Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents press county on long‑running Driftwood/Sandestin code enforcement, administrators cite litigation limits

Walton County Board of County Commissioners · June 30, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Public commenters, including Tabitha Howard and others, alleged the county failed to deliver an independent engineering report promised years ago and raised accusations of harassment. County legal staff said parts of the matter are in active litigation and agreed to provide commission members with case files and code‑enforcement responses for review.

During the public‑comment period, Tabitha Howard delivered an extended statement alleging the county failed to produce an independent engineering report she said the board had promised in 2021 regarding Driftwood Estates and Sandestin DRRI concerns. Howard described repeated assurances that a report would be delivered "within a week or two" and said, "Five years later, where is that report?" She said the failure to deliver left her and her family personally harmed and accused county code enforcement and property managers of contributing to harassment and bans from private properties.

Other speakers, including Alan Osborne and Dan Howard, echoed concerns about enforcement consistency and whether the county had properly required developers to comply with stormwater and other infrastructure obligations. County legal staff responded that some elements of the matter were remanded into litigation in February of the prior year and that the county could not discuss pending litigation in detail during a public meeting. Legal counsel and administration agreed to collect and share code‑enforcement case files and the county’s responses to the commissioners for review and to meet with concerned commissioners and members of the public to explain the administrative record.

The board did not act on the allegations during the meeting; staff agreed to gather documents and return with clarifications on code enforcement outcomes and the status of the promised engineering work where litigation does not prevent disclosure.