MAOS

Monday, March 12, 2012 Anne-Marie Martinez, Bar Counsel Attorney Consumer Assistance Program The Florida Bar 651 East Jefferson Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2300 Re: Complaint by Timothy Stevens against William Gentry Crawford, Jr. Florida Bar File No. 2012-50,051 (17J) Madam; The following is in response to the March 8, 2012 letter by Steven J. McDonald on behalf of his client. In that rebuttal, McDonald noted [a]ll five (5) of Mr. Stevens' ethics complaints against the five (5) DBHA Commissioners were dismissed by the Florida Commission on Ethics for lack of jurisdiction. I submit this is an intentional gross mischaracterization of the facts. 1. I filed six ethics complaints, not five. The sixth complaint, the document that McDonald glaringly overlooks, is against Commissioner Lee Giannino and stands at the very heart of this matter. 2. McDonalds suggestion of this issue being resolved incorrectly portrays the reality of the situation. 3. Last week, continuing their yearlong investigation of Giannino, the Florida Commission on Ethics contacted the Deerfield Beach Housing Authority seeking documentation. 4. Prosecutors from the Broward State Attorneys Office have very recently indicated an ongoing and active investigation into this matter. Additionally, Crawfords analysis of the situation, dated April 21, 2010, suggests biasness based on his long-time relationship with Giannino; his written opinion at odds with his own email written a few weeks later: [T]his email will confirm that your wife with talk with Pam Davis about getting rid of this indebtedness owed the DBHA, which has created a conflict for me, Pam, and the DBHA. In my opinion, the problem violates Florida law. While his written opinion may be based on sound case law, it certainly flies against the advice he is giving Giannino. After I brought this matter to his attention, in June of 2010, according to Crawfords own words, he believed his client was violating Florida Law. I opine this mutual biasness continued three months later when Giannino voted to extend Crawfords contract with the Agency and was clearly evident in the drafting of the December 2010 Promissory Note, whereby Giannino, with Crawfords help, received

MAOS

special pecuniary gain with this sweetheart deal: 1. 2. 3. 4. No interest accumulated over the history of the unpaid debt (2006-2010) A reduction in the interest rate (from 8% down to 6%) The Agencys standard no default clause was not included Repayment terms, normally one year, were extended to five

Most disturbingly, by ignoring my written notification and by helping Giannino to enter into a loan agreement with his own agency, a loan agreement that contained terms of special pecuniary interest, I opine Crawfords actions aided not only in the continued, but created additional violations of Florida Law. Should you require further assistance, I stand ready to help. Regards

Timothy Chaz Stevens 818-468-5433