-
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
BROWARD OFFICE OFTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL
MEMORANDUM
Honorable Tim Ryan, Mayor, Broward County
John :d :::,b,::~:::~::n~r::rd ?tsommissioners July 14, 2015
OIG Final Report Re: Unsubstantiated Allegatio11 of Gross
Mismanagement By The Broward County Environmental Licensing and
Building Permitting Division - Elevator Section, Ref. OIG
14-025
Attached please find the final report of the Broward Office of
the Inspector General (OIG) regarding the above-captioned matter.
The OIG investigation did not result in a finding of gross
mismanagement in the Elevator Section ' s handling of its
relatively high number of elevators overdue for annual inspection.
The OIG investigation did, however, identify significant
inadequacies with the management of the Elevator Section -
inadequa
-
BROWARD OFFICE
OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT
===========================================================
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Unsubstantiated Allegation of Gross Mismanagement By The Broward
County Environmental Licensing and Building Permitting
Division – Elevator Section
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 1 of 29
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
SUMMARY
The Broward Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has concluded
an investigation of allegations that mismanagement at the Broward
County Environmental Licensing and Building Permitting Division1
(ELBPD) – Elevator Section caused a substantial backlog in annual
elevator inspections, thus creating a public safety risk. The OIG
investigation did not result in a finding of gross mismanagement,
but it did identify significant concerns with the operation of the
Elevator Section. In this report, we detail those concerns and make
recommendations intended to alleviate mismanagement issues and
enable more timely compliance with inspection requirements mandated
by Florida Statutes and administrative authorities.2 In August
2014, the OIG received information that 3,916 of Broward County’s
approximately 9,900 elevators were overdue for their required
annual inspections. During the course of this investigation, we
learned that overdue annual elevator inspections are a common
problem in the elevator industry throughout Florida. The number of
overdue elevator inspections in Broward County, however, had
drastically increased from the 1,309 elevators that were overdue
for inspection in January 2013. The OIG discovered that there were
several factors that contributed to the excessive number of overdue
annual inspections at the Elevator Section, including the
termination of three elevator inspectors in March 2014 for failing
to perform their duties; the additional resignation of a fourth
inspector; scheduling conflicts with elevator maintenance companies
when scheduling inspections; and a failure by management to monitor
the number of overdue inspections. Near the close of the
investigation, we met with the newly-assigned Elevator Section
management and discussed our concerns. Thereafter, we provided the
Section with an opportunity to ameliorate the situation during the
first quarter of 2015. During the first quarter of calendar year
2015, the Section reduced the number of overdue annual inspections
to 3,582. Although we are still troubled by the size of the
remaining backlog, the OIG recognizes the Elevator Section’s
efforts to reduce the number of overdue annual inspections. While
this investigation did not substantiate the allegations of gross
mismanagement, the OIG continues to have concerns as to the
effectiveness of the management of the Elevator Section and its
ability to address the number of
1 Formerly known as the Broward County Permitting, Licensing and
Consumer Protection Division (PLCPD) 2 Section 12.01(D)(1)(a) of
the Charter of Broward County requires the OIG to issue a report at
the conclusion of an investigation of allegations involving gross
mismanagement, regardless of whether the allegations were
substantiated.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 2 of 29
overdue inspections. Accordingly, the OIG will continue to track
the Elevator Section’s progress on this issue. OIG CHARTER
AUTHORITY
Section 12.01 of the Charter of Broward County empowers the
Broward Office of the Inspector General to investigate misconduct
and gross mismanagement within the Charter Government of Broward
County and all of its municipalities. This authority extends to all
elected and appointed officials, employees and all providers of
goods and services to the County and the municipalities. On his own
initiative, or based on a signed complaint, the Inspector General
shall commence an investigation upon a finding of good cause. As
part of any investigation, the Inspector General shall have the
power to subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, require the
production of documents and records, and audit any program,
contract, and the operations of any division of the County, its
municipalities and any providers. The Broward Office of the
Inspector General is also empowered to issue reports, including
recommendations, and to require officials to provide reports
regarding the implementation of those recommendations. ENTITIES AND
INDIVIDUALS COVERED IN THIS REPORT
Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation –
Bureau of Elevator Safety The Department of Business and
Professional Regulation’s (DBPR) Bureau of Elevator Safety3 is
statutorily required to ensure that elevators and escalators
throughout Florida are safe. The Bureau fulfills this mission by
enforcing elevator safety laws and licensing and regulating
industry professionals, elevators, escalators, and other vertical
and inclined conveyance devices. Broward County Environmental
Licensing, Building, and Permitting Division The ELBPD protects
public safety, health and welfare by administering and enforcing
all applicable building, zoning, consumer protection and animal
care ordinances, codes, laws, rules, resolutions and regulations in
effect. Elevator Section The Elevator Section is a unit of the
ELBPD that regulates approximately 9,900 elevating devices
countywide.4 The Elevator Section is charged with issuing permits
for new installations and any alterations of existing devices. The
Section is also responsible for:
3 The Bureau of Elevator Safety is a part of DBPR’s Division of
Hotels and Restaurants. 4 During the timeframe covered by this
investigation, the number of elevators regulated by the by the
Elevator Section ranged from 9,700 to 9,900.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 3 of 29
Ensuring compliance with Florida Statutes and the Florida
Building Code through review of all construction plans for new and
remodeled elevating devices;
Ensuring safety of elevating devices through mandated
enforcement by Qualified Elevator
Inspectors per Chapter 399 of Florida Statutes, Chapter 61C-5 of
the Florida Administrative Code, and Chapter 30 of the Florida
Building Code;
Completing inspections associated with certificates of operation
issued for elevating devices;
and
Timely coordinating with fire, police, paramedics and other
emergency responders on accidents involving elevating devices.
The Regulated Business Administrator The Regulated Business
Administrator initially became involved with the Elevator Section
when he was tasked with conducting an internal investigation of
several employees in that section. When the Assistant Building
Official charged with managing the Elevator Section was re-assigned
to another project, the Regulated Business Administrator requested
that he be assigned the duties associated with managing the Section
in addition to his other ELBPD duties. The Assistant Building
Official The Assistant Building Official referred to in this report
is currently assigned to the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood
International Airport. Prior to his being assigned to the airport
in August 2014, his responsibilities included managing the Elevator
Section. After his re-assignment to the airport, his
responsibilities were divided between the Elevator Section
Supervisor and the Regulated Business Administrator. The Elevator
Section Supervisor The Elevator Section Supervisor (Supervisor) was
hired in May 2013 following the retirement of the former Elevator
Section supervisor (Former Supervisor) on January 31, 2013. He has
worked in both the public and private sectors in the elevator
maintenance and inspection field since 1980. Although he previously
reported to the Assistant Building Official, he now reports to the
Regulated Business Administrator. RELEVANT GOVERNING AND
ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES
Chapter 399, Florida Statutes (Elevator Safety) Termed the
“Elevator Safety Act,” the purpose of this chapter in the Florida
Statutes “is to provide for the safety of life and limb and to
promote public safety awareness” as “[t]he use of unsafe and
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 4 of 29
defective lifting devices imposes a substantial probability of
serious and preventable injury and exposes employees and the public
to unsafe conditions.” §399.001, Fla. Stat. (2014). The relevant
sections of this chapter require annual inspections and testing by
the assigned authority.
While the Bureau of Elevator Safety is statutorily required to
ensure that elevators and escalators throughout Florida are safe,
the agency can, and has, contracted with a number of local agencies
to enforce this duty. To date, the Bureau has delegated its duty,
through contract, to Broward County, Miami-Dade County, the City of
Miami, City of Miami Beach, and Reedy Creek. These contracted
jurisdictions can execute their duties as they see fit, including
allowing the use of private inspectors. Broward County has recently
joined those jurisdictions that allow for the use of private
inspectors but only for those elevators maintained by one specific
company. Section 3001, Florida Building Code This chapter of the
Florida Building Code governs the design, construction,
installation, alteration, repair, and maintenance of elevators and
conveying systems and their components in the State of Florida.
