Update, April 4, 2025: STILL WAITING FOR RECORDS FROM Florida House Speaker-designate SAMUEL PAUL GARRISON, who stands to profit from a controversial St. Johns County Attorney contract, a contract violation of public policy rubber-stamped by Commissioners on 3-2 vote on March 25, 2025.
I have now sent a third e-mail to County, which has not informed me about the date and time of the negotiation meeting, despite repeated requests to Commission Vice Chair Clay Murphy: Commissioner Murphy said that the date for the negotiation meeting has not yet been set, but that he will advise me when it is scheduled, so that I can attend.
On Friday, March 28, 2025 at 03:27:56 PM EDT, Ed Slavin <easlavin@aol.com> wrote:
Dear Speaker-designate Garrison and Ms. Dixon::
Would you please be so kind as to tell me today the proposed date, time, place and agenda of the St. Johns County Attorney contract negotiation meeting between Vice Chair Clay Murphy and the law firm of Florida House Speaker-designate SAMUEL PAUL GARRISON?
Please send all related documents by PDF today, including draft contract and draft and final public Sunshine notice of negotiation meeting.
Thank you.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
www.edslavin.com
(904) 377-4998
Earlier, I sent a followup e-mail to Speaker-designate GARRISON and County:
On Friday, March 28, 2025 at 02:32:49 PM EDT, Ed Slavin <easlavin@aol.com> wrote:
Dear Speaker-designate Garrison and Ms. Dixon:
1. Please send me PDFs of the requested records today,
2. When would our Florida House Speaker-designate, Rep. SAMUEL PAUL GARRISON be available for an interview, either this weekend or on Monday, March 31, 2025, about his BRADLEY, GARRISON & KOMANDO, P.A. law firm's proposed role as our St. St. Johns County Attorney based on "influence?"
3. I look forward to hearing from both of you later today.
Thank you.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
www.edslavin.com
(904) 377-4998
Pray for putative "reform" St. Johns County Commissioner Clay Murphy to reconsider his rash decision, joining with two pro-developer hick hack sad sacks, tatterdemalion Commissioners CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST and SARAH ARNOLD, uninformed, uneducated and gullible as usual.
On Thursday, March 27, 2025 at 01:39:10 PM EDT, Ed Slavin <easlavin@aol.com> wrote:
-screenshot.jpg)
To Honorable Samuel Paul Garrison, Florida House Speaker-elect & Florida House Ethics Committee Chair
and Ms. Betty Dixon, St. Johns County Attorney's office:
Dear Speaker-elect Garrison and Ms. Dixon:
1. Would you please be so kind as to send me by tomorrow all Florida Bar, Florida Ethics Commission, Florida Attorney General, Florida House of Representatives or other legal opinions or requests for them, and all correspondence, on Speaker-elect Garrison's corporate law firm (BRADLEY, GARRISON & KOMANDO, P.A.) and its proposed hiring as the County Attorney for St. Johns County, one of the fastest-growing counties in the State of Florida, on the basis of Speaker-elect SAMUEL PAUL GARRISON's "influence?"
(Statement of Commission Vice Chair, Clay Murphy, on video, here: Mar 25, 2025 Special Board of County Commissioners - St. Johns County, FL
2. Florida law, F.S. 112.311, states:
Legislative intent and declaration of policy:
(5) It is hereby declared to be the policy of the state that no officer or employee of a state agency or of a county, city, or other political subdivision of the state, and no member of the Legislature or legislative employee, shall have any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect; engage in any business transaction or professional activity; or incur any obligation of any nature which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his or her duties in the public interest. To implement this policy and strengthen the faith and confidence of the people of the state in their government, there is enacted a code of ethics setting forth standards of conduct required of state, county, and city officers and employees, and of officers and employees of other political subdivisions of the state, in the performance of their official duties. It is the intent of the Legislature that this code shall serve not only as a guide for the official conduct of public servants in this state, but also as a basis for discipline of those who violate the provisions of this part.
(6) It is declared to be the policy of the state that public officers and employees, state and local, are agents of the people and hold their positions for the benefit of the public. They are bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the State Constitution and to perform efficiently and faithfully their duties under the laws of the federal, state, and local governments. Such officers and employees are bound to observe, in their official acts, the highest standards of ethics consistent with this code and the advisory opinions rendered with respect hereto regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that promoting the public interest and maintaining the respect of the people in their government must be of foremost concern.
F.S. 112.311
C. As I wrote our St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners on March 17, 2025 (items renumbered):
1. Conflicts of interest must be scrupulously guarded against. See, e.g., United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Co., 364 U.S. 520, 548 (1961)("the 'Dixon-Yates' case," involving TVA rivals' conflicts of interest in a proposed Memphis coal-fired powerplant), citing Matthew 6:24 -- "no [person] can serve two masters," holding that laws and rules preventing conflicts of interest are aimed "not only at dishonor but at conduct that tempts dishonor."
