FORT PIERCE — City Attorney Sara Hedges’ “employment is in jeopardy,” acknowledged Mayor Linda Hudson — who supports Hedges — after a vote to renew the lawyer’s contract for another year failed 2-3 at a May 18 City Commission meeting.
Hedges’ current three-year contract does not expire until September 11, but it requires the City Commission to give her 90 days notice if commissioners do not plan to renew it. If notice had not been given by June 13, the contract would have automatically renewed on a year-to-year basis.
The move to let Hedges’ contract expire was spearheaded by Commissioner Chris Dzadovksy, who said it was not personal but that the city attorney’s office had overstepped into the duties of the city manager.
“My concern is not personalities. My concern is preserving the integrity of the charter structure, maintaining clear operational boundaries supporting our employees and the appropriate exercise of their professional responsibilities and ensuring responsible governance for the citizens of Fort Pierce,” Dzadovsky said.
Dzadovsky was ultimately joined by commissioners Arnold Gaines and Curtis Johnson in voting against renewing Hedges’ contract.
“I have talked to several employees in the city of Fort Pierce, and it’s one thing to be a strong advocate, but when the city employees don’t want to deal with someone, that’s a problem,” Gaines said.
Hedges — along with City Manager Richard Chess and City Clerk Linda Cox — was due for an annual performance review at the June 8 City Commission meeting, and there was a desire voiced by Gaines and Johnson to have private conversations with Hedges between now and then, to be followed by a vote at that meeting. However, Commissioner Michael Broderick made a motion to renew the contract for one year, and Hudson provided a second, forcing their colleagues to vote yes or no.
“That was forced tonight by putting a motion on the floor that was seconded, which forced an actual vote,” Johnson said. “I feel short circuited here because I’ve not had a chance to have an objective conversation with the city attorney, city clerk or city manager. So, my decision was rendered based on where we are tonight, and what was put on the floor that I couldn’t abstain from.”
Broderick and Hudson gave unequivocal support for Hedges, with Broderick comparing the proceedings to a “witch trial” and directly challenging Dzadovsky.
“Commissioner Dzadovsky, thank you for your commentary. It was enlightening. I think your conclusions are innacurate, but that’s not a debate to have here,” Broderick said. “I do not agree with the perspective that this is not a personal issue. I believe that there is a faction of the commission and administration that has targeted Ms. Hedges because they don’t necessarily agree with her, what I would consider to be, aggressive legal perspectives, which from the city’s perspective is a very valuable asset.”
Hedges declined to share her feelings with the City Commission, sticking to legal advice.
“I have a lot that I would like to say, but bar ethics rules do not allow me to say a lot of things,” Hedges said.
Commissioners were careful not to get into specifics of possible pending litigation against the city that involves Hedges.
On April 28, the city received a pre-lawsuit notice of intent from attorneys representing the city’s finance director and CFO, Johnna Morris.
The notice of intent letter laid out a number of allegations against the city, and particularly singled out Hedges as having allegedly committed “unlawful conduct.”
The letter alleges that Hedges recommended firing Morris after the city received a wage garnishment order for a personal debt that Morris owes. A final judgment against Morris was obtained by JP Morgan Chase Bank on Jan. 8 for a total of $14,343.61. Morris, who is paid $180,000 annually, was to have $1,321.19 garnished from her total earnings of $6,870.44 each pay period, according to court records related to the final judgment.
However, concerns were later raised that terminating an employee because of a wage garnishment, as Hedges allegedly sought to do, may violate the Consumer Credit Protection Act, which is a law that protects workers who are indebted. The consequences of breaking that law could be a fine up to $1,000 and one year in prison.
The apparent dispute with Chess centered around allegations, made by Dzadovsky, that Hedges had prevented Chess from consulting an outside attorney on the situation.
Morris is now back at work.
The notice of intent specifically demanded discipline against Hedges “up to and including termination,” among other demands.
Without saying what exactly he was referring to, Broderick called into question the truth behind the narratives that have surrounded Hedges.
“Somebody’s not telling the truth here,” Broderick said. “Everybody in City Hall knows what she’s being accused of and she’s never, ever done it.”
Johnson suggested that he may have had heard different things in his one-on-one meetings with staff than Broderick did.
“You’re not in my conversations with Ms. Hedges or Ms. Cox or Mr. Chess,” Johnson told Broderick, later going on to say, “I know what I heard.”
Multiple commissioners said they planned to investigate and attempt to figure out what the truth really is during their upcoming one-on-one meetings.
Those one-on-one meetings will seemingly include Hedges, who told commissioners that even if she wanted to leave she is required to stay on for at least 90 days.
“I do have a contract that says if I’m going to give you a notice I have to give you 90 days notice unless you agree to less time. So, even if I walked in tomorrow and gave you my notice, I would still be here for 90 days,” Hedges said, in response to speculation that she may not stick around long enough for the June 8 performance review to occur. “I’ll be here on June 8th. I’m contractually obligated to be here on June 8th, so I will be here.”
With Hedges’ performance review already scheduled for the June 8 meeting, commissioners said they plan to discuss next steps then.
The commissioners who voted against renewing Hedges’ contract did not rule out eventually offering her a new contract between now and September 11. Dzadovsky repeatedly said that stopping the contract from automatically renewing on June 13 merely gives the commission time and flexibility to decide what it wants to do over the next three and a half months.
Wicker Perlis is TCPalm’s Watchdog Reporter for St. Lucie County. You can reach him at Wicker.Perlis@TCPalm.com.
This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: Florida city attorney’s job in jeopardy after contract renewal vote fails
Reporting by Wicker Perlis, Treasure Coast Newspapers / Treasure Coast Newspapers
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