ASME A17.1 (2007)(w/2008a & 2009b addendum), Safety Code for
Elevators and Escalators This safety code for elevators and
escalators, published by the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME), addresses elevators, escalators, dumbwaiters,
moving walks and material lifts. It also provides requirements
applying to the design, construction, installation, operation,
testing, inspection, maintenance, alteration and repair of these
conveyances.
8.11.1.1.1 Periodic Inspections (a) Periodic inspections shall
be made by an inspector employed by the authority having
jurisdiction or by a person authorized by the authority having
jurisdiction... ***
8.11.1.1.2 Periodic Tests
(a) Periodic tests as required in 8.6 shall be witnessed by an
inspector employed by the authority having jurisdiction, or by
persons authorized by the authority having jurisdiction...
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 5 of 29
61C-5 (Florida Elevator Safety Code), Florida Administrative
Code The Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) is the official
compilation of administrative rules for the State of Florida. 61C-5
of the F.A.C. constitutes the Florida Elevator Safety Code. It also
requires annual inspections and testing as well as provides for
citations as follows:
61C-5.023. Citations
(1) Upon a determination of probable cause, the division will
issue a citation for:
(a) Performing work without a valid permit or license, or
operating an elevator without a valid temporary operating permit
as required under Chapter 399, F.S.
(b) Operating an elevator with a certificate of operation that
has been expired for two or more consecutive years…
***
(7) A citation issued under paragraph (1)(b) will result in a
fine of $250 for the first offense and $500 for the second offense.
Citations issued under paragraph (1)(b) will be dismissed if a
valid certificate of operation has been obtained before the
citation becomes a final order.
Operations Section Guidelines for Elevator Safety Personnel,
Elevator Section Policy and Procedure Manual (2006) The Elevator
Section’s publication (Section Manual) produced for the purpose of
establishing policies and procedures for the regulation and
inspection of elevators and escalators. INVESTIGATION
Investigation Overview This investigation is predicated on
information alleging that mismanagement at the Elevator Section
caused a significant backlog in annual elevator inspections, thus
creating a public safety risk. The investigation involved the
review of substantial documentation by OIG Special Agents
including, but not limited to, Florida Statutes, the F.A.C., the
Florida Building Code, ASME 17.1, training materials, SOPs,
activity reports, inspection reports, and emails. OIG Special
Agents also conducted interviews of management officials from the
Bureau of Elevator Safety, the Miami-Dade County Office of Elevator
Safety (Miami-Dade County), the Reedy Creek Improvement District
(Reedy Creek) and the ELBPD, as well as interviews of current and
former employees of the Elevator Section.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 6 of 29
Specifically, the OIG obtained a report indicating that in
August 2014, 3,916 of Broward County’s approximately 9,900
elevators were overdue for annual inspection (Exhibit 1).
Thereafter, the OIG obtained a report indicating that in October
2014, 3,931 of the elevators were overdue for their annual
inspections (Exhibit 2). This was in stark contrast to January 2013
figures which reflected only 1,309 elevators overdue for their
annual inspections (Exhibit 3). The OIG was able to verify the
accuracy of these figures through its interviews of multiple
members of Elevator Section management. Once contacted and given
the opportunity to address the number of elevators overdue for
annual inspection, the Elevator Section was able to reduce the
number of elevators overdue for annual inspection to 3,582 by March
30, 2015 (Composite Exhibit 4, consisting of a January 15, 2015
memorandum from the Inspector General to the Regulated Business
Administrator, and an April 10, 2015 memorandum from the Regulated
Business Administrator to the Inspector General). As there
continued to be a significant amount of elevators overdue for
annual inspection, the OIG remains concerned about the Section’s
ability to timely reduce the backlog. Notwithstanding the Elevator
Section’s number of overdue annual inspections, the OIG does not
find gross mismanagement in the Section’s handling of the matter
given the termination of a significant number of staff members in
2014. Interviews conducted by OIG Special Agents revealed that
generally, the elevator industry as a whole, from the state level
to the local level, experiences difficulties with ensuring the
timeliness of annual inspections: albeit at different degrees.
Before privatizing the inspection process in 2000, the Bureau of
Elevator Safety, which is responsible for 45,000 elevators, had
“thousands” of overdue inspections despite having 24 inspectors on
staff. As of September 2014, the number hovers around 1,000
delinquent inspections – this with the use of private inspectors
along with Bureau inspectors. Miami-Dade County, which uses private
inspectors for elevators on private properties, has approximately
20% of its 10,841 elevators overdue for inspection. The OIG has,
however, identified significant ongoing areas of concern with the
management of the Elevator Section. On March 30, 2015, 3,582, or
36%, of Broward County’s at that time 9,967 elevators were still
overdue for an inspection. This number of overdue elevator
inspections is especially disconcerting considering the fact that
on January 30, 2013, Broward County only had approximately 13% of
their elevators overdue for an annual inspection. Through its
investigation, the OIG has learned that there were several factors
that may have contributed to the drastic increase in the number of
elevators overdue for annual inspection in Broward County. However,
the OIG cannot discount or minimize the role that management played
in the deterioration of the Elevator Section’s performance, as
discussed below.
1. Elevator Section Management did not Endeavor to Keep Abreast
of Overdue Annual Inspections After the Former Supervisor’s
Retirement
When the Former Supervisor retired, on January 31, 2013, 1,309
of the County’s elevators were overdue for their annual inspections
(Exhibit 3). Through witness interviews, OIG Special Agents
determined that, by all accounts, the Former Supervisor was
well-respected and knowledgeable. He routinely met with maintenance
company representatives and did not allow them to fall behind on
their inspections. In fact, he ensured that they communicated with
Elevator Section inspectors when
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 7 of 29
coordinating inspections. Additionally, the Former Supervisor
monitored the number of outstanding annual inspections through
reports generated by an Elevator Section employee. Upon the Former
Supervisor’s retirement, the Assistant Building Official, who had
shadowed the Former Supervisor for five to six months before his
retirement, was tasked with managing the Elevator Section. Because
of perceived5 difficulties with hiring due to pay disparity between
Broward County and the private sector as well as other government
agencies, a new supervisor was not hired until five months later in
May 2013. During his interview with OIG Special Agents, the
Assistant Building Official candidly admitted that he only became
aware in May or June 2014 that overdue annual inspection figures
had “shot through the roof.” Until this point, he did not monitor
the number of overdue annual inspections despite being charged with
managing the Elevator Section. Instead, he merely assumed that the
number of outstanding annual inspections continued to be around
1,000 – the number it was when he was originally assigned to the
Section in January 2013. Indeed, the Assistant Building Official
made the assertion that inspections were “generally up to date” in
a February 19, 2014 email (Exhibit 5). The Assistant Building
Official’s failure to monitor the number of overdue annual
inspections is disturbing given the fact that such figures were
readily available in the County’s Public Operating System (POSSE)
internal database. Indeed, three daily reports based on these
figures (the Outstanding Annual Inspections for Commercial
Elevators Report, the Average Inspections Due Report, and the
Overdue Inspections by Inspector Report) were historically provided
to the Former Supervisor in order to track the work performed by
the unit. Notwithstanding the fact that these reports were readily
accessible, the Assistant Building Official opted to forego
familiarizing himself with them, even going so far as instructing
the employee who generated these reports to stop disseminating them
altogether. The Assistant Building Official’s failure to keep
abreast of the number of overdue annual inspections was not only
unreasonable, in and of itself, but wholly illogical considering
the composition of the Elevator Section in March 2014. During that
time period, the Section terminated three inspectors for misconduct
and lost an additional inspector for other reasons. In a matter of
a month, the Elevator Section went from eleven inspectors to seven.
Whereas the loss of approximately 40% of manpower should certainly
raise an organization’s red flags as to its ability to perform, the
Assistant Building Official still did not endeavor to determine
whether the Section was conducting its inspections in a timely
manner – a task that, if undertaken, would have immediately alerted
him as to the dismal overdue annual inspection numbers.
