Video report
- For their own good
Fifty years ago, they were screwed-up kids sent to the Florida School for Boys to be straightened out. But now they are screwed-up men, scarred by the whippings they endured. Read the story and see a video and portrait gallery.
- More video reports
|
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Politics
County attorney's job at risk over deal
Meanwhile, a grand jury may look into the county purchase of the property appraiser's land.
By WILL VAN SANT, JONATHAN ABEL and THERESA BLACKWELL
Published July 25, 2007
|
ADVERTISEMENT
View the documents
Pinellas County Attorney Susan H. Churuti sent a letter to both parties in the land deal: County Appraiser Jim Smith and County Commissioner Board Chairman Ronnie E. Duncan. According to the letters, the rules of the Florida Bar obligated her to notify both parties of the potential for conflict of interest.
» In depth
The story so far
Smith buys land
Pinellas County Property Appraiser Jim Smith buys a 1.5-acre wooded parcel in the Tarpon Woods area of East Lake for $15,000 in 1994. The property straddles Brooker Creek.
Crews clear land
Always prone to flooding, the Tarpon Woods area is particularly in trouble after the 2004 hurricane season. County crews work the area, including Smith's property, in early 2005, clearing falling trees and sediment from Brooker Creek. Smith complains about the work on his property, which he says included cutting trees and deepening a creek channel. The county apologizes but denies cutting trees.
Smith looks to sell
In July 2006, Smith lists the property for $400,000, marketing it as a "Beautiful Custom Home Site." He gets no offers. Eleven months later, the county buys the property for $225,000, saying it will be used for flood control work.
Times examines deal
On July 4, the St. Petersburg Times reports the land purchase, revealing Smith was paid nearly quadruple what his own office had assessed the property at for tax purposes. The paper also reports that the county, despite experts' advice, never obtained a civil survey of the property or considered flooding before negotiating with Smith. What's more, its legal staff urged the county to close on the deal June 29 despite an incomplete internal audit.
County reacts
At a July 10 meeting, county commissioners order County Administrator Steve Spratt to investigate the deal. Three days later, Spratt releases a 10-page report that will later be shown to have key omissions.
Times uncovers more
Stories detail interaction among Smith, county officials and County Attorney Susan Churuti that went far deeper than what Spratt reported to the public July 13:
• The county's interest in the property was initiated March 8 when Smith confronted Spratt and Charles Norwood, the county's director of Geographic Services, complaining that county workers had "destroyed" his property.
• Smith contacted Churuti and Commission Chairman Ronnie Duncan around March 16. Within a week, Duncan agreed to let Churuti represent both the county and Smith in negotiations.
• Spratt said Churuti never told him she was also representing Smith, which he now says is "a problem." Further, Spratt said he relied on her advice that because crews went on Smith's property without his permission, the county was legally liable for damage there.
|
Pinellas County Attorney Susan Churuti's job of 20 years appeared in jeopardy Tuesday as the controversy intensified over the county's purchase of land owned by Property Appraiser Jim Smith. In a separate development, State Attorney Bernie McCabe said he would ask a grand jury Thursday whether it wished to investigate the purchase of Smith's vacant lot on Brooker Creek. McCabe said he had no evidence of a specific law being broken, but that "a broad examination of every aspect" of the deal was under way. Churuti, 52, told the St. Petersburg Times late Tuesday that she was considering resigning. And two of her bosses questioned if she could repair the damage done to her credibility. The Times reported Tuesday that Churuti had agreed to represent both Pinellas and Smith in talks that led the county to buy Smith's property last month for $225,000. The appraiser owned the parcel as a private citizen and not in his capacity as an elected official. Smith said county work crews had damaged his property during flood control work. The revelation of Churuti's dual role was the latest example of county leaders failing to disclose key details of the deal to the public. Churuti said her motivation was to resolve the matter quickly to avoid costly litigation. "I wish I hadn't taken the hard way," Churuti said with a touch of anger. "I wish I had not tried to save the county money." County Commissioner Ken Welch said Tuesday that there will have to be consequences. "The only question in my mind is the severity of the consequences," he said. Commission Chairman Ronnie Duncan, whose own role in the county's negotiations has come under scrutiny, went further, confirming that he would weigh whether to seek Churuti's firing. "That's one option," Duncan said. "And I'm going to seriously consider that." Churuti said she knew it was "a slippery slope" when she sat down with Smith and Duncan and had both men sign conflict of interest waivers in March. Duncan said he thought the waiver would just allow Churuti to talk with Smith and his private attorney but did not know a purchase was in the works. Churuti said Smith and the county shared a goal: The appraiser wanted to sell his land and the county wanted to buy the property for flood control work. In such cases, she said, the Florida Bar does not prohibit dual representation. But Churuti agreed to her unique role only after an angry Smith had contacted several senior county officials, including Duncan, and Smith's private attorney wrote