Grant Izzi, a candidate for the District 2 City Commission seat in St. Pete Beach, sent out a mailer to voters in December 2024 that showed him in his Air Force uniform. The mailer was provided to the Guardian by a reader who is also a St. Pete Beach voter.
However, Izzi’s use of a picture of himself in US military uniform appears to violate two part of this 2008 US Department of Defense Directive on “Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces.” The term “members” is defined under “4. POLICY” to include “retired members.” Izzi is a retired US Air Force officer.

Specifically, §4.3.2.1 of the directive prohibits the “use or allow]ing] the use of photographs, drawings, and other similar media formats of themselves in uniform as the primary graphic representation in any campaign media, such as a billboard, brochure, flyer, Web site, or television commercial.”
We asked Izzi via email: do you agree that the picture of you in uniform is in fact the “primary graphic” of the mailer? If you don’t agree, then in your view, what is the primary graphic in your mailer?
We received no response to our questions from Mr. Izzi. The Guardian reached out to Izzi twice via email over a 15-day period, and also texted him to make sure he received the emails.
Izzi’s mailer also appears to violate this portion of another paragraph of the DoD directive:

§4.3.1.2. Include or permit the inclusion of their current or former specific military duty, title, or position, or photographs in military uniform, when displayed with other non-military biographical details. [underlining added]
Izzi show himself in “in military uniform” and gives his “former specific military duty, title, or position” while it is “displayed with other non-military biographical details” on the back side of the mailer.
§4.3.1.2 of the directive goes on to say:
Any such military information must be accompanied by a prominent and clearly displayed disclaimer that neither the military information nor photographs imply endorsement by the Department of Defense or their particular Military Department (or the Department of Homeland Security for members of the Coast Guard); [followed by a sample disclaimer]
Such a disclaimer does appear on the back side of the mailer, but whether the disclaimer was prominent or not is not for us to judge. However, the prohibition on combining the display of oneself in uniform with “other non-military biographical details” appears to be absolute.
“All military personnel should avoid the inference that their political activities imply or appear to imply DoD sponsorship, approval, or endorsement of a political candidate, campaign, or cause,” according to this US DoD Standards of Conduct Office (SOCO) publication (which appears to have been published in approx. 2015).
The directive was issued in 2008 as a form of add-on to the 1939 Hatch Act, which limits political activities of executive branch federal employees (except for the President and Vice President). The directive applies only to and specifically to military personnel.
Having received no response from Izzi, we turned to the other candidate in the district 2 race for comment.

“If nothing else, it shows bad judgment,” City Commissioner for Lisa Robinson (District 2) said about Izzi’s mailer.
“It sticks out to me because I am the daughter of a highly decorated Air Force Lieutenant Colonel who received five medals during his service as a pilot during the Vietnam War. He retired from the Air Force after 25 years.”
For the record: Robinson is not the person who provided us with Izzi’s mailer.
Robinson also commented on the fact that Izzi didn’t disclose that he is a former (not current) member of the St. Pete Beach Parks & Recreation Committee (the language used in Izzi’s mailer).
“The only reason Izzi was on the Parks & Rec Committee is because the then appointed city commissioner Nick Filtz appointed Izzi to the committee,” Robinson said. “There was only one meeting during the entire time Izzi was on that committee.”
Filtz was accused by some of doing the bidding of large developers of the beachfront, and was defeated 71% to 29% by Robinson in the August 20, 2024 special election.
“My candidacy is about putting residents first,” Robinson told the Guardian over the phone. “And I have consistent record of doing so.”
“As a commissioner, I have remained true to my values and commitment to Residents First,” Robinson said in an emailed statement. “I’m working tirelessly to initiate and make policy changes to get residents back in their home. I recognized the impact of our 5 year Lookback and initiated the change to a Zero Lookback, uncoupled the combining of Substantial Damage (SD) and Substantial Improvement, repealed 10% & 20% owner/builder contingencies fees to allow additional monetary allowance towards repairs, hosted a Town Hall to help residents navigate the SD appeals process and most recently developed an Outreach Program to assist our elderly residents and those that are not tech savvy or find themselves lost/paralyzed in the process. These are just a few of my accomplishments in my short tenure.”
The St. Pete Beach District 2 city commission race is non-partisan. The election is held March 11th. For more information from the candidates, visit Robinson’s campaign website at LisaForSPB.com and Izzi’s at izziforstpetebeach.com.
As always….the Guardian reports and the readers decide. Please like our Facebook page to find out when we publish new stories.