Preview
I’ Ol
, THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11 JUDICIAL
' CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
. FLORIDA
GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION
. CASE NO.: 05-15871 CA 23
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ex. rel.
MICHELLE TRIMBLE 8
we. en FLED WT EXHINTS g
WACKENHUT CORPORATION, EXHI3i05 ricED Wildl DE 5
Defendant.
/
REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS. :
FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Ps
In supplement to its Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Juric,
Defendant, The Wackenhut Corporation, does hereby submit the following table comparing
the allegations contained in the Verified Second Amended Complaint, which was reviewed by
Judge Leyte-Vidal, with that of the sworn deposition testimony of Plaintiff-Realtor, Michelle
Trimble, given on May 5, 2006 and September 20, 2006,"
As previously indicated in Wackenhut's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject
Matter Jurisdiction, because Trimble admits that she has no direct or independent
knowledge of the information on which the allegations in the Verified Second Amended
Complaint are based, as to either the Metrorail/Metromover (MDTA) or the Juvenile
Assessment Center (JAC), she is not an “original source" as required by the Ordinance.
Accordingly, this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction, requiring dismissal of this
qui tam action. Ordinance, §21-255, et. seq.
ee
"The Verified Second Amended Complaint is annexed hereto as Exhibit "A" Both deposition
transcripts of Michelle Trimble are annexed hereto as Composite Exhibit "
{M2478944;1}
eeALLEGATIONS MADE BY MICHELLE MICHELLE TRIMBLE'S SWORN
TRIMBLE IN HER VERIFIED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT TO THE CONTRARY
(Nos. listed correspond to Complaint) (Citations to transcript listed after each section)
Q. Have you reviewed Wackenhut's contracts with
Allegations re: Wackenhut's
the county?
Contracts with Miami-Dade County...
A. Not really, no. I'm not into it. We were
10. In fact, for more than a decade,
never allowed to see contracts.
Waceknhut has never had_ sufficient
Personnel to fulfill its contracts with
Miami-Dade County. Wackenhut has
been chronically short of guards and
Supervisors in all its contracts with
Miami-Dade County.
Q. During your employment at the JAC you were
never allowed to see contracts?
A. No.
13. As Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, | Q. There wasn't one kept on-site?
became more acquainted with the
performance and execution of
Wackenhut's contract to provide
services to Miami-Dade County's JAC, it
became increasingly apparent that
Wackenhut had insufficient personnel to
fulfill the contractual Specifications.
A. No.
Q. How about when you snooped around in the
captain's office? Did you find a contract?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 212, line 25 - page
213, line 11.
33. During the relevant period of
statutory limitation, Wackenhut entered
into two contracts for guard and security
serves...
Q. Has anyone provided you with any information
anonymously regarding Wackenhut's practices in
its county contracts?
41. Wackenhut has failed to provide the
human resources for which its has
contracted... [Wackenhut] has prepared
false documents Purporting to show that
Miami-Dade County contracts are being
fully performed "with all required
personnel... [Wackenhut] has submitted
bills for phantom hours and services [to
the County]... [Wackenhut] has received
Payment for same [from the County].
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211 , lines 4~7,
Q. After you were removed from the JAC, did you
Allegations re: the Metrorail
Continue any investigation?
Metromover (MDTA) Operations...
32. Subsequent to Plaintiff-Relator's | A. Investigation as to how?
termination, Trimble undertook to
Becta imble undertook to
investigate whether other contracts |Q. As to anything related to Wackenhut.
{M2478944;1}
CC _with Miami-Dade County, and
specifically, whether | Wackenhut's| A. No, not really. Like | said, that's when |
contracts for guard and security | went to the Inspector General after that.
services for the Miami-Dade Transit
Authority (MDTA), including its Metrorail
and Metromover operations, were also
falsely and inflatedly billed. (emphasis
added).
37. [This J references "fictitious time
sheets" submitted to county in
connection with Metrorail operations.]
38. ...roving patrol and bus patrol
positions are left empty...[and]...billed
to the County; The time sheets
submitted to the County would indicate
three 12 hour posts were manned,
those these 36 hours would have been
filled by a single person working 12
hours; Captains or other supervisors
were directed to stand post ...[and] the
County [is] billed for both the post and
the supervisor's positions; After working
a portion of the shift, the person would
be permitted to leave, the post would
remain empty, and the County [is] billed
for the entire shift;
39. [This {| references “fictitious time
sheets" submitted to county in
connection with Metrorail operations.]
40. [This {| also references "fictitious
time sheets" submitted to county in
connection with Metrorail operations.]
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 176, lines 2 — 7.
Q. How about the Metrorail? Do you have any
information about what's going on at the Metrorail?
A. None.
Q. How do you get your information about what's
going on at the Metrorail?
A. How do! get it?
Q. Yeah.
A. | don't get any information what's going on
at the Metrorail.
Q. You don't know anybody that works on the
Metrorail?
A.No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 35, line 13 — page 36,
line 3.
Q. How about the county? Do you talk to anybody
at the county about what goes on at the Metrorail?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 36, lines 4-9.
Q. Did you personally perform any investigation
into how the Metrorail operation was being
conducted?
A. No, ma'am.
Q. Do you personally know any officers that
worked for Wackenhut on the Rail?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 182, lines 17 - 23.
{M2478944;1}Allegations re: Inquiry / Investigation
performed by Michelle Trimble...
15. Further inquiry and investigation by
Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, revealed that,
notwithstanding the inability of
Defendant, Wackenhut, to provide
Miami-Dade County with the _ full
compliment of security staffing at the
JAC, it nevertheless always billed
Miami-Dade County as of the JAC unit
were fully staffed.
16. Specifically, Plaintiff-Relator,
Trimble, discovered that Defendant,
Wackenhut, was obliged to provide
Miami-Dade County 920 hours of guard
services per week at the JAC. A copy
of the current contract to provide guard
services at the JAC is attached to the
Appendix to this Verified Complaint as
Exhibit 1. Severe staffing shortages
rarely permitted Waceknhut to actually
provide more than 750 hours of actual
personnel time, and recent investigation
has revealed that the actual number of
hours worked by Wackenhut employees
average 600 hours per week.
17. Notwithstanding that Waceknhut
was unable to provide 920 hours per
week for guard services at the JAC,
Waceknhut always billed Miami-Dade
County as if the JAC were fully staffed.
Trimble began conducting her own
investigation into the method by which
Wackenhut created and submitted false
and inflated bills for JAC guard services.
18. Trimble own investigation revealed
that time worked by guards was
recorded by sign in sheets onto which
Waceknhut employees were to sign
their names and hours worked...
Subsequent to Plaintiff-Relator's
Trimble undertook __to
32.
termination,
Q. While you were employed by Wackenhut did |
you take any documents?
A. No.
Q. Did you copy any documents?
A. No.
Q. Has anyone given you any Wackenhut
documents since you left the employment of
Waceknhut?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 5/5/06, page 5, line 22 — page 6, line
4.
Q. You have no idea where you've gotten the
materials that you've attached to your complaint?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 5/5/06, page 15, lines 3- 5.
Q. Did you conduct any investigation into how
Wackenhut bills the county?
A. I didn't conduct an investigation on how
Wackenhut bills the county. | ended up
conducting an investigation on what was going
on, how people were getting paid for hours that
they didn't work and they were coming in when
they feel and still getting paid for the hours and
don't come in and still get their hours also.
Q. Have you ever reviewed any bill or invoice
submitted to the county by Wackenhut?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 159, lines 2 - 13.
Q. After you were removed from the JAC, did you
continue any investigation?
A. Investigation as to how?
{M2478944:1}investigate whether other contracts with
Miami-Dade County, and _ specifically,
whether Wackenhut's contracts for
guard and security services for the
Miami-Dade Transit Authority (MDTA),
including its Metrorail and Metromover
operations, were also falsely and
inflatedly billed.
36. ...45 unfilled position yield a 2,700
hour shortage of personnel every week.
Yet, despite this shortage, unscheduled
absences, and a weekly schedule of
8,500 to 11,000 billable hours every
week, Wackenhut never fails to bill the
County for its maximum allowed hours,
with the exception of occasional weeks
during which it claims to be short as few
as 10 but no more than 100 hours.
Q. As to anything related to Wackenhut.
A. No, not really. Like | said, that's when |
went to the Inspector General after that.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 176, lines 2-7.
Q. Tell me what you did to investigate what was
going on.
A. Ihad started paying attention to the sign-in
sheets, how everybody signed in and started
trying to see what the captain [Vasquez] was
doing on the payroll and once he found out that
twas snooping around, my days off changed,
and the day of the payroll stopped, to Sunday
and Monday and payroll is done on Monday
and my days off was changed.
Q. So you were snooping around his office?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you able to make copies of any of his
documents?
A. The sign-in sheets were kept in the office.
Q. Is that a yes or ano?
A. No.
Q. You weren't able to get a copy of anything that
the captain [Vasquez] had done which proved your
suspicions, is that correct?
A. Right.
Q. You're snooping around. What did you find?
A. | couldn't find anything because [Vasquez]
realized that | was snooping around.
Q. So you didn't find anything?
A. No, and after | started questioning, my days
off changed.
{M2478944;1}Q. But you still remained while you were at the
JAC very cognizant of everything that's going on
and aware, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And after you left the JAC, that's the end of
your investigation? Yes or no.
A. Yes.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 177, line 21 — page
179, line 3 (emphasis added).
Q. Did your investigation involve anything else
other than talking to some of your former
coemployees at the JAC?
A. That's it.
Q. Who else provided you some _ information
which helped you in your investigation?
A. Well, at that time | went and hired an
attorney and he hired an investigation team.
Q. Did you personally perform any investigation
into how the Metrorail operation was being
conducted?
A. No, ma'am.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, Page 182, lines 9 — 20.
Allegations re: fraudulent _ bills
submitted to the County...
19. After the alteration of time sheets, a
bill was prepared by Wackenhut's office
and submitted to the County for
payment....Among the employees
receiving extra pay were Sonia Bartlett,
Tameka Allen, David = Mayorga,
Deleatha Davis, Pelegue Cine and Jose
Cuepo....
Q. Did you conduct any investigation into how
Wackenhut bills the county?
A. I didn't conduct an investigation on how
Waceknhut bills the county. | ended up
conducting an investigation on what was going
on, how people were getting paid for hours that
they didn't work and they were coming in when
they feel and still getting paid for the hours and
don't come in and still get their hours also.
Q.__Have you ever reviewed any bill or invoice
{M2478944;1}22. ...Wackenhut has not engaged any
new personnel to fulfill the juvenile
detention officer requirements of the
agreement at anytime. Instead, it had
deployed CPOs from the chronically
understaffed JAC and billed 336 more
phantom hours per week.
23. ... Despite undertaking to provide
40 hours per week for additional CPO
time, Wackenhut has failed to do so and
has employed its "time _ shifting”
methods set forth in paragraphs 18 and
19, supra.
24. ~...Wackenhut caused false and
inflated invoices to be submitted for
payment to Miami-Dade County,
reflecting phantom hours and services...
