[mtdjed]

Without getting into details, I question POAs statement (Dec 2023) relative to a person's entitlement to restitution of wages, benefits, legal expenses, and job, based upon the Appellate Panel decision. Wasn't the perjury charge initiated after the removal for cause? And, also by the State.

Seems like the POA statement is akin to the POA article on Page 12 ( VHA / Daily Sun Attempt to Manipulate Readers (setting the record straight - again)

Perhaps next month POA will clarify.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by mtdjed

Without getting into details, I question POAs statement (Dec 2023) relative to a person's entitlement to restitution of wages, benefits, legal expenses, and job, based upon the Appellate Panel decision. Wasn't the perjury charge initiated after the removal for cause? And, also by the State.

Seems like the POA statement is akin to the POA article on Page 12 ( VHA / Daily Sun Attempt to Manipulate Readers (setting the record straight - again)

Perhaps next month POA will clarify.

I believe the removal was initiated after the charges were brought. The charges were the reason given for the removal.

I don't know the legal grounds for restitution and I suspect the POA does not either. The POA means well but they sometimes have a poor understanding of the facts.

[blueash]

The legal grounds for reinstatement as a commissioner is the Florida constitution. De Santis suspended Miller based on his authority given him to do exactly that, not requiring suspension but allowing for it. The exact same section of the constitution says:

(c) By order of the governor any elected municipal officer indicted for crime may be suspended from office until acquitted and the office filled by appointment for the period of suspension, not to extend beyond the term, unless these powers are vested elsewhere by law or the municipal charter.

See the magic words "until acquitted"? Miller has been acquitted of all charges against him. Thus his suspension is now voided, automatically by the wording of the constitution. He was elected in 2020 to serve four years, thus his term is not over even though it was filled by a replacement. The constitution seems to very clearly require that Miller return to his office until the end of the term for which he was elected.

And Florida law, see 112.51 (6) says the following: [my bold]

(6) If the municipal official is acquitted or found not guilty or is otherwise cleared of the charges which were the basis of the arrest, indictment, or information by reason of which he or she was suspended under the provisions of this section, then the Governor shall forthwith revoke the suspension and restore such municipal official to office; and the official shall be entitled to and be paid full back pay and such other emoluments or allowances to which he or she would have been entitled for the full period of time of the suspension. If, during the suspension, the term of office of the municipal official expires and a successor is either appointed or elected, such back pay, emoluments, or allowances shall only be paid for the duration of the term of office during which the municipal official was suspended under the provisions of this section, and he or she shall not be reinstated."

Now, tell me again why you think the POA is wrong? In fact it seems although IANAL, that Florida law REQUIRES, that upon a finding of not guilty that the person who suspended Miller must revoke the suspension forthwith. Ask yourself, why is Florida law being ignored to the detriment of Miller and the voters who elected him to serve a term ending in 2024?

[Normal]

The consecution of events demonstrates the injustice metered towards Mr. Miller. Restitution is warranted wherever it can be delivered.

The guy was charged on an incident that took place after the fact of original unproven claims. Politicians know what it is like to get tripped up on a tangent from an original charge. The original charge is irrelevant despite the questioning phase.

[Stu from NYC]

The developer wanted him gone and stay gone. He has a huge amount of power for better or worse.

[JGibson]

Originally Posted by blueash

The legal grounds for reinstatement as a commissioner is the Florida constitution. De Santis suspended Miller based on his authority given him to do exactly that, not requiring suspension but allowing for it. The exact same section of the constitution says:

(c) By order of the governor any elected municipal officer indicted for crime may be suspended from office until acquitted and the office filled by appointment for the period of suspension, not to extend beyond the term, unless these powers are vested elsewhere by law or the municipal charter.

See the magic words "until acquitted"? Miller has been acquitted of all charges against him. Thus his suspension is now voided, automatically by the wording of the constitution. He was elected in 2020 to serve four years, thus his term is not over even though it was filled by a replacement. The constitution seems to very clearly require that Miller return to his office until the end of the term for which he was elected.