5 While the Assistant Building Official considered the pay
disparity between what the Elevator Section pays and what other
organizations pay to be an obstacle to hiring, the Regulated
Business Administrator denied the existence of such an
obstacle.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 8 of 29
The Assistant Building Official was subsequently reassigned to
the airport in August 2014 and is no longer charged with any duties
involving the Elevator Section. Currently, the Section has been
directed to prepare two weekly reports: one that tracks all
elevators with overdue annual inspections and another that tracks
elevators with expired certificates of occupancy. These two weekly
reports are now distributed to Section employees, who have been
instructed that the figures reflected therein are a high priority.
Although a third of the County’s elevators remain overdue for
inspection, the fact that the Elevator Section is currently
undertaking efforts to rectify the situation caused, in part, by
the Assistant Building Official’s failure to monitor overdue annual
inspections is promising.
2. The Supervisor was Assigned Too Many Duties, Resulting in His
Failure to Effectively Supervise the Elevator Section
The Supervisor reported to the Assistant Building Official, who
was then managing the Elevator Section. The investigation revealed
that the Supervisor was assigned roles that unreasonably exceeded
that of an Elevator Section supervisor, a fact that even the
Regulated Business Administrator acknowledged during his interview
with OIG Special Agents. Indeed, the Supervisor seemed to be not
only the Section supervisor, but a pseudo-manager6 as well as an
elevator inspector. Pursuant to the position’s job description, the
Supervisor’s “[w]ork involves planning and organizing the work of
the Elevator Section; supervising Elevator Plans Examiners,
Elevator Inspectors and assigned subordinate staff; reviewing
elevator installation plans, blueprints, specifications, and
materials lists to determine compliance with applicable standards
and regulations; and coordinating contractual service agreements.”
(Exhibit 6). Through at least December 2014, the Supervisor’s
responsibilities included reviewing plans and permits for the
installation of new and remodeled elevators, and reviewing variance
requests. However, he was also tasked with supervising the
inspections performed by the inspectors, and scheduling and
performing inspections himself. In fact, since approximately August
2014, he spends almost all of his time performing inspections. This
was verified by not only the Supervisor himself, but by other
employees of the Elevator Section.7 What is more, upon the
Assistant Building Official’s re-assignment to the airport, the
Supervisor was charged with being the point of contact for the
Bureau of Elevator Safety. These responsibilities include preparing
and sending the Monthly Activity Report, as well as conducting
telephone conferences and bi-annual meetings with the Bureau and
representatives from the other contracted jurisdictions. This, in
addition to, the Regulated Business Administrator’s directive that
the Supervisor revise the Section Manual.
6 According to the Regulated Business Administrator, there is no
actual budgeted position for Elevator Section manager. Although the
Assistant Building Official supervised the Supervisor and acted in
a Section manager-type capacity, the budgeted position he held, and
continues to hold, is that of Assistant Building Official/ELBPD
Manager. 7 The fact that the Supervisor has dedicated his time to
performing inspections rather than acting in a supervisory capacity
is perhaps a direct result of the fact that the Assistant Building
Official also tasked him with “handl[ing] the problem” once the
number of overdue annual inspections came to light.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 9 of 29
The OIG notes that, in his initial interview, the Regulated
Business Administrator acknowledged that the Supervisor’s duties
were too broad and assured that, in the future, his duty to conduct
inspections would be reduced so that he could dedicate his time to
supervisory functions. However, during the Regulated Business
Administrator’s second interview on April 23, 2015, he admitted
that the Supervisor is still operating as an inspector, despite his
earlier assurance to eliminate that burden. However, the assignment
of duties has changed since December 2014. Currently, the
Supervisor is almost exclusively charged with duties associated
with working out in the field conducting and supervising
inspections, as well as the “on the job” training of new
inspectors. Further, the Supervisor is charged with being available
to the inspectors either via cell phone or, if needed, in person
during an inspection. Meanwhile, a supervisor with Code Compliance
has been brought in to handle in-office supervisory duties within
Elevator Section including overseeing the scheduler, handling
attendance issues, handling annual evaluations, and creating the
citation program. He is also charged with monitoring the GPS data
from the inspectors’ county vehicles on a daily basis and handling
the creation and implementation of a citation enforcement program
for the Section. While it is the Elevator Section management’s
prerogative to discharge duties amongst its ranks as it sees fit,
its arrangement of duties from May 2013 through at least December
2014 wholly failed to appreciate the impact of overtasking one
individual or position. Specifically, Section management failed to
recognize that the natural effect of overtasking the Supervisor
would be his inability to properly execute his duties.
3. Elevator Section Management Failed to Maintain Effective
Relationships with Elevator Maintenance Companies
Until recently, Broward County required that an Elevator Section
inspector be present to monitor the tests which are performed by
the elevator maintenance company technician.8 The consensus of all
the witnesses interviewed was that one factor that led to the
current state of the Elevator Section’s overdue annual inspection
numbers was difficulties in scheduling inspections with the
elevator maintenance companies. This was also a problem prior to
January 2013. However, where the Former Supervisor would regularly
meet with maintenance company representatives to ensure that
elevator companies would communicate with inspectors for effective
coordination of inspections, such a relationship seemingly did not
exist between January 2013 and December 2014, as evidenced by a
sample of emails reviewed by the OIG as a part of this
investigation. Instead of engaging in a collaborative effort to get
elevators inspected, all parties focused on the assignment of
blame. The evident lack of collaboration between the maintenance
companies and the Elevator Section acted to impede the Section’s
ability to conduct inspections in a timely fashion. By way of
example, one witness recounted that shortly after the Supervisor
was hired, one of the major elevator maintenance companies stopped
scheduling inspections on Mondays and Fridays. This decision
8 The requirement remains in place with the exception of one
specific elevator maintenance company.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 10 of 29
effectively reduced the choice of days that Section inspectors
could inspect elevators owned by that company by 40%. Instead of
addressing this issue with the company, the Supervisor reportedly
chose to dismiss it, stating, “I can’t do anything!” In his April
23, 2015 interview, the Regulated Business Administrator described
the changes that have since been instituted in efforts to address
communication between the maintenance companies and the Elevator
Section. He explained that an employee has been charged with
coordinating the scheduling of inspections on a full-time basis.
That employee has daily communication with the maintenance
companies and has been able to improve the coordination when
scheduling inspections with the maintenance companies. Moreover,
the Regulated Business Administrator reported that he has had
frequent conversations with the company which maintains the largest
amount of Broward County elevators to ensure that inspections are
being coordinated efficiently. He has been assured by them that the
scheduling problems of the past have been resolved.
4. The Elevator Section Failed to Fully Utilize its Citation
Program
Further, the Elevator Section has also failed to make full use
of its citation program in order to assure compliance with
inspection timeframes. The Assistant Building Official explained to
OIG Special Agents that the Elevator Section philosophy was “let’s
get [elevators] fixed and running.” As a result, citations were
rarely issued by Section inspectors. A citation program, however,
is considered to be an effective tool in gaining the compliance of
elevator owners and maintenance companies in scheduling annual
inspections, in correcting deficiencies, and in ensuring the safe
operation of elevators. To that end, the Elevator Section invested
resources in updating its citation program. However, up until March
30, 2015, only sixteen citations have been issued to elevator
maintenance companies and owners despite the fact that the Section
now has an updated citation program (Composite Exhibit 4). These
citations were all for failing to obtain a final inspection for
permitted work (Exhibit 7). When questioned about the incidental
number of citations issued, the Regulated Business Administrator
explained that once the Elevator Section is able to meet requests
for annual inspections, he anticipates being able to issue
citations for other violations, including overdue annual
inspections and expired certificates of operation.9
5. The Elevator Section Failed to Maintain A Current Policy and
Procedure Manual
Finally, the OIG investigation determined that the Elevator
Section does not have a current policy and procedure manual. In
fact, the most recent version of the Section Manual is dated 2006.