25. All bills were hand-delivered to the
Miami-Dade County employee
administering the contract with
Wackenhut.
35. Wackenhut creates false
documentation to hide these shortages
and justify billing the County fully,
despite a lack of coverage. Since 1999,
the personnel shortage has significantly
worsened, with as many as 35 CPO
positions unfilled in a shift and an
average of 45 unfilled positions in a 24-
hour period.
44, Defendant, Wackenhut, has
violated § 21-258 in its business
dealings with Miami-Dade County by ...
presenting false claims for payment;
Defendant, Wackenhut, has violated §
21-258 in its business dealings with
Miami-Dade County by ... making and
using false record hours to get a false,
fraudulent or inflated claims paid by the
County; Defendant, Wackenhut, has
violated § 21-258 in its business
dealings with Miami-Dade County by ...
delivering services, with an_ intent to
submitted to the county by Wackenhut?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever reviewed Sonia Bartlett's
paychecks?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever reviewed Tameka Allen's
paychecks?
A. No.
Q. Did David Mayorga ever show you his
paychecks?
A. No.
Q. How about Jose Cuepo?
A. No.
Q. Mr. Cine, did he ever show you his timesheets?
A. No.
Q. How about his paychecks?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 159, line 2 — page
160, line 4.
Q. And you know they were getting paid how?
Because you didn't see their paychecks?
A. No. I started watching the sign-in sheets
then.
Q. But you didn't see their paychecks?
A. No.
* ee
Q. Did there come a point in time where you
learned dates and times when this had occurred?
{M2478944;1}defraud, of a different quantity than
specified in several contracts with the
County.
A. No. At that time | was removed like right
away after that.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 172, lines 12 - 17;
page 173, line 23 — page 174, line 1.
Q. Did Agent Johnson ever show you any bills?
A. Agent Johnson?
Q. Isn't that the name of the agent at OIG?
A. No, I've never seen bills.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, lines 14 — 17.
Allegations re: Information provided
to OIG by Michelle Trimble...
20. ...The OIG investigation was
prompted by Trimble's notice to it as the
original source of information about JAC
overbilling....
29. In December, 2004, Plaintiff-
Relator, Trimble, reported the fraudulent
scheme to Miami-Dade County's OIG.
{M2478944:1}
Q. You weren't subpoenaed to go in to talk to the
OIG?
A. Yeah, they called me and asked me to come
in.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 339, lines 6 — 9.
Q. You didn't give Agent Johnson any documents?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 40, lines 8 - 10.
Q. Did Agent Johnson ever show you any bills?
A. Agent Johnson?
Q. Isn't that the name of the agent at OIG?
A. No, I've never seen bills.
Q. He showed you some timesheets and
logbooks from the JAC, right?
A. That's it.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, lines 14 — 20
(emphasis added).
Q._ Did you provide the Inspector General with any{M2478944:1}
ee
schedules which indicated the time that the officers
were working? on
A. No.
Q. Did he show you any schedules?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 114, line 25 - page
115, line 5.
Q. What were you asking [Agent Johnson about]
that you weren't getting answers to?
A. What was going to happen, | had been
removed and was there anything else going on.
Basically after | found out no, I went in and
consulted an attorney. | called him back at
another time, asked could | get some [copies]
of those documents that he had obtained and
he told me no because they were going to go
on an investigation.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06. page 119, line 22 ~ page
120, line 15 (emphasis added).
Q. When you first went and met with somebody at
the Inspector General's Office, what did you tell
them?
A. I told them that there were — Wackenhut was
— people were signing in for hours that they
didn't work on a routine basis and the more |
spoke up about it, the more it became a hostile
environment for me to work and I was removed.
Q. Did you tell the Inspector General anything
else, the agent of the Inspector General anything
else besides that?
A. That people were getting paid for hours they
didn't work.
+ ee
Q. Captain Vasquez was the one perpetrating this
Payment of hours that people weren't working?A. Yes.
Q. That is who you reported to the Inspector
General?
A. Yes, that's what I reported as to what was
going on.
* ee
Q. Did you write anything down?
A. No.
Q. Did they show you any documents?
A. Yeah. Once they went in and obtained the
documents from Mr. Vasquez | was called back
in to show them what I was talking about.
Q. So what were you shown at that second
meeting?
A. |was shown all the sign-in sheets, the sign-
in sheets and logbooks.
eee
Q. Tell me what you told them.
A. Then once | showed them what was done |
discovered Captain Vasquez signing out on the
officer sign-in sheets.
Q. Tell me what you told them.
A. lexplained to them how the fraud was done,
how the sign-in sheets were whited out.
Q. Can you explain that to me?
A. The sheets were whited out and time was
added.
Q. What did you tell them that they didn't know by
looking at the sign-in sheet?
{M2478944:1}A. I told them Captain Vasquez was signing in
on the officers sign-in sheets, the times that he
was — | just stumbled upon it — times he was
supposed to_be working at another job, that
they didn't work those hours.
Q. What else did you tell the agents of the
Inspector General's office that they didn't know?
A. That was it.
Q. When you talked to the agent about Rudy
Vasquez having another job, that was information
they did not know before you told them, right?
A. Correct.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 105, line 22 — Page
106, line 9; page 107, lines 18 — 24; page 108,
lines 13 — 22; page 109, line 19 — page 110, line 20
(emphasis added).
Allegations re: Miami-Dade County's
"Transportation Services Contract"...
21. In or about February, 2002,
Defendant, Wackenhut, and the JAC
entered into a new and _ separate
agreement whereby Wackenhut agreed
to provide "Transportation Services" at
the JAC. Specifically, Wackenhut
agreed to provide two (2) nine-
passenger vans at the cost of $1,600.00
per vehicle .... Transportation Services
Contract is attached...
22. ...from February, 2002 through
May, 2004, Wackenhut transported no
juveniles and the two vans for which
Miami-Dade County was billed were
deployed by Wackenhut at its Blue
Lagoon headquarters or at other
Wackenhut job sites.
Q. Do you know anybody that works in the
Department of Transportation at the county?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 36, lines 19 — 21.
Q. Have you reviewed Wackenhut's contracts with
the county?
A. Not really, no. I'm not into it. We were
never allowed to see contracts.
Q. During your employment at the JAC you were
never allowed to see contracts?
A. No.
Q. There wasn't one kept on-site?
A. No.
Q. How about when you snooped around in the
captain's office? Did you find a contract?
A._No.
{M2478944;1}Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 212, line 25 - page
213, line 11.
Q. Has anyone provided you with any information
anonymously regarding Wackenhut's practices in
its county contracts?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, lines 4— 7.
Q. Has anyone from the transit department ever
contacted you?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 214, lines 19 - 21.
Allegations re: Lobbyist Activities...
8. Wackenhut engaged lobbyists to
appear before the Miami-Dade County
Commission to secure contracts and
continue business relationships with the
County...
9. As a consequence of the lobbying
efforts set forth in paragraph 8, supra,
Wackenhut has rarely, if ever, had
competitive bidders for its contracts...
Q. Who are Wackenhut's lobbyists?
A. I don't even know.
Q. Do you have any idea what the Wackenhut
lobbyists do?
A. No.
Q. You don't have any information about the
lobbyists or what they do?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever come into contact with any
Wackenhut lobbyists while you were working at the
JAC?
A. Never.
ee oe
Q._ Did you ever hear anything about their
activities?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever uncover anything as part of your
investigation revolved around the Wackenhut
{M2478944;1}lobbyists?
A. No, not in my knowledge.
Q. Right. That's what I'm asking you about. What
do you know?
A. No. Nothing. | ---
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, line 21- page
212, line 17.
Allegation re: Luis Garafalo...
30. ...Captain, Luis Garofalo ...has
continued billing phantom hours to
Miami-Dade County...and _ receives
payment therefore, even though he is
present less than 40 hours per week.
Do you know who Luis Garafalo is?
No. I've never met him before.
You have no idea who he is?
I've never seen him before.
P > oO > Oo
Do you have any information about any
wrongdoing involving Luis Garafalo?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 209, lines 9— 15.
Allegation re: Terry Grant...
34. In 1999, Terry Grant, an MDTA
administrator, expressed a concern to
Wackenhut regarding false and inflated
billing.
Q. Do you know Terry Grant?
A. No, ma'am.
Q. Have you ever talked to Terry Grant?
A. No, ma'am.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 36, lines 10 — 13.
Allegations re: Daniel Kaslick...
37. ...The current administrative
supervisor is Daniel Kaslick.....
38. In order to fill the 45 to 70 empty
posts per day, the administrative
supervisors, Kaslick or Pereira, direct
Majors or acting Majors working as shift
Q. Do you know Daniel Kaslick?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 183, lines 1 - 2.
{M2478944;1}supervisors, Captains, and CPOs in a
daily redeployment effort.... CPOs are
directed to work several posts
simultaneously by Mssrs. Kaslick ....
39. From the fictitious time sheets, Mr.
Kaslick, or before him, Mr. Pereira,
prepare a preliminary bill with the
assistance of Mr. Pendleton's office....
These fictitious time sheets are
thereafter kept in the office of Mr.
Pendleton to which Plaintiff has no
access.
Allegations re: Elijah Pendleton...
37. ...Wackenhut's Project Manger is
Elijah "Eddie" Pendleton.
39. From the fictitious time sheets, Mr.
Kaslick... prepare a preliminary bill with
the assistance of Mr. Pendleton's
office.... These fictitious time sheets are
thereafter kept in the office of Mr.
Pendleton to which Plaintiff has no
access.
Q. Do you know Elijah Pendleton?
A. No.
Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 182, lines 24 - 25.
{M2478944;1}Respectfully Submitted,
AKERMAN SENTERFITT
Attorneys for Defendant Wackenhut
SunTrust International Center, 28th Floor
One Southeast Third Avenue
Miami, Florida 33131-1704
Phone: (305) 374-5600
Christine L-Welstead
Florida Bar No.: 970956
Angela C. de Cespedes Wenke
Florida Bar No.: 623571
Diana M. Szego
Florida Bar No. 017095
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
| HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via
facsimile and U.S. mail this 13" day of November, 2006 to: H. Mark Vieth, Esq., Tilghman &
Vieth, P.A., One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2410, 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida
33131; Lauri Waldman Ross, Esq., Lauri Waldman Ross, P.A., Two Datran Center, Suite
1612, 9130 S. Dadeland Bivd., Miami , Florida 33156; and Hugo Benitez, Esq., Assistant
County Attorney, Stephen P. Clark Center, 711 NW 1st Street, Suite 2810, Miami, Florida
33128.
(M2478944;1)EXHIBIT "A"IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
11° JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION
CASE NUMBER: 05-15871 CA 23
MIAMI-DADE COUNT’ Y, ex rel,
MICHELLE TRIMBLE,
Plaintiff,
vs. UL TAM ACTION
WACKENHUT CORPORATION,
Defendant.
a /
PLAINTIFF'S VERIFIED SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
ND JURY TRIAL DEMAND
Plaintiff, Miami-Dade County, ex rel. Michelle Trimble, sues the Defendant, Wackenhut
Corporation, and alleges as follows:
1. This is a qui tam action for damages brought under the Miami-Dade County False
Claims Ordinance, §21-255, et. Seq., Miami
2,
-Dade County Code.
