04-11-2012, 06:32 AM #1
Brannon Skewers Harris, will not run for re-election
From WZEP 1460AM
Walton Commissioner Scott Brannon made a statement about what he calls lies, threats and attacks and said he will no longer sit idly with his hands tied behind his back. Brannon said he can admit he was wrong and made a mistake.
Brannon read from a statement and said cooperation with Suzanne Harris is doing exactly what she says. He said Harris sued the county and has used the press at every opportunity, though the commissioners have a policy to not talk about pending litigation. Brannon read a statement he had certified that made allegations against Harris. He also took a lie detector test and provided statements about the results.
The commissioner said he tried to reach out to Suzanne Harris as a commissioner and a TDC member in an attempt to assist her as a concerned citizen. He calls that a mistake. Brannon charges that while Harris may claim to be acting as a “citizen advocate”, she is nothing more than a person motivated by her own selfish desires for power and profit.
Brannon said in November of last year she asked him to come and meet with her concerning the lawsuit she was pending against the county. He said “cooperation” to Harris is doing exactly what she says. Brannon said it is and has been about how Harris can profit against Walton County.
Brannon also made statements against County Administrator Greg Kisela. He says Kisela met with Harris and it is obvious to him that Kisela decided he does not work for the Board and would rather play politics with Harris.
Brannon alleges he and people around him have been under attack and criticism from Harris. Brannon says he tried to work with her. In the statement, Brannon says, “You either do as she wants, or she goes after you in every way possible, without regard for the truth, ethics or moral integrity.”
Brannon stated that in a meeting with Harris, she stated, “or, what if Lloyd (Blue) found out my son had $50,000 in student loans from law school, and for $50,000 this all goes away.”
Brannon apologized to anyone he has insulted or offended. He said his behavior, at times was erratic and some things he has said and done are unacceptable as someone elected to serve the people of Walton County.
Brannon said he will not be seeking reelection to a third term to his office. He said this will allow him to refocus on completing the things he has started.
04-11-2012, 01:09 PM #2
Wow! He accuses her of blackmailing the county. Alleging that she said she would drop all the lawsuits if Lloyd Blue paid off her son's $50,000 student loan. And he took a lie detector test to back it up and passed. Somebody stick a fork in her. And him I suppose.
04-11-2012, 02:18 PM #3
Does it strike anyone as ODD that Brannon submitted to a lie dector test with someone he appears to know personally (from his comments in his statement) ?
And if Mr, Brannon is suddenly telling the truth now...what happened when he plead guilty to 17 complaints against him with the Florida Ethics Commission? Why did he continue to operate out of Sunshine even after being court ordered to do so?
If you want people to believe you're telling the truth 100% of the time then the time to be honest should have started years ago Mr. Brannon....not once you were caught with your pants down. You simply are not believable in my opinion regardless of how you try to sugar coat it.A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is still getting its boots on!
04-11-2012, 04:55 PM #4
Seems that Clay Adkinson forward an "ethics commission" complaint to Scott Brannons private email address with instructions for him to print and not forward the email and attachments.
Brannon forwarded the email from Clay to Ms. Harris.
The subject line is "Document for SH".
Why did Brannon seek someone to file an ethics commission complaint against L Jones ?
04-11-2012, 05:04 PM #5
Stick a fork in her? While you're ready to buy bridges in the desert, let me find something to sell you. Scott was guilty of ethics violation in 2008, signed a consent decree in 2009 which forbade hime from using personal email for county business, since then has violated that order hundreds if not thousands of times, worked with Clay to surreptitiously draft an ethics complaint against a fellow Commissioner and did not have the courage to file it himself but instead again violated the law by sending it from his personal email to Suzanne for her to file, in the process ignoring his/the county's attorneys admonition not to forward this.... Surely, you jest about Suzanne when you appear to take the word of Scott. His fall from grace began long ago but is as yet not complete.