This version of the manual does not address many of the recent
changes in Elevator Section policy, such
9 Although waiving citations for those inspections that are
untimely as a result of the Elevator Section’s inability to
schedule them does make sense, the Section should still be able to
issue citations to those who have made no effort to schedule their
annual inspection in a timely manner, and those who have not cured
violations observed during an initial inspection in the time
given.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 11 of 29
as the new inspection exemption for two-stop elevators.10
Although the failure to revise or update the Section Manual
predates the Regulated Business Administrator’s, the Assistant
Building Official’s, and the Supervisor’s tenure with the Elevator
Section, the fact remains that there has been no effort to update
the manual despite the Regulated Business Administrator’s
acknowledgement of its extreme importance.
Remedial Action by the Elevator Section On April 10, 2015, the
Regulated Business Administrator provided this office with a
memorandum addressing three issues: (1) the number of overdue
annual inspections as of March 30, 2015; (2) the number of annual
inspections conducted in the first calendar quarter of 2015; and
(3) a description of any actions taken by the Elevator Section to
address the OIG’s concerns (Composite Exhibit 4). Further, the
Regulated Business Administrator participated in an additional
interview with OIG Special Agents on April 23, 2015. In his
memorandum, the Regulated Business Administrator reported that the
Elevator Section had reduced the number of expired elevator
certificates of operation by 12.5%. He also reported a 3.5%
decrease in overdue annual inspections, from 3,707 on December 9,
2014 to 3,582 on March 30, 2015. Moreover, with eight full-time
inspectors on board11, the Elevator Section reported conducting a
total of 1,773 annual inspections/periodic test inspections in the
first quarter of 2015.12 During his additional interview, the
Regulated Business Administrator expanded upon the changes
implemented in the Elevator Section during the first quarter of
2015. In addition to the changes described above – namely, the
generation of weekly reports; the addition of the Code Compliance
supervisor; the improved relations with elevator maintenance
companies; and the enhancement of the citation program – he also
reported that the Section had adopted the two-stop exemption,
thereby allowing 25% of the county’s elevators to be eligible for
exemption from Section-conducted annual inspections. Further, the
Section is now allowing private inspectors to witness the second
part of the inspection for elevators maintained by the maintenance
company which currently maintains the majority of Broward County
elevators, potentially reducing the number of required annual
inspections. The Section will consider allowing other companies to
follow suit on a case-by-case basis upon request. INTERVIEW
SUMMARIES
As a part of the investigation, OIG Special Agents conducted
numerous witness interviews. Significant interviews are summarized
below:
10 A detailed description of the two-stop elevator exemption can
be found below in the Regulated Business Administrator’s interview
summary. 11 Although the Elevator Section was considered fully
staffed as of April 10, 2015, two inspectors were not accounted for
in the above because they had only started their training during
the relevant time frame. 12 Although this figure is significantly
lower than the number of inspections reported over the last two
years (Exhibit 8), the Regulated Business Administrator explained
that during the first quarter of 2015, the Elevator Section changed
the fashion in which it counted inspections performed, yielding
lower – but more accurate – figures.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 12 of 29
1. Interview of the Chief, Florida Bureau of Elevator Safety
The Chief has been employed by the State of Florida for
twenty-eight years, the last ten years with the Bureau of Safety.
He served in both the capacities of deputy chief and operations
chief before being promoted to chief in 2010.
The Chief explained that pursuant to Chapter 399, Florida
Statutes, the owner of an elevator is responsible for the safe
operation, proper maintenance and inspection, and correction of
deficiencies noted during an inspection of that elevator. Every
elevator is required to display a certificate of operation which is
valid for a period not to exceed two years. A timely satisfactory
inspection is required for the renewal of a certificate of
operation.
The Chief further explained that the Deputy Chief is responsible
for the management of the contract between the DBPR and Broward
County that empowers the County to enforce Florida Statute 399,
parts of the Florida Building Code, and Chapter 61C-5 of the F.A.C.
The DBPR has the same contract with other jurisdictions, which are
also overseen by the Deputy Chief. The Chief stated that the Bureau
of Elevator Safety and each of the contracted jurisdictions handle
the inspection process differently. The Bureau has oversight of
approximately 45,000 elevators. As it has only ten inspectors for
the entire state, the Bureau allows private third-party inspectors
to conduct annual inspections – a practice that has been allowed
since the year 2000. He also stated that prior to privatizing the
inspection process, the Bureau, at one point, had only four
inspectors and “thousands” of overdue inspections. As of September
16, 2014, the Bureau had approximately 1,000 delinquent
inspections.
Although the Chief was unaware of the fact that Broward County
had over 3,000 elevators that were overdue for an annual
inspection, he was aware that there was an issue with delinquent
elevator renewals. Supervisors at the Elevator Section, namely the
Former Supervisor, the Assistant Building Official, the Supervisor,
and another individual had been informing him for several years of
this problem. The Chief explained, however, that the issue of
delinquent elevator renewals was not unique to Broward County.
Indeed, they, as well as other contracted jurisdictions, have also
struggled with this problem. The Bureau of Elevator Safety
addressed its own problem by dedicating one staff member to inspect
the severely, or “hard-core,” delinquent elevators.
The Chief explained that enforcing Chapter 399, Florida Statutes
can be very difficult. Several issues contribute to the problem of
overdue inspections. Some elevator owners are not aware of the
annual inspection requirement and, in turn, fail to obtain an
inspection for their elevators. Other elevator owners will have
their elevators inspected but then fail to correct the deficiencies
noted during the failed annual inspections in a timely matter.
Then, there are elevator owners who do not pay the fines that were
incurred as a result of the inspection.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 13 of 29
If the Bureau of Elevator Safety was to determine that the
Elevator Section has a significant issue with overdue inspections,
the Chief would inquire as to why the inspections were overdue as
well as have them provide solutions. Depending upon the severity of
the problem, the Bureau may consider termination of the contract.
The Chief volunteered that possible solutions to the problem could
include the hiring of additional staff and allowing private,
third-party inspectors to conduct the annual inspections. The
implementation of either of these solutions would be acceptable to
the Bureau.
2. Interview of the Deputy Chief, Florida Bureau of Elevator
Safety
The Deputy Chief has been employed with the State of Florida for
thirty-one years. He has been with the Bureau of Elevator Safety
since 2005 and has served as the Deputy Chief since 2009. The
Deputy Chief advised that he has never been an elevator inspector
in the public or private sector, and stated that his duties have
been in the field of contract management and administrative
oversight.
The Deputy Chief is responsible for managing the contract
between the DBPR and Broward County. He is also managing the same
contract with four other jurisdictions: Miami-Dade County, the City
of Miami, the City of Miami Beach, and Reedy Creek. He has managed
these contracts since 2005.
The Deputy Chief explained that Chapter 399, Florida Statutes
requires that an elevator be inspected on an annual basis in order
to receive a certificate of operation, which, in turn, is required
to operate the elevator. The statute places the responsibility to
ensure that the elevator is inspected on the owner of the
elevator.
The annual inspection, also known as a routine inspection, is
conducted in two parts. The first part is conducted by an Elevator
Section inspector using a checklist known as the A17.2 Checklist.
The second part, referred to as the periodic test, is performed by
a Qualified Elevator Inspector, also known as a third-party
inspector, and witnessed by an Elevator Section inspector. Both
parts of the annual inspection could be performed either on the
same day or on two separate days.
In 2003, the Bureau of Elevator Safety had a significant number
of overdue elevator inspections as it had 24 inspectors to perform
inspections on 50,000 elevators throughout Florida. A decision was
made to allow third-party inspectors to perform both parts of the
annual inspection and complete the required Elevator Inspection
Report without having the need for a Bureau inspector to witness
the inspection. Nevertheless, Bureau inspectors still periodically
monitor annual inspections during the course of their duties.