This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to §21-259(2)(a), Miami-
Dade County Code.
3. Plaintiff, Miami-Dade County, is a political subdivision of the State of Florida
and the government of the citizens of Miami-Dade County.
4. Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, is an individual and resident of Miami-Dade
County, Florida.5. Defendant, Wackenhut Corporation, is a Florida corporation doing business in
and with Miami-Dade County, Florida.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
6. Defendant, Wackenhut Corporation (“Wackenhut”) is in the business, inter alia,
of providing security and guard services to public and private organizations and individuals. In
such connection, Wackenhut has entered into contracts with the Plaintiff, Miami-Dade County or
its subdivisions, to provide guard and Security services for several authorities, agencies, and/or
instrumentalities of Miami-Dade County government,
7. Wackenhut has built up an ongoing business relationship with Miami-Dade
County over many years, becoming the preferred provider of guard and security services to
Miami-Dade County.
8. Wackenhut has engaged lobbyists to appear before the Miami-Dade County
Commission to secure Contracts and continue the business relationships with the County. In this
connection and building on its prior business Telationship, Wackenhut has convinced the Miami-
Dade County Commission and the County Manager that, due to its size and prior business
relationship with the County, only Wackenhut has sufficient qualified personnel to fulfill County
contracts for guard and security services.
9. AS a consequence of the lobbying efforts set forth in Paragraph 8, supra,
Wackenhut has rarely, if ever, had competitive bidders for its contracts. Instead, Wackenhut has
obtained contracts by receiving “bid waivers” from the County Manager or its contracts were the
product of “requests for Proposals,” wherein factors other than the lowest bid could be
considered in awarding a contract. In each scenario, Wackenhut has urged that competitors beexcluded from the contract Process because only Wackenhut had sufficient human resources to
fulfill a contract,
10. In fact, for more than a decade, Wackenhut has never had sufficient personnel to
fulfill its contracts with Miami-Dade County. Wackenhut has been chronically short of guards
and supervisors in all its contracts with Miami-Dade County.
IL. Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, began working for Defendant, Wackenhut, in
May, 1998. Her first position was a “Custom Protection Officer” (CPO) in Miami-Dade
County’s Juvenile Assessment Center CJAC”). Wackenhut has had a contract for many years to
provide guard and Security services to the JAC where juveniles arrested in the County are
initially processed in the criminal justice system.
12, From May, 1998 to 2001 : Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, worked as a CPO for the
JAC. In 2001, and continuing to October, 2004, Trimble was a Wackenhut Sergeant assigned to
the JAC,
13. As Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, became more acquainted with the performance and
execution of Wackenhut’s Contract to provide services to Miami-Dade County’s JAC, it became
increasingly apparent that Wackenhut had insufficient Personnel to fulfill the contractual
specifications,
14. Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, began to complain to her superiors and co-workers that
the failure to provide sufficient personnel Posed a danger to JAC workers and detainees,
15. Further inquiry and investigation by Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, revealed that,
notwithstanding the inability of Defendant, Wackenhut, to provide Miami-Dade County with the
full compliment of security staffing at the JAC, it nevertheless always billed Miami-Dade
County as if the JAC unit were fully staffed.16. Specifically, Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, discovered that Defendant, Wackenhut,
was obliged to provide Miami-Dade County 920 hours of guard services per week at the JAC, A
Captain, specifically during Trimble’s employ, Rudolfo Vazquez, along with the Major assigned
to the JAC by Wackenhut, namely, Mike Wickham, through the use of White Out© altered19. After the alteration of time sheets, a bill was prepared by Wackenhut’s office and
submitted to the County for payment. In the interim, Vazquez open and notoriously declared to
various Wackenhut JAC employees “I gave you ten hours,” “I gave your twenty hours,” or other
varying amounts of time. Additionally, Vazquez usually “gave” himself sixteen hours for
working on the weekend even though he was not present at the JAC because he was working for
Miami-Dade County’s Parks Department. Vazquez frequently declared that this was his way of
“taking care” of his best employees, and for their part, said employees frequently declared that
they had received “extra time” in their paychecks. Among the employees receiving extra pay
were Sonia Bartlett, Tameka Allen, David Mayorga, Deleatha Davis, Pelegue Cine, and Jose
Quepo, the latter of whom was employed by Wackenhut’s subcontractor, Alanis,
20. The sign in time sheets are in the exclusive control of Wackenhut such that they
cannot be attached to this Complaint, save for records seized by the Miami-Dade County’s
Office of Inspector General (OIG), which records are not subject to disclosure until the
completion of OIG’s ongoing investigation. The OIG investigation was prompted by Trimble’s
Notice to it as the original source of information about JAC overbilling. Notwithstanding,
attached to the Appendix as Exhibit 2 is a sample of the aforesaid JAC time sheets showing
David Mayorga working at the JAC in three instances with different sign in signatures.
21. In or about February, 2002, Defendant, Wackenhut, and the JAC entered into a
new and separate agreement whereby Wackenhut agreed to provide “Transportation Services” at
the JAC. Specifically, Wackenhut agreed to provide two (2) nine-passenger vans at the cost of
$1,600.00 per vehicle and assign two additional juvenile detention officers 24 hours per day, 7
5-days per week, 336 total hours per week at the rate of $23.27 per hour. The monthly cost of this
service is $37,453.12, A copy of this Transportation Services Contract is attached in the
Appendix as Exhibit 3,
22. In fact, from February, 2002 through May, 2004, Wackenhut transported no
juveniles and the two vans for which Miami-Dade County was billed were deployed by
Wackenhut at its Blue Lagoon headquarters or at other Wackenhut job sites. Furthermore,
Wackenhut has not engaged any new personnel to fulfill the juvenile detention officer
Tequirements of the agreement at anytime. Instead, it had deployed CPCs from the chronically
understaffed JAC and billed 336 more phantom hours per week.
23. In May, 2004, Wackenhut and the County entered into an new contract whereby
the rate for the vans was reduced and 40 hours per week, instead of 336 hours, was billed for a
Transportation Services CPO, A copy of the new Transportation Services contract is attached to
the Appendix as Exhibit 4, Despite undertaking to provide 40 hours per week for additional
CPO time, Wackenhut has failed to do so and has employed its “time shifting” methods set forth
in paragraphs 18 and 19, supra.
24. In furtherance of these schemes, Wackenhut caused false and inflated invoices to
be submitted for Payment to Miami-Dade County, reflecting phantom hours and services, and
Defendant, Wackenhut, received payment for those bills.
25. With knowledge of the false and inflated nature of its billing methods, bills, and
payment therefor, Wackenhut undertook to specifically avoid the U.S. postal service or other
instrumentalities of interstate commerce when submitting its bills to Miami-Dade County. All
-~6-bills were hand-delivered to the Miami-Dade County employee administering the contract with
Wackenhut.
26. As Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, communicated her increased criticism of the
fraudulent scheme to her superiors and co-workers, she came under increasing hostility and
criticisms by her supervisors working in the JAC. In October, 2004, she confronted Captain
Rudolfo Vazquez, and told him that Wackenhut either needed more personnel or correct billing
of Miami-Dade County.
27. — Within a week, Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, related the same concerns to a
Wackenhut trainer, Bill Winstell. While speaking to Winstell, Vazquez. burst into the room
where Trimble and Winstell were speaking and demanded to know what Trimble was saying to
Winstell. When told, Vazquez declared to Plaintiff-Relator Trimble: “I have got to get rid of
you.”
28. On October 26, 2004, two days after this declaration by Vazquez, Plaintiff-
Relator, Trimble, was demoted from the Wackenhut rank of sergeant to CPO and transferred out
of the JAC after nearly six years.
29. In December, 2004, Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, reported the fraudulent scheme to
Miami-Dade County’s OIG. The OIG receives payment from Wackenhut for the auditing of its
performance under various contracts with Miami-Dade County.
30. In response to inquiry by the OIG, Wackenhut conducted a cursory investigation
and fired Rudolfo Vazquez for dual employment by the County and Wackenhut.. The
Wackenhut employee who investigated the Trimble OIG charges, Major Marty Bair, discovered
~7-evidence that time sheets had been altered with White Out©, consistent with the preparation of
false and inflated hours and bills to the County. Bair declined to investigate, even though
Trimble’s OIG complaint was about false billing, not dual employment. Notwithstanding the
termination of Vazquez, Wackenhut replaced Vazquez with another Captain, Luis Garofalo, who
has continued billing phantom hours to Miami-Dade County per week. Consistent therewith,
Garofalo schedules himself for 96 hours a week of JAC time and receives payment therefor,
even though he is present less than 40 hours per week. A copy of Garofalo’s schedule is
attached to the Appendix as Exhibit 5,
31. On May 6, 2005, Defendant, Wackenhut fired Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle
Trimble.
32. Subsequent to Plaintiff-Relator’s termination, Trimble undertook to investigate
whether other contracts with Miami-Dade County, and specifically, whether Wackenhut’s
contracts for guard and security services for the Miami-Dade Transit Authority (MDTA),
including its Metrorail and Metromover operations, were also falsely and inflatedly billed.
33. During the relevant period of statutory limitation, Wackenhut entered into two
contracts for guard and security services. Wackenhut’s 1999 and 2004 Miami-Dade Transit
contracts are attached to the Appendix as Exhibits 6 and 7 respectively.
34. In 1999, because of a concern expressed by Terry Grant, an MDTA administrator,
Wackenhut directed the same Major Marty Bair to conduct an audit of three months of billing
for Wackenhut's Metrorail operations (hereinafter, “1999 Audit”). After documenting numerous
specific instances of false and inflated billing, Bair found:
-8-a. Hours worked on one Post were attributed to another post;
b. Supervisors Standing a post in replacement for an absent regular officer do
not sign in, though the Post is billed to the County as though another Supervisor worked the post;
c “Great emphasis seems to be placed on ensuring that the invoice total hours
worked never reflect a lack of coverage at the station . . . regardless of the fact
there was an apparent lack of Coverage on the statio;”
d. “There was extensive use of white out on the sign ins;”
€. “The location listed at the top of the sign ins for the Posts frequently do not
reflect the actual name of the Post the officer worked and are Many times not consistent with the
name of the post as reflected on the payroll and billing system. One Post might be referred to by
two or three different names on sign ins.” A copy of the 1999 Audit is attached as Exhibit 8.
