We were notified yesterday that a revised letter of intent (LOI) was sent to the county yesterday for our OLF 8 property. See the revised LOI below:
Guidelines
Wednesday, January 31, 2024
Thursday, January 25, 2024
Jonathan Owens Declines Opportunity to Speak on his Own Behalf for Legal Fees He's Requested YOU Pay
Jonathan Owens, the former county employee who worked for disgraced former county commissioner Doug Underhill and who is in possession of stolen county records----- recently had the gall to formally request a taxpayer funded legal defense for his transgressions and resultant troubles stemming from his unauthorized possession of said files.
The County Attorney's Office added this request for a taxpayer-funded (i.e. YOU) defense from former employee Owens to our agenda on Tuesday. And Owens even showed up to the meeting, sitting in the back row of the chambers.
Nevertheless----not one commissioner on the dais Tuesday showed any inclination of even countenancing this outrageous Owens request once it was up for consideration on the agenda. (four of us were present, D2 commissioner Mike Kohler blew off the meeting and wasn't there)
When offered the opportunity to speak on his own behalf to personally request the county cover his legal bills before discussion on this item ended-----Owens sat motionless like a wax statue of a ventriloquist's doll.
He had the opportunity to ask, speak, lobby, and request, --and he did nothing.
The thing that is incredible to me coming off of this awkward, cringe-worthy spectacle is the rank loyalty and feilty a handful of citizens and one radio talk show host are demonstrating toward Owens in this matter.
It really is both fascinating and sad.
But facts are facts and they cannot be surpressed no matter how much Kool Aid the Underhill/Owens/Tallman fanboy club chugs.
FOCUS ON FACTS:
1. The records at issue were stolen from the county, and the stolen records contain personal identification information (full photos of passports, Pictures of front and back of driver's licenses, bank account numbers and pins, social security numbers, tax forms, medical records, and a host of other data on more than a dozen citizens) that would never be released under any public records request, ever.
2. Jonathan Owens admitted he has all of these records, has read them all, knew much of the information was personal/private, kept all these files upon leaving employment from the county, did not report to relevant county staff he possessed them when he worked at the county, and has subsequently dissemenated these files to others unredacted. He admitted this all freely and openly on Tallman Mckay's Podcast (which has been scrubbed from 1620's site) as well as in the News Journal.
3. Mere possession of this personal identification information as described above, unauthorized, on this many people is a third degree felony under Florida Law. That's why the State Attorney and appropriate law enforcement agencies were notified and a criminal investigation was requested by the county on this matter back in June. One week later--law enforcement investigators met me in my office and were given possession of the entire file--and both the county and I, personally, signed a waiver on that date allowing investigators to freely and without providing to us any immunity or amnesty-----free reign to search all the contents of all the files in question for ANY EVIDENCE of ANY CRIME. (Somebody wake up "letter-writers" Mike Kohler and Steve Stroberger and let them know this)
4. Jonathan Owens is specifically NOT authorized to possess this type of data, nor was he ever authorized to possess it--- and his handling and/or possession of such data--which includes photos of my family members' passport documents, Photos of my Family's driver's licenses, my social security numbers, and my childrens' social security numbers, and my sons' tax returns----was never a part of his job duties and/or a normal course of his employment in the county. What he should have done, if his story is true and this stick drive was shoved under his office door, was immediately turn the drive over to legal. That would have been the appropriate course of action for him to take. But Owens didn't do that.
5. County staff that handles public records requests for the BCC have testified, under oath, that prior to the county becoming aware of this data breach and the theft of these records coming to light----no PRR's had been made for my text messages from my personal phone. (for the geniuses reading this--it's because those who wanted these files were already given them by Owens, unlawfully, and outside of the PRR and/or discovery process--see the relevant testimony from the county's investigation, below)
6. Nothing at all related to this matter implicates the whistlebolower statutes--Federal or State--as such status would have to have been determined and agreed to by the court PRIOR to the improper, unlawful
Monday, January 22, 2024
County Partners with Faith Based Community to Help Citizens During the Cold Snap
County Emergency Manager Travis Tomkins does a great job in his position, and keeps the board on top of issues of importance that relate to weather issues and natural disasters. In the wake of this past week's bitter cold, the county worked together with community partners and the faith-based community to help citizens find shelter from the cold. Tompkins sent a recap of this work to the board and staff, and it is great to be able to report this good news of teamwork. From Tompkins' email:
"Leadership,
Travis D. Tompkins
Escambia County, Emergency Manager"
Jonathan Owens Doesn't Rate a Taxpayer Funded Legal Defense
Tomorrow morning on our agenda of the regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners, we will be discussing a request from former employee Jonathan Owens.
