• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
  • Hello all! We will be performing a website & forum update soon. You may get logged out so now is the time to make sure your email address in your account is correct - go to your account to check it and update it now. Send us a message with your username and/or email address if you need help.

Robert 'Bob' Hudson Introduction

New posts
rheffron said:
Boy, am I glad I did not bid on that communication contract! Motorola should be suing someone for payment by now or is the interest piling up?
Click to expand...

It was not bid. They will be paid. I am sure there will be interest on the amount not paid by the due date.(IMO)
 
Are you telling me that there is not a requirement to bid on a purchase this large? Most Governments/Departments require biding over a certain amount. Many as low as $5K unless the vendor is the only one that can provide the product/service. That cannot be the case here.

Is there oversight if that is the Sheriffs policy?
 
rheffron said:
Are you telling me that there is not a requirement to bid on a purchase this large? Most Governments/Departments require biding over a certain amount. Many as low as $5K unless the vendor is the only one that can provide the product/service. That cannot be the case here.

Is there oversight if that is the Sheriffs policy?
Click to expand...

Governments around here rarely require bids when upgrading integrated equipment. If they go to a different vendor it would require replacing more than just the consoles. Now I do not know exactly what was bought, what the contract said, or the exact circumstances in this situation, so I will shut up now and go back to lurking.
 
I now have a Robert 'Bob' Hudson campain website.

This is the link:http://www.bobhudson-2008.com

I will continue to monitor this thread as well. hopefully you will find it helpful in answering questions about me as an individual and as a candidate for District 5.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Dear Voter,

I want to be YOUR Walton County District 5 Commissioner because, with your help and input, we can do better for all of Walton County.

I want to bring common sense back to government processes and offer you engaged, informed, accountable and responsive leadership.

I advocate long-term planning to accomplish short-term goals and plans for Walton County. I aim to make Walton County government proactive rather than reactive.

I will work to expand the economic development funding in Walton County, to bring environmentally friendly industry and business to our county. I will work to help diversify our economic base to help it weather economic fluctuations and nourish our tourism industry. We need to spend more than $500,000 on economic development.

With such financial pressures on families, we need to focus completely on making sure government works for everyone, not just the special interests.

I have devoted a great deal of time as a citizen activist attending County Commission meetings, workshops , budget planning sessions and providing input. I have a unique knowledge of the issues facing Walton County.

You deserve a full time commissioner who will listen to and represent ALL county property owners and citizens. I have the time, passion and the energy to do an efficient effective job representing the interests of all citizens.

Together - We Can Do Better !
 
Last edited:
Mr. Hudson:

First I want to thank you for your replies to my questions and others questions. I think it says something that you are the only County Commissioner candidate that has been on sowal.com. That being said, I have a few follow-up questions based on some posts on the website.

One, what do you think about the recent issues with the Sherrif regarding the the 300k spent on communications. Was it "bid" legally? If he comes in to the County Commission meeting "hat in hand" would you approve his request or not.

Two, this issue with "things left on the beach" what do you think? You have previously stated that some beaches (at least 40%) are privately owned and the owner must allow usage and could remove people so should the government have the right to play beach removal czars and take the stuff on those privately-owned beaches or not?

Three, there has been some talk about beach renourishment along more beaches in Walton County. Since you are trying to get the seat of Meadows and District 5 where it has been done before, are you for or against it for the rest of sowal?

Finally a simple yes or no one for ya, I see in newspapers that the taxpayers association have concerns regarding buying that beach at eastern Lake. Would you approve it or not?

Thanks again for answering my questions. I know you are busy but I think you have already given the voters some things to mull over and these may help you along.
 
Mr. Hudson:

First I want to thank you for your replies to my questions and others questions. I think it says something that you are the only County Commissioner candidate that has been on sowal.com. That being said, I have a few follow-up questions based on some posts on the website.

One, what do you think about the recent issues with the Sherrif regarding the the 300k spent on communications. Was it "bid" legally? If he comes in to the County Commission meeting "hat in hand" would you approve his request or not.