35. The reason for the documentary irregularities noted in the 1999 Audit was
Wackenhut’s chronic Personnel shortages and its creation of false documentation to hide these
shortages and justify billing the County fully, despite a lack of coverage. Since 1999, the
personnel shortage has significantly worsened, with as many as 35 CPO positions unfilled ina
shift and an average of 45 unfilled Positions in a 24-hour period,
36. The 45 unfilled Positions yield a 2,700 hour shortage of personnel every week,
Yet, despite this shortage, unscheduled absences, and a weekly schedule of 8,500 to 11,000
billable hours every week, Wackenhut never fails to bill the County for its maximum allowed
hours, with the exception of occasional weeks during which it claims to be short as few as 10 but
no more than 100 hours, Again, the billing of false and inflated hours to the County is a product
-9~of liberal use of White Out © on sign in sheets in order to adjust hours and names to make it
appear that posts are staffed, even though no one is working on them--commonly referred to by
Wackenhut employees as “ghost Posts,”--and to extend hours Purportedly worked ona post,
though the Post is left abandoned,
37. Wackenhut personnel are deployed in various Positions in the Metrorail operation.
CPOs are placed at Stations along the Metrorail and Metromover in fixed or Static postings,
Additionally, 6 to 8 CPOs are assigned to “roving Patrols.” Roving patrols ride Metrorail and
Metromover trains and Cars or otherwise move about the system to provide additional security to
Passengers, Moreover, 8 or 9 “bus patrols” monitor bus activities, sometimes Tiding behind
buses, sometimes tiding on buses, and Sometimes posting at troublesome bus stops. Immediately
Metrorail performance from the 4% and 5" floor of the Stephen P, Clark Government Center.
Administratively, a Wackenhut employee in the rank of Captain is assigned to the Position of
“administrative Supervisor.” Among other duties, the administrative Supervisor prepares the work
~10-Kaslick. Kaslick’s predecessor during the period of limitation was Roberto Pereira. Wackenhut’s
Project Manager is Elijah “Eddie” Pendleton.
38. In order to fill the 45 to 70 empty posts per day, the administrative supervisors,
Kaslick or Pereira, direct Majors or acting Majors working as shift supervisors, Captains, and
CPOs ina daily redeployment effort. In redeploying personnel, Wackenhut’s administrators
endeavor to fill the most visible Positions first, especially platform and gate positions most visible
to the public. This redeployment occurs in several ways:
a. Roving patrols and bus patrols are frequently redeployed to fill fixed post
positions. In so doing, roving patrol and bus patrol positions are left empty, though they are
billed to the County;
b. CPOs are directed to work several posts simultaneously by Mssrs. Kaslick,
Pereira, Major Alvarado, or others, including shift supervisors, acting at the direction of
Wackenhut administrators, By way of example, Jose Mora, while working as a CPO, was
assigned to the South Miami station, a two-person post. After signing in at the South Miami
Station, he would be directed to take a southbound train to the Dadeland South station at which he
would perform the duties of one or two CPOs at that station. The time sheets submitted to the
County would indicate three 12 hour posts were manned, those these 36 hours would have been
filled by a single person working 12 hours;
¢. Captains or other supervisors were directed to stand a Post so that the County would
be billed for both the post and supervisor’s positions;
-ll-d. CPOs at the ends of their shifts were directed to go to other posts to sign in for
another 10 or 12 hour shift. After working a portion of the shift, the person would be permitted to
leave, the post would remain empty, and the County billed for the entire shift;
€. The identical name is written several times on schedules in order to make it appear as
if the shift has been fully staffed, even though it is not and the person is only working one
Position;
f. Names of people not working at all are written on time sheets in order to make it
appear that positions are filled. By way of example, Mr. Kaslick has written his own name into
time sheets as though he was working an actually unmanned Post;
8. Fictitious names are written on time sheets,
39. From the fictitious time sheets, Mr. Kaslick, or before him, Mr, Pereira, Prepare a
preliminary bill with the assistance of Mr. Pendleton’s office. Time sheets are entered into a
missing 10 to 100 hours Per week. These fictitious time sheets are thereafter kept in the office of
Mr. Pendleton to which Plaintiff has no access,
40. Notwithstanding the fictitious time sheets, Captains and shift supervisors make
note of redeployments and pen posts on documents referred to as “run sheets.” Run sheets arelog books, compared to the time sheets and bills, would document the redeployment described
above. Plaintiff does not have copies of the logbooks which were recently seized by the County’s
auditor’s office at the direction of the County Manager. Neither log books nor run sheets
Constitute the false or inflated bills submitted to the County; Wackenhut does not rely on the
documents Teflecting the actual hours oF persons working such hours, instead relying on the
fictitious time sheets in the Preparation of County billing,
41. Inall aspects of Contract performance and billing, Defendant, Wackenhut, has
failed to provide the human resources for which its has contracted, it has prepared false
documents Purporting to show that Miami-Dade County contracts are being fully performed with
all required personnel, it has submitted bills for phantom hours and services, and it has received
Payment for same.
42. Asa result of the fraudulent overbilling of Miami-Dade County, the County has
suffered damage by being billed for phantom services.
43. Section 21-258 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida prohibits the
following:
(a) Any person who knowingly presents or causes to be
presented to the County, or to any officer, employee,
agent, or consultant of the County, a false or
fraudulent claim for Payment or approval;
(b) Any Person who knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be
made or used, a false, fraudulent, or inflated claim paid or
approved by the County;
-13-(c) Any person who conspires to defraud the County by
facilitating the payment of a false, fraudulent, or
inflated claim allowed or paid by the County;
(4) Any person who delivers, with the intent to defraud
the County, goods or services of different quality or
quantity than that specified in the applicable contract
or specification;
44. Defendant, Wackenhut, has violated §21-258 in its business dealings with Miami-
Dade County by (a) presenting false claims for payment; (b) making and using a false record of
hours to get a false, fraudulent or inflated claims paid by the County; and (c) by delivering
services, with an intent to defraud, of a different quantity than specified in several contracts with
the County.
45. Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, is a person, pursuant to §21-259(2), Code of
Miami-Dade County, Florida, who is entitled to bring an action for violations of §21-259, and has
engaged undersigned counsel and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorney’s fee.
46. All conditions precedent to this action have been performed, occurred, or have
been waived.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, on behalf of Miami-Dade County,
hereby demands judgment against the Defendant, Wackenhut Corporation for the following as
specified in §21-258 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida.
-14-(©)
69]
(g)
Three times the amount of the false, inflated or
fraudulent claims submitted to Miami-Dade County
over the five years immediately prior to the filing of
this action;
Costs, attorney’s fees, and all expert, investigator,
and consulting fees; and
Be subject to debarment from Miami-Dade County
business for a period of five years,
JURY TRIAL DEMAND
Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all issues so triable by law.
VERIFICATION OF MICHELLE TRIMBLE
Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Michelle Trimble, who was
duly swom and declared that the factual assertions made herein are true and correct and based
upon her personal knowledge, admissions of Wackenhut employees, or documents which she has
Seen, possesses, or controls,
-15-Nut Trimble’
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this AT icy of December, 2005 by
Michelle Trimble who declares that the facts asserted herein are true and are based on her
Personal knowledge, admissions of Wackenhut ployees, and documents, and who is personally
known to me or has produced her drivers licen i ificatign.
STATE OF FLORIDA )
) SS:
COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE )
0 hE The. VOL
! ¥ Micanmisenposzues (Print, Type or Stamp Comabissioned Mame
WEAF expies sly 19,2000 Of Notary Public)
E. ATE OF SERVICE
THEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished
by hand-delivery this aK day of December, 2005 to: Christine Welstead, Esquire, AKERMAN
SENTERFITT, Sun Trust International Center, 28" Floor, One Southeast Third Avenue, Miami,
FL 33131-5600, and by U.S, mail to: Hugo Benitez, Esq., Assistant County Attorney, Stephen P.
Clark Center, 111 N.W. First Strect, Suite 2810, Miami, FL 33128.
-16-Respectfully submitted,
TILGHMAN & VIETH, P.A.
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Relator
One Biscayne Tower
Suite 2410
2 South Biscayne Blvd,
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: 305/381-8806
Facsimile: 305/381-8813
By: S
H.MARK VIETH
FBN: 399256
~17-COMPOSITE
EXHIBIT "B"IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FL.
CASE NO. 05-15871 CA 23
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ex. Rel.
MICHELLE TRIMBLE,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
WACKENHUT CORPORATION,
Defendant(s) .
- - - ee,
One Southeast Third Avenue
Miami, Florida
September 20, 2006
10:28 a.m. - 12:35 p.m.
and
1:30 p.m. - 4:25 p.m.
Videotaped deposition of MICHELLE TRIMBLE
taken by Defendant for purposes of discovery and
for use as evidence in trial in the above-entitled
cause pursuant to Notice of Taking Deposition
heretofore filed before LISA PERAZA, Shorthand
Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of
Florida at large, on the date and time
above-referred to.
Klein, Bury, Reif, Applebaum & Associates
AU.S. Legal Support Company2 4
i ‘APPEARANCES: | 1. Thereupon:
TILGHMAN & VIETH, P.A. 2 MICHELLE TRIMBLE
3 By: H. MARK VIETH, ESQ. 3 was called as a witness and, having been duly
4 ae esceme Boulevard 4 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
Miami, Florida 33131 15 DIRECT EXAMINATION
5 Telephone: (305) 381-8806 STEAD:
Facsimile: (305) 381-8813 6 BY MS. WE D:
6 appearing on behalf of 7 Q. Good morning.
7 Plaintiff(s). 8 — A. Good morning.
8 AKERMAN SENTERFITT 9 Q. Please state your name.
9 wr eeTNe Le Cae SO. 10 A. Michelle Trimble,
an sy ).
SunTrust International Center 11 Q. Who is Michelle Vickers?
10 One Southeast 3rd Avenue - 28th Floor 12 A. The same person,
Miami, Florida 33131-1714 i
i Telephone: (305) 374-5600 13 Q. What name do you go by?
Facsimile: (305) 374-5095 14 A. Michelle Trimble.
12 appearing on behalf of . a
Defendant(s) Wackenhut, 15 Q. You provided us with an authorization form
13 16 to get your IRS records in this matter?
14 ALSO PRESENT: Michael Slusher ‘17 A. Yes,
Diana Szego oo a
15 Eddy Esquivel 18 Q. And you signed it Michelle Vickers?
16 -INDEX- i
17 WITNESS DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 8 A {signed t Michelle Vickers because my
18 MICHELLE TRIMBLE 20 social security number is still under Michelle
19 [Ms. Welstead} 4 21 Vickers,
20. [Mr. Vieth] - ‘ : ,
21 -EXHIBITS- 22 Q. What is your social security number?
22 Defendant's Page 3°;
23-1 [Complaint] 54
24 2 [Memo - May 21,'04] 97 | 24 Q. When is the last time you filed tax
25__3 [Memo - April 29,'03] 132 25 _returns? _
3) 5
1 Exhibits (Cont): | 1A. Tfile tax returns every year.
2 4 [Incident Report - April 22,'03] 133 2 Q. Did you file then in April?
3 5 [Incident Report - April 23,'03] 134 3 A. Lusually file tax returns in January or
4 6 [Incident Report - April 22,'03] 136 | 4 mid January for every year.
5 7 [Incident Report - May 21,104] 147 | 5 Q. Your 2005 tax returns, were those submitted
6 6 between January and April of this year?
7 se & 7 A. Yes.
8 8 —Q. Do you do them yourself?
9 ‘THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now on the video; 9 A. No,
10 record. Today is Wednesday, the 20th day of | 10 Q. Who do you use to help you with that?