the county encouraging it to buy the land to settle Smith's damage claim. And her representation of Smith as a private citizen may conflict with a state law prohibiting local government attorneys from representing adversaries of the governments that employ them. Mark Herron, a Tallahassee lawyer who deals with ethics law would not comment specifically on Churuti's actions but said some situations are so fraught with conflict of interest that a waiver is not enough. "Look at their job descriptions," Herron said. "Is it the duty of this employee of the county or of this local government attorney to represent private citizens? I think it is not." County Administrator Steve Spratt, who said he learned just last week of Churuti's activities, said the conflict waivers were signed at a time when he was still investigating whether the county could repair the property, not buy it. "I told her that I was troubled," Spratt said Tuesday, "that I have major problems with that." Yet Spratt's actions are also under scrutiny. A report Spratt filed to the County Commission July 13 suggests that the letter written by Smith's attorney in March asking the county to buy the property sparked the county's interest in the land. In fact, an irate Smith had paid a visit to Spratt five days earlier. Questions also surround Smith's actions. The county said it last worked on Smith's property in early 2005, when crews operated throughout the Tarpon Woods area to remove debris from the 2004 hurricanes. Smith, 67, the elected appraiser for 19 years, complained in September 2005 about damage from the work but never followed up on his claim until March of this year. He told county leaders his land had been "devastated." But for the previous nine months the property was for sale for $400,000, pitched as a "Beautiful Custom Home Site." Smith has acknowledged he was hoping to use the check from the county toward the purchase of a $497,000 private home in Countryside. At a County Commission meeting Tuesday, a resolution endorsing McCabe's inquiry passed unanimously. That puts the commission in the bizarre situation of backing an inquiry into a land purchase it approved unanimously -- without any public discussion -- on June 5. The commission also agreed to consider hiring an outside attorney to represent members in McCabe's inquiry. County Commissioner Bob Stewart said the board supported the sale because it did not know then what it knows now. Churuti has acknowledged not disclosing her role to the commissioners. "What's happened since June 5th," Stewart said, "has been revelations about facts and relationships we were not aware of. We didn't have the background that we are entitled to and should expect." Times researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report. Will Van Sant can be reached at vansant@sptimes.com or (727) 445-4166.
[Last modified July 25, 2007, 01:29:04]
Share your thoughts on this story
Comments on this article
|
by Jim
|
07/26/07 03:11 PM
|
|
Property appraiser is definatly an elected office that needs term limits. He's bloated with corruption. Anyone with any ethics can see abuse of office here! He's been around so long I'm sure he conducts personal business on taxpayer time regularly.
|
|
by Mary
|
07/26/07 01:19 PM
|
|
The County Attorney works for the Board of County Commissioners. The BOARD works for YOU. If she did something "wrong", it was at the direction of her bosses, I can assure you - she should not be the sacrificial goat!!!
|
|
by Jose
|
07/26/07 11:55 AM
|
|
Oh come on people! What do you expect - honesty and open government? Get real! At least in Hillsborough we know what to expect from our BOCC - and do we ever get it!
|
|
by Holly
|
07/26/07 10:54 AM
|
|
Why in the world are politicians so corrupt?!?!?!
That's it! I'm running for office of 'anything' in the next election.....and I swear to tell the truth - no matter the consequences!
I will seek out creeps and expose them!
Want to help???
|
|
by Doe
|
07/25/07 11:07 PM
|
|
I'm sure there will be no charegs, and someone will be made a scapegoat, maybe two, but not even all who were involved will face consequences. And then they'll find another gvnt job elsewhere. Smith basically blackmailed. they should all be gone.
|
|
by Alan
|
07/25/07 06:56 PM
|
|
IF smith walks like a duck, smells like a duck; he must.....
|
|
by nancy
|
07/25/07 06:25 PM
|
|
county attorney should know the law .and follow the law .example to all.
|
|
by James
|
07/25/07 05:55 PM
|
|
Smith, Spratt, Duncan, Churati must be reminded over and over again that they work for us, the citizen and not for themselves. I would love to have Churuti help me sell my property.
|
|
by CJ
|
07/25/07 03:34 PM
|
|
I could be wrong, but I don't think the County Commissioners are able to fire Smith, as he is an elected official, similar in nature to the sheriff, clerk of court, etc. He can resign though, which is what he should do.
|
|
by Marty
|
07/25/07 03:01 PM
|
|
I think all parties to this deal should be reprimanded/fired. Who is looking out for the interests of ALL citizens? Not these bozos.
|
|
by Brian
|
07/25/07 01:26 PM
|
|
Let's not stop with Ms Chiruti, Spratt and possibly one or two commissoners may need the ax as well.
|
|
by VM
|
07/25/07 11:47 AM
|
|
When the BCC said in yesterday's meeting they welcomed "Bernie's" investigation to clear this up, I knew nothing would come of it - politics as usual in Pinellas. Steve Spratt and Ronnie Duncan are just as responsible & haven't their stories changed?
|
|
by Silly person
|
07/25/07 11:41 AM
|
|
Crooked attorneys, crooked appraiser, crooked commissioners, crooked watchdogs, this whole deal and all the major players are more crooked than Booker Creek itself. Take names clean house next election, only way to straighten out this crooked mess.
