March 19, 2025, Press Release Fant Farm Organics

Complaint 1 of 3

Dear Ethics Commission,

I am filing this formal ethics complaint against Jason Whistler, Levy County Property Appraiser, for violations of Florida Statute § 112.313(6) (Misuse of Public Position), § 837.06 (False Official Statements), § 195.027 (Uniform Property Assessments), and § 839.13 (Falsifying Records or Official Misconduct).

Whistler knowingly provided false and misleading evidence to the Levy County Board of County Commissioners and the Value Adjustment Board (VAB) process regarding neighboring property values in an attempt to justify a selective and arbitrary reduction in land assessments. His actions represent a clear abuse of his public position, a deliberate misrepresentation of property valuation data, and an attempt to influence both legislative decisions and the property tax appeals process with fabricated evidence that did not meet Florida Department of Revenue (DOR) guidelines for property valuation.

I initially filed a petition to the VAB to challenge the improper assessment of my property, but due to health reasons, I was forced to withdraw before the hearing took place. However, before my withdrawal, Jason Whistler and the Levy County Property Appraiser’s Office had already prepared and submitted false evidence for the hearing, which remained on record despite my withdrawal. This fraudulent valuation claim was later used by the Levy County Commission as a justification in Ordinance 2023-11, the county’s manure composting ban.

Whistler submitted a statement claiming that “based on recent sales near Mr. Fant’s composting operation, it has been determined that the land assessments in the surrounding area needed to be reduced by 20%.” (Pg 5,6 is a portion of the evidence submitted to VAB)The actual data showed a difference of only approximately 7.4%, not 20%. The correct calculation of the percentage difference is as follows:

Property A sold for $9,644.75 per acre, and Property B sold for $8,928.57 per acre. The correct calculation is 9,644.75 – 8,928.57 = 716.18. The percentage difference is calculated as follows: 716.18 ÷ 9,644.75 = 0.074255 or approximately 7.4%. Whistler falsely exaggerated the variance as 20%, nearly three times the actual difference, demonstrating either gross incompetence or intentional falsification. (Pg 7)

Property A had significant value-adding improvements, including a drilled well, full fencing, a concrete apron off the road, a custom aluminum gate with an electric opener, and a ¼ mile-surfaced driveway with road millings. Property B had none of these features and also contained an old limerock pit, which reduced its market value, as well as deed restrictions, which further lowered the property’s appraised worth. Whistler failed to consider these critical factors, in direct violation of Florida DOR guidelines, which require assessors to account for land characteristics in valuation adjustments. The “valuation” by the property appraiser’s office also did not take into account the fact that Loncala (the seller of the cheaper parcel) typically sold all of their lots below market value. (Pg 7)

A review of neighboring properties revealed that no other properties in the surrounding area received a 20% or even a 10% reduction in valuation. This further proves that the 20% figure was not based on legitimate property assessment practices but was selectively applied without any valid justification.

The false 20% property devaluation claim was later used as justification in the county’s manure composting ban, Ordinance 2023-11. The ordinance states: “Whereas in connection with 2023 Value Adjustment Board petitions, the county property appraiser found that ’based on recent sales near… composting operation, it has been determined that the land assessments in the surrounding area needed to be reduced by 20%.’” By submitting false valuation data that was later used in an official ordinance restricting manure composting, Whistler directly influenced legislative action based on fraudulent evidence. This demonstrates not only an ethical violation but also a direct misuse of public office to influence public policy with falsified information.(Pg8)

Even if Whistler was not directly responsible for generating this false evidence, it is his duty as the Property Appraiser to ensure that all official records, valuations, and statements submitted under his authority are accurate and truthful. As the head of the Levy County Property Appraiser’s Office, he is ultimately responsible for overseeing the integrity of all property assessments and the evidence submitted in tax appeals or related legislative matters. By allowing false information to be presented under his name and used to justify official government decisions, he failed to uphold the required standards of accuracy, fairness, and transparency in his office.

Florida Statute § 112.313(6) – Misuse of Public Position applies because Whistler used his position as Property Appraiser to submit false data to both the Levy County Commission and the VAB process to influence hearing and legislative outcomes. This is a direct violation of misuse of public position, as he manipulated official records and property valuation evidence to serve a predetermined objective rather than applying impartial and fact-based assessment standards.