11 September commencing at approximately 10:28 A.M. 11 A. All Accounts Services.
12 This is the videotaped deposition of 12 Q. Have you been using All Accounts for a
13 Michelle Trimble located at the Offices of Akerman 13 little while?
14. Senterfitt, One Southeast Third Avenue, in Case No. | 14 A. Yes.
1505-15871 CA 23 in the matter of Miami-Dade and 1/15 Q. How many years?
16 Michelle Trimble vs. Wackenhut Corp. /16 A. Quite a few years. I don't recall how
17 Our court report is Lisa Peraza with | 17 many. Three or four years.
18 Klein-Bury & Associates, My name is Mike Massa | 18 Q. Where is All Accounts located?
19 with Klein, Bury & Associates, -19 A. It's in Hialeah.
20 Counsel, please state your appearances for 20 Q. ‘Is there a particular Person that you deal
21 the record, | 21 with there?
22 MR. VIETH: Mark
Preview
I’ Ol , THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11 JUDICIAL ' CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, . FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION . CASE NO.: 05-15871 CA 23 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ex. rel. MICHELLE TRIMBLE 8 we. en FLED WT EXHINTS g WACKENHUT CORPORATION, EXHI3i05 ricED Wildl DE 5 Defendant. / REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS. : FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Ps In supplement to its Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Juric, Defendant, The Wackenhut Corporation, does hereby submit the following table comparing the allegations contained in the Verified Second Amended Complaint, which was reviewed by Judge Leyte-Vidal, with that of the sworn deposition testimony of Plaintiff-Realtor, Michelle Trimble, given on May 5, 2006 and September 20, 2006," As previously indicated in Wackenhut's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, because Trimble admits that she has no direct or independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations in the Verified Second Amended Complaint are based, as to either the Metrorail/Metromover (MDTA) or the Juvenile Assessment Center (JAC), she is not an “original source" as required by the Ordinance. Accordingly, this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction, requiring dismissal of this qui tam action. Ordinance, §21-255, et. seq. ee "The Verified Second Amended Complaint is annexed hereto as Exhibit "A" Both deposition transcripts of Michelle Trimble are annexed hereto as Composite Exhibit " {M2478944;1} eeALLEGATIONS MADE BY MICHELLE MICHELLE TRIMBLE'S SWORN TRIMBLE IN HER VERIFIED DEPOSITION TESTIMONY SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT TO THE CONTRARY (Nos. listed correspond to Complaint) (Citations to transcript listed after each section) Q. Have you reviewed Wackenhut's contracts with Allegations re: Wackenhut's the county? Contracts with Miami-Dade County... A. Not really, no. I'm not into it. We were 10. In fact, for more than a decade, never allowed to see contracts. Waceknhut has never had_ sufficient Personnel to fulfill its contracts with Miami-Dade County. Wackenhut has been chronically short of guards and Supervisors in all its contracts with Miami-Dade County. Q. During your employment at the JAC you were never allowed to see contracts? A. No. 13. As Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, | Q. There wasn't one kept on-site? became more acquainted with the performance and execution of Wackenhut's contract to provide services to Miami-Dade County's JAC, it became increasingly apparent that Wackenhut had insufficient personnel to fulfill the contractual Specifications. A. No. Q. How about when you snooped around in the captain's office? Did you find a contract? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 212, line 25 - page 213, line 11. 33. During the relevant period of statutory limitation, Wackenhut entered into two contracts for guard and security serves... Q. Has anyone provided you with any information anonymously regarding Wackenhut's practices in its county contracts? 41. Wackenhut has failed to provide the human resources for which its has contracted... [Wackenhut] has prepared false documents Purporting to show that Miami-Dade County contracts are being fully performed "with all required personnel... [Wackenhut] has submitted bills for phantom hours and services [to the County]... [Wackenhut] has received Payment for same [from the County]. A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211 , lines 4~7, Q. After you were removed from the JAC, did you Allegations re: the Metrorail Continue any investigation? Metromover (MDTA) Operations... 32. Subsequent to Plaintiff-Relator's | A. Investigation as to how? termination, Trimble undertook to Becta imble undertook to investigate whether other contracts |Q. As to anything related to Wackenhut. {M2478944;1} CC _with Miami-Dade County, and specifically, whether | Wackenhut's| A. No, not really. Like | said, that's when | contracts for guard and security | went to the Inspector General after that. services for the Miami-Dade Transit Authority (MDTA), including its Metrorail and Metromover operations, were also falsely and inflatedly billed. (emphasis added). 37. [This J references "fictitious time sheets" submitted to county in connection with Metrorail operations.] 38. ...roving patrol and bus patrol positions are left empty...[and]...billed to the County; The time sheets submitted to the County would indicate three 12 hour posts were manned, those these 36 hours would have been filled by a single person working 12 hours; Captains or other supervisors were directed to stand post ...[and] the County [is] billed for both the post and the supervisor's positions; After working a portion of the shift, the person would be permitted to leave, the post would remain empty, and the County [is] billed for the entire shift; 39. [This {| references “fictitious time sheets" submitted to county in connection with Metrorail operations.] 40. [This {| also references "fictitious time sheets" submitted to county in connection with Metrorail operations.] Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 176, lines 2 — 7. Q. How about the Metrorail? Do you have any information about what's going on at the Metrorail? A. None. Q. How do you get your information about what's going on at the Metrorail? A. How do! get it? Q. Yeah. A. | don't get any information what's going on at the Metrorail. Q. You don't know anybody that works on the Metrorail? A.No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 35, line 13 — page 36, line 3. Q. How about the county? Do you talk to anybody at the county about what goes on at the Metrorail? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 36, lines 4-9. Q. Did you personally perform any investigation into how the Metrorail operation was being conducted? A. No, ma'am. Q. Do you personally know any officers that worked for Wackenhut on the Rail? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 182, lines 17 - 23. {M2478944;1}Allegations re: Inquiry / Investigation performed by Michelle Trimble... 15. Further inquiry and investigation by Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, revealed that, notwithstanding the inability of Defendant, Wackenhut, to provide Miami-Dade County with the _ full compliment of security staffing at the JAC, it nevertheless always billed Miami-Dade County as of the JAC unit were fully staffed. 16. Specifically, Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, discovered that Defendant, Wackenhut, was obliged to provide Miami-Dade County 920 hours of guard services per week at the JAC. A copy of the current contract to provide guard services at the JAC is attached to the Appendix to this Verified Complaint as Exhibit 1. Severe staffing shortages rarely permitted Waceknhut to actually provide more than 750 hours of actual personnel time, and recent investigation has revealed that the actual number of hours worked by Wackenhut employees average 600 hours per week. 17. Notwithstanding that Waceknhut was unable to provide 920 hours per week for guard services at the JAC, Waceknhut always billed Miami-Dade County as if the JAC were fully staffed. Trimble began conducting her own investigation into the method by which Wackenhut created and submitted false and inflated bills for JAC guard services. 18. Trimble own investigation revealed that time worked by guards was recorded by sign in sheets onto which Waceknhut employees were to sign their names and hours worked... Subsequent to Plaintiff-Relator's Trimble undertook __to 32. termination, Q. While you were employed by Wackenhut did | you take any documents? A. No. Q. Did you copy any documents? A. No. Q. Has anyone given you any Wackenhut documents since you left the employment of Waceknhut? A. No. Trimble Depo 5/5/06, page 5, line 22 — page 6, line 4. Q. You have no idea where you've gotten the materials that you've attached to your complaint? A. No. Trimble Depo 5/5/06, page 15, lines 3- 5. Q. Did you conduct any investigation into how Wackenhut bills the county? A. I didn't conduct an investigation on how Wackenhut bills the county. | ended up conducting an investigation on what was going on, how people were getting paid for hours that they didn't work and they were coming in when they feel and still getting paid for the hours and don't come in and still get their hours also. Q. Have you ever reviewed any bill or invoice submitted to the county by Wackenhut? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 159, lines 2 - 13. Q. After you were removed from the JAC, did you continue any investigation? A. Investigation as to how? {M2478944:1}investigate whether other contracts with Miami-Dade County, and _ specifically, whether Wackenhut's contracts for guard and security services for the Miami-Dade Transit Authority (MDTA), including its Metrorail and Metromover operations, were also falsely and inflatedly billed. 36. ...45 unfilled position yield a 2,700 hour shortage of personnel every week. Yet, despite this shortage, unscheduled absences, and a weekly schedule of 8,500 to 11,000 billable hours every week, Wackenhut never fails to bill the County for its maximum allowed hours, with the exception of occasional weeks during which it claims to be short as few as 10 but no more than 100 hours. Q. As to anything related to Wackenhut. A. No, not really. Like | said, that's when | went to the Inspector General after that. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 176, lines 2-7. Q. Tell me what you did to investigate what was going on. A. Ihad started paying attention to the sign-in sheets, how everybody signed in and started trying to see what the captain [Vasquez] was doing on the payroll and once he found out that twas snooping around, my days off changed, and the day of the payroll stopped, to Sunday and Monday and payroll is done on Monday and my days off was changed. Q. So you were snooping around his office? A. Yes. Q. Were you able to make copies of any of his documents? A. The sign-in sheets were kept in the office. Q. Is that a yes or ano? A. No. Q. You weren't able to get a copy of anything that the captain [Vasquez] had done which proved your suspicions, is that correct? A. Right. Q. You're snooping around. What did you find? A. | couldn't find anything because [Vasquez] realized that | was snooping around. Q. So you didn't find anything? A. No, and after | started questioning, my days off changed. {M2478944;1}Q. But you still remained while you were at the JAC very cognizant of everything that's going on and aware, right? A. Yes. Q. And after you left the JAC, that's the end of your investigation? Yes or no. A. Yes. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 177, line 21 — page 179, line 3 (emphasis added). Q. Did your investigation involve anything else other than talking to some of your former coemployees at the JAC? A. That's it. Q. Who else provided you some _ information which helped you in your investigation? A. Well, at that time | went and hired an attorney and he hired an investigation team. Q. Did you personally perform any investigation into how the Metrorail operation was being conducted? A. No, ma'am. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, Page 182, lines 9 — 20. Allegations re: fraudulent _ bills submitted to the County... 19. After the alteration of time sheets, a bill was prepared by Wackenhut's office and submitted to the County for payment....Among the employees receiving extra pay were Sonia Bartlett, Tameka Allen, David = Mayorga, Deleatha Davis, Pelegue Cine and Jose Cuepo.... Q. Did you conduct any investigation into how Wackenhut bills the county? A. I didn't conduct an investigation on how Waceknhut bills the county. | ended up conducting an investigation on what was going on, how people were getting paid for hours that they didn't work and they were coming in when they feel and still getting paid for the hours and don't come in and still get their hours also. Q.