We have on the one hand a woman who refused to be bullied by the county a few years ago, and in the process of fighting back, she was stiff-armed by the county when she made legitimate public records requests, ultimately having to file suit to compel the county to abide by the law and in the process exposing the abysmal multitude of other failures of compliance with the law here, there and yonder in what was supposed to be routine public business. She spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of her own money fighting county hall and won.
She took exception to the manner in which the county undertook to acquire land in the Chat Holley fiasco, again spending her own money in defense of the public treasury, your tax dollars and mine in that treasury. Outside counsel retained and paid by the county was very critical of the county and its processes and found what appeared likely to them to be several violations of state law in that transaction. The county attorney resigned in the wake of that investigation, and Mr. Miller was found guilty by a judge who was his lifelong friend when Suzanne's suit against Mr. Miller reached court.
Suzanne has put her money where her mouth is in the complaint against Scott for violating the 2009 consent decree, and the only questions remaining there are whether there will be criminal charges involved and the extent of the penalty leveled by the judge in Suzanne's case.
She has also spent her money filing the ethics complaint against Mr. Jones, which complaint Mr. Brannon had not the scrotal content to file in his own name.
She has also spent her own money filing suit against the commissioners individually and the county in the Chat Holley transaction, again in defense of your tax dollars and mine, not in pursuit of personal gain but in the cause fo seeking decent, honest, transparent governance of Walton County.
Now I'm sure that somewhere along the line Scott has done some admirable things, but he gets paid to be admirable, honest, transparent, above board, and in compliance with the law, granting no special favors as Commissioner, and that expectation is for uniform compliance and integrity 100% of the time, not for when it's convenient. 3 a.m. counts, too. It may not be used as a valid excuse for ethical and legal lapses.
In sum, I fail to see where you come from with stick a fork in her. I say we all owe Suzanne a deep and lasting debt of gratitude for her courage and her integrity. Who among us would be willing to place themselves on the line and work as hard and openly as she has in the name of good government? Damn few!
Talk is cheap. Hard choices and hard work for the public good is not. We deserve better governance, and Suzanne deserves our thanks.
04-11-2012, 05:31 PM #6Basically, I'm just passing through on my way to Australia.
04-12-2012, 10:27 PM #7
I'm away from the coast this week but had to weigh in. I thought it odd in his letter that Scott comes out swinging " ..will no longer sit idly by with my hands tied behind my back"......but then he quits! He showed her (Ms. Harris).
The people who received Scott's illegal emails that included name calling and racial slurs were certainly quite. Where was the outrage then? Why were the emails responded to and complied with?
04-12-2012, 10:51 PM #8
04-13-2012, 06:21 AM #9
That's right Bob! Hey, I'll play.
Bob , rite me am emale to theCounty commishun and put thes points in it four me. help me out.
1. I'll not vote for any county commissioner who does not vote for a public censure of Brannon
2. I'll not vote for any commissioner who doesn't act to remove all TDC board and director
04-13-2012, 08:24 AM #10
Note the quote at the end of the email. (A quote made by a "successful" politician.)
"Well Done is better than well said".....Benjamin Franklin
This quote does not seem appropriate.....
A more applicable quote might be:
"Better well said, when NOT well done". Or, "NO man can tame the tongue".... at 3:00 a.m.!!"
Again, I must commend Suzie for her intestional fortitude, vim and vigor!!!
UOTE=Bob Hudson;763053]Another 3AM Email
04-14-2012, 01:17 PM #11
04-14-2012, 05:55 PM #12
I thought profanity was not allowed on this site.
04-15-2012, 10:55 PM #13
"She spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of her own money fighting county hall and won."
I would be willing to bet that with a little digging one might find that possibly she used the money of the property she represents and not her own money at all......
Last edited by insightful; 04-15-2012 at 10:57 PM.
04-16-2012, 12:16 AM #14
She still spent a great deal of private money to clean up our county. Not a fan, but have to give her props for having the balls to do this.
04-17-2012, 07:12 AM #15
Brannon and some other Walton elected officials really illustrate the real power in Walton county. A corrupt little Republican mutual admiration society with no regard to the good of the public. And it isn't just the county commission that operates outside the bounds of decency and ethical behavior. I think we need to clean house. Too bad independents and Democrats have no chance of winning elections.
