Commentary: A Voice of Reason from Suanne Thamm

Dear Readers: Some of you may remember that before I wrote for the Fernandina Observer, I occasionally mailed out opinion pieces that I entitled THAMM-O-GRAMMS. Not sure whether I will resume at the pace and level that I once wrote, but I thought that the issue raised at last night’s meeting was important enough to dust off the old keyboard and issue …

THAMM-O-GRAMM

February 8, 2023

For us, it starts with One Rule: Use Good Judgment In All Situations. ~Nordstrom Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, nordstrom.com

Almost 2 hours into the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC) meeting on February 7, 2023, Vice Mayor David Sturges moved to terminate City Manager Dale Martin “without cause.” Sturges then proceeded to list his reasons, which are well laid out in Mike Lednovich’s article in today’s Fernandina Observer (https://fernandinaobserver.com/city-news/late-commission-news-a-move-to-fire-the-city-manager/).

Sturges’ list of complaints included some of Martin’s personnel decisions, communications issues, the Brett’s controversy, and what Sturges perceived as Martin’s over reliance on Commissioner Chip Ross. (The latter was reminiscent of the old Smothers Brothers routine in which Tommy always charged that their mother loved Dickie best.) What was almost most surprising was that despite the item’s not appearing on the agenda, the other commissioners did not seem surprised by Sturges’ announcement. It was also clear that Martin had been blindsided; he asked for Sturges’ list so that he could respond, which he did. Also responding was Commissioner Chip Ross, who declared that Sturges’ concerns were really about him, not City Manager Martin.

The entire discussion may be seen on the city website: https://fernandinabeachfl.new.swagit.com/videos/207177

The item was not on the agenda, but raised by Vice Mayor Sturges under Item 10: City Manager Reports (time marker 1:52.56).

A few things struck me as I watched the discussion play out. Firstly, as mentioned above, was what appeared to be a lack of surprise from other commissioners at Sturges’ motion. It was almost as if the matter had been discussed prior to the meeting, whether as part of the recent political campaigns that led to the seating of two new commissioners in December (Mr. James Antun and Mr. Darron Ayscue) or through some other means. I then wondered why two new commissioners, who had been in office barely 2 months, would be willing to move on an action as momentous as this for the city. Only those of us who have lived through what at one time had seemed to be a never-ending cycle of hiring/firing city managers can truly understand how this cycle adversely impacts the city cost-wise and in the eyes of the citizens and city employees as well as making Fernandina Beach the butt of jokes at the Florida League of Cities.

Dale Martin has served as Fernandina Beach City Manager for almost 8 years, a modern record for our city. He has hired exemplary department heads who under his general direction have addressed longstanding problems: poor planning, stormwater and drainage problems, poor wage structure that limits recruitment efforts and retention of valuable employees, and a general lack of maintenance of city facilities. His determined efforts to get FEMA to own up to its promises to fund marina repairs caused by Hurricane Matthew paid off to the tune of millions of dollars. A new fire station is under construction near our new airport terminal that was build under his watch. Beach walkovers are being repaired or replaced.

Additionally, Martin writes a weekly column published in the News Leader and the Fernandina Observer to provide readers with updates on city projects or other items of local interest. Residents have gotten to know him through these columns, as well as through his work with local non profits. He initiated a Citizens Academy to help interested residents learn how and why the city does what it does. Citizen surveys that he has commissioned every 2 years indicate that Fernandinians are satisfied with the level of service provided by city departments under his leadership.

So, where’s the beef? Has he made mistakes, sure. But do his mistakes rise to the level of a need to terminate his employment? I would say not at this point. Some say that pushback on Martin has come from pro-development people who bristle against the enforcement of building and land development codes. Others resent any tax increase, even if it is to provide better or increased services to the public. Then there are those single issue people who hold grudges when their issue is not resolved to their satisfaction. And let’s not rule out the role social media plays to spread unfounded rumors and gossip.

Commissioners have the opportunity to meet with the city manager and the city attorney weekly to discuss concerns or seek clarification. Many questions can be addressed during those meetings and resolutions can be arrived at without a lot of drama. But we seem to be in an era where results are not as important as drama played out in public.

The upshot of the discussion about firing the city manager was to postpone the question to the next meeting, which will take place on Feb. 21 at 6 p.m. in City Hall. Mayor Bradley Bean expressed a desire to hear from citizens on this matter. I hope that citizens who value continuity in local government and who respect the job City Manager Martin is doing will show up and let their voices be heard.

