Walton County Commissioner Brannon accused of ethics violations

It's not the first time a Co. Commissioner for Walton Co. has been caught in real estate transactions. I had a near miss with one a few years ago......poor guy literally went under.

Nothing wrong with having real estate dealings, but when a Commissioner uses (or, it appears) his/her position on the Board to benefit their real estate development dealings, that's unethical.

The lots had covenants and restrictions that allowed for commercial and the development order expired after the new owners didn't proceed with the project. Check your facts first!

I agree that you and yours seems to be getting the royal ***** job from SanDestin. I think the courts should be the proper venue to force them to keep their word. Most people without an interest in this issue would be on your side.
But, you lose me with this grandstand play on Mr. Brannon. While you probably achieved your goal ( publicity for your cause) many people without an interest in this issue think such tactics are unfair. I am one of them. Thus, while you may gain in the short-term, I believe you damage your cause in the long-term.
As to a "thank you" vote, I really don't care. My sense of right/wrong does not change at the whim of the crowd.
Best of luck to you.

I agree that you and yours seems to be getting the royal ***** job from SanDestin. I think the courts should be the proper venue to force them to keep their word. Most people without an interest in this issue would be on your side.
But, you lose me with this grandstand play on Mr. Brannon. While you probably achieved your goal ( publicity for your cause) many people without an interest in this issue think such tactics are unfair. I am one of them. Thus, while you may gain in the short-term, I believe you damage your cause in the long-term.
As to a "thank you" vote, I really don't care. My sense of right/wrong does not change at the whim of the crowd.
Best of luck to you.

Why are you defending a politician who did something illegal or unethical? At this point in my life politicians found guilty of corruption or unethical dealings should be tarred and feathered.

Not in the BCC chambers as that's pretty messy, maybe out in the grass of the roundabout.

I normally agree with most of your positions but for the life of me, I cannot understand how you can call Alan's position on Commissioner Brannon "grandstanding". He has accurately quoted the state statute regarding when you should recuse yourself from a Commission vote. To me, it is very clear, but then maybe I don't interpret the English language correctly. I don't think Alan has hurt his cause at all, is a credit to the county and is more up to speed on this issue that ANYONE in the county. As to the "whim of the crowd" I certainly am not affected by such. However, I do understand "facts" when they are presented to me when, indeed, they are "facts". As I see it, Alan has presented "facts" as what he has presented all come from official and filed sources. Some people need to start realizing just how dedicated and correct this man is. We certainly need more of his kind in Walton County.

What jury/board/commission has found Mr. Brannon guilty of anything? Seems "innocent until proven guilty" has been ignored or forgotten.

What jury/board/commission has found Mr. Brannon guilty of anything? Seems "innocent until proven guilty" has been ignored or forgotten.

Such a "charred earth' outlook as yours is exactly why more and more good potential candidates do not choose to run for office. Why risk their reputations when people are ready to tar and feather them at the slightest hint that they may have violated a rule or code.

Yes, it is true that Brannon has not yet been found guilty...............I apologize for jumping to conclusions based solely on his past behavior, past ethical problems, my knowledge of his character, and the evidence presented.

My definition of "grandstanding" is to bring charges in a meeting before a board with zero jurisdiction over the alleged behavior. The proper venue for this issue is the state ethics commission. I also am uncomfortable with accusing someone of wrongdoing via "ambush." I also don't see the connection between Mr.Brannon's votes and the alleged conflict. Seems if he wanted to help is friend/partner's lots increase in value, he would vote to SUPPORT the homeowners.

I normally agree with you Andy, but on this one I guess we must agree to disagree agreeably.

I think we paid about 14K per lot for the MSBU and about 250 per quarter for the HOA.

You personally write a check to the soa every quarter for $250.00 but you don't have access to the common areas? How can the soa enforce that upon you? I would just stop paying.

When will the public apology to Mr Brannon occur ?

i hear at the next BCC mtg. Gotta see this.[



/quote



AAHHHH! Intrested Girl, I missed you. Shades of election season, I see my test of the Gossip chain is complete.

Come on up in front of the BCC and state your case. Better read this before you come. Note, it's just two days after I appeared before the BCC.

"Luuucccy, ju've got some splaaaaning to do."

Let's see them answer all these letters from the state.

AAHHHH! Intrested Girl, I missed you. Shades of election season, I see my test of the Gossip chain is complete.

Come on up in front of the BCC and state your case. Better read this before you come. Note, it's just two days after I appeared before the BCC.

"Luuucccy, ju've got some splaaaaning to do."

Let's see them answer all these letters from the state.

You personally write a check to the soa every quarter for $250.00 but you don't have access to the common areas? How can the soa enforce that upon you? I would just stop paying.

Driftwood Estates owners don't pay SOA (Sandestin Owners Association) dues; Alan and the other Driftwood Estates owners pay quarterly dues to their own homeowners association (Driftwood Estates HOA). These are two separate entities.

Hence they don't have usage rights to the common areas maintained by the Sandestin Owners Association.....and funded by Sandestin owners that pay SOA dues. Seems fair to me.

If you read the second attachment in Alan's above post, you will see why Driftwood owners believe that the do have specific rights of usage for certain Sandestin amenities. It is noted in the first page of that pdf.

Could you turn up the dpi setting on your scanner? Those pdf files were awful, if they are yours. If not, then someone at the county needs some training.

For what it is worth, I was told about your plan to apologize by a County Commissioner. I told them I thought that strange because I had heard you had a whole lot more to say. Also told you and Brannon had met and worked out your differences. Yes the rumor mill is a fascinating thing in Walton County.

It also states that the Driftwood owners themselves did not approve in sufficient numbers of joining the association that pays for and maintains the 4 rights of usage that are listed in the letter.

Thus, "the residents are not entitled to participate in the amenities within Sandestin becasue they (Driftwood residents) did not desire to pay the amenity fee as required."

Speaking of election rumors, is it true that Pat Blackshear has stated that she was considering running for district five in three years?

Seems that Alan will have to contend with her in the future, no matter the outcome of Driftwood

In the part which notes the 4 rights of usage, it is prefaced by stating that membership is not required to have those rights. Maybe I read it too fast, but that is how I understand it. Sounds like you see it differently. Did you read that part, too, or, did I completely make that up in my mind?

That would make little sense if you compare the salaries of the two positions.

If you read the second attachment in Alan's above post, you will see why Driftwood owners believe that the do have specific rights of usage for certain Sandestin amenities. It is noted in the first page of that pdf.

Alan, perhaps you could also provide us with, "Attachment 2," noted in the first pdf. I'm curious to read it.

More interesting to me is the second attachment in Alan's previous post, which on the last page explains some history and connections of people employed by the County, also working for the defendant. I've heard about some of the connections before, but Holy Cow! -- those are very interesting, especially if they are proven to be true.