__Have you ever reviewed any bill or invoice {M2478944;1}22. ...Wackenhut has not engaged any new personnel to fulfill the juvenile detention officer requirements of the agreement at anytime. Instead, it had deployed CPOs from the chronically understaffed JAC and billed 336 more phantom hours per week. 23. ... Despite undertaking to provide 40 hours per week for additional CPO time, Wackenhut has failed to do so and has employed its "time _ shifting” methods set forth in paragraphs 18 and 19, supra. 24. ~...Wackenhut caused false and inflated invoices to be submitted for payment to Miami-Dade County, reflecting phantom hours and services... 25. All bills were hand-delivered to the Miami-Dade County employee administering the contract with Wackenhut. 35. Wackenhut creates false documentation to hide these shortages and justify billing the County fully, despite a lack of coverage. Since 1999, the personnel shortage has significantly worsened, with as many as 35 CPO positions unfilled in a shift and an average of 45 unfilled positions in a 24- hour period. 44, Defendant, Wackenhut, has violated § 21-258 in its business dealings with Miami-Dade County by ... presenting false claims for payment; Defendant, Wackenhut, has violated § 21-258 in its business dealings with Miami-Dade County by ... making and using false record hours to get a false, fraudulent or inflated claims paid by the County; Defendant, Wackenhut, has violated § 21-258 in its business dealings with Miami-Dade County by ... delivering services, with an_ intent to submitted to the county by Wackenhut? A. No. Q. Have you ever reviewed Sonia Bartlett's paychecks? A. No. Q. Have you ever reviewed Tameka Allen's paychecks? A. No. Q. Did David Mayorga ever show you his paychecks? A. No. Q. How about Jose Cuepo? A. No. Q. Mr. Cine, did he ever show you his timesheets? A. No. Q. How about his paychecks? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 159, line 2 — page 160, line 4. Q. And you know they were getting paid how? Because you didn't see their paychecks? A. No. I started watching the sign-in sheets then. Q. But you didn't see their paychecks? A. No. * ee Q. Did there come a point in time where you learned dates and times when this had occurred? {M2478944;1}defraud, of a different quantity than specified in several contracts with the County. A. No. At that time | was removed like right away after that. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 172, lines 12 - 17; page 173, line 23 — page 174, line 1. Q. Did Agent Johnson ever show you any bills? A. Agent Johnson? Q. Isn't that the name of the agent at OIG? A. No, I've never seen bills. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, lines 14 — 17. Allegations re: Information provided to OIG by Michelle Trimble... 20. ...The OIG investigation was prompted by Trimble's notice to it as the original source of information about JAC overbilling.... 29. In December, 2004, Plaintiff- Relator, Trimble, reported the fraudulent scheme to Miami-Dade County's OIG. {M2478944:1} Q. You weren't subpoenaed to go in to talk to the OIG? A. Yeah, they called me and asked me to come in. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 339, lines 6 — 9. Q. You didn't give Agent Johnson any documents? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 40, lines 8 - 10. Q. Did Agent Johnson ever show you any bills? A. Agent Johnson? Q. Isn't that the name of the agent at OIG? A. No, I've never seen bills. Q. He showed you some timesheets and logbooks from the JAC, right? A. That's it. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, lines 14 — 20 (emphasis added). Q._ Did you provide the Inspector General with any{M2478944:1} ee schedules which indicated the time that the officers were working? on A. No. Q. Did he show you any schedules? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 114, line 25 - page 115, line 5. Q. What were you asking [Agent Johnson about] that you weren't getting answers to? A. What was going to happen, | had been removed and was there anything else going on. Basically after | found out no, I went in and consulted an attorney. | called him back at another time, asked could | get some [copies] of those documents that he had obtained and he told me no because they were going to go on an investigation. Trimble Depo 9/20/06. page 119, line 22 ~ page 120, line 15 (emphasis added). Q. When you first went and met with somebody at the Inspector General's Office, what did you tell them? A. I told them that there were — Wackenhut was — people were signing in for hours that they didn't work on a routine basis and the more | spoke up about it, the more it became a hostile environment for me to work and I was removed. Q. Did you tell the Inspector General anything else, the agent of the Inspector General anything else besides that? A. That people were getting paid for hours they didn't work. + ee Q. Captain Vasquez was the one perpetrating this Payment of hours that people weren't working?A. Yes. Q. That is who you reported to the Inspector General? A. Yes, that's what I reported as to what was going on. * ee Q. Did you write anything down? A. No. Q. Did they show you any documents? A. Yeah. Once they went in and obtained the documents from Mr. Vasquez | was called back in to show them what I was talking about. Q. So what were you shown at that second meeting? A. |was shown all the sign-in sheets, the sign- in sheets and logbooks. eee Q. Tell me what you told them. A. Then once | showed them what was done | discovered Captain Vasquez signing out on the officer sign-in sheets. Q. Tell me what you told them. A. lexplained to them how the fraud was done, how the sign-in sheets were whited out. Q. Can you explain that to me? A. The sheets were whited out and time was added. Q. What did you tell them that they didn't know by looking at the sign-in sheet? {M2478944:1}A. I told them Captain Vasquez was signing in on the officers sign-in sheets, the times that he was — | just stumbled upon it — times he was supposed to_be working at another job, that they didn't work those hours. Q. What else did you tell the agents of the Inspector General's office that they didn't know? A. That was it. Q. When you talked to the agent about Rudy Vasquez having another job, that was information they did not know before you told them, right? A. Correct. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 105, line 22 — Page 106, line 9; page 107, lines 18 — 24; page 108, lines 13 — 22; page 109, line 19 — page 110, line 20 (emphasis added). Allegations re: Miami-Dade County's "Transportation Services Contract"... 21. In or about February, 2002, Defendant, Wackenhut, and the JAC entered into a new and _ separate agreement whereby Wackenhut agreed to provide "Transportation Services" at the JAC. Specifically, Wackenhut agreed to provide two (2) nine- passenger vans at the cost of $1,600.00 per vehicle .... Transportation Services Contract is attached... 22. ...from February, 2002 through May, 2004, Wackenhut transported no juveniles and the two vans for which Miami-Dade County was billed were deployed by Wackenhut at its Blue Lagoon headquarters or at other Wackenhut job sites. Q. Do you know anybody that works in the Department of Transportation at the county? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 36, lines 19 — 21. Q. Have you reviewed Wackenhut's contracts with the county? A. Not really, no. I'm not into it. We were never allowed to see contracts. Q. During your employment at the JAC you were never allowed to see contracts? A. No. Q. There wasn't one kept on-site? A. No. Q. How about when you snooped around in the captain's office? Did you find a contract? A._No. {M2478944;1}Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 212, line 25 - page 213, line 11. Q. Has anyone provided you with any information anonymously regarding Wackenhut's practices in its county contracts? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, lines 4— 7. Q. Has anyone from the transit department ever contacted you? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 214, lines 19 - 21. Allegations re: Lobbyist Activities... 8. Wackenhut engaged lobbyists to appear before the Miami-Dade County Commission to secure contracts and continue business relationships with the County... 9. As a consequence of the lobbying efforts set forth in paragraph 8, supra, Wackenhut has rarely, if ever, had competitive bidders for its contracts... Q. Who are Wackenhut's lobbyists? A. I don't even know. Q. Do you have any idea what the Wackenhut lobbyists do? A. No. Q. You don't have any information about the lobbyists or what they do? A. No. Q. Did you ever come into contact with any Wackenhut lobbyists while you were working at the JAC? A. Never. ee oe Q._ Did you ever hear anything about their activities? A. No. Q. Did you ever uncover anything as part of your investigation revolved around the Wackenhut {M2478944;1}lobbyists? A. No, not in my knowledge. Q. Right. That's what I'm asking you about. What do you know? A. No. Nothing. | --- Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 211, line 21- page 212, line 17. Allegation re: Luis Garafalo... 30. ...Captain, Luis Garofalo ...has continued billing phantom hours to Miami-Dade County...and _ receives payment therefore, even though he is present less than 40 hours per week. Do you know who Luis Garafalo is? No. I've never met him before. You have no idea who he is? I've never seen him before. P > oO > Oo Do you have any information about any wrongdoing involving Luis Garafalo? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 209, lines 9— 15. Allegation re: Terry Grant... 34. In 1999, Terry Grant, an MDTA administrator, expressed a concern to Wackenhut regarding false and inflated billing. Q. Do you know Terry Grant? A. No, ma'am. Q. Have you ever talked to Terry Grant? A. No, ma'am. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 36, lines 10 — 13. Allegations re: Daniel Kaslick... 37. ...The current administrative supervisor is Daniel Kaslick..... 38. In order to fill the 45 to 70 empty posts per day, the administrative supervisors, Kaslick or Pereira, direct Majors or acting Majors working as shift Q. Do you know Daniel Kaslick? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 183, lines 1 - 2. {M2478944;1}supervisors, Captains, and CPOs in a daily redeployment effort.... CPOs are directed to work several posts simultaneously by Mssrs. Kaslick .... 39. From the fictitious time sheets, Mr. Kaslick, or before him, Mr. Pereira, prepare a preliminary bill with the assistance of Mr. Pendleton's office.... These fictitious time sheets are thereafter kept in the office of Mr. Pendleton to which Plaintiff has no access. Allegations re: Elijah Pendleton... 37. ...Wackenhut's Project Manger is Elijah "Eddie" Pendleton. 39. From the fictitious time sheets, Mr. Kaslick... prepare a preliminary bill with the assistance of Mr. Pendleton's office.... These fictitious time sheets are thereafter kept in the office of Mr. Pendleton to which Plaintiff has no access. Q. Do you know Elijah Pendleton? A. No. Trimble Depo 9/20/06, page 182, lines 24 - 25. {M2478944;1}Respectfully Submitted, AKERMAN SENTERFITT Attorneys for Defendant Wackenhut SunTrust International Center, 28th Floor One Southeast Third Avenue Miami, Florida 33131-1704 Phone: (305) 374-5600 Christine L-Welstead Florida Bar No.: 970956 Angela C. de Cespedes Wenke Florida Bar No.: 623571 Diana M. Szego Florida Bar No. 017095 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE | HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via facsimile and U.S. mail this 13" day of November, 2006 to: H. Mark Vieth, Esq., Tilghman & Vieth, P.A., One Biscayne Tower, Suite 2410, 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, Florida 33131; Lauri Waldman Ross, Esq., Lauri Waldman Ross, P.A., Two Datran Center, Suite 1612, 9130 S. Dadeland Bivd., Miami , Florida 33156; and Hugo Benitez, Esq., Assistant County Attorney, Stephen P. Clark Center, 711 NW 1st Street, Suite 2810, Miami, Florida 33128. (M2478944;1)EXHIBIT "A"IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11° JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION CASE NUMBER: 05-15871 CA 23 MIAMI-DADE COUNT’ Y, ex rel, MICHELLE TRIMBLE, Plaintiff, vs. UL TAM ACTION WACKENHUT CORPORATION, Defendant. a / PLAINTIFF'S VERIFIED SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT ND JURY TRIAL DEMAND Plaintiff, Miami-Dade County, ex rel. Michelle Trimble, sues the Defendant, Wackenhut Corporation, and alleges as follows: 1. This is a qui tam action for damages brought under the Miami-Dade County False Claims Ordinance, §21-255, et. Seq., Miami 2, -Dade County Code. