Ethics complaints dismissed against GRU CEO Ed Bielarski and State Attorney Brian Kramer
BY JENNIFER CABRERA
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – At their December 6 meeting, the Florida Commission on Ethics dismissed ethics complaints against GRU CEO Ed Bielarski and State Attorney Brian Kramer for lack of legal sufficiency.
Complaint against Bielarski
The complaint against Bielarski, made by Robert Mermer, alleged that Bielarski was using utility ratepayer funds to “openly campaign and influence the outcome of an upcoming referendum in clear contravention” of Florida statutes. The complaint stated that GRU mailed out flyers with utility bills in October and also sent out information about the referendum on GRU governance to customers via email; the flyers alerted ratepayers that the referendum would be on the November ballot and, according to the complaint, provided “a comparison of one perspective on the consequences of a Yes versus a No vote.”
The complaint also alleges that Bielarski’s “CEO’s Corner” page on GRU’s website used his “official authority as CEO to influence voters to oppose the referendum. This is a first degree misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail.”
Complaint against Kramer
The complaint against Kramer, made by Thomas J. Kelly, alleged that Kramer violated the Florida Constitution and various statutes by filing an affidavit in a civil case to support the University of Florida’s position that Marsy’s Law protected certain UF employees from having to provide public records to Kelly.
Kelly alleged that because criminal charges against him were dropped, the employees were not protected by Marsy’s Law and Kramer was outside the bounds of his office because he was “tending to docketed legal matters outside of his official duties” although the Florida Constitution requires that “[a] state attorney… shall devote full time to the duties of the office.”
Both complaints dismissed for lack of legal sufficiency
Both complaints were dismissed for lack of legal sufficiency. According to the press release, “These reviews are limited to questions of jurisdiction and determinations as to whether the contents of the complaint are adequate to allege a violation of the Code of Ethics or other laws within the Commission’s jurisdiction. As no factual investigation precedes the reviews, the Commission’s conclusions do not reflect on the accuracy of the allegations made in these complaints.”
DemaCrooks that filed the Bogus Complaints, need to crawl under a rock!😁
So my bogus complaint didn’t work ? This just means we go on to the next phase. I will mobilize my League of ambassadors and allow the homeless to plug their cell phones into the street lights at GRU currently pays for. This will show Big Daddy Eddie B. who is boss? I even cracked myself up when I say a place for our homeless to plug in their cell phones. I just need the underlings I rule over to remember to keep paying their elevated property taxes, fees, and surcharges so I can continue to have the funds to continually go after Big Daddy Eddie B. I learned this by watching my leader and mentor and smartest man in the world, Biden going after Trump and we all see how that worked out.
I wonder how much the poor GRU customers have to pay for the continual harassment of both Mr. Bielarski and the GRU Authority state law, by rabid Democrats who don’t want to lose the private piggy bank they had for the last 20 years.
One more reason to kick old Harvey to the curb at the next election.
Many millions when properly reviewed
Whatever happened to the investigation into the Alachua County school board land purchase? What about the Clovis Watson investigation?
The public is protected from knowing because they pay folks who are elected or appointed to protect them from knowing.
So it appears the Gainesville Sun now gets its news from the Alachua Chronicle. This is a sea change in journalism, a former daily that became the spokesman for City Hall now appropriates information from a competitive local journal that tries not to be city hall’s outlet.
So if this is so “University of Florida’s position that Marsy’s Law protected certain UF employees from having to provide public records”…. What’s in the records that cannot be seen by the public? And what might be exposed that should be? Trust in government and their media will be right back after a long break in the program
The case is 01-2019-CA-001260. In the end, they reached a settlement in which UF agreed to remove a statement from their website in which they warned employees that Kelly was a potential threat who “espoused a racist ideology” (that was the relief Kelly requested in his complaint). Kelly’s public records requests seemed to be for the purpose of mounting a defense against UF’s statement about him.
Oh thanks for the facts
Loser’s continue to Lose. Why don’t the losers without ethics have to reimburse the innocent party?
Every member of the “Ethics Commision” is a political appointee put there by the state GOP, which has a proven record of screwing Gainesville and Alachua County voters. Obviously Belarski violated the law concerning using government resources to influence an election – this simple fact was not addressed in the ruling – and he should have been reprimanded at a minimum.
https://www.change.org/p/make-law-enforcement-fully-investigate-shots-fired-calls-to-911-dispatch
Who’s representing GRU in the recent lawsuit? Whose firm supported Mr Kramers campaign? Connect the dots people… district 8 is long overdue for a DOJ investigation…