How Clueless is City Attorney Jorge Fernandez?

Although the Bar gave him a pass for his incompetent handling of the Hank Adorno fire fee scandal, what do you make of this legal giveaway:

Item RE.12 06-01877 on the last Miami City Commission meeting agenda, a resolution brought forth by City Attorney Jorge Fernandez, authorizes the director of finance to pay 750,000 taxpayer dollars to settle a lawsuit brought against the city and Joe Arriola by Wisconsin-based Hammes Sports Development, Inc. and Hammes Sports Development of Florida, LLC for breach of contract. In short, Fernandez wants to, as he said during the meeting, “buy the case off.”

Hammes Sports Development, Inc. and Hammes Sports Development of Florida, LLC sued the city of Miami for “compensatory damages in excess of $2 million” for breaking a project management agreement, or PMA, signed last year by the city when Arriola was still city manager, which put Hammes of Florida, LLC in charge of the $150 million Orange Bowl renovation. The city’s reason for breaking the deal: It wanted to hire Hammes, Inc., not its subsidiary, Hammes Sports Development of Florida LLC, and says officials were tricked into a contract with a company that would be less liable for mistakes and mismanagement. Hammes responds that this argument is “belied by the fact that numerous drafts and communications exchanged between the parties included the name of Hammes, LLC.” Hammes also notes in its lawsuit that “the City presumably read the PMA carefully before the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the City’s Risk Management Administrator signed the PMA, so the City must have known the identity of the Hammes entity with whom it had contracted.”

At the Nov. 9 meeting, Commissioner Tomas Regalado was the strongest voice opposing the resolution to settle the Hammes case. “The truth needs to be told; the city needs to know what went on with that contract. [If you settle this case] you won’t be buying closure, you’ll be buying silence,” he said.

When Commissioner Linda Haskins first brought the motion to approve the settlement forward, it died. None of Haskins’ colleagues on the dais seconded her motion.

This was the emotional tipping point for City Attorney Fernandez, who loudly protested that the settlement is a “bitter pill this commission has to swallow.” Fernandez also added that if he were forced to take the case to court, his job as city attorney “is to defend the players involved at all costs. Don’t look to me to do anything but defend them!”

Fernandez also claimed that the city could lose up to $13 million if it went to court against Hammes. This number was refuted by both Commissioner Regalado and Commissioner Michelle Spence-Jones.

“That is not a correct figure,” said Regalado.

“The figure you gave is not what I [just] heard,” said Spence-Jones.

In fact, the actual lawsuit against the city reads “in excess of $2 million.”

Eventually, Spence-Jones made a motion to reconsider, and the commission soon passed the resolution. The majority’s opinion was that paying Hammes off would protect the taxpayers, as paying $750,000 was better than paying millions.

“If this case goes to court, there will be public disclosures,” Regalado said to the SunPost, “so they put a gun to the commission’s head and said ‘if you don’t settle, we’ll have to pay $13 million.’”

So the City did not know which Hammes entity it was entering into a contract with? And decided to simply break the contract? Are the Three Stooges reviewing contracts and legal documents over there?

And $13 million -- what a joke. Is it just me or maybe Hammes might have some difficulty proving up these speculative numbers?