421.06

Commissioners or employees prohibited from acquiring interests in housing projects and required to disclose interests in specified properties; exception.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

421.06 Commissioners or employees prohibited from acquiring interests in housing projects and required to disclose interests in specified properties; exception.—Except for the leasehold interest held by a tenant-commissioner in the housing project in which he or she is a tenant, no commissioner or employee of an authority shall acquire any interest, direct or indirect, in any housing project or in any property included or planned to be included in any project, nor shall he or she have any interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or proposed contract for materials or services to be furnished or used in connection with any housing project. If a commissioner or employee of an authority owns or controls an interest, direct or indirect, in any property included or planned to be included in any housing project, he or she shall immediately disclose the same in writing to the authority. Such disclosure shall be entered upon the minutes of the authority. Failure so to disclose such interest constitutes misconduct in office.

History.—s. 6, ch. 17981, 1937; CGL 1940 Supp. 7100(3-f); s. 2, ch. 84-250; s. 83, ch. 97-103.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1991–2015 · leading case: William R. Crews v. State of Florida

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

William R. Crews v. State of Florida (2015) fla · cites it 4× “” See also § 421.06, Fla. Stat. (2015) (providing that the failure of a local housing authority employee to disclose an ownership interest in property included in a public housing project is “misconduct in office”).”

PANAMA CITY HOUSING AUTH. v. Sowby (1991) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “The employer's contention, predicated primarily on section 421.06, Florida Statutes, that the referee's application of the law to the facts was fatally flawed, is analogous to the argument advanced in English that the section 443.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.