I believe what the Commissions did was discuss each of the ones Candidates applying for the Appointments in a Televises Meeting and even took Questions and Statements about the Candidates from those attending the Meetings.

What if the tax-paying citizens of Tallahassee wanted the meeting broadcast? We paid for the infrastructure of buildings and cameras, etc. Suppose citizens want to review the meeting in detail. Sets a bad precedent.

Also, does truthtellertimeisup mean ‘the truth-teller is here, time is up for evil’, or does it mean ‘ the time is over for telling the truth’, or is there another meaning entirely?

Thr question remains: who does #2 work for?

Also, does truthtellertimeisup mean ‘the truth-teller is here, time is up for evil’, or does it mean ‘ the time is over for telling the truth’, or is there another meaning entirely?

This action by the Ethics Officer verifies her replacement was overdue. The board seemed unwilling or unable to supervise her properly. They spent (spend?) all their time determining what they could NOT do. They are always getting ready to do something, they just never do it. Maybe a new Chairman, with a new Ethics Officer, will make a difference. Maybe, just maybe, they can finally quit checking the tires and start the damn trip. I

I think that this would be a legal determination- but I would say yes it is a Sunshine violation. The email date is Friday Nov. 15th at 2:23 in the afternoon; and the meeting was Tuesday the 19th. This left 1 day only to advise; Alison Farris was involved – via cc line? It was standard practice to televise and all had an expectation of this meeting to be televised. Anyone planning to view it would not have gotten notice – or timely notice to assure that they had the info; and additionally the recorded archived record was then put in jeopardy of being available. So YES – this would be both an ethics violation and a Sunshine law violation. Take notes on common sense issues, Commissioners.