While the following laws do not fall under the direct enforcement of the Ethics Commission, they are necessary to reference in order to illustrate how Jason Whistler misused his position. These laws demonstrate that he leveraged his authority to knowingly violate established legal standards by submitting false information to the Value Adjustment Board (VAB), manipulating property valuation data, and misrepresenting assessment figures. As the Property Appraiser, it was his duty to ensure that all evidence presented was accurate and lawful, yet he allowed or facilitated the submission of misleading information. His actions resulted in the deliberate presentation of inaccurate evidence, creating an unjust financial impact and influencing the VAB process in a manner that deviates from uniform appraisal practices.

Florida Statute § 837.06 – False Official Statements applies because Whistler knowingly submitted false and misleading property valuation figures in an official government proceeding (the VAB process) and an official county ordinance (2023-11). Providing incorrect, exaggerated, or selectively applied data in an official capacity is a criminal violation under Florida law.

Florida Statute § 195.027 – Uniform Property Assessments applies because Florida law requires that all properties be assessed fairly and consistently. By selectively applying an arbitrary 20% reduction to specific parcels while failing to apply similar adjustments to other comparable properties, Whistler violated this statute. His actions created a manipulated tax environment where some properties benefited from intentional misvaluation while others did not.

Florida Statute § 839.13 – Falsifying Records or Official Misconduct applies because if an official knowingly submits or approves a falsified property assessment record or report with the intent to mislead a government entity, it constitutes a third-degree felony. Whistler’s decision to submit fabricated valuation figures to the VAB process and have them cited in a county ordinance demonstrates a clear case of official misconduct and falsification of records.

Whistler’s submission of false information to the Levy County Commission and the VAB process tainted the integrity of both governmental processes. His deliberate misrepresentation of sales data misled the board into accepting an incorrect assessment and misled county commissioners into passing an ordinance based on fraudulent claims.

His actions also undermine public trust in the Levy County Property Appraiser’s Office. If officials can fabricate evidence to influence property tax and zoning decisions, it raises concerns about systemic corruption and fairness in county policy making.

Furthermore, his failure to apply legitimate property appraisal standards violated Florida DOR guidelines and harmed taxpayers who rely on accurate and fair property assessments. If such misconduct is permitted to continue unchecked, it could lead to further cases of intentional property misvaluation, selective enforcement of tax reductions, and the passage of further legislation based on false premises.

I request that the Florida Commission on Ethics conduct a full investigation into Jason Whistler’s submission of false information to the Levy County Commission and the VAB process, including a review of the property records, sales comparisons, and assessment methods used in his report.

Additionally, I request that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) investigate whether Whistler’s actions constitute falsification of public records under Florida law and whether criminal charges should be pursued.

Given the severity of this misconduct, I further request that the Florida Department of Revenue (DOR) audit the Levy County Property Appraiser’s Office to determine whether similar fabricated evidence has been used in other VAB hearings or county ordinances.

Sincerely,

Allen Fant

Jason Whistler Ethics Complaint 2 of 3

Dear Ethics Commission,

I am filing this formal ethics complaint against Jason Whistler, Levy County Property Appraiser, for violations of Florida Statute § 112.313(6) (Misuse of Public Position), § 838.015 (Bribery), § 195.027 (Uniform Property Assessments), and § 837.06 (False Official Statements). Whistler was personally present in a meeting where his Assistant Property Appraiser, Randy Rutter, attempted to bribe me by offering a property valuation reduction in exchange for my withdrawal from a Value Adjustment Board (VAB) hearing. Additionally, Whistler was copied in emails confirming this valuation change and did nothing to prevent the illegal transaction from taking place.

Incident Summary

A week before my scheduled VAB hearing, I met with both Jason Whistler and Randy Rutter at the Levy County Property Appraiser’s Office. During this meeting, Rutter, in Whistler’s presence, explicitly offered to reduce my property’s taxable value by 20% if I withdrew from the VAB hearing. Whistler did not intervene or object to this unethical offer, instead allowing his subordinate to proceed with the negotiation.

After I withdrew from the hearing due to health reasons, I received two separate emails from Rutter confirming that the tax reduction was contingent on my withdrawal:

1. The first email stated, “We did receive your withdrawal form and we will be lowering your land value as discussed in our meeting.” This confirms that the tax reduction was not based on a legitimate reassessment but rather on my agreement to withdraw from the VAB hearing.

2. The second email stated, “Please find the attached TRIM Notices that reflect the discounted land value discussed.” The actual reduction ended up being approximately 10%, rather than the initially offered 20%.

