“No probable cause:” Martin, Drew and Bean cleared by Ethics Commission

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
August 7, 2017 1:00 a.m.

 

“No probable cause” for ethics complaints against School Board Chair Donna Martin, Tax Collector John Drew and Senator Aaron Bean.  So has ruled the Florida Commission on Ethics.

The Florida Commission on Ethics (http://www.ethics.state.fl.us) has recently disposed of complaints against two Nassau County elected officials and a State Senator who represents Nassau County. School Board Chair Donna Martin, Tax Collector John Drew and Senator Aaron Bean, were all the subjects of formal complaints filed by Callahan resident Carlos Slay, a man who considers himself a “public advocate.” Slay was resoundingly defeated by John Drew in his quest to unseat Drew in last year’s Republican primary.

Slay’s attacks against Drew were not the usual campaign rhetoric, at least according to the State Attorney’s Office last June. Stephen Siegel, Senior Division Chief of the State Attorney’s office for Nassau County wrote to Slay in a letter dated June 7, 2016: “The allegations you raise in your letter have been shown to be inaccurate, generally without merit or otherwise made with reckless disregard of the truth and are not the subject of further review by the State Attorney’s Office.” [SEE: https://fernandinaobserver.com/2016/06/15/state-attorneys-office-slams-nassau-candidate-carlos-slays-wreckless-disregard-for-truth/]

Not content to accept the State Attorney’s ruling, Slay continued his attacks against Drew, with fallout hitting Bean and Martin, by filing allegations of ethics complaints with the State Commission on Ethics.

Dr. Donna Martin

With little fanfare, the Ethics Commission dismissed the complaint against Martin earlier in July. During their July 9 closed meeting they ruled, “No probable cause was found to believe that DONNA MARTIN, Nassau County School Board Chair, had a prohibited business relationship because of her husband’s service on the board of directors of a company that entered into an agreement with the school district to provide free mental health services to students, at no cost to the District.”

The most recent Ethics rulings came in a commission press release dated August 2, 2017, exonerating both Drew and Bean:

John Drew

“The Commission considered the results of an investigation in a complaint filed against JOHN M. DREW, Nassau County Tax Collector. No probable cause was found regarding seven allegations of a misuse of office. The allegations were that he stored his camper on his office property; stored his boat on office property; convinced school district officials to hire his wife; convinced the school board to enter into contracts with companies he co-owns with his wife; made inappropriate remarks and solicitations to a subordinate employee; used public funds to pay the terms of a settlement agreement and associated legal fees arising from a harassment claim brought forward by an employee; and used his position to expedite a sexual harassment claim in an effort to obtain personal protection from the allegations.”

AND …

Florida Senator Aaron Bean

“The Commission found no probable cause to believe that Senator AARON BEAN misused his position to receive a $7.76 reimbursement for mileage. The Commission also determined there was no probable cause to believe that Senator Bean misused his position to secure an appropriation in the State budget for a business venture in which he was personally involved, and dismissed the allegation. Similarly, the Commission voted to dismiss an allegation that he had a voting conflict when he voted to approve a line item appropriation for the business venture. No probable cause was found to believe that the Senator misused his position to ask a fellow legislator to include a request for the business appropriation in the Florida State University budget.”

Slay had gained little traction locally in his multiple charges against Drew and Bean until he managed to catch the attention of a reporter for the Naples Daily News, which “broke the story” on March 18 this year http://www.naplesnews.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/18/senator-helped-friend-secret-1-million-state-payment-aaron-bean/98679188/. Florida Politics, however, never took the bait, instead publishing an expose of Slay three days later on March 21, 2017 http://floridapolitics.com/archives/234336-carlos-slay.

Those news reports seemed to breathe new life into what many had considered a dead issue following Slay’s overwhelming rejection by the voters in 2016 Republican Primary, where he lost to incumbent John Drew, who received 90.75% of the vote. (Drew went on to win re-election with more than 99 percent of the vote against a mysterious write-in candidate.)

But following the release of the Ethics Commission decision, Florida Politics did not pass up an opportunity to remind their readers that unlike other sources, they had gotten the story right. (http://floridapolitics.com/archives/242388-ethics-panel-bean-controversy)

It remains to be seen what, if any, action Bean, Drew and Martin will take following their official vindication.

According to the Florida Commission on Ethics Guide to the Sunshine Amendment and Code of Ethics for Public Officers and Employees (2017):

“When the Commission determines that a person has filed a complaint with knowledge that the complaint contains one or more false allegations or with reckless disregard for whether the complaint contains false allegations, the complainant will be liable for costs plus reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by the person complained against. The Department of Legal Affairs may bring a civil action to recover such fees and costs, if they are not paid voluntarily within 30 days.”

Editor’s Note: Suanne Z. Thamm is a native of Chautauqua County, NY, who moved to Fernandina Beach from Alexandria,VA, in 1994. As a long time city resident and city watcher, she provides interesting insight into the many issues that impact our city. We are grateful for Suanne’s many contributions to the Fernandina Observer.

2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Harvey Slentz
Harvey Slentz(@haslentzaol-com)
6 years ago

Perhaps Slay can wait until the August 21st eclipse and accuse Bean, Drew and Martin of “Eating the Sun”.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott(@dave-l)
6 years ago

While I agree that Mr. Slay’s allegations were a bit beyond the pale, I also think that most people believe that the $1 million contract for Dr. Drew was cronyism at its worst for all the parties involved – especially FSU initially taking a 20% cut for simply reviewing invoices and making payments. In loan sharking operations that would be known as the “vig” or the “juice”. Can’t really fault Aaron as one of his responsibilities is to get deals favoring his constituents, but one really has to question how much of a sweetheart contract this was based on the poor completion results so far.