Guidelines

I am one member of a five person board. The opinions I express on this forum are mine only, and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Escambia County Staff, Administrators, Employees, or anyone else associated with Escambia County Florida. I am interested in establishing this blog as a means of additional transparency to the public, outreach to the community, and information dissemination to all who choose to look. Feedback is welcome, but because public participation is equally encouraged, appropriate language and decorum is mandatory. Although this is not my campaign site for re-election--sometimes campaign related information will be discussed, therefore in an abundance of caution I add the following : Political Advertisement Paid for and Approved by Jeff Bergosh, Republican, for Escambia County Commissioner District 1








Tuesday, March 9, 2021

Devastating Document: It's PAST Time for the County to be Out of This!

Friday's ruling demonstrates that it is past time for the full board to be out of this lawsuit caused solely and completely by one member of the full board and specifically NOT by the other members...


Late Friday afternoon a devastating document was released.  It was forwarded to Board Members subsequently.

The document is not devastating for all the individual members of the Board of County Commissioners, per se--but rather for one member of the Board-commissioner Doug Underhill and his legal team.  

The problem is that currently the full Board is also a party to the suit.  

But upon reading this document, it should be clear that it is past time for the rest of the board to be removed from this lawsuit.  As a board, we have no control over Doug Underhill's social media postings on his individually owned and maintained accounts--so why are we in this still?  We cooperated and spent $10,000 to download all the files from Doug Underhill's facebook accounts so why are we in this still?  Commissioner Underhill did not share those files with the county, and he stated that all the files from that document download the county paid for that were public records were turned over--so why are we in this still?  

So at this point, the county has been proactive in doing everything we can do to compel Commissioner Underhill to comply with the records law--to the extent we can and are able. He acted individually in all of this, as an individually elected constitutional officer, so why are we in this still?? 

Yes, it is time--no PAST TIME--- for  the rest of the Board to be released from the lawsuit caused by one member's conduct.  If it is true that all the bona fide public records Doug Underhill possessed were NOT turned over--that is on him and not on us, period.  Why are we still in this?

Read the document, an order from Magistrate Hope Thai Cannon, here.  Then ask yourself this question, Why is the full board dragged into this---why are we still in this?

The document disputes many assertions made by Commissioner Underhill, most notably that he has already turned over all public records from his facebook account--and that the remaining 24,000 pages from his facebook accounts are, according to him, not public records.  The Judge in this ruling disagrees and so states in this order:  From to the order:

"Based on the Court’s review of each of the over 24,000 pages, the Court finds

they do include public records. Specifically, the Court finds Facebook Messenger

conversations containing the following content constitute a public record:

(1) Requests by constituents for Commissioner Underhill to take action or

requests from Commissioner Underhill for a constituent to act—this includes, for

example, a request from a resident for Commissioner Underhill to look into a matter

affecting the District or for Commissioner Underhill to consider voting a certain way

on a County matter, as well as requests from Commissioner Underhill for residents

to come out in support of a County issue and messages from Commissioner

Underhill identifying ways a Facebook User can communicate with;

(2) General expressions of thanks by residents for Commissioner

Underhill’s service to the County—this includes, for example a constituent’s

appreciation for the manner in which Commissioner Underhill responded to an

issue;

(3) Requests for information about County matters from constituents and

Commissioner Underhill’s response—this includes, for example, a request from a

constituent regarding whether District 2 covers certain areas and a request from a

business owner on his obligations under the COVID restrictions;

(4) Expressions of disagreement or complaints by constituents of

Commissioner Underhill’s position on County matters—this includes, for example,

a constituent’s discontent due to being blocked from Underhill’s Facebook pages

after expressing her disagreement with him on a County matter and a constituent’s

discontent over something Commissioner Underhill said in an ECBCC meeting; and

(5) Commissioner Underhill’s positions and opinions, including his

disagreement with constituents, on matters involving the County or to be decided by

the County—this includes, for example, Commissioner Underhill’s explanation to a

constituent about why he voted a certain way on a County matter, what he thinks the

ECBCC or its commissioners should do on certain County matters, and actions he

plans to take in his role as Commissioner.

Thus, while Defendants seek to recast the .pdfs as containing rogue

commentary unrelated to “official agency business,” a commissioner cannot use his

position as both a shield and a sword. Commissioner Underhill cannot use Facebook

to communicate with the public as a commissioner, with the authority and force of

that public position, and then seek to prevent such information from being disclosed

as a public record under the guise that the ECBCC did not specifically authorize him

to make the post or engage in the discussion. “The mandate to provide access to

public records takes precedence over disclosure of information that ‘may cause

inconvenience or embarrassment to public officials.’”





6 comments:

Mel Pino said...

Commissioner Bergosh, the answer to this is very simple: because your County Attorney works for Doug Underhill rather than the entire board. Why is it that the BOCC adopted the same bogus defense that Doug's lawyers did? It is clear why Doug's attorneys had to come up with something--anything--because his actions are indefensible, and there is no good way to do anything about it legally.

Not so with the BOCC. You guys have a big, big problem on your hands with both your attorney and your administrator, and until you realize it and do something about it, the dysfunction at the County will continue to crescendo.

--Melissa Pino

Anonymous said...

The public saw that Underhill had received Valentino's emails and complained about GN using private email and then leaked personal info during his first campaign, Now the shoe is on the other foot. Those private messages between him and Ray Guillory came out during that suit.

The county as a board addressed the social media issue and allowed it to stand that he could still operate the way he did.

His facebook messages are subject to public records.
Now maybe you can find out "Who spilled the beans" as if you didn't know. Who helped the medical director in her suit, Who sent messages to the media about DOH complaints?

Ridiculous. He should not have conducted county business on Escambia Citizen Watch face book where she has citizens blocked either.

David Bear took it to task.

You were all asked to Censure him under Roberts Rules and failed to do so.

It is up the you, the county to maintain the public records.

How to you plan to get the county out of this, How do you remove your self from a suit?

Maybe it's water under the bridge, but what is amazing is how many people he could use.

For instance can't Beulah see he is trying to help Hemmer develop OLF 8 instead of get economic opportunity for the people who already live here?


Lawyers in town are the one's making a decent wage on all this nonsense.

The world is full of incompetence and immature leaders.

The medical director could have helped straighten out the training and there is a reason no one wants to know in an interview she was a single mother..

The Maddrey texts show the mentality of what that can mean to some people.

I don't know about Administrator Gilley but people do watch county business. Firing people left and right is not a very good tactic. Teaching them to be professional may be better.

I didn't like her cutsy way of acting at the interview and Barry winking at her when she gave her 100 day plan.

You all added her on after the search was ongoing.

Maybe professional standards are in place for a reason.

I don't know much about Bear's funding past campaign but perhaps he is just simply trying to keep absolute idiots from having a seat. After watching social media and politics I see people are not as smart as I used to give them credit.

Anonymous said...

The entire board is being sued because he is part of you. You all or your team failed to intervene to compel him to follow the law (county attorney, other board members, etc.) very similar to other reasons the entire board is named in a lawsuit.

Anonymous said...

Investigate the noise pollution, not the chattering on social media noise but the actual

Jet Ski noise in the bay. I think official complaints have been filed. Do you all need another lawsuit?

Anonymous said...

It looks like D2 took his Commissioner facebook page down.

He was promoting the GOFUNDME hosted by a county employee for the Medical Director's Legal costs, via that page at one time.

Anonymous said...

Finally

Political Advertisement Paid For and Approved by Jeff Bergosh, Republican for Escambia Commission D1