And Florida law, see 112.51 (6) says the following: [my bold]

(6) If the municipal official is acquitted or found not guilty or is otherwise cleared of the charges which were the basis of the arrest, indictment, or information by reason of which he or she was suspended under the provisions of this section, then the Governor shall forthwith revoke the suspension and restore such municipal official to office; and the official shall be entitled to and be paid full back pay and such other emoluments or allowances to which he or she would have been entitled for the full period of time of the suspension. If, during the suspension, the term of office of the municipal official expires and a successor is either appointed or elected, such back pay, emoluments, or allowances shall only be paid for the duration of the term of office during which the municipal official was suspended under the provisions of this section, and he or she shall not be reinstated."

Now, tell me again why you think the POA is wrong? In fact it seems although IANAL, that Florida law REQUIRES, that upon a finding of not guilty that the person who suspended Miller must revoke the suspension forthwith. Ask yourself, why is Florida law being ignored to the detriment of Miller and the voters who elected him to serve a term ending in 2024?

Fantastic research.

[New Englander]

Originally Posted by blueash

The legal grounds for reinstatement as a commissioner is the Florida constitution. De Santis suspended Miller based on his authority given him to do exactly that, not requiring suspension but allowing for it. The exact same section of the constitution says:

(c) By order of the governor any elected municipal officer indicted for crime may be suspended from office until acquitted and the office filled by appointment for the period of suspension, not to extend beyond the term, unless these powers are vested elsewhere by law or the municipal charter.

See the magic words "until acquitted"? Miller has been acquitted of all charges against him. Thus his suspension is now voided, automatically by the wording of the constitution. He was elected in 2020 to serve four years, thus his term is not over even though it was filled by a replacement. The constitution seems to very clearly require that Miller return to his office until the end of the term for which he was elected.

And Florida law, see 112.51 (6) says the following: [my bold]

(6) If the municipal official is acquitted or found not guilty or is otherwise cleared of the charges which were the basis of the arrest, indictment, or information by reason of which he or she was suspended under the provisions of this section, then the Governor shall forthwith revoke the suspension and restore such municipal official to office; and the official shall be entitled to and be paid full back pay and such other emoluments or allowances to which he or she would have been entitled for the full period of time of the suspension. If, during the suspension, the term of office of the municipal official expires and a successor is either appointed or elected, such back pay, emoluments, or allowances shall only be paid for the duration of the term of office during which the municipal official was suspended under the provisions of this section, and he or she shall not be reinstated."

Now, tell me again why you think the POA is wrong? In fact it seems although IANAL, that Florida law REQUIRES, that upon a finding of not guilty that the person who suspended Miller must revoke the suspension forthwith. Ask yourself, why is Florida law being ignored to the detriment of Miller and the voters who elected him to serve a term ending in 2024?

Well said Blueash.

[mtdjed]

Originally Posted by blueash

The legal grounds for reinstatement as a commissioner is the Florida constitution. De Santis suspended Miller based on his authority given him to do exactly that, not requiring suspension but allowing for it. The exact same section of the constitution says:

(c) By order of the governor any elected municipal officer indicted for crime may be suspended from office until acquitted and the office filled by appointment for the period of suspension, not to extend beyond the term, unless these powers are vested elsewhere by law or the municipal charter.

See the magic words "until acquitted"? Miller has been acquitted of all charges against him. Thus his suspension is now voided, automatically by the wording of the constitution. He was elected in 2020 to serve four years, thus his term is not over even though it was filled by a replacement. The constitution seems to very clearly require that Miller return to his office until the end of the term for which he was elected.

And Florida law, see 112.51 (6) says the following: [my bold]

(6) If the municipal official is acquitted or found not guilty or is otherwise cleared of the charges which were the basis of the arrest, indictment, or information by reason of which he or she was suspended under the provisions of this section, then the Governor shall forthwith revoke the suspension and restore such municipal official to office; and the official shall be entitled to and be paid full back pay and such other emoluments or allowances to which he or she would have been entitled for the full period of time of the suspension. If, during the suspension, the term of office of the municipal official expires and a successor is either appointed or elected, such back pay, emoluments, or allowances shall only be paid for the duration of the term of office during which the municipal official was suspended under the provisions of this section, and he or she shall not be reinstated."