1. The budget process for the 2007 FY did not include any request from the SO for replacement of E911 equipment. A constitutional officer has a certain amount of latitude to shift certain budget items within each budget (operating and capital). Carr, Riggs, & Ingram have taken the position that the "replacement" of the E911 system was a system upgrade not a new capital item. I would have to have access to the contract (which I have never seen) and the PO (which I have seen) to determine whether I agree personall with that determination. If it was a "system upgrade" the SO could have shifted non-capital dollars to pay for the equipment as long as the payment was made within the 2007 budget year. Although he signed a PO and contract for the equipment within the time period allowed he did not complete the transaction within FY 2007. If the SO determined that they had an emergency he would have to hold a "public hearing" to allow public comment on the request. He added the item to the BCC agenda and then did not personally appear before the BCC to answer questions. The individual making the request referred all of the questions back to the Sheriff. Had he appeared and satisfied the Commission and public that he had an emergency situation then it would have been handled in the normal course of business.


2. There was no bid process on the equipment.

3. I would have several questions for the Sheriff concerning the exact nature of the Emergency, the proceess he followed and the availibility within his current budget to pay for the equipment. If those answers were given and verified - then I would vote to pay for the equipment - I would not subject the County to futher legal action by the contractor and would provide the emergency service to the citizens of Walton County.

There are a tremendous number of unanswered questions on this issue.

Two, this issue with "things left on the beach" what do you think? You have previously stated that some beaches (at least 40%) are privately owned and the owner must allow usage and could remove people so should the government have the right to play beach removal czars and take the stuff on those privately-owned beaches or not?

1. What I have said is that certain individuals hold deeds that claim ownership to the mean high water line and that a "taking" by the public through claims of "customary usage" would have to be made on a case by case determination. I believe that the public has the right to access to the "public portions" of the beach and that they should be able to utilize that beach in a manner consistent with current law. I believe that the issue is complex and current Florida law concerning this issue is making its way through the court system. It will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court.

2. The issue of "tagging items" for removal is currently under study and review, due to legal limitations of the current ordinance. If a beach front property owner has a deed that states ownership to the mean high water line, then he/she should be held responsible for the items that are on "their property" that are in violation of an ordinance designed to provide for the protection of the public and the environmental issues. Their property is "unique" and carries with it a certain amount of responsibility and obligation. They should be good custodians of the resource.

Three, there has been some talk about beach renourishment along more beaches in Walton County. Since you are trying to get the seat of Meadows and District 5 where it has been done before, are you for or against it for the rest of sowal?

I support beach renourishment.

I believe that it is necessary to support the tourism industry and therefore the citizens of Walton County. I also believe that it has been shown to be a good return on investment. My understanding is that the projected cost for the next project is somewhere between 40-50 million dollars. The real issue is where the dollars would come from to pay for the project. It would require a combined effort of local funds (TDC dollars) - and State and Federal Grants) and is controlled by both state and federal environmental legislation. Those state and federal dollars are currently in short supply . The issue of renourishment on "privately held property" is a totally different issue that your question does not cover.

Finally a simple yes or no one for ya, I see in newspapers that the taxpayers association have concerns regarding buying that beach at eastern Lake. Would you approve it or not?

No

Not in the form it is currently drafted. We are not truly buying the land as I understand the contract. Currently the preservation easement would be held by a "yet undefined LLC".

We should protect and preserve the unique areas whenever possible, we should clearly own title to the property when taxpayer dollars are utilized to make the purchase.

I must point out that my association with the Walton County Taxpayers Association ended when I became a candidate.

Thanks again for answering my questions. I know you are busy but I think you have already given the voters some things to mull over and these may help you along.

It is only through an exchange of questions that voters will understand a candidate. My answers to your thoughtful questions are based on the information and research into the issues at this point in time. A person serving the public must always be willing to keep an open mind. All positions must be studied during the process of determing how to vote. A commissioner should then vote based on the greater public interest and not just on his/her own personal viewpoint. Sometimes those two can be in direct conflict with each other. I experienced this on several occassions while serving as a School Board member.
 
Last edited:
Bob, earlier you said:

"Although I was asked by many to run for the District 5 Commissioner position, I made a decision to support Cindy in her re-election. I met with her personally over a year ago and told her that I would not run against her. I was in a meeting with her less that 2 weeks ago and restated my intention to support her."

Do you have any comment on the statement she made that was in today's Walton Sun? Was this expected?....

Earlier this week, Meadows told The Sun she would be supporting Republican candidate Alan Osborne, stating she felt he ?would handle the job very well.?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter









Share this page




                               
Back
Top