2. All conflict of interest laws are based upon Matthew 6:24 ("A man cannot serve two masters"), which the unanimous Supreme Court decision by Chief Justice Earl Warren deemed to be both a "moral principle" and a "maxim which is especially pertinent if one of the masters happens to be economic self-interest."
3. {Speaker-elect SAM GARRISON's law partner] Mr. [RICHARD CHRISTIAN] KOMANDO unilaterally refuses to disclose the identity of his law firm clients, not client confidences. His overbearing assertion of privilege is unadorned by any citation to any court or ethics opinions on lawyers who are government employees. This flunks the "laugh test." It also flunks the "smell test." Mr. KOMANDO said he would not apply for the permanent County attorney position. Now, aving applied for the permanent position, Mr. KOMANDO is in no position to withhold information that is materially relevant to his suitability to be our St. Johns County Attorney. Mr. KOMANDO is acting as if he were the judge in his own case. This is so wrong.
4. James Madison wrote in The Federalist No. 10: "No [person] is allowed to be a judge in [his/her] own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time . . . ."
5. The United States Supreme Court held in In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955) (Black, J.), "[O]ur system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness. To this end no man can be a judge in his own case and no man is permitted to try cases where he has an interest in the outcome." See also TWA v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 102U.S. App. D.C. 391, 392, 254 F.2d 90, 91 (1958). Spencer v. Lapsley, 20 How. 264, 266 (1858); Publius Syrus, Moral Sayings 51 (D. Lyman transl. 1856) ("No one should be judge in his own cause."); Blaise Pascal, Thoughts, Letters and Opuscules 182 (Wight transl. 1859) ("It is not permitted to the most equitable of men to be a judge in his own cause."). As William Blackstone wrote, "[I]t is unreasonable that any man should determine his own quarrel," 1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 91 citing Dr. Bonham's Case, 8 Rep. 114a (C.P. 1610); see also City of London v. Wood, 12 Mod. 669, 687 (1701)(Lord Holt)(invalidating fine for refusal to serve as sheriff recovered by the city in its own court of Mayor and Aldermen). See also Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Lavoie, 475 U.S. 813 (1986)(overruling case where Chief Justice of Alabama Supreme Court wrongfully sat in judgment of case that would set precedent for his own pending case); Ward v. Village of Monroeville, 409 U.S. 57 (1972); Gibson v. Berryhill, 411 U.S. 564 (1973); Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35 (1975); Cinderella Career and Finishing Schools, Inc. v. FTC, 425 F.2d 583 (D.C. Cir. 1970); American Cyanamid Co. v. FTC, 363 F.2d 757 (6th Cir. 1966); SCA Services, Inc. v. Morgan, 557 F.2d 110 (7th Cir.1977).
6. Being a secretive developer "team player" is not a bona fide occupational qualification in hiring a County Attorney.
7. No "team players" are desired or required here. "Team player" is freighted with the speech-chilling implication that one is willing to "go along to get along," say what management wants to hear, and do what one is told by managers, no matter what the ethics or legality of the situation. In the political corruption case of United States v. Salvatti, 451 F.Supp. 195, 197-98 (E.D. Pa. 1978), one witness testified that "when she complained to the Mayor about Mr. Carroll's pressure, and advised him that the proposed payment to the Sylks would be totally improper and probably illegal, the Mayor chided her for not being a team player." See also Fitzgerald v. Seamans, 384 F.Supp. 688,697n7 (D.D.C. 1974), affirmed, 553 F.2d 220, 224 (D.C. Cir. 1977), reversed, Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982); Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982) (remarks of President Nixon et al. on need to fire heroic Department of Defense whistleblower A. Ernest Fitzgerald after he testified truthfully before Congress on C-5A transport cost overruns, with Nixon saying Mr. Fitzgerald was "not a team player"); Broderick v. Ruder, 685 F.Supp. 1269 (D.D.C. 1988)(sexual harassment at Securities and Exchange Commission); Tomsic v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co, 85 F.3d 1472, 1474 (10th Cir. 1996); Geddes v. Benefits Review Board, 735 F.2d 1412, 1416, 1420 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (Washington Metropolitan Transportation Authority considered workers' compensation claimant not a "team player"); Davis v. California, 1996 WL 271001 (E.D.Cal.1996); Schloesser v. Kansas Dept. of Health & Environment, 766 F.Supp. 984 (D. Kansas 1991); Stradford v. Rockwell International, 48 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 697, 49 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 38,828,1988 WL 159939 (S.D.Ohio); Seymour M. Hersh, "Annals of National Security: The Intelligence Gap -- How the digital age left our spies out in the cold," The New Yorker, December 6, 1999 at 58, 62.
8. Commissioners, please feel free to call me to discuss.
Thank you.
With kindest regards, I am, 
Sincerely yours,
Ed Slavin
Box 3084
St. Augustine, Florida 32085-3084
www.edslavin.com
(904) 377-4998