Whistler was copied on these emails and did nothing to stop or reverse the unethical tax reduction. His presence at the meeting, his inclusion in the email chain, and his failure to take corrective action demonstrate his direct complicity in an unlawful tax adjustment scheme designed to manipulate the VAB process.

A records review of neighboring properties showed that no other properties in the area received a similar reduction in valuation. This further confirms that the reduction was not based on standard reassessment procedures but was an arbitrary and selective adjustment designed to prevent scrutiny of the property appraiser’s office at the VAB hearing.

Violations of Florida Ethics Laws

Florida Statute § 112.313(6) – Misuse of Public Position

Whistler, as the Levy County Property Appraiser, knowingly participated in and approved a deal in which a taxpayer’s property valuation was reduced only if they withdrew from a VAB appeal. Public officials cannot condition financial benefits on a taxpayer’s willingness to abandon their rights. His presence at the meeting where this offer was made, combined with his failure to intervene or report the misconduct, constitutes a deliberate misuse of public office.

While the following laws do not fall under the direct enforcement of the Ethics Commission, they are necessary to reference in order to illustrate how Jason Whistler misused his position. These laws demonstrate that he leveraged his authority to knowingly violate established legal standards, using his position to offer or approve improper incentives in exchange for withdrawing from the Value Adjustment Board process, thereby engaging in bribery and manipulating property valuations for an unjust benefit.

Florida Statute § 838.015 – Bribery

Bribery occurs when a public official offers or provides an unauthorized benefit to influence an official decision or action. Whistler was directly involved in a meeting where a tax reduction was offered in exchange for my withdrawal from a formal government hearing. The fact that the actual tax reduction was later confirmed in an email he was copied on further supports that this was a coordinated bribery attempt. Even if Whistler did not personally make the offer, his presence, knowledge, and failure to act make him complicit in this unlawful transaction.

Florida Statute § 195.027 – Uniform Property Assessments

Property assessments must be conducted fairly and consistently under Florida law. Whistler approved a selective valuation reduction without justification, which violates uniform property tax assessment standards. The records review confirmed that none of my neighboring properties received similar reductions, proving this was a preferential tax adjustment.

Florida Statute § 837.06 – False Official Statements

Whistler knowingly allowed or approved a fraudulent property valuation change without a legitimate market-based reason, and in doing so he facilitated a falsified tax record. The email confirming my tax reduction, sent after I withdrew from the hearing, serves as written evidence of an improper transaction.

Conclusion and Request for Investigation

I request that the Florida Commission on Ethics conduct a full investigation into Jason Whistler’s involvement in approving or allowing a fraudulent tax reduction based on a quid pro quo arrangement. Additionally, I request that the Florida Department of Revenue and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) review the altered property valuation and investigate whether Whistler knowingly allowed false information to be recorded in county tax records.

Sincerely,

Allen Fant

Jason Whistler Ethics Complaint 3 of 3

Dear Ethics Commission,

I am filing this ethics complaint against Jason Whistler, Levy County Property Appraiser, for abusing his position and violating Florida Statute § 112.313(6) (Misuse of Public Position) by granting improper tax benefits to his in-laws. Whistler has knowingly allowed non-agricultural structures to remain under an agricultural exemption, reducing his in-laws’ tax liability and failing to correct or report this misclassification.

Incident Summary

Parcel ID 0072200100 is the homestead property of Whistler’s in-laws, consisting of only one acre. Parcel ID 0072200200, which contains a pool, barns, and carport belonging to the homestead, is improperly receiving a full agricultural exemption. Whistler has failed to notify the Building and Zoning Department of this issue and has continued granting the exemption, artificially lowering the property’s taxable value.

If properly classified, the in-laws would lose their agricultural exemption on an acre of land, increasing its valuation from $185 (agricultural timber classification) to $21,500 (homesite valuation).

Mr Whistler is in Violation of Florida Statute § 112.313(6) – Misuse of Public Position

Whistler has deliberately granted a tax benefit to his in-laws by keeping non-agricultural structures under an agricultural exemption and failing to correct or report this misclassification.

Whistler’s actions constitute a misuse of public office by granting a financial benefit to his in-laws while violating Florida property assessment laws. I request a full investigation and appropriate disciplinary action to hold him accountable.

Sincerely,

Allen Fant

————————————— 

Posted March 19, 2025