Owens is requesting that county taxpayers fund his legal defense in a civil lawsuit he is facing and also in an ethics complaint he is defending.
Yes, the county does have a policy that provides, in some circumstances, a legal defense for an employee who faces litigation arising from such an employee's normal and routine employment activities.
Jonathan's case does not meet that standard.
And many believe Jonathan is actually guilty of a crime, a third degree felony, by possessing, unauthorized, the personal identification information on five or more individuals, which is illegal under Florida Law.
Owens claims he innocently, when he was a county employee, came into possession of a file containing this personal identification information. Furthermore, he admitted reading this file, keeping it, and disseminating it unredacted to a law firm suing the county. He admitted his possession of this file in the newspaper and on the radio on Andrew Tallman McKay's program on AM1620 back on August 7th. (transcript here)
This is why law enforcement is investigating this issue--they know it is illegal, too! They (law enforcement and the State Attorney's Office) know this file has pictures, text messages, and other information that should not be possessed by anyone who is not authorized to possess it. Mere possession under the statute is unlawful. --and Jonathan is specifically NOT authorized to possess this file, which contains:
a. Social security numbers for at least 3
individuals.
b. User names and passwords for e-mail
and service accounts.
c. American Banking Association routing
and bank account numbers for multiple accounts.
d. The address and access codes for the
electronic gate and lock on a private residential condominium.
e. Photographs of the Passports of two
persons.
f. IRS tax returns for two separate persons.
g. Insurance cards.
h. Credit and debit card pictures, numbers and
PINs.
i. Pictures of Driver’s Licenses of two separate persons.
j. W-2 forms for one person.
6. Additionally, the file includes personal and private discussions on the following health matters
relating to at least 13 different individual citizens who are not public
figures and that are also not in any way connected to Escambia County’s
Government:
a. Colonoscopy.
b. Hospitalizations.
c. Psychological
Diagnoses.
d. Miscarriage.
e. Cancer.
f. Heart
attack.
g. Parkinson’s
Disease.
h. Cancer
diagnosis and prognosis.
i. Suicide.
j. COVID
Vaccination Status.
k. COVID
Diagnoses.
Friday, January 19, 2024
Increased Homestead Exemption will Result in $6.6 Million Revenue Loss for Escambia County
"The FL Legislature has proposed an additional homestead
exemption of $25,000 that would need to be approved by the voters of the State
of Florida at the November 2024 elections.
The current exemption of $25k would go up to $50k applicable
to assessed property values greater than $50k for all levies excluding the
school district levies. (proposed bill attached)
Thursday, January 18, 2024
89th Coffee with the Commissioner- Featuring D1 State Representative Michelle Salzman
Wednesday, January 17, 2024
Underhill Wins!!!!: (a Pyrrhic Victory)
![]() |
| "If we are victorious in one more such battle, we shall be utterly ruined" -King Pyrrhus of Epirus, 318-272 BC |
A ruling in Federal Court was handed down earlier this week.
It was a pyrrhic victory of epic proportion for disgraced former commissioner Doug Underhill in that he "Won" one aspect of a long brewing, long simmering and percolating case.
Yes, a judge ruled for him (Underhill) in just ONE (1) aspect of this lawsuit.
The suit was filed alleging Underhill violated the constitutional rights of constituent(s) by hiding comments and blocking comments on social media accounts he, Underhill, controlled--and the judge did side with Underhill on this.
But --even though the Judge ruled for Underhill on just this one aspect of the suit----another portion of the same ruling was simultaneously devastating to Underhill.
......Because the Judge also ruled for the plaintiff, David Bear, in the other, equally important part of the same suit-----and awarded $130, 425.50 to him (Bear) from Underhill for Underhill's failure to produce requested public records.
From the order:
"The Court previously found Bear entitled to an award of attorney’s fees against Underhill pursuant to the Florida Public Records Act, Fla. Stat. § 119.12, resulting from his failure to respond to a public records request for records within his custody. The Court also determined that Underhill may be held personally liable for those fees as the responsible “agency,” within the meaning of the statute. ...The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment in favor of Bear and against Underhill on the Public Records Act claims of Counts I and III, including an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $130,425.50 to Bear, and final judgment in favor of Underhill and against Bear on the First Amendment claim of Count VII, and close the file."
| "If we are victorious in one more such battle, we shall be utterly ruined" -King Pyrrhus of Epirus, 318-272 BC |
_Page_1.jpg)
_Page_2.jpg)
_Page_3.jpg)
_Page_4.jpg)
_Page_5.jpg)
_Page_6.jpg)