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to §21-259(2)(a), Miami- Dade County Code. 3. Plaintiff, Miami-Dade County, is a political subdivision of the State of Florida and the government of the citizens of Miami-Dade County. 4. Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, is an individual and resident of Miami-Dade County, Florida.5. Defendant, Wackenhut Corporation, is a Florida corporation doing business in and with Miami-Dade County, Florida. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 6. Defendant, Wackenhut Corporation (“Wackenhut”) is in the business, inter alia, of providing security and guard services to public and private organizations and individuals. In such connection, Wackenhut has entered into contracts with the Plaintiff, Miami-Dade County or its subdivisions, to provide guard and Security services for several authorities, agencies, and/or instrumentalities of Miami-Dade County government, 7. Wackenhut has built up an ongoing business relationship with Miami-Dade County over many years, becoming the preferred provider of guard and security services to Miami-Dade County. 8. Wackenhut has engaged lobbyists to appear before the Miami-Dade County Commission to secure Contracts and continue the business relationships with the County. In this connection and building on its prior business Telationship, Wackenhut has convinced the Miami- Dade County Commission and the County Manager that, due to its size and prior business relationship with the County, only Wackenhut has sufficient qualified personnel to fulfill County contracts for guard and security services. 9. AS a consequence of the lobbying efforts set forth in Paragraph 8, supra, Wackenhut has rarely, if ever, had competitive bidders for its contracts. Instead, Wackenhut has obtained contracts by receiving “bid waivers” from the County Manager or its contracts were the product of “requests for Proposals,” wherein factors other than the lowest bid could be considered in awarding a contract. In each scenario, Wackenhut has urged that competitors beexcluded from the contract Process because only Wackenhut had sufficient human resources to fulfill a contract, 10. In fact, for more than a decade, Wackenhut has never had sufficient personnel to fulfill its contracts with Miami-Dade County. Wackenhut has been chronically short of guards and supervisors in all its contracts with Miami-Dade County. IL. Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, began working for Defendant, Wackenhut, in May, 1998. Her first position was a “Custom Protection Officer” (CPO) in Miami-Dade County’s Juvenile Assessment Center CJAC”). Wackenhut has had a contract for many years to provide guard and Security services to the JAC where juveniles arrested in the County are initially processed in the criminal justice system. 12, From May, 1998 to 2001 : Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, worked as a CPO for the JAC. In 2001, and continuing to October, 2004, Trimble was a Wackenhut Sergeant assigned to the JAC, 13. As Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, became more acquainted with the performance and execution of Wackenhut’s Contract to provide services to Miami-Dade County’s JAC, it became increasingly apparent that Wackenhut had insufficient Personnel to fulfill the contractual specifications, 14. Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, began to complain to her superiors and co-workers that the failure to provide sufficient personnel Posed a danger to JAC workers and detainees, 15. Further inquiry and investigation by Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, revealed that, notwithstanding the inability of Defendant, Wackenhut, to provide Miami-Dade County with the full compliment of security staffing at the JAC, it nevertheless always billed Miami-Dade County as if the JAC unit were fully staffed.16. Specifically, Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, discovered that Defendant, Wackenhut, was obliged to provide Miami-Dade County 920 hours of guard services per week at the JAC, A Captain, specifically during Trimble’s employ, Rudolfo Vazquez, along with the Major assigned to the JAC by Wackenhut, namely, Mike Wickham, through the use of White Out© altered19. After the alteration of time sheets, a bill was prepared by Wackenhut’s office and submitted to the County for payment. In the interim, Vazquez open and notoriously declared to various Wackenhut JAC employees “I gave you ten hours,” “I gave your twenty hours,” or other varying amounts of time. Additionally, Vazquez usually “gave” himself sixteen hours for working on the weekend even though he was not present at the JAC because he was working for Miami-Dade County’s Parks Department. Vazquez frequently declared that this was his way of “taking care” of his best employees, and for their part, said employees frequently declared that they had received “extra time” in their paychecks. Among the employees receiving extra pay were Sonia Bartlett, Tameka Allen, David Mayorga, Deleatha Davis, Pelegue Cine, and Jose Quepo, the latter of whom was employed by Wackenhut’s subcontractor, Alanis, 20. The sign in time sheets are in the exclusive control of Wackenhut such that they cannot be attached to this Complaint, save for records seized by the Miami-Dade County’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), which records are not subject to disclosure until the completion of OIG’s ongoing investigation. The OIG investigation was prompted by Trimble’s Notice to it as the original source of information about JAC overbilling. Notwithstanding, attached to the Appendix as Exhibit 2 is a sample of the aforesaid JAC time sheets showing David Mayorga working at the JAC in three instances with different sign in signatures. 21. In or about February, 2002, Defendant, Wackenhut, and the JAC entered into a new and separate agreement whereby Wackenhut agreed to provide “Transportation Services” at the JAC. Specifically, Wackenhut agreed to provide two (2) nine-passenger vans at the cost of $1,600.00 per vehicle and assign two additional juvenile detention officers 24 hours per day, 7 5-days per week, 336 total hours per week at the rate of $23.27 per hour. The monthly cost of this service is $37,453.12, A copy of this Transportation Services Contract is attached in the Appendix as Exhibit 3, 22. In fact, from February, 2002 through May, 2004, Wackenhut transported no juveniles and the two vans for which Miami-Dade County was billed were deployed by Wackenhut at its Blue Lagoon headquarters or at other Wackenhut job sites. Furthermore, Wackenhut has not engaged any new personnel to fulfill the juvenile detention officer Tequirements of the agreement at anytime. Instead, it had deployed CPCs from the chronically understaffed JAC and billed 336 more phantom hours per week. 23. In May, 2004, Wackenhut and the County entered into an new contract whereby the rate for the vans was reduced and 40 hours per week, instead of 336 hours, was billed for a Transportation Services CPO, A copy of the new Transportation Services contract is attached to the Appendix as Exhibit 4, Despite undertaking to provide 40 hours per week for additional CPO time, Wackenhut has failed to do so and has employed its “time shifting” methods set forth in paragraphs 18 and 19, supra. 24. In furtherance of these schemes, Wackenhut caused false and inflated invoices to be submitted for Payment to Miami-Dade County, reflecting phantom hours and services, and Defendant, Wackenhut, received payment for those bills. 25. With knowledge of the false and inflated nature of its billing methods, bills, and payment therefor, Wackenhut undertook to specifically avoid the U.S. postal service or other instrumentalities of interstate commerce when submitting its bills to Miami-Dade County. All -~6-bills were hand-delivered to the Miami-Dade County employee administering the contract with Wackenhut. 26. As Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, communicated her increased criticism of the fraudulent scheme to her superiors and co-workers, she came under increasing hostility and criticisms by her supervisors working in the JAC. In October, 2004, she confronted Captain Rudolfo Vazquez, and told him that Wackenhut either needed more personnel or correct billing of Miami-Dade County. 27. — Within a week, Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, related the same concerns to a Wackenhut trainer, Bill Winstell. While speaking to Winstell, Vazquez. burst into the room where Trimble and Winstell were speaking and demanded to know what Trimble was saying to Winstell. When told, Vazquez declared to Plaintiff-Relator Trimble: “I have got to get rid of you.” 28. On October 26, 2004, two days after this declaration by Vazquez, Plaintiff- Relator, Trimble, was demoted from the Wackenhut rank of sergeant to CPO and transferred out of the JAC after nearly six years. 29. In December, 2004, Plaintiff-Relator, Trimble, reported the fraudulent scheme to Miami-Dade County’s OIG. The OIG receives payment from Wackenhut for the auditing of its performance under various contracts with Miami-Dade County. 30. In response to inquiry by the OIG, Wackenhut conducted a cursory investigation and fired Rudolfo Vazquez for dual employment by the County and Wackenhut.. The Wackenhut employee who investigated the Trimble OIG charges, Major Marty Bair, discovered ~7-evidence that time sheets had been altered with White Out©, consistent with the preparation of false and inflated hours and bills to the County. Bair declined to investigate, even though Trimble’s OIG complaint was about false billing, not dual employment. Notwithstanding the termination of Vazquez, Wackenhut replaced Vazquez with another Captain, Luis Garofalo, who has continued billing phantom hours to Miami-Dade County per week. Consistent therewith, Garofalo schedules himself for 96 hours a week of JAC time and receives payment therefor, even though he is present less than 40 hours per week. A copy of Garofalo’s schedule is attached to the Appendix as Exhibit 5, 31. On May 6, 2005, Defendant, Wackenhut fired Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble. 32. Subsequent to Plaintiff-Relator’s termination, Trimble undertook to investigate whether other contracts with Miami-Dade County, and specifically, whether Wackenhut’s contracts for guard and security services for the Miami-Dade Transit Authority (MDTA), including its Metrorail and Metromover operations, were also falsely and inflatedly billed. 33. During the relevant period of statutory limitation, Wackenhut entered into two contracts for guard and security services. Wackenhut’s 1999 and 2004 Miami-Dade Transit contracts are attached to the Appendix as Exhibits 6 and 7 respectively. 34. In 1999, because of a concern expressed by Terry Grant, an MDTA administrator, Wackenhut directed the same Major Marty Bair to conduct an audit of three months of billing for Wackenhut's Metrorail operations (hereinafter, “1999 Audit”). After documenting numerous specific instances of false and inflated billing, Bair found: -8-a. Hours worked on one Post were attributed to another post; b. Supervisors Standing a post in replacement for an absent regular officer do not sign in, though the Post is billed to the County as though another Supervisor worked the post; c “Great emphasis seems to be placed on ensuring that the invoice total hours worked never reflect a lack of coverage at the station . . . regardless of the fact there was an apparent lack of Coverage on the statio;” d. “There was extensive use of white out on the sign ins;” €. “The location listed at the top of the sign ins for the Posts frequently do not reflect the actual name of the Post the officer worked and are Many times not consistent with the name of the post as reflected on the payroll and billing system. One Post might be referred to by two or three different names on sign ins.” A copy of the 1999 Audit is attached as Exhibit 8. 