04-17-2012, 08:43 AM #16For those who have fought for it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know.
04-18-2012, 04:01 PM #17
Brannon has certainly stepped in it and probably made the best move by resigning.
But....have you ever met Suzanne Harris? Brannon's shots aren't far from the mark.
04-18-2012, 08:59 PM #18
Scott couldn't be further from the mark. Suzanne wants the same thing as most good citizens, i.e., good, honest, effective, transparent government by honorable people acting in an intelligent and honest fashion. The difference between her and most is that when she sees our public officials failing her (and our) most basic tests and trust, she acts! And she works her ass off in taking action on your behalf and mine.
Talk is easy and cheap. Saddle up and put in the time with Suzanne and her little foot-soldiers, and you'll appreciate a wee bit more just how much she and others like her are doing for you.
When all the dust settles, perhaps you'll understand better just how courageous and honest this lady is. While Scott is free to attack her with his self-serving statements of dubious veracity, she is forbidden to refute his attacks with factual information in her possession. I know she has it. I've seen it. Come to the courthouse 4/30 for an educational day.
I hope you have what it takes to publicly apologize for your imputations here today once all the facts are public, provided of course there is no judicial seal on the proceedings. Suzanne is on the side of the angels, your statement notwithstanding. You speak from a perspective of factual deprivation.
04-18-2012, 09:06 PM #19
And lest I forget again, GraytonGuy, Scott did not resign, unfortunate as that may be. He announced he was not running for re-election. Would that you were right in that regard. When the time comes that many of his emails are public, you'll understand better. Not a pretty picture. The worst have not been released for public consumption. Feel free to do your own public records request and sort through the thousands of emails and you'll understand, too. A really ugly picture! With time and effort, any citizen can be as informed.
04-18-2012, 10:13 PM #20
I just don't get the continuous witch hunt. Granted, some of our public officials abuse their positions. If Ms. Harris really wants to make a change she should run for a county seat.
04-19-2012, 07:53 AM #21
04-19-2012, 07:56 AM #22
04-19-2012, 08:29 AM #23
04-19-2012, 09:35 AM #24
04-19-2012, 12:31 PM #25
04-19-2012, 02:35 PM #26
04-23-2012, 10:23 AM #27
04-23-2012, 10:28 AM #28
I don't disagree that Brannon has made some horrible blunders. I'm just saying that the whole cast in this play is more than a bit self-serving and disfunctional.
You are correct in pointing out my error in stating Brannon resigned. He did, indeed, simply declare he was not a candidate for re-election. I guess I do "have what it takes" to apologize when I am incorrect.
04-27-2012, 10:00 AM #29
04-27-2012, 11:37 AM #30
What is a "developer tree hugger"?
04-28-2012, 09:54 AM #31
No, I am not an elected public official, and yes, though far from wealthy, I contributed to someone's campaign last election cycle and have done so this one as well. My contributions are small but they show my belief in the particular candidate's position as I perceive it. While I'm at it, let me give you my reasons for support of our form of government, flawed though it may be.
While many may consider me naive for saying this, let me assure you I am not. Anyone can learn to be known and recognized if they set their mind to it. It is not whether they are "known" but rather how their ideas, principles and solutions will be perceived and accepted by the electorate. You are right by maintaining that it takes money to run for office in today's political environment. We have no one to blame but ourselves. We made it that way several decades ago. We do not, however, have to rely only on Developer's for funding. If your position is well known and widely accepted, you can prevail. I know this sounds altruistic but that is not so if you have faith in our governmental system. That faith is lacking to a great degree today and therein lies the problem.
One thing more which I failed to mention previously. You and many others, can make an impact without running for office. In my younger days, I sat on both a community planning commission and a capital improvements board. Neither position was an elected one but both contributed greatly to community development. You can also speak out on issues concerning you at public workshops and non partisan political functions. You, of course, realize that God does not say "yes" to every request you make. Well, neither do public officials. Most of the ones I have known well take into consideration the public as a whole.
