Let's Have A FULL Audit !

Where can I get my T-Shirt of that???

Classic, I love it.

Can we have a useful post that details what you propose? Who would perform the audit? What would it entail? How long would it take? What are the goals? Who pays for it?

Where can I get my T-Shirt of that???

Classic, I love it.

I'm sure Robert Nelson's daughter could make you one.

Can we have a useful post that details what you propose? Who would perform the audit? What would it entail? How long would it take? What are the goals? Who pays for it?

Bob will dole that out as he see's fit and when distractions are necessary.

This is a useful post. Puts faces with names...

Also, two of the three have connections to the Planning Commissioner link with the latest State Sunshine violation.

The guy that made the violation was appointed by Imfeld.

The Chair of that committee is related to Larry Jones.

Add - Sara wanted to keep a citizen from learning about a public meeting and you have a nice mix of corrupt public officials continuing to attem

Add - Sara wanted to keep a citizen from learning about a public meeting and you have a nice mix of corrupt public officials continuing to attem

If Sara really wanted to keep him out of a public meeting all she had to do was wait for Osborne to show his a$$ and have the bailiff remove him. That probably should have happened more than once!

I met with the State Attorney this morning.

I'm happy with what I was told

I met with the State Attorney this morning.

I happy with what I was told

Are we going to have another "with hunt"?

A friend sent this and I thought it might be of interest to the participants of our little fracas here.

"SOA telling everyone that Becnel was just using the current NOPC as a clean up NOPC. See the county's comments in blue so far. If becnel can get this NOPC approved most of his projects would be reviewed as less than minor and therefore there would be no opportunity for residents to publicly object to them. There are many pitfalls in this as you can see from the staff's comments. Becnel and his hired guns have sold your board a load of crap if they think these changes don't affect their rights and future development. Please note there is no submission of a comprehensive traffic analysis on how circulation of traffic affects the resort or US98 with all these changes. He's trying to rely on a study from 1984 for traffic at best. Please also note he's trying to change the definition of open space in order to bring about compliance. He's not fixing or preserveing anything, just changing definitions. I thought you'd like to know the truth on what's coming before the planning commisson on the 27th and the BOCC on DEC 2nd at a special meeting. This is the county getting the wool pulled over its eyes by Dana Mathews and company."

First time I've tried to upload and this is a very large file, so if my attempt to shorten the process does not work, please do your best if you in fact are interested to get the gist of the staff responses to Becnel's attorneys' requests that the county ignore the rules that us mere mortals are expected to comply with.

As there are quite a number of pages to attach and a file error with p. 5 and more after p. 11, l'll split this up and finish tomorrow.

@lazin&drinkin how is this relevant? Should be another thread?

As I was involved in the process of posting this, the other thread had not been started. This seemed appropriate to the upcoming audit in that it's just this sort of attempt by a developer to skirt the rules that is part and parcel of the problem. Were this to pass the BCC, Sandestin would have a green light to bypass public notice and hearings, among other things. That said, when I have the time to post the remainder, and it's time-consuming, I intend posting on the NOPC thread that is now the better locus for this.

I couldn't give two $hits about Sandestin, what does concern me is the attempt to redefine open space. This would affect a lot more than just Sandestin if the definition were changed.

Matt J, you hit at least one of the nails o the head. It is the larger frame of reference and the threats to that larger frame posed by this NOPC by Sandestin that should be our concern. We have laws and rules. Our planning dept and BCC have not followed them. We have an expensive mess as a result, with a serious impairment of the quality of life for the residents of this county and some serious legal bills that could have been avoided by the county adhering to those laws and rules. There are other implications in this NOPC that threaten us and the rule of law. Public awareness is the first line of defense, or should be. If we the people don't object, we deserve what we get, and this forum provides a means of spreading the awareness needed to speak outrage, and which outrage must be communicated to the BCC if we are to have any hope for a change for the better.

I could be wrong, but don't the changes have to be reaffirmed by the state? In other words, doesn't all of this have to be reviewed by the state similar to COMP and LDC changes?

Also I think we should give credit where due, the planning department did finally say that Sandestin was out of compliance.