I guess the flip side is that if there is no appearance of illegalities, then we should not worry......wait, isn't that what is going on in Okaloosa County.
We elect people knowing what they bring to the table.
Walton County Commissioner Brannon accused of ethics violations
- Thread starter Alan Osborne
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
I guess the flip side is that if there is no appearance of illegalities, then we should not worry......wait, isn't that what is going on in Okaloosa County.
We elect people knowing what they bring to the table.
alan, i am SO impressed with your commitment. i hope you see justice, but in the meantime, keep making people uncomfortable.
i got shivers when i read the description of events.
i'm sorry, but it's scary how the culture of unethical behavior is so pervasive here. they're not even the slightest bit embarrassed! they're indignant in addition to being incompetent and criminal. that's ok. i'm mortified FOR them.
i got shivers when i read the description of events.
i'm sorry, but it's scary how the culture of unethical behavior is so pervasive here. they're not even the slightest bit embarrassed! they're indignant in addition to being incompetent and criminal. that's ok. i'm mortified FOR them.
Assume nothing...I am not even human.
As the saying goes, correllation is not causation. I fail to see an agency. What smells is the stagnant water in Driftwood that wafts among the CWJ and the Osborne alike.
Here goes your answer
Don't know you Sam but here goes,
1. Never said CWJ Holdings did any thing wrong or Mr Jones.
2. According to the develpmental order, the area where CWJ holdings has lots, is my neighborhoods designated lakes and open area.
My plat was recorded in 1979 and CWJ's part was platted after I bought my House. That's my drainage area according to the master plan.
3. CWJ's lots must become a lake or open area for full compliance. Plat must be abandoned for that to happen.
4. There will never be a non flooded driftwood without this area being returned to its original intent and about 5 million dollars worth of drainage improvements.(Which the county doesn't have)
My part of the neighborhood paid for a multi-million dollar MSBU drainage fix, that part of the neighborhood ruined. (No CWJ or Mr. Jones didn't do it, but I want the developer held responsible.)
Part 2
1. Mr Jones is a partner with Mr. Brannon in the Freeport Group LLC and another LLC. I never said checks were being cut or would be cut to anybody.
But the statute is clear in our opinion on relationships.
Florida Statute
112.3143 Voting conflicts.--
(4) No appointed public officer shall participate in any matter which would inure to the officer's special private gain or loss; which the officer knows would inure to the special private gain or loss of any principal by whom he or she is retained or to the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained; or which he or she knows would inure to the special private gain or loss of a relative or business associate of the public officer, without first disclosing the nature of his or her interest in the matter.
Commissioner Brannon did participate in votes that affected the property owned by CWJ holdings. (see the BCC minutes) Is Mr. Jones a business associate of Mr. Brannon? According to the LLC's annual report on Sun Biz, the answer is yes. The benefit is, it will save the interior lot owners a lengthy battle against the developer at our neighborhoods expense. Money does not have anything to do with it. Was it disclosed in the meetings or after the vote in writing?
No, as far as I can tell. What part of shall participate in any Matter is confusing?
Sam, I have spoken to Mr. Brannon and will give him time to answer after talking with his council. If you came to the meeting, I think you'll see I made much more serious allegations aganst a State official and have some more for some county staff. I have offered and been available to talk to any of the commissioners any time outside of the public meeting's but have been basically stonewalled for years about any real answers, so our Board did it the only place left available. The BCC meeting. By the way, I recieved a unamious vote from the 170+ owners who feel Driftwood has been handled improperly by the developer, the County and the State. It's not just me, we're tired of it.
Even if Brannon made a mistake, it's a misdemeanor punishable by a 500 dollar fine as long as he doesn't deny it. It seems the press is worse than the punishment. I have appeared 25+ times before the BCC, they had a fair shot at other solutions. They chose poorly IMO.
Sam, you muddied the waters with things I didn't say at the meeting. Too bad they cut my freedom of speech off with Mr. Brannon as the last subject, it left him in the spotlight when there was so much more written evidence I had regarding other staff that is far worse. I only get about ten minutes per meeting so I'll feed them this pie one 10 minute slice at the time.
Alan
Don't know you Sam but here goes,
1. Never said CWJ Holdings did any thing wrong or Mr Jones.
2. According to the develpmental order, the area where CWJ holdings has lots, is my neighborhoods designated lakes and open area.