Contact information for Mayor Bean and Commissioners:

Mayor Bradley Bean

Email  [email protected]

Phone: (904) 415-5181

Vice Mayor David Sturges

Email  [email protected]

Phone: (904)753-2445

Commissioner Chip Ross

Email [email protected]

Phone: (410) 394-0220

Commissioner James Antun

Email [email protected]

Phone: (516) 547-5309

Commissioner Darron Ayscue

Email [email protected]

Phone: (904) 780-4480

Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it wrongly, and applying unsuitable remedies. ~Ernest John Pickstone Benn, c. 1930

41 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Al MacDougall
Al MacDougall (@guest_67118)
1 year ago

A detailed and thorough review of Mr Martin’s service is warranted.
There is a widely held sense that a “special” relationship exists between Mr. Martin and certain Commissioners–a relationship that needs assessment.

Robert S. Warner, Jr.
Robert S. Warner, Jr. (@guest_67120)
1 year ago
Reply to  Al MacDougall

Explain, Al. Also explain “widely”.

Al MacDougall
Al MacDougall (@guest_67121)
1 year ago

I will leave that to the Commissioners to explore and assess.

Mark Tomes
Mark Tomes(@mtomes)
1 year ago
Reply to  Al MacDougall

Al, your vague comments and innuendos and refusal to elaborate do not help in a civil and comprehensive discussion, but rather only add to negativity and divisiveness. Please get more specific or refrain from joining the conversation.

Karen
Karen(@karen)
1 year ago
Reply to  Al MacDougall

And here I was thinking it might have to do with our city manager being the only one to do the hiring and firing of city employees, such as the city attorney. Ms. Bach’s representation of the city that evening was interesting.

DAVE LOTT
DAVE LOTT(@dave-l)
1 year ago
Reply to  Karen

Karen, the City Attorney (like the City Manager and City Clerk) are charter employees and serve at the pleasure of the City Commission.

Dman
Dman(@darryl)
1 year ago

I understand and accept that you do not support the termination of Mr. Martin. I am glad this issue was held over for further discussion as ending a person’s employment is not a matter to take lightly. I take issue with your statement/insinuation that this was pre discussed by the commissioners and in particular that you named the 2 new commissioners as if they were part of a conspiracy. I believe that rises to the level of slander, unless you have some evidence to offer?

Miles Taylor
Miles Taylor (@guest_67123)
1 year ago
Reply to  Dman

Sturges “mentored” Ayscue and Antun prior to the election.

Dman
Dman(@darryl)
1 year ago
Reply to  Miles Taylor

absolutely not true

Julie Ferreira
Julie Ferreira(@julie-ferreira)
1 year ago
Reply to  Dman

I will not speak to mentoring Ayscue because I have no idea but David did tell me that he was mentoring Anton- just for the record.

Dman
Dman(@darryl)
1 year ago
Reply to  Julie Ferreira

Ok I will go ask them and respond

Roy Chisolm
Roy Chisolm(@hwalker00)
1 year ago
Reply to  Miles Taylor

Then shouldn’t the vote have been 3-2 to fire Mr. Martin?

Al MacDougall
Al MacDougall (@guest_67124)
1 year ago
Reply to  Dman

This author has a history.

Lucy Peistrup
Lucy Peistrup(@lucyp74)
1 year ago

It’s obvious that the author of this article sides with the city manager. I am a county resident that has sadly has to accept the choices made by the city fathers whether I like them or not. I feel that they have done a disservice to the citizens by spending an exorbitant amount of money on an airport that is used by FEW in our community instead of INVESTING in the waterfront that would be enjoyed by MANY. As evidenced by Mr. Bob Allison’s recent articles, it seems that no one at the city wants to listen to HIS ideas—even KNOWING that it was HIS BRAINCHILD that established the waterfront where Brett’s exists today!! The sheer irony of that is beyond belief to me. The idea of inviting cruise ships to an INDUSTRIAL port seems a bit ridiculous if you ask me because they really won’t bring much revenue to our community given the amount of “trouble” they would bring. Why can’t we be content with being a SMALL COMMUNITY?!?! Being a QUIET, QUAINT, TREE filled community is what drew people here to begin with, but we are slowly losing ALL of that thanks to EXTENSIVE UNFETTERED GROWTH that no one seems to care about. I say let Mr. Sturges let loose the elephant in the room.

John Goshco
John Goshco (@guest_67199)
1 year ago
Reply to  Lucy Peistrup

The ONLY reason that the airport isn’t a major money loser is that the federal government, and to a lesser extent, the state, provide MAJOR financial subsidies. If Fernandina Beach had to pay for the occasional repaving of only one runway, or the full cost of the new terminal, they’d turn that valuable real estate into a tax-generating housing development in the blink of an eye.

DAVE LOTT
DAVE LOTT(@dave-l)
1 year ago
Reply to  John Goshco

Not true John. If the City were to “give up” the aeronautical use of the land, they do not get to choose an alternative use of the land. The FAA has a prescribed process for such a situation. In this case, the County would be given first right of refusal to take over the operation of the airport. It they refused, then it would be open for the Jacksonville Aviation Authority to take it over, and so on.
You are correct in that the airport enterprise fund is self-sufficient and used no city property tax dollars for its operation. All of its revenue comes from hangar and FBO rental fees, share of the fuel sales and grants from the FAA and FDOT which gets their revenue from aviation fees.

