That’s it. There are no other qualifiers or loopholes. No follow-up phrase that says: “… unless the governor really, really wants him to.”

Yet the watchdogs at the Florida Bulldog news site reported Monday that Gilzean had been fulfilling both roles — serving as ethics commission chairman and running the Reedy Creek-turned-Central Florida Tourism Oversight District — for a few months now.

(Though the ethics commission’s website still describes Gilzean as a “nonprofit executive” — the job he left. Quite the sticklers for accuracy, these watchdogs.)

Sentinel reporter Skyler Swisher also recapped an interesting timing sequence in Gilzean’s hiring.

On April 21, Gilzean’s ethics commission dismissed an ethics complaint against Gov. Ron DeSantis that had been filed by allies of Donald Trump who’d argued that DeSantis was inappropriately using the governor’s office to boost his national political profile.

Then on May 10, the governor’s appointees at the Disney taxing district announced they wanted to give Gilzean the $400,000-a-year job.

So, to recap: The governor’s Disney appointees appointed the governor’s ethics appointee to a high-paying job less than three weeks after that same ethics appointee dismissed a complaint against the man who’d appointed him to that position.

Hillbilly family reunions look less incestuous.

Now, if the Florida ethics commission isn’t cracking down on conflicts, it sure isn’t the first time. This state’s ethics enforcement has long been weaker than a Shirley Temple.

Consider some of the headlines from recent years:

Ethics commission: Steube had no conflict sponsoring bill written by his law firm” (In this case, the commission basically concluded that, yes, the lawmaker had authored a bill that financially helped out his law firm, but that the firm didn’t really benefit that much.)

State Rep. Marlene O’Toole won’t be punished for violation of ethics law” (Here, the commission concluded she’d done something wrong but decided to leave the punishment up to her buddies in the Legislature, who decided they’d largely take a pass.)

Those two cases both involved GOP lawmakers. But the lack of ethics enforcement has been a bipartisan affair. Consider also: “Ethics panel dismisses complaint against Gary Siplin.” (Here, the commission concluded the Orlando Democratic legislator had used a taxpayer-funded mailer to promote his wife, who was seeking political office at the same time, but that the personal benefit to Siplin was “incidental.”)

Basically, there are newborn babies with more teeth.

Those involved in the latest hubbub are pretty tight-lipped. Gilzean wouldn’t answer questions. Neither would the governor’s office or ethics commission.

And this isn’t the first time Gilzean made headlines during his new tenure with the Disney governmental district.

Two weeks ago, Gilzean announced the Disney taxing district was ending all of its “so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives,” calling them “illegal and simply unAmerican.”

Now, if you heard DeSantis say something like that, it wouldn’t be surprising. But it sounded odd coming from a man who spent the last seven-plus years working for the Urban League — a civil rights group that devoutly espouses the value of  Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) endeavors. The Urban League not only preaches the value of inclusion, the national nonprofit actually offers services to help other organizations implement DEI programs “to make your organization a more equitable workplace.”

Tax records filed last year show Gilzean earned $172,272 while working as CEO of the Central Florida Urban League.

Perhaps not surprisingly, after Gilzean trash-talked the very diversity initiatives his previous employer had touted, his former boss responded with force. National Urban League CEO Marc Morial said Gilzean’s about-face was a “betrayal of the values at the very core of our mission,” telling the Tallahassee Democrat that Gilzean’s “crass political expediency is all the more offensive given his previous vantage point to the harm he knows it will cause.”

Gilzean didn’t respond to questions about that issue either.

So what happens next? Well, ethics and legal experts say there’s clearly a problem with Gilzean’s dual roles. Even one of Gilzean’s colleagues on the ethics commission told the Bulldog it appeared Gilzean was no longer eligible to serve.

But maybe there’s some provision no one’s yet considered. Or maybe state officials will decide they just don’t care.

Statutorily, the authority to remove ethics commissioners rests with the governor, House speaker, Senate president and chief justice of the Supreme Court.

The other option might be for someone to file a complaint with … you guessed it … the ethics commission. One can only imagine how that would go.