Presently, Miami-Dade County, the City of Miami, and the City of
Miami Beach have contracted with third-party inspectors and use
them, as well as their own inspectors, to perform inspections.
Broward
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 14 of 29
County and Reedy Creek are the only two jurisdictions that
utilize their own inspectors exclusively.13
The Deputy Chief reported that according to the DBPR Division of
Hotels and Restaurants 2010-2011 Annual Report, the Bureau of
Elevator Safety attained a 97% compliance rate for current
certificates of operation. The Deputy Chief attributed the high
compliance rate to the change of policy which allowed the annual
inspections to be performed by the third-party inspectors, and also
to the implementation of a citation program. 3. Interview of the
Chief Elevator Inspector, Miami-Dade County
The Chief Elevator Inspector stated that Miami-Dade County has
10,841 elevators in its jurisdiction, which includes 1,200
County-owned pieces of equipment. Currently, there are 2,229
elevators, or approximately 20%, that are overdue for an
inspection. These overdue inspections include elevators that were
inspected but did not pass. The Chief Elevator Inspector explained
that the Miami-Dade County enforcement unit monitors the overdue
inspections list and directs inspectors to investigate complaints
involving elevators with overdue inspections. Inspectors prepare
800 to 1,000 inspection reports each month and approximately 18,000
inspection reports annually. In addition to the Chief Elevator
Inspector, the Miami-Dade County staff consists of two supervisors,
seven field inspectors, and one contract specialist. Like
representatives from the Bureau of Elevator Safety, the Chief
Elevator Inspector explained that Chapter 399, Florida Statutes
requires an elevator owner to maintain their elevator and ensure
that inspections are conducted annually. The annual inspection
consists of two parts: one conducted solely by an inspector, and
the second part conducted by either a private inspector or a
government inspector. He advised that the second part is the more
difficult part to conduct because it requires coordination of the
schedules of two or three people: the contracted elevator
maintenance company employee, a third-party elevator inspector, if
one is used, and, based upon the situation, a government elevator
inspector. The Chief Elevator Inspector went on to explain that
before 2002, the DBPR was under contract with Miami-Dade County to
enforce Chapter 399, Florida Statutes. This contract was terminated
in 2002 when new statutory fee limits restricted the county’s
ability to operate at its funding level. From 2002 through August
2003, all elevator inspections were performed by private inspectors
who sent their inspection reports directly to the Bureau of
Elevator Safety. On August 22, 2003, Miami-Dade County entered into
a new contract to enforce Chapter 399, Florida Statutes. Early on
in the contract both private inspectors and county inspectors
were
13 Although such was a correct statement at the time of the
Deputy Chief’s interview, Broward County has since started allowing
the use of private inspectors under certain circumstances.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 15 of 29
conducting inspections. All inspection reports were sent
directly to the county. This system, however, produced uneven
inspection results. The Chief Elevator Inspector stated that at the
present time, the Miami-Dade County inspection process somewhat
mirrors the Bureau of Elevator Safety process in that private
inspectors conduct the inspections on private property and county
inspectors perform inspections on the 1,200 elevators owned by the
county. Miami-Dade County also utilizes the Bureau’s citation
program. In addition, the county conducts a quality assurance
program, as required by the contract, through which county
inspectors conduct follow-up inspections of both private and county
inspections on locations randomly chosen by a software program.
There have been instances where some locations selected for
follow-up have had violations despite an indication that no
violations were noted. The Chief Elevator Inspector observed that
such discrepancies raise questions on the quality of the
inspections being performed. 4. Interview of Elevator Section
Employee A
Employee A reported that the Elevator Section inspection staff
currently consists of the Supervisor and eight full-time
inspectors. No one in a management position above the Supervisor
has any knowledge or experience in the elevator safety profession.
The Elevator Section was responsible for the inspection of
approximately 9,800 elevators. Approximately 3,900 elevators, about
40%, have outstanding overdue annual inspections. In July 2013,
only 10% of the elevators in the County were overdue for their
annual inspection. Employee A stated that the management decision
that had the largest impact on the Elevator Section and contributed
to the high rate of overdue annual inspections was the termination
of three experienced inspectors in March 2014 and the failure of
the County to fill those positions quickly. By October 2014, only
one of the vacated positions had been filled. Employee A provided
several examples of directives issued by the Supervisor that he
believed were harmful to the efficient operation of the Elevator
Section. For instance, the Supervisor recently advised the
inspectors that, instead of allowing the larger maintenance
companies to use the internet-based system to schedule the annual
inspections, the inspectors were to contact the elevator owners and
schedule the inspections personally. This process, however, leads
to more time spent on scheduling the inspections and only serves to
further slow the scheduling process as the owner has to contact the
maintenance company, who has to then re-contact the inspector.
Employee A described the Former Supervisor as very knowledgeable
about the management of the Elevator Section. He was much more
forceful in dealing with the elevator maintenance companies and
held them accountable to ensure that they communicated with the
Elevator Section inspectors when coordinating the inspections. When
the Former Supervisor was in charge, only about 10% of the total
numbers of elevators in the County were overdue for their
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 16 of 29
annual inspections. Indeed, he would routinely meet with the
maintenance company representatives and not let them fall behind to
the extent that they are today. Employee A explained that, shortly
after the Supervisor was hired, the elevator maintenance company
that handles the maintenance for approximately 40% of the elevators
in the county stopped scheduling inspections on Mondays and
Fridays. This effectively reduced the amount of time that
inspectors could perform inspections on those elevators by 40%.
This is one of the main contributing factors to the backlog of
annual inspections. The Supervisor refused to address this issue
with the company and basically threw up his hands, stating “I can’t
do anything!” Employee A also reported that, until recently,
inspectors were assigned to geographic areas based upon the zip
code to conduct inspections. Six to eight months ago, however, the
Supervisor changed this system to a system where inspectors were
randomly assigned inspections across the county. This new system is
causing Elevator Section inspectors to spend more time driving to
inspections and thereby further reduces their efficiency. Finally,
Employee A recounted that the Former Supervisor used to issue
citations to elevator owners. As of the date of his interview,
however, inspectors had not been provided citations to use. The
Regulated Business Administrator has brought in a Code Compliance
employee to help formulate a citation program. When the new program
is implemented, elevator owners will be issued a citation when they
have not made the required repairs within 100 days of the
inspection date, which is an additional ten days over the 90 days
provided for in Chapter 399, Florida Statutes.
5. Interview of Elevator Section Employee B
Employee B reported that the Elevator Section is under the
control of the Regulated Business Administrator as well as other
officials in the ELBPD. The Assistant Building Official had no
working knowledge or experience related to elevator construction,
permitting or inspection. The Supervisor had previously worked as
an inspector for the state of Florida and preferred to perform
inspections rather than supervise the Elevator Section. In August
2014, the Assistant Building Official was transferred to a project
manager position at the airport. Employee B observed that the
Elevator Section does not have enough inspectors to complete all
the inspections. The Supervisor has been out of the office
completing inspections and plan reviews much of the time which
should be spent supervising the Elevator Section. This has left the
Section largely unmanaged and lacking any coherent priorities or
directions to achieve its responsibilities. The management and
staffing deficiencies have caused a backlog of approximately 3,500
overdue annual elevator inspections. Some of these past due
inspections are two or more years
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 17 of 29
overdue. An existing Overdue Annual Inspection Report in POSSE
reflects all elevator inspections and indicates which inspections
are overdue. Up until July 2014, Employee B reported to the
Supervisor and was in charge of a variety of Elevator Section
functions, including addressing problems involving permits and
inspections with contractors, handling complaints on a variety of
issues, and assisting with inspector requests for information. She
also used to produce three reports on a daily basis which would
assist supervisors and inspectors in tracking the work performed by
the unit; the Outstanding Annual Inspections for Commercial
Elevators Report, the Average Inspections Due Report, and the
Overdue Inspections by Inspector Report. The Assistant Building
Official recently told her to stop disseminating the Overdue
Inspections by Inspector Report to Elevator Section staff without
providing a reason for the change. In July 2014, the Regulated
Business Administrator informed her that she would be acquiring
customer service functions and reporting to another individual who
is with the Broward County Pollution Prevention Remediation and Air
Quality Division. 6. Interview of the Former Supervisor
The Former Supervisor began his employment with Broward County
on January 8, 2007 and was the supervisor of the Elevator Section
until he retired on January 31, 2013. When he retired, there were
between 1,400 to 2,000 overdue annual elevator inspections in the
County. He has since learned the number has increased to
approximately 4,000 elevators.