Now, tell me again why you think the POA is wrong? In fact it seems although IANAL, that Florida law REQUIRES, that upon a finding of not guilty that the person who suspended Miller must revoke the suspension forthwith. Ask yourself, why is Florida law being ignored to the detriment of Miller and the voters who elected him to serve a term ending in 2024?

The original infraction was multiple violations related to the Sunshine law.

BUSHNELL — Two Sumter County commissioners have been arrested and charged with perjury, for allegedly lying under oath during a Sunshine Law violation investigation.

The perjury charges were dropped against one, but not the other. But both were relieved of duty. Could it be that the suspension from duty is unrelated to the perjury conviction which has been reversed by the Appellate .

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by mtdjed

The original infraction was multiple violations related to the Sunshine law.

BUSHNELL — Two Sumter County commissioners have been arrested and charged with perjury, for allegedly lying under oath during a Sunshine Law violation investigation.

The perjury charges were dropped against one, but not the other. But both were relieved of duty. Could it be that the suspension from duty is unrelated to the perjury conviction which has been reversed by the Appellate .

What ever happened to the original charge, of violating the Sunshine Laws?

2 Florida county commissioners from The Villages removed after perjury charges

DeSantis removes two commissioners arrested for possible Sunshine Law violations

Sumter commissioners suspended from office | News | The Villages Daily Sun | thevillagesdailysun.com

[mtdjed]

Originally Posted by blueash

Now, tell me again why you think the POA is wrong? In fact it seems although IANAL, that Florida law REQUIRES, that upon a finding of not guilty that the person who suspended Miller must revoke the suspension forthwith. Ask yourself, why is Florida law being ignored to the detriment of Miller and the voters who elected him to serve a term ending in 2024?

My response was that perhaps the Appellate decision is not the deciding factor regarding restitution since both supervisors were replaced. Only one was tried for perjury. Fact is, that both violated the Sunshine law and both initially denied the accusation. Both were in violation. Neither was innocent of the infraction. The recent Appellate decision didn't absolve anything regarding their initial violation.

That is why I think the POA was wrong to suggest restitution is appropriate.

I do not expect a retraction of the POA opinion, but at the same time I do not expect to see taxpayer money provided to the two individuals.

Time will tell if the POA was right or wrong. However, I find that the POA is better at criticizing others than admitting their own errors.

Note, my original point was the potential error in the POAs position about restitution. IT was simply a question.

Whether your citation of laws is appropriate or not will soon be known. Do you really expect these guys to get reinstated and reimbursed? I would guess, not likely.

[RRGuyNJ]

What is a POA, and WHY are people so damn lazy they can't spell things out these days. POA to me reminds me of a Power Of Attorney but I'm guessing that's not the case.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by RRGuyNJ

What is a POA, and WHY are people so damn lazy they can't spell things out these days. POA to me reminds me of a Power Of Attorney but I'm guessing that's not the case.

There the ones who throw their bulletin in your driveway.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by RRGuyNJ

What is a POA, and WHY are people so damn lazy they can't spell things out these days. POA to me reminds me of a Power Of Attorney but I'm guessing that's not the case.

Probably took longer to type that than to put "POA the Villages" into a google search.

The expansion of the acronym would not help you much, you still would not know anything about them. You would likely wind up typing "POA the Villages" into google anyway.

[Maker]

Originally Posted by RRGuyNJ

What is a POA, and WHY are people so damn lazy they can't spell things out these days. POA to me reminds me of a Power Of Attorney but I'm guessing that's not the case.

Property Owner's Association
www (DOT) poa4us (DOT) org

Like any organization that advocates a position, many like them, many do not. Look at their past positions on politics and decide for yourself.

[PhilG]

My understanding - Miller lied under oath - that is apparently not in dispute. When confronted with the facts, he retracted his lie. The court found that retraction effectively negated the "perjury" per Florida law.

Miller is not exonerated. Appears his dishonesty is confirmed. Can't speak to the legal aspects of back pay, reinstatement etc. or the relevance of Sunshine Law violation,- the court can chase that down. Personally, I wonder at having a commissioner so willing to commit the initial lie as well as the alleged interaction behind the lie.

suspect folks' opinions re. this matter are driven more by politics than substance.