35. The reason for the documentary irregularities noted in the 1999 Audit was Wackenhut’s chronic Personnel shortages and its creation of false documentation to hide these shortages and justify billing the County fully, despite a lack of coverage. Since 1999, the personnel shortage has significantly worsened, with as many as 35 CPO positions unfilled ina shift and an average of 45 unfilled Positions in a 24-hour period, 36. The 45 unfilled Positions yield a 2,700 hour shortage of personnel every week, Yet, despite this shortage, unscheduled absences, and a weekly schedule of 8,500 to 11,000 billable hours every week, Wackenhut never fails to bill the County for its maximum allowed hours, with the exception of occasional weeks during which it claims to be short as few as 10 but no more than 100 hours, Again, the billing of false and inflated hours to the County is a product -9~of liberal use of White Out © on sign in sheets in order to adjust hours and names to make it appear that posts are staffed, even though no one is working on them--commonly referred to by Wackenhut employees as “ghost Posts,”--and to extend hours Purportedly worked ona post, though the Post is left abandoned, 37. Wackenhut personnel are deployed in various Positions in the Metrorail operation. CPOs are placed at Stations along the Metrorail and Metromover in fixed or Static postings, Additionally, 6 to 8 CPOs are assigned to “roving Patrols.” Roving patrols ride Metrorail and Metromover trains and Cars or otherwise move about the system to provide additional security to Passengers, Moreover, 8 or 9 “bus patrols” monitor bus activities, sometimes Tiding behind buses, sometimes tiding on buses, and Sometimes posting at troublesome bus stops. Immediately Metrorail performance from the 4% and 5" floor of the Stephen P, Clark Government Center. Administratively, a Wackenhut employee in the rank of Captain is assigned to the Position of “administrative Supervisor.” Among other duties, the administrative Supervisor prepares the work ~10-Kaslick. Kaslick’s predecessor during the period of limitation was Roberto Pereira. Wackenhut’s Project Manager is Elijah “Eddie” Pendleton. 38. In order to fill the 45 to 70 empty posts per day, the administrative supervisors, Kaslick or Pereira, direct Majors or acting Majors working as shift supervisors, Captains, and CPOs ina daily redeployment effort. In redeploying personnel, Wackenhut’s administrators endeavor to fill the most visible Positions first, especially platform and gate positions most visible to the public. This redeployment occurs in several ways: a. Roving patrols and bus patrols are frequently redeployed to fill fixed post positions. In so doing, roving patrol and bus patrol positions are left empty, though they are billed to the County; b. CPOs are directed to work several posts simultaneously by Mssrs. Kaslick, Pereira, Major Alvarado, or others, including shift supervisors, acting at the direction of Wackenhut administrators, By way of example, Jose Mora, while working as a CPO, was assigned to the South Miami station, a two-person post. After signing in at the South Miami Station, he would be directed to take a southbound train to the Dadeland South station at which he would perform the duties of one or two CPOs at that station. The time sheets submitted to the County would indicate three 12 hour posts were manned, those these 36 hours would have been filled by a single person working 12 hours; ¢. Captains or other supervisors were directed to stand a Post so that the County would be billed for both the post and supervisor’s positions; -ll-d. CPOs at the ends of their shifts were directed to go to other posts to sign in for another 10 or 12 hour shift. After working a portion of the shift, the person would be permitted to leave, the post would remain empty, and the County billed for the entire shift; €. The identical name is written several times on schedules in order to make it appear as if the shift has been fully staffed, even though it is not and the person is only working one Position; f. Names of people not working at all are written on time sheets in order to make it appear that positions are filled. By way of example, Mr. Kaslick has written his own name into time sheets as though he was working an actually unmanned Post; 8. Fictitious names are written on time sheets, 39. From the fictitious time sheets, Mr. Kaslick, or before him, Mr, Pereira, Prepare a preliminary bill with the assistance of Mr. Pendleton’s office. Time sheets are entered into a missing 10 to 100 hours Per week. These fictitious time sheets are thereafter kept in the office of Mr. Pendleton to which Plaintiff has no access, 40. Notwithstanding the fictitious time sheets, Captains and shift supervisors make note of redeployments and pen posts on documents referred to as “run sheets.” Run sheets arelog books, compared to the time sheets and bills, would document the redeployment described above. Plaintiff does not have copies of the logbooks which were recently seized by the County’s auditor’s office at the direction of the County Manager. Neither log books nor run sheets Constitute the false or inflated bills submitted to the County; Wackenhut does not rely on the documents Teflecting the actual hours oF persons working such hours, instead relying on the fictitious time sheets in the Preparation of County billing, 41. Inall aspects of Contract performance and billing, Defendant, Wackenhut, has failed to provide the human resources for which its has contracted, it has prepared false documents Purporting to show that Miami-Dade County contracts are being fully performed with all required personnel, it has submitted bills for phantom hours and services, and it has received Payment for same. 42. Asa result of the fraudulent overbilling of Miami-Dade County, the County has suffered damage by being billed for phantom services. 43. Section 21-258 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida prohibits the following: (a) Any person who knowingly presents or causes to be presented to the County, or to any officer, employee, agent, or consultant of the County, a false or fraudulent claim for Payment or approval; (b) Any Person who knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false, fraudulent, or inflated claim paid or approved by the County; -13-(c) Any person who conspires to defraud the County by facilitating the payment of a false, fraudulent, or inflated claim allowed or paid by the County; (4) Any person who delivers, with the intent to defraud the County, goods or services of different quality or quantity than that specified in the applicable contract or specification; 44. Defendant, Wackenhut, has violated §21-258 in its business dealings with Miami- Dade County by (a) presenting false claims for payment; (b) making and using a false record of hours to get a false, fraudulent or inflated claims paid by the County; and (c) by delivering services, with an intent to defraud, of a different quantity than specified in several contracts with the County. 45. Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, is a person, pursuant to §21-259(2), Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida, who is entitled to bring an action for violations of §21-259, and has engaged undersigned counsel and agreed to pay them a reasonable attorney’s fee. 46. All conditions precedent to this action have been performed, occurred, or have been waived. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff-Relator, Michelle Trimble, on behalf of Miami-Dade County, hereby demands judgment against the Defendant, Wackenhut Corporation for the following as specified in §21-258 of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida. -14-(©) 69] (g) Three times the amount of the false, inflated or fraudulent claims submitted to Miami-Dade County over the five years immediately prior to the filing of this action; Costs, attorney’s fees, and all expert, investigator, and consulting fees; and Be subject to debarment from Miami-Dade County business for a period of five years, JURY TRIAL DEMAND Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all issues so triable by law. VERIFICATION OF MICHELLE TRIMBLE Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Michelle Trimble, who was duly swom and declared that the factual assertions made herein are true and correct and based upon her personal knowledge, admissions of Wackenhut employees, or documents which she has Seen, possesses, or controls, -15-Nut Trimble’ SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this AT icy of December, 2005 by Michelle Trimble who declares that the facts asserted herein are true and are based on her Personal knowledge, admissions of Wackenhut ployees, and documents, and who is personally known to me or has produced her drivers licen i ificatign. STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ) 0 hE The. VOL ! ¥ Micanmisenposzues (Print, Type or Stamp Comabissioned Mame WEAF expies sly 19,2000 Of Notary Public) E. ATE OF SERVICE THEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by hand-delivery this aK day of December, 2005 to: Christine Welstead, Esquire, AKERMAN SENTERFITT, Sun Trust International Center, 28" Floor, One Southeast Third Avenue, Miami, FL 33131-5600, and by U.S, mail to: Hugo Benitez, Esq., Assistant County Attorney, Stephen P. Clark Center, 111 N.W. First Strect, Suite 2810, Miami, FL 33128. -16-Respectfully submitted, TILGHMAN & VIETH, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiff-Relator One Biscayne Tower Suite 2410 2 South Biscayne Blvd, Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: 305/381-8806 Facsimile: 305/381-8813 By: S H.MARK VIETH FBN: 399256 ~17-COMPOSITE EXHIBIT "B"IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FL. CASE NO. 05-15871 CA 23 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, ex. Rel. MICHELLE TRIMBLE, Plaintiff(s), vs. WACKENHUT CORPORATION, Defendant(s) . - - - ee, One Southeast Third Avenue Miami, Florida September 20, 2006 10:28 a.m. - 12:35 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. - 4:25 p.m. Videotaped deposition of MICHELLE TRIMBLE taken by Defendant for purposes of discovery and for use as evidence in trial in the above-entitled cause pursuant to Notice of Taking Deposition heretofore filed before LISA PERAZA, Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Florida at large, on the date and time above-referred to. Klein, Bury, Reif, Applebaum & Associates AU.S. Legal Support Company2 4 i ‘APPEARANCES: | 1. Thereupon: TILGHMAN & VIETH, P.A. 2 MICHELLE TRIMBLE 3 By: H. MARK VIETH, ESQ. 3 was called as a witness and, having been duly 4 ae esceme Boulevard 4 sworn, was examined and testified as follows: Miami, Florida 33131 15 DIRECT EXAMINATION 5 Telephone: (305) 381-8806 STEAD: Facsimile: (305) 381-8813 6 BY MS. WE D: 6 appearing on behalf of 7 Q. Good morning. 7 Plaintiff(s). 8 — A. Good morning. 8 AKERMAN SENTERFITT 9 Q. Please state your name. 9 wr eeTNe Le Cae SO. 10 A. Michelle Trimble, an sy ). SunTrust International Center 11 Q. Who is Michelle Vickers? 10 One Southeast 3rd Avenue - 28th Floor 12 A. The same person, Miami, Florida 33131-1714 i i Telephone: (305) 374-5600 13 Q. What name do you go by? Facsimile: (305) 374-5095 14 A. Michelle Trimble. 12 appearing on behalf of . a Defendant(s) Wackenhut, 15 Q. You provided us with an authorization form 13 16 to get your IRS records in this matter? 14 ALSO PRESENT: Michael Slusher ‘17 A. Yes, Diana Szego oo a 15 Eddy Esquivel 18 Q. And you signed it Michelle Vickers? 16 -INDEX- i 17 WITNESS DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 8 A {signed t Michelle Vickers because my 18 MICHELLE TRIMBLE 20 social security number is still under Michelle 19 [Ms. Welstead} 4 21 Vickers, 20. [Mr. Vieth] - ‘ : , 21 -EXHIBITS- 22 Q. What is your social security number? 22 Defendant's Page 3°; 23-1 [Complaint] 54 24 2 [Memo - May 21,'04] 97 | 24 Q. When is the last time you filed tax 25__3 [Memo - April 29,'03] 132 25 _returns? _ 3) 5 1 Exhibits (Cont): | 1A. Tfile tax returns every year. 2 4 [Incident Report - April 22,'03] 133 2 Q. Did you file then in April? 3 5 [Incident Report - April 23,'03] 134 3 A. Lusually file tax returns in January or 4 6 [Incident Report - April 22,'03] 136 | 4 mid January for every year. 5 7 [Incident Report - May 21,104] 147 | 5 Q. Your 2005 tax returns, were those submitted 6 6 between January and April of this year? 7 se & 7 A. Yes. 8 8 —Q. Do you do them yourself? 9 ‘THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now on the video; 9 A. No, 10 record. Today is Wednesday, the 20th day of | 10 Q. Who do you use to help you with that? 11 September commencing at approximately 10:28 A.M. 11 A. All Accounts Services. 12 This is the videotaped deposition of 12 Q. Have you been using All Accounts for a 13 Michelle Trimble located at the Offices of Akerman 13 little while? 14. Senterfitt, One Southeast Third Avenue, in Case No. | 14 A. Yes. 1505-15871 CA 23 in the matter of Miami-Dade and 1/15 Q. How many years? 16 Michelle Trimble vs. Wackenhut Corp. /16 A. Quite a few years. I don't recall how 17 Our court report is Lisa Peraza with | 17 many. Three or four years. 18 Klein-Bury & Associates, My name is Mike Massa | 18 Q. Where is All Accounts located? 19 with Klein, Bury & Associates, -19 A. It's in Hialeah. 20 Counsel, please state your appearances for 20 Q. ‘Is there a particular Person that you deal 21 the record, | 21 with there? 22 MR. VIETH: Mark