The Former Supervisor opined that there were several factors
which have contributed to the growing number of overdue annual
elevator inspections. These factors include a failure by the
Elevator Section to enforce the annual inspection requirement, a
failure to conduct follow-up inspections when violations were
observed during an initial inspection, the inability to gain the
compliance of elevator owners and maintenance companies to timely
schedule the inspections, and reduced staffing levels. The Former
Supervisor stated that a citation program would aid in gaining the
compliance of the elevator owners and maintenance companies in
scheduling annual inspections and correcting the deficiencies that
are observed during inspections. While a citation system existed
during his tenure, it lacked the technological capability to track
and was rarely used. The Former Supervisor explained that there are
several issues involving the elevator maintenance companies which
impact the Elevator Section’s efficiency. For example, the company
that maintains the highest percentage of elevators in the county
stopped scheduling inspections on Mondays and Fridays because of
the negative financial impact to the company. The failure to
schedule inspections on these days contributed to the growing
number of overdue annual inspections. The Former Supervisor also
advised that elevator maintenance companies are not permitted to
charge the owners for the time that it takes their mechanics to
actually perform the annual test so the maintenance companies are
not keen on scheduling inspections.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 18 of 29
7. Interview of the Regulated Business Administrator
The Regulated Business Administrator was interviewed on two
occasions. During his first interview on November 13, 2014, the
Regulated Business Administrator explained that he began his career
with Broward County in 1996 when he was hired as a Code Enforcement
Officer. After being assigned to positions with increasing
responsibility during his tenure with the county, he was appointed
to the position of Regulated Business Administrator in the ELBPD in
October or November of 2013. In February 2014, he was charged with
coordinating an investigation into an allegation of misconduct
involving several employees in the Elevator Section. Three elevator
inspectors were subsequently terminated as a result of the
investigation.14 A fourth inspector voluntarily resigned shortly
thereafter. In May 2014, the Assistant Building Official, who at
that time was charged with managing the Elevator Section, was
transferred to fill a vacant position at the airport. At that
point, the Regulated Business Administrator requested that he be
charged with managing the Elevator Section in addition to his other
duties despite the fact he has no experience in the elevator safety
or inspection field.
When the Regulated Business Administrator took over the Elevator
Section management duties, he realized that he had “walked into a
sinking ship.” In his opinion, the problems that existed at the
Section were not caused by mismanagement. Instead, he continued,
there was a need for a change in management style from the
Assistant Building Official’s laissez-faire style to his own
stronger, authoritarian style. The Regulated Business Administrator
was provided with copies of two reports that had been prepared by
the Elevator Section, Status of Elevators with Overdue Annual
Inspections, dated January 1, 2013, and Outstanding Annual
Inspections for Commercial Elevators, dated October 1, 2014 which
reflected overdue annual inspection numbers of 1,309 and 3,931,
respectively.15 The Regulated Business Administrator admitted that
these numbers were very high and advised that there were two
primary issues which led to the number of outstanding annual
inspections growing out of control: (1) the termination of the
three inspectors and the resignation of a fourth inspector in March
2014, and (2) chronic issues involving the scheduling and
cancellation of inspections with the elevator maintenance
companies. The Regulated Business Administrator was unaware of the
“huge” amount of overdue annual elevator inspections until June
2014, when one of the elevator maintenance companies submitted a
public records request for the number of outstanding annual
inspections. The company made the records request because some of
their clients were unable to obtain a new certificate of operation
because they were unable to get their elevator inspected due to the
backlog of inspections.
14 The misconduct consisted of the employees going to their
homes and/or to other non-work related locations while reporting
that they were working. A Global Positioning System (GPS) device
installed in the vehicles used by Elevator Section inspectors was
instrumental in the identification of the misconduct. 15 This meant
that, as of October 1, 2014, 40% of the total number of 9,884
elevators under the jurisdiction of the Elevator Section had not
been inspected for at least one year.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 19 of 29
After the four inspectors left the Elevator Section in March
2014, the number of inspectors was reduced from eleven to seven. It
was his decision to not quickly fill the four positions as he
wanted to make sure that the misconduct issues that were identified
during the investigation of the three inspectors did not extend to
other members of the Elevator Section.
The Regulated Business Administrator advised that prior to
hiring any new inspectors, he directed the Supervisor to ensure
that the Elevator Section was using the existing staff as
efficiently as possible. Once this was completed, he decided to
only hire one new inspector every two months to slowly assimilate
the new inspectors into the unit. Currently, there are eleven
full-time inspector positions and one part-time position in the
budget with only one full-time position still vacant as of November
2014. The Regulated Business Administrator stated that the
discrepancy between the starting salary at the Elevator Section and
in the private sector has not been a hindrance to hiring new
inspectors.
The Regulated Business Administrator explained that the Elevator
Section did not track the number of outstanding annual inspections
on a monthly basis, nor did it produce a monthly report which
included this number, until after the OIG requested this
information during an interview with the Supervisor on September
30, 2014.16 As a result of the OIG request, he directed the
Elevator Section to begin producing and maintaining a monthly
report so that this number could be closely monitored by the
Supervisor. While the number of outstanding annual inspections may
have possibly been monitored at some unknown time in the past, his
staff has advised him that this information is not available as it
was not saved.
The Regulated Business Administrator also explained that another
issue which contributed to the excessive backlog of outstanding
annual inspections was the constant complications that occur during
of the scheduling of inspections between the elevator inspectors
and the elevator maintenance companies. After he learned that the
scheduling of inspections was a major problem, he directed that one
employee be assigned to coordinate the scheduling of inspections on
a full-time basis. This employee was tasked with this
responsibility in an effort to improve upon the current process,
however, she subsequently resigned. Another employee was then
assigned those duties.
The Elevator Section recently instituted a new inspection
exemption procedure for elevators that only stop at two adjacent
floors and have a current service contract in efforts to reduce the
current number of outstanding annual inspections. This exemption is
sanctioned by Chapter 399, Florida Statutes. The Regulated Business
Administrator explained that owners of two-stop elevators will have
the option of either having an Elevator Section inspector or a
private inspector perform/witness the annual inspection. An
elevator maintenance company presented the concept as a way to
reduce the amount of inspections performed by Elevator Section
staff
16 The OIG requested that the Regulated Business Administrator
provide the number of outstanding annual inspections from November
2013 to October 2014 either in a monthly report or in some other
fashion in order to obtain a historical understanding of this
issue. He advised that this information did not exist because the
Elevator Section did not prepare a monthly report reflecting these
figures as they were not closely monitoring the number of
outstanding annual inspections.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 20 of 29
and to enable this particular elevator company’s clients, and
those of other elevator owners, to obtain a new certificate of
operation in less time.
The new two-stop exemption procedure requires that a standard
form be completed by the elevator owner and the Certified Elevator
Inspector on an annual basis and submitted to the Elevator Section.
Upon receipt of this form, the Section “will take the elevator
owners and maintenance companies word” that there is a maintenance
contract in place and will not require a copy of the contract. The
Section will perform spot-checks to ensure that the inspections
performed by the private inspectors were performed as required.
