“ I still think the attack on the building was unfair. In all the investigations, there was nothing found that was improper. There was nothing done in secret and there was nothing done outside the process that was supposed to be followed.” — Paul Hawkes
PHOTOS: (AP Photo/Steve Cannon, File)
Previous page: The 1st District Court of Appeal’s new home in Tallahassee; Left: A courtroom in the building; Above: Members of the media photograph the 1st District Court of Appeal’s second-floor atrium during a news media tour of the completed building on Nov. 29, 2010.
“ If you look at the cost of a building, there are 16 or 17 items that you look at ... there’s site prep, there’s engineering fees, and there’s something called ‘general building costs’ added on top. [Morgan] took that one line and neglected all the other line items. Our building was actually built below the projected cost.” — Paul Hawkes
“completely unfounded.” “I knew we were building a very cost-efficient building” he says. “We got attacked for flat-screen televisions. Well, they weren’t even making tube televisions anymore … It’s state of the art but it’s not extravagant. But they hit us for TVs.” Critics also questioned the terrazzo floors and fake marble pillars, he says. “If you’re building a floor with lots of traffic, terrazzo make sense; it lasts forever. Now, is it a little bit fancy? I guess you could have done it cheaper, but we’re talking a few thousand dollars less. And the columns … I suppose you just could have put a coat of paint on it and not done the faux marble painting and save some money but it’s really hard to find places to save money.” Hawkes says other expenses, such as a “graywater” system for flushing, added to the final bill but also secured the building’s designation as “LEED Gold,” the second-highest rating for environmentally friendly new structures. Special fire-resistant caulking and putting communication cables in protective casings, to mention a couple more extras, all cost more, he says. “It was a six-year project, from first appropriation to movein. The vision was cast and the funding was in place.” Then Morgan, a Pulitzer Prize winner, started poking around. “I remember sitting in Andrew’s one day when I was still a judge,” Hawkes says, referring to a longtime eatery in the shadow of the Capitol frequented by the Tallahassee in-crowd. “Lucy Morgan came by and leaned over to me, ‘How’s your Taj Mahal coming?’ I said, ‘It’s coming along fine.’ ” According to Hawkes, “Lucy said our building should have cost $250 per square foot and it cost $400 per square foot. Well, if you look at the cost of a building, there are 16 or 17 items that you look at ... there’s site prep, there’s engineering fees, and there’s something called ‘general building costs’ added on top. She took that one line and neglected all the other line items. Our building was actually built below the projected cost. We never had a cost overrun. There were no change orders. “I understand Lucy has a function and she developed a role here,” Hawkes says. “I did get the lion’s share of the hit, but we had a building committee and all decisions were voted on.”
Hawkes says he’s run into Morgan since leaving the court. Asked about their interaction, he says, “It was fine. But I still think the attack on the building was unfair. In all the investigations, there was nothing found that was improper. There was nothing done in secret and there was nothing done outside the process that was supposed to be followed,” adding that CFO Sink made the motion to approve the courthouse and the Cabinet’s vote was unanimous. Morgan, now retired and living in North Carolina, declined to respond to Hawkes’ comments in detail. She says she stands by her stories. “Rather than face a (misconduct) trial, he resigned from the court,” she tells INFLUENCE in an email. “That speaks louder than anything I might say.” Hawkes says the courthouse “did not get a nickel that did not go through a formal process. That’s why it was never labeled a ‘turkey.’ ” Turkeys are what Florida TaxWatch, a nonprofit conservative watchdog, calls budget items that it thinks didn’t get proper scrutiny when lawmakers write a state budget. Often, such projects are quietly added to the budget toward the end of a legislative session. “What was really criticized was expenses—and buildings are expensive,” Hawkes says. “It was built to accommodate future growth and to be worthy of its function. We tried to think about the future. And we tried to build a building that wouldn’t be thrown away.” Asked what he would do differently in retrospect, Hawkes says he basically would have been a better lobbyist. “I would have educated more members. I would have invited them out (to the construction site) more often.” Like many, he reflects on the mistakes of the past to inform his current pursuit. Hawkes describes his job as a go-between who gathers and disseminates “intel” for both sides, clients and legislators. “Clients pay because they think you’re going to be able to help them,” he says. “You help your clients in not just ‘getting to yes’ but sometimes you help by just knowing what’s going to happen. It’s just information; that’s what clients pay for. They use lobbyists to decide which battles are winnable.” ][
FALL 2015 INFLUENCE | 89