We’re all sadly accustomed to reading stories about politicians doing ugly things. But the newly revealed accusations against Orlando Commissioner Regina Hill look extra ugly.
Hill is accused of defrauding an elderly Orlando resident — a 96-year-old woman who says Hill, a Democrat, tricked her into giving Hill control over her assets and then proceeded to drain her bank account of more than $100,000, spending the money on everything from a vacation to a facelift.
Hill’s attorney, Warren Lindsey, said: “Ms. Hill denies any allegations of unlawful conduct.” And, in fact, Hill hasn’t even been charged with anything, as the Florida Department of Law Enforcement says its investigation is ongoing.
But a judge issued a temporary protective injunction for “exploitation of a vulnerable adult,” demanding that Hill stay away from the woman and her money.
Probe: Orlando Commissioner spent 96-year-old’s money on home upgrades, IV treatments
In doing so, Judge Heather Higbee cited “an immediate and present danger of exploitation” and a “likelihood of irreparable harm.”
There are a lot of things in the case file and other public records that look pretty damning — not just for Hill, but also for Orlando City Hall.
The accusations are long and complicated, involving multiple houses, extravagant spending and even one document where a witness appears to have misspelled his own name.
But to sum up the ugliness of the allegations against Hill, allow me to share one paragraph, in its entirety, from the sworn statement by FDLE special agent Steve Brenton:
“A thorough review of the various financial documents showed that Hill used [the alleged victim’s] funds to do things such as rent a vehicle, purchase expensive bottles of perfume, clothing, purchase numerous intravenous infusions of vitamins from Vitalounge, purchase a facelift for Hill, a New Year Eve’s hotel stay in Miami Florida, car insurance payments on Hill’s personal vehicles, and dental surgery for Hill. These purchases and/or bank withdrawals exceeded $100,000 and solely benefitted Hill.”
If even half of that is true, it’s beyond vile.
But there are details in other documents that seem like they should’ve raised red flags long ago.
One appears in an investigation the city launched back in late 2022 after one of Hill’s former aides accused her of running an unprofessional and unethical office.
The complaint was basically an employment/workplace issue, accusing Hill of being over-demanding and prone to using profanity. But it revealed a two-part acknowledgement by Hill herself that seems incredibly problematic.
First, Hill acknowledged that she was first introduced to the elderly constituent via her role as a city official. (“According to Commissioner Hill, she was alerted to the situation by the Orlando Police Department and/or Code Enforcement,” read the report.)
Second, Hill told the city’s investigator that the same alleged victim cosigned a loan to help Hill purchase a home after Hill helped the constituent with her housing problems. (“Commissioner Hill explained that she purchased the home at issue using her own money and the CITIZEN co-signed the loan.”)
Let’s stop right there. In what universe is that ethically appropriate?
A city official ends up getting help securing a personal loan from a 90-something-year-old whom she met because her house was facing code enforcement issues?
It is baffling to me that the law firm being paid to investigate this issue, Allen Norton and Blue, didn’t flag that as problematic. And that the city, which paid for the report, didn’t scream bloody murder.
A spokeswoman for Mayor Buddy Dyer said “it is common for city commissioners to be advised about health and human service needs of constituents in their Districts.”
Well, sure. But is it common for city officials to then turn to those citizens for help securing a personal loan? I sure hope not.
The city also noted their paid investigator didn’t cite any instances of “criminal conduct.” That’s true. The investigation didn’t conclude much of anything. It was largely the legal equivalent of a shrug emoji, saying that Hill’s aide said something, Hill said something else and that the investigator wasn’t able to confirm very much. That can’t really be Orlando’s version of accountability.
There are lots of other red flags about this case — including an almost laughable inconsistency in the signatures on one of the documents where Hill gained control over the alleged victim’s assets.
Hill’s son is listed as one of the witnesses to the legal document — and his name is misspelled. In the “signature” version of Hill’s son’s name, his last name says “Nembhard.” In the “printed” version of his name, it’s missing the letter H, saying “Nembard.”
How likely would you be to misspell your own name? Or to sign off on an incorrect spelling of it on a legal document?
It’s also worth noting that the injunction case against Hill is being handled by Community Legal Services, a respected local organization that provides pro bono legal help for low-income citizens who don’t have many other places to turn.
In a Facebook post about the case, Community Legal Services minced no words in calling out Hill by name and saying she was accused of “financially exploiting a 96-year-old woman who lives in the Parramore area of downtown Orlando.”
(The “HELPline” for Community Legal Services, by the way, is 800-405-1417.)
Hill will obviously have her day in court. In fact, a hearing on the injunction is scheduled for Wednesday. And again, FDLE has not brought or recommended any criminal charges, citing “an active investigation.”
But it’s pretty clear that she has a lot to answer for — as does the city, which was notified more than a year ago that one of its commissioners had turned to a citizen for monetary help after other city officials told her that constituent was in trouble. And again, that just looks ugly.
smaxwell@orlandosentinel.com