The Regulated Business Administrator acknowledged that he
directed the Supervisor to spend a majority of his time in the
field conducting inspections. After reviewing the supervisory and
administrative responsibilities that had been assigned to the
Supervisor, and considering that a portion of the Assistant
Building Official’s duties were also assigned to the Supervisor
after the Assistant Building Official was transferred, the
Regulated Business Administrator admitted that the Supervisor’s
scope of responsibility was too broad for one supervisor. The
Regulated Business Administrator assured that, in the future, the
Supervisor’s inspection duties will be reduced in order to allow
him to spend more time performing supervisory functions. The
Regulated Business Administrator also assured that “call-back”
inspections, which are return visits after an initial inspection
has identified violations which need to be corrected, would be
conducted as the number of overdue annual inspections is
reduced.
Finally, the Regulated Business Administrator stated that the
Section Manual was in need of revision as it had not been updated
since 2006. It does not address many of the recent changes to be
instituted at the Elevator Section, such as the new two-stop
exemption, the use of call-back inspections to follow-up on
violations found during inspections, and the new citation program.
There is no timetable for when this revision will take place
despite the importance of having an updated manual to provide new
hires at the Elevator Section.
The Regulated Business Administrator was subsequently
re-interviewed on April 23, 2015 in order to discuss his April 10,
2015 memorandum as well as to obtain an update on the state of the
Elevator Section operations. Prior to this interview, the Regulated
Business Administrator provided the OIG with his memorandum
(Composite Exhibit 4) which reported that as of March 30, 2015,
3,582 of the, at that time, 9967 elevators under the Section’s
purview were overdue for their annual inspections. This new figure
represented a 3.5% reduction from the 3,707 elevators which had
overdue annual inspections on December 9, 2014. The Regulated
Business Administrator reported that the Elevator Section has set a
short-term goal of reducing the number of overdue annual
inspections to 20% (1,998) over the next six months. While this
number would still be too high for his liking, the Regulated
Business Administrator continued, it would show significant
progress in the right direction.
The Regulated Business Administrator stated that the Elevator
Section has undergone significant changes since he took over in May
2014. Specifically, there have been personnel
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 21 of 29
changes due to misconduct, an installation of a new management
philosophy which included greater accountability and increased
oversight of the inspectors, changes in how the inspections are
scheduled with the elevator maintenance companies, and other
administrative changes aimed at improving the efficiency of the
Section. He further offered that the Section has made significant
strides in improving the factors that contributed to the excessive
number of overdue annual inspections.
To begin, the Elevator Section has been directed to prepare two
weekly reports: one which tracks all elevators with overdue annual
inspections and a second report which tracks elevators with expired
certificates of occupancy. Section personnel have been advised that
these two issues are their top priorities. The reports are
distributed to ensure that everyone keeps focused and sets their
priorities accordingly.
Further, in an effort to reduce the number of overdue annual
inspections, the Supervisor and he approved a new process so that
private inspectors can witness the test portion of the annual
inspection. This process was approved in either December 2014 or
January 2015. Whereas previously, the Elevator Section required a
Section inspector to witness elevator tests conducted by elevator
maintenance companies, the new procedure allows elevator tests to
be witnessed by private inspectors. This new procedure was
implemented at the request of an elevator maintenance company with
not only one of the largest amount of elevators under contract, but
with the highest number of overdue inspections.
In explaining this new process, the Regulated Business
Administrator conceded that the Elevator Section does not have a
written policy on it and that he did not seek the approval of his
superiors prior to implementing the new procedure. Instead, the
process was approved through the Supervisor (and himself) as the
Supervisor is considered the “Authority Having Jurisdiction.” The
Regulated Business Administrator also noted that although this
particular elevator company is the only company that has contracted
with a private inspector, he would consider approving the process
for any company that has a significant amount of elevators with
overdue annual inspections on a case-by-case basis.
The Regulated Business Administrator also advised that the
Elevator Section implemented a two-stop exemption process in
December 2014. As a whole two-stop elevators account for 25% of all
elevators in the County. To date, 95 elevators have been approved
for exemption.
Additionally, the Elevator Section has made improvements to the
process that it uses when scheduling inspections with the elevator
maintenance companies. One employee has been assigned to coordinate
the scheduling of inspections on a full-time basis. She has daily
communication with the maintenance companies and has been able to
improve the coordination when scheduling inspections with the
maintenance companies. Further, the Regulated Business
Administrator has personally engaged in frequent conversations with
the maintenance company that services the largest number of County
elevators to ensure that inspections are being coordinated
efficiently.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 22 of 29
Further, a supervisor with Code Compliance was brought in to
relieve the Supervisor of many administrative duties at the
Elevator Section such as overseeing the scheduler, handling
attendance issues, handling annual evaluations, creating the
citation program, and a myriad of other duties that would take away
from the time that the Supervisor could spend in the field
conducting and supervising inspections. This supervisor is also
charged with monitoring the GPS data from the inspectors’ vehicles
on a daily basis. As a matter of fact, the supervisor, along with
an individual from another division, is working on creating alert
reports to better utilize the GPS system.
The Code Compliance supervisor is also handling the citation
enforcement program for the Elevator Section. Although there were
only the sixteen citations issued to elevator maintenance companies
and owners in the first quarter of 2015 for failing to obtain a
final inspection for permitted work, this was only a starting point
for the program. In the future, they anticipate issuing citations
for other violations, including overdue annual inspections and
expired certificates of operation, once they are able to meet
requests for annual inspections.
In the Regulated Business Administrator’s opinion, the Elevator
Section is currently being adequately supervised with the Code
Compliance supervisor handling the administrative duties and the
Supervisor responsible for the field duties, which include both
conducting and supervising inspections. The Supervisor is always
available to the inspectors either via cell phone or by joining the
inspectors on-site during an inspection. The Supervisor is also
responsible for the “on the job” training of new inspectors.
The Regulated Business Administrator acknowledged that the
Elevator Section has still not started the process of revising the
nine-year old Section Manual. Although it remains high on the list
of priorities, there is simply not enough time at the moment where,
regardless if the revision is done in-house or by an outside
consultant, the Supervisor would still have to be intimately
involved in the process.
As far as staffing concerns, the Regulated Business
Administrator reported that the Elevator Section has eleven
full-time and one part-time inspector positions in its budget. They
have divided the 9,900 elevators located throughout the County into
geographic areas and management believes that the number of
budgeted positions is appropriate for the number of inspections
that need to be performed. The Regulated Business Administrator
denied the presence of a retention problem at the Elevator Section.
Instead, he assigned the Section turnover to a wide range of
reasons, including termination for failing to adapt to the higher
standards of accountability and personal reasons outside of
management’s control. He further insisted that, although salary has
come up during the interview of some prospective new hires, it has
not been an impediment to hiring. The Regulated Business
Administrator characterized the morale at the Elevator Section
as
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 23 of 29
“good” adding that “[the Elevator Section is] building a new
team and changing a culture is always a difficult process which
includes some growing pains.” 8. Interview of the Assistant
Building Official
The Assistant Building Official was first hired by Broward
County in 1996 as a building inspector, but then left to obtain a
position as the Chief Structural Inspector with the City of
Hallandale Beach in 2004. He was rehired with the County in 2006 as
an Assistant Building Official and, in May 2012, was assigned to
the position of ELBPD manager, which included management of the
Elevator Section. Although he had no experience in the elevator
industry, he was an experienced manager who could address the
day-to-day issues at the Section, such as attendance, evaluations,
and personnel issues. After the Former Supervisor retired in
January 2013, the Assistant Building Official’s duties changed to
solely managing the Elevator Section. The Assistant Building
Official noted that the Former Supervisor had years of experience
in the elevator safety field and was knowledgeable as to the
Florida Building Code regulations which govern the installation and
inspection of elevators. The position vacated by the Former
Supervisor was not filled until May 2013. The new Supervisor and an
administrative coordinator reported directly to him and the
inspectors reported directly to the Supervisor. The Assistant
Building Official recounted that the supervisor position was
difficult to fill because of the large disparity in starting salary
between what the County pays and what the private sector and other
county and municipal governments pay. The Assistant Building
Official’s management responsibilities at the Elevator Section
required that he be in the office; he rarely went out in the field
with the inspectors. His primary responsibility was to “make sure
that the elevators in the County were safe and running.”