My plat was recorded in 1979 and CWJ's part was platted after I bought my House. That's my drainage area according to the master plan.
3. CWJ's lots must become a lake or open area for full compliance. Plat must be abandoned for that to happen.
4. There will never be a non flooded driftwood without this area being returned to its original intent and about 5 million dollars worth of drainage improvements.(Which the county doesn't have)
My part of the neighborhood paid for a multi-million dollar MSBU drainage fix, that part of the neighborhood ruined. (No CWJ or Mr. Jones didn't do it, but I want the developer held responsible.)
Part 2
1. Mr Jones is a partner with Mr. Brannon in the Freeport Group LLC and another LLC. I never said checks were being cut or would be cut to anybody.
But the statute is clear in our opinion on relationships.
Florida Statute
112.3143 Voting conflicts.--
(4) No appointed public officer shall participate in any matter which would inure to the officer's special private gain or loss; which the officer knows would inure to the special private gain or loss of any principal by whom he or she is retained or to the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained; or which he or she knows would inure to the special private gain or loss of a relative or business associate of the public officer, without first disclosing the nature of his or her interest in the matter.
Commissioner Brannon did participate in votes that affected the property owned by CWJ holdings. (see the BCC minutes) Is Mr. Jones a business associate of Mr. Brannon? According to the LLC's annual report on Sun Biz, the answer is yes. The benefit is, it will save the interior lot owners a lengthy battle against the developer at our neighborhoods expense. Money does not have anything to do with it. Was it disclosed in the meetings or after the vote in writing?
No, as far as I can tell. What part of shall participate in any Matter is confusing?
Sam, I have spoken to Mr. Brannon and will give him time to answer after talking with his council. If you came to the meeting, I think you'll see I made much more serious allegations aganst a State official and have some more for some county staff. I have offered and been available to talk to any of the commissioners any time outside of the public meeting's but have been basically stonewalled for years about any real answers, so our Board did it the only place left available. The BCC meeting. By the way, I recieved a unamious vote from the 170+ owners who feel Driftwood has been handled improperly by the developer, the County and the State. It's not just me, we're tired of it.
Even if Brannon made a mistake, it's a misdemeanor punishable by a 500 dollar fine as long as he doesn't deny it. It seems the press is worse than the punishment. I have appeared 25+ times before the BCC, they had a fair shot at other solutions. They chose poorly IMO.
Sam, you muddied the waters with things I didn't say at the meeting. Too bad they cut my freedom of speech off with Mr. Brannon as the last subject, it left him in the spotlight when there was so much more written evidence I had regarding other staff that is far worse. I only get about ten minutes per meeting so I'll feed them this pie one 10 minute slice at the time.
Alan
Last edited:
Larry has properly recused himself IMO.
TooFarTampa
SoWal Insider
I find Sunbiz.org to be extremely enlightening and very reliable. I have personally seen people deny business relationships even when a 3-minute records search makes it clear that they are not telling the truth.
Whatever the outcome in this case, I admire anyone willing to pay attention enough to research these issues and, when it appears necessary, file the appropriate complaints.
Whatever the outcome in this case, I admire anyone willing to pay attention enough to research these issues and, when it appears necessary, file the appropriate complaints.
and yet more creepiness.
You've outdone me. I can't argue with that logic.
Why are people attacking Alan?
There is no secret agenda or vendetta here - he has even taken exception to Brannon being singled out. His goal is for our local government to be honest and for our government's promises to its citizens be honored.
Commissioner Brannon failed to recuse himself from hearings in which he had a clear conflict of interest. Another commissioner who had a potential conflict (or appearance of one) recused himself.
Who thinks that someone who is legally partnered with someone in 2 or more businesses shouldn't recuse themselves when an issue dealing with that person is bought before them?
There is no secret agenda or vendetta here - he has even taken exception to Brannon being singled out. His goal is for our local government to be honest and for our government's promises to its citizens be honored.
Commissioner Brannon failed to recuse himself from hearings in which he had a clear conflict of interest. Another commissioner who had a potential conflict (or appearance of one) recused himself.
Who thinks that someone who is legally partnered with someone in 2 or more businesses shouldn't recuse themselves when an issue dealing with that person is bought before them?
Sorry, idlewind
Alan
I know you have supported some of my views, but I accused no one of being a crook. I posted my reply to Sam Story. The connection is clear and I presented the proof. I'm sorry I offended you.
Alan