|
|
by Harry
|
07/25/07 11:40 AM
|
|
Risk Mgt.should have handled and investigated this claim as they are charged with doing with EVERY claim of this nature. If the claim could not be settled and Mr. Smith started litigation
the matter should have then been referred to outside counsel.
|
|
by Mark
|
07/25/07 11:32 AM
|
|
Why all the concentration on Ms. Churuti? It seems apparent that Jim Smith abused his position to weasel the Commission into purchasing his property at an inflated price. Is the Times content with just making Ms. Churuti a scapegoat? It's a shame.
|
|
by DR
|
07/25/07 10:35 AM
|
|
Local Government feels they are above the law. The lawyer, Duncan and Smith should be investigated and those in charge held accountable to the citizens of Pinellas County. Maybe they can occupy some jail space
|
|
by bob
|
07/25/07 10:25 AM
|
|
The State Attorney should investigate Smith for doing personal work pertating to his business while sitting in his office - just ask his employees
|
|
by kathy
|
07/25/07 10:13 AM
|
|
a grand jury sounds like a good idea, but when's the last time anyone associated with bernie mccabe was found guilty! mccabe's a joke. jim smith is a disgrace. as for susan churuti, just go.....and take jim with you!
|
|
by John
|
07/25/07 10:11 AM
|
|
How does Duncan get off scott free in this approving Churuti working for both sides? Spratt's kingdom starting to show some leaks? Come on people, vote and cycle these people out of these positions. Continuing to re elect this incompetance is nuts
|
|
by Sarah
|
07/25/07 10:10 AM
|
|
Thanks St. Petersburg Times for bringing this corruption to light. Without the paper's investigative reporters, the public would be in the DARK about how our $$$ is spent! Is there anyone in government who is not on the take??
|
|
by Dawn
|
07/25/07 10:08 AM
|
|
Jim Smith should also resign his position. As should that sale be reversed and the money returned. To sit there and enjoy his very susupicious profit while the attorney is punished is a sad commentary on his character.
|
|
by Jason
|
07/25/07 10:05 AM
|
|
"I wish I hadn't taken the hard way," Churuti said with a touch of anger. "I wish I had not tried to save the county money." Right..if that is not the comment of a guilty person. She did it for a gov't good ol' buddy.
|
|
by Terry
|
07/25/07 09:55 AM
|
|
And Jim Smith thinks he'll be re-elected?? He's got to be kidding!!
|
|
by Paul
|
07/25/07 09:42 AM
|
|
Yo Mr. Property Appraiser, you're so busted dude! Thanks for jacking up my taxes by 25% last year on my rental property. My tenants thank you too, since I had to pass along the increase. Built in 1925, they will always be apts, not 'highest/best use'
|
|
by Kim
|
07/25/07 09:32 AM
|
|
Duncan, Smith, and Churuti all need to go not just Churuti.
|
|
by Jim
|
07/25/07 09:31 AM
|
|
He threatens to sue the county and then has his buddies buy his property for way over its value. Sorry but this is illegal and he should lose his job.
|
|
by Sam
|
07/25/07 09:28 AM
|
|
I would call this a comedy of errors but for the fact that taxpayes in Pinellas are not amused.
|
|
by Kay
|
07/25/07 09:10 AM
|
|
Save the county money? I'm sure a damage settlement would have been much less than the purchase price. How does deepening a creek chanel damage it? I would think it would make it more attractive to a potential buyer. Smith needs the heat on this!
|
|
by tracy
|
07/25/07 09:07 AM
|
|
has anyone ever heard of "buddy-buddy"? i wonder how many people associated to smith made out through the years in his office? i'd get rid of them all and start over with new people that are not there for the illegal tax breaks and appraisals buddy?
|
|
by BP
|
07/25/07 08:59 AM
|
|
Susan this is completely different from Aungst. The State Attorney did an extensive investigation and found he did nothing wrong. He did not abuse his position or break any laws. Get over it! Jim Smith on the other hand looks much more unethical.
|
|
by Kathleen
|
07/25/07 08:26 AM
|
|
Susan Churuti's arrogance in saying, "she wishes she'd not taken the hard way" only underscores that she has no concept of what being a public servant is. She and Smith violated the public's trust and both should be removed from office.
|
|
by kd
|
07/25/07 08:21 AM
|
|
fire them, fine them, jail them; this is too much like the Bush administration's idea that there are 2 sets of laws and electeds are elitists that don't have to abide ...
|
|
by Harold
|
07/25/07 08:12 AM
|
|
Why is the attorney being played as the bad one here? She gained nothing, that we know of. It is the property appraiser that was paid 4 times what his office said the property was worth.
|
|
by susan
|
07/25/07 07:21 AM
|
|
who wants to bet the state attorney inquiry does not lead to any charges? does anyone remember its inquiry into former clearwater mayer brian aungst, who had his own property deal sweetened by politics? can you spell w-h-i-t-e-w-a-s-h?
|
|
by Larry
|
07/25/07 07:03 AM
|
|
OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!
|
|
Subscribe to the Times
Click here for daily delivery
of the St. Petersburg Times.
|