Specifically, the Assistant Building Official’s duties included the
oversight of permitting on new and remodeled elevators,
inspections, handling citizen complaints about malfunctioning
elevators and other issues, and management of the daily operations
of the Elevator Section. He learned the day-to-day operations of
the Section while working with the Former Supervisor for five to
six months before his retirement. In May 2014, the Assistant
Building Official was assigned duties at the airport. He was
entirely reassigned from the Elevator Section to the airport in
August 2014. His prior managerial duties at the Elevator Section
were split between the Supervisor and the Regulated Business
Administrator. When the Assistant Building Official took over
management duties at the Elevator Section, there were approximately
9,000 elevators and ten inspectors. At that point, there were about
1,000 elevators overdue for their annual inspections. The Assistant
Building Official admitted
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 24 of 29
that, while he could have obtained relevant figures from his
computer, he was not actively monitoring the number of overdue
annual inspections as it was not considered a problem at the time.
Instead, he was handling a bigger issue which was the constant
friction between the elevator owners, maintenance companies, and
inspectors – a common problem in the governmental elevator
inspection field in Florida. The Assistant Building Official, like
the Regulated Business Administrator, was provided with copies of
two reports, Status of Elevators with Overdue Annual Inspections,
dated January 30, 2013, and Outstanding Annual Inspections for
Commercial Elevators, dated October 1, 2014 which reflected overdue
annual inspection numbers of 1,309 and 3,931, respectively. The
Assistant Building Official also acknowledged the accuracy of the
figures and explained that he first became aware that the number of
outstanding annual inspections had “gone through the roof” in May
or June of 2014, as he had not previously been monitoring the
numbers. He assumed that the number of outstanding annual
inspections was still around 1,000. When the problem was brought to
his attention, he directed the Supervisor to handle it. The
Assistant Building Official explained that the factor that had the
largest impact on the growing numbers of outstanding annual
inspections was the drastic reduction in the number of inspectors
at the Elevator Section in March 2014. During that time, three
inspectors were terminated for, among other things, taking long
lunch breaks and not working until the end of their shift.17 A
fourth inspector also resigned for unrelated reasons. Prior to
March 2014, there were eleven full-time inspectors and one
part-time inspector assigned to conduct inspections in eleven
designated areas. Despite not having monitored the number of
outstanding annual inspections, the Assistant Building Official
reported that losing four inspectors greatly impacted the Elevator
Section’s ability to conduct inspections in a timely fashion. He
subsequently admitted that he did not know if the actions or
inactions of the three inspectors may have contributed to the
growing number of outstanding annual inspections, as he did not
research that matter. The Assistant Building Official recounted
that when the four inspectors left the Elevator Section, he
immediately requested that the open positions be filled. While it
would normally take about one month to fill a vacant position, it
took two months to fill the first of the four positions. He was
forced to reassign the seven remaining inspectors to cover the
eleven geographic areas which obviously increased the number of
elevators to inspect. The Elevator Section ran efficiently when one
inspector was assigned to a designated area because that inspector
became knowledgeable about details such as the age and condition of
the elevators and was able to take “ownership” for those
elevators.
17 Although inspector vehicles had been equipped with GPS in
June 2012, the Assistant Building Official did not monitor the GPS
data either before or after these inspectors were investigated. The
Assistant Building Official ultimately acknowledged that, in
hindsight, the Supervisor and he were probably responsible for the
poor supervision of the inspectors’ daily activities prior to March
2014.
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 25 of 29
The Assistant Building Official identified the large disparity
between starting salaries in the private sector and at other
governmental elevator inspection agencies in South Florida as the
largest impediment to expeditiously filling the inspector
positions. While the starting salary for elevator inspectors at the
Elevator Section is around $52,000, Miami-Dade County offers an
annual starting salary of $65,000. Experienced private sector
elevator mechanics earn around $85,000 annually. The Assistant
Building Official was unaware of any requests to conduct a salary
study or to raise the entry-level salary for the inspector
position. With regard to scheduling, the Assistant Building
Official explained that the Elevator Section utilizes a web-based
system to schedule inspections which can be accessed by the
elevator maintenance companies. He opined that the Section’s system
works well and is viewed as a model system by other county and
municipal governments that conduct elevator inspections. However,
problems with scheduling arose after March 2014 when the number of
inspectors was severely reduced. The elevator maintenance companies
with the largest number of elevators to maintain would request the
most amount of time from the inspectors so that they could have
their elevators inspected. With regard to enforcement, the
Assistant Building Official explained that, while inspectors are
empowered to issue citations for elevators which do not have a
current certificate of operation and other violations, citations
were rarely issued during the time that he was managing the
Elevator Section. The general philosophy of the Section was “let’s
get them [the elevators] fixed and running.” As an example of that
philosophy, the Assistant Building Official described an instance
where an elevator had several major violations which were not being
addressed by the owner. Rather than issuing a citation, he
threatened to have the elevator shut down. The owner chose to
quickly address the violations. The Assistant Building Official
recognized, however, that a citation program used in the right
situations could increase the compliance of the elevator owners and
the efficiency of the Elevator Section. To that end, he has
directed a supervisor with Code Compliance to establish an
efficient and more aggressive citation program. The Assistant
Building Official also suggested that call-back inspections –
re-inspections conducted after violations were found during an
initial inspection – would also be a good idea. As it stands now,
elevator owners sign a copy of the inspection report and send it to
the Elevator Section as proof that minor violations have been
corrected with more serious violations requiring the signature of a
certified elevator mechanic. Once Section staffing levels are
increased and the number of outstanding annual inspections is
reduced, the Assistant Building Official continued, the Section
would consider call-back inspections for more serious violations
that involve safety issues. The Assistant Building Official went on
to report that the Supervisor is currently spending a majority of
his time in the field conducting inspections instead of supervising
the unit. Moreover, while the Supervisor already had a wide range
of responsibilities, he ended up also acquiring the Assistant
Building Official’s former responsibilities upon his re-assignment.
The
-
BROWARD OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
FINAL REPORT RE: UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATION OF GROSS
MISMANAGEMENT BY THE BROWARD COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL LICENSING AND
BUILDING PERMITTING DIVISION – ELEVATOR SECTION
OIG 14-025
July 14, 2015
Page 26 of 29
Assistant Building Official acknowledged that the Supervisor’s
scope of responsibility is too broad for one supervisor. Finally,
the Assistant Building Official advised that the Section Manual
that is currently being used by the Elevator Section was written
several years ago, and while it does address the major
responsibilities of the Section, it is in need of revision.
9. Interview of the Supervisor
The Supervisor was hired in May 2013. Although he previously
reported to the Assistant Building Official, he now reports
directly to the Regulated Business Administrator. When he was hired
by the County, the Supervisor was basically provided with
“on-the-job” training by his subordinates, the Elevator Section
inspectors. He had no training on the monitoring or tracking
systems that were in place at the time in the Section, nor did
anyone explain his responsibilities as the Section supervisor. His
current responsibilities include reviewing plans and permits for
the installation of new and remodeled elevators, reviewing variance
requests, supervising the inspections performed by the inspectors,
and scheduling and performing inspections himself as time allows.
Upon the Assistant Building Official’s recent assignment to the
airport, the Supervisor was also assigned to be the point of
contact between the deputy chief of the Bureau of Elevator Safety
and the County. These responsibilities include preparing the
Monthly Activity Report and sending it to the deputy chief, and
conducting telephone conferences and bi-annual meetings with the
deputy chief and representatives from the other contracted
jurisdictions. The past several weeks, however, he has spent almost
all of his time performing inspections because “a lot of work has
piled up.” Specifically, “they are behind on their annuals – of
course.” The Supervisor explained that Broward County has 9,884
elevators that are required to be annually inspected by the
Elevator Section. At the time of the interview, September 30, 2014,
the Elevator Section had eight inspectors – nine, including himself
– on staff