Friday, August 08, 2008

Ten Questions for Peacock

Someone claiming to be John Peacock, a board member of the Santa Rosa Island Authority, has found his way to yesterday's article on this web site about the SRIA meeting that wasn't. "Please feel free to contact me," he writes, "if you want to really set the record straight." Then, he issues us instructions on how to do that privately.

We accept Mr. Peacock's generous invitation to "set the record straight." But in the interests of keeping things in the Sunshine, rather than do it privately we'd like to give him the opportunity to answer ten simple questions right here, for everyone to see.

Just use the message function, Mr. Peacock. You know how it works.


1. Were you the decision-maker in calling a “special” SRIA board meeting for August 6 at 5 pm? If not, who was?

2. The Notice of Meeting bears the date of July 5 for a meeting scheduled for July 6. What day and time was the Notice of Meeting actually published?

3. Did you direct Jayne Bell to publish the Notice of Meeting; if not, who did?

4. How, when, and by whom was the decision made that “John Peacock will be acting chairman” as stated in the notice of meeting?

5. Did you or any other board member decide to make you, John Peacock, “acting chairman” of this "special meeting" before the notice was published; if so, when, where, why, and by whom was that decision made?

6. What was the agenda business to be considered at that “special meeting”?

7. It has been claimed on the Independent News web site blog that “the issue was an attempt by Mr. Peacock... to...squelch the investigation of the manager by numerous complaints of numerous ex-employees.” To your knowledge, is there an ongoing internal investigation of complaints from employees or ex-employees about Buck Lee? What is the specific nature of those complaints?

8. When you and other members of the board met on August 6, did SRIA attorney Stebbins advise that the meeting was improperly noticed to the public and might well violate the Sunshine Law?

9. On the Independent News' "Rick's Blog" a message by “robertonlamar” claims News Journal reporter Michael Stewart sent a letter to SRIA officials asking for comments and information about employee or ex-employee complaints. Is there such a letter and, if so, when does the SRIA intend to respond?

10. As an appointed SRIA board member, are you in favor or opposed to Mike Whitehead’s oft-expressed desire to abolish the SRIA and have county officials take over its functions?


Anonymous said...

Is this the same
John Peacock pushing the strong mayor for Pensacola?

Is this the definition of "Strong"

Anonymous said...

Would love to see John Peacock respond to your questions for public post. Because so much happens "in the dark" around here, it would be great to have a public expanation of the events described by public officials.

John Peacock said...

Dear Beach Blogger,

My offer was that for us (you and I and whomever else YOU would like) to meet and I will answer ANY and ALL questions and show you ALL the documentation to support actions taken before and during the past week or so. I am not typically a fan of blogs due to the fact that folks can make accusations and false statements anonymously. I am much more of a face to face person. As a public official, I welcome the opportunity to clear up the many misconceptions that seem to be rampant from your post and the posts of others on this site. Answering your 10 questions is such as small piece of the puzzle that it really doesnt do the issue the justice it deserves. This will be my last response on your site as I am not interested in a blog debate. My offer was to have you and others ask me specific questions regarding this or any other matter and answer them fully. Piece-mealing the questions only leaves the opportunity for additional falsehoods and accusations. We have way too much of that already. My offer is as sincere as they get. Most reputable media sources would welcome the opportunity to have an open conversation with full documentation about a matter that the media outlet seemed to think was very serious. I am offering that and only that type of conversation.

Anonymous said...

I know from the inside what is going on with this matter. All I will say at this time is that Peacock is "in bed" with Buck Lee and he is doing his best to prevent anyone from investigating numerous complaints that have been made about highly improper conduct by Buck Lee. Also, by early next week a criminal complaint will be filed against Peacock alleging NUMEROUS Sunshine Law violations.

Keep watching because Peacock is going to be exposed for the liar that he is.

Anonymous said...

How in the world can a "non chairman" and "non vice chairman" agree on their own "prior" to a "special" meeting to "assume" said offices that they were never voted to (and even document their action by including it in the agenda???), without clearly violating the sunshine law?