I hope you can accept that, while I understand your obvious abhorrence with government, it is not all what you think. It certainly has more than its share of warts and blemishes. It also has the beauty and brightness of over 200 years of overall unqualified success as the best governing method ever perpetrated on this planet.
Last edited by Andy A; 04-28-2012 at 09:59 AM.For those who have fought for it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know.
04-28-2012, 11:06 AM #32
I agree Andy
04-28-2012, 11:08 AM #33
Andy, well and truly said as always.
04-29-2012, 05:45 AM #34
Thanks Andy. The real enemy is not government - it is apathy and ambivalence.
04-29-2012, 07:32 AM #35
05-09-2012, 07:39 AM #36
Maybe Commissioner Brannon should have said: "it's all a vast left wing conspiracy".
09-05-2012, 04:25 PM #37
Brannon hit the nail on the head about Ms. Harris!!
For someone suing for the Sunshine Law She keeps all her secretes she is OH sorry was the General Manager at Edgewater. She keeps her owners in the dark about everything lies about everything has to have total control.
I could go on and on but soon the press will get it out to everyone and they will be shocked!!!!
09-05-2012, 04:33 PM #38
You are so right just dig and you will see she uses the properties money that she manages oh sorry used to manage.
09-05-2012, 08:46 PM #39
09-06-2012, 01:31 PM #40
Just curious local 32550, are you an owner at Edgewater ? What about Edgewater's Board of Directors, they have to approve the budget and expenditures, don't they ? Just curious if you have proof of wrongdoing or do you just dislike Ms. Harris ? Just asking
Last edited by Independent Thinker; 09-06-2012 at 01:32 PM.
09-06-2012, 01:43 PM #41
I am not sure what qualifies a person to have an opinion about someone else without facts yet that does not seem to stop people from having opinions. I am not sure what qualifies a person to be part of the "solution" unless you want to change your whole life and become a politician or a political activist. I believe opinions are okay if you are willing to make some attempt to look at both sides of an argument or another human and of course all humans have flaws and all arguments have two sides. Many of our flaws are revealed when money and power are involved. Our system of government is based on many principles but in my opinion the most important is checks and balances. If we ever lose sight of that principle then we will no longer have a balanced system of government and the results will be disasterous. What I see in the argument about these two people confirms that checks and balances are in place in our county government but it does not confirm anything else about the moral value of either person. People make mistakes and should pay for those mistakes but lets leave the moral judgement of people out of the debate. Maybe I am naive but I believe we are better humans when we treat those that disagree with us with respect. Life is a team sport!
09-06-2012, 03:28 PM #42
On the other hand, he may keep at it until she elects to sic her attorney on him despite the cost to her. She has demonstrated more than once her willingness to do what she believes right despite both the costs of doing so and the opprobrium heaped on her by many, including many on this forum, for standing up for what she sees as right. She suffers fools not lightly, and local 32550 is a fool if he thinks she doesn't know who he is.
Based on prior postings, even I could find his home address and a street view thereof in a minute or two, and he has posted his cell number online under local 32550 previously on Sowal. His degree field was not aerospatial engineering, and his hands are unclean.
09-07-2012, 08:08 AM #43
Thanks lazin&drinkin, no response from local 32550 answering my question tells a lot about the allegations.
09-25-2014, 05:58 PM #44
09-25-2014, 07:51 PM #45
Is that monkey Curious George?
By festus in forum Local Government and GroupsReplies: 13Last Post: 04-05-2012, 03:38 PM
By scooterbug44 in forum Local Government and GroupsReplies: 9Last Post: 11-20-2011, 11:51 AM
By Buz Livingston in forum SoWal LoungeReplies: 6Last Post: 03-08-2011, 05:41 PM
By Jim Tucker in forum SoWal LoungeReplies: 2Last Post: 09-29-2008, 03:52 PM
By organicmama in forum SoWal LoungeReplies: 22Last Post: 04-16-2008, 07:18 PM