Bob Allison
Bob Allison(@bob-allison)
1 year ago

Suanne, there is no person on Amelia Island whose opinions I hold in higher regard than yours, but if the allegations made by Commissioner Sturges are true, the City has a very serious problem. If Mr. Martin actually instructed the City’s Department heads “to make it look ugly” in their response to the proposed 10% department budget cuts, then we have an appointed official scheming to undermine the intent of our elected officials. This is a clear and obvious threat to our local “representative” government. If Commissioner Sturges’s allegations are correct, Mr. Martin has got to go.

Robert Warner
Robert Warner (@guest_67135)
1 year ago
Reply to  Bob Allison

Bob – You are better than this. I think Sturgis needs to put up or be quiet. Burden’s on him now.

Paul Lore
Paul Lore (@guest_67138)
1 year ago

Miss seeing you and your writing…

Doug Mowery
Doug Mowery(@douglasm)
1 year ago

Alright!!! A Thamm-o-Gramm……….keep them coming Suanne. Your views are always worth the read!

I was shocked to read the article detailing the late motion. On one level, most political organizations have rules on late agenda items (high bar to be in order) so folks can prepare and make an informed decision. The vote to postpone was a very good move but that barely passed 3-2. What was that breakdown? Two weeks to catch a breath and figure this out is necessary. Hasty decisions are rarely a good thing! That move to postpone should have been 5-0……message sent and received…..now figure out what to do. Never shoot first, ask questions later.

And I don’t know if Martin is cozy with Dr. Ross or not……but Dr. Ross has proven to be the most intense researcher on the FBCC. Who was the one commissioner to vote against Ragucci’s request for endorsement of grant money for WWT? (That was later rescinded with the City looking foolish after facts came out). Who went after Ragucci to produce documents in Court? Who asked Tammi Bach for the Supreme Court case law she alleged existed in the new “Townhomes on the Tringali property” fiasco a couple weeks ago? Dr. Ross isn’t letting anybody pull a fast one on his watch. I didn’t vote for Ross when he first ran…….I was wrong. He does a great job of making sure my tax dollar is not wasted.

Doug Mowery
Doug Mowery(@douglasm)
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mowery

I just watched the video and I think there was a fundamental misunderstanding on a “Motion to Table”. It cannot be placed there for weeks or months…..if it is not resurrected by a motion at the NEXT meeting it “falls from the table” and no longer exists.

The move to table did fail 3-2 but a subsequent motion to postpone to a time certain (next meeting) did pass 3-2. Ross, Ayscue and Bean were Yes……Sturges and Anton were No. That sequence around 2+40 of the video is worth the 10 minutes.

Julie Ferreira
Julie Ferreira(@julie-ferreira)
1 year ago
Reply to  Doug Mowery

I am rather shocked that a new Commissioner on the job for a bit over a month would not vote to postpone long enough to at least gather public opinion,

John Findlay
John Findlay(@jfindlay)
1 year ago

If the other commissioners were not surprised at this agenda item suddenly appearing at the end of the meeting, I surmise that there must have been communication beforehand. IF that it true, I believe it would violate the Sunshine Laws.

chip ross
chip ross(@chipross)
1 year ago
Reply to  John Findlay

I had absolutely no idea that issue was going to appear.

John Findlay
John Findlay(@jfindlay)
1 year ago
Reply to  chip ross

No, I did not think that you did. I am more concerned about the Republican commissioners, who seem to vote as a block.

Roy Chisolm
Roy Chisolm(@hwalker00)
1 year ago
Reply to  John Findlay

If the “republicans” voted as a, wouldn’t it have been 4-1 to terminate Mr. Martin or at least 3-2?

Dman
Dman(@darryl)
1 year ago
Reply to  John Findlay

which is exactly what they did not do, facts never get in the way of a liberal comment though do they lol

Chris
Chris (@guest_67239)
1 year ago
Reply to  Dman

Just wait till next meeting. The final vote will be the tell all. I was present at the meeting. 4 commissioners did not act surprised at the issue being brought forward. That was obvious. Nor did several members in the audience. My interpretation is the 3-2 vote occurred because Anton had a question and Bean (the deciding vote) voted to postpone in order for him to get his answer. In my opinion, that was appropriate action. Let’s see what transpires next meeting.

Ashley
Ashley(@faith)
1 year ago
Reply to  John Findlay

They seem surprised to me and wanted more information. Just because they didn’t want to go through it point by point might mean they actually agreed with Stuges to begin with, that it’s high time he head out (and manage citizens sentiment as well)

Mac Morriss
Mac Morriss(@macmorrisshotmail-com)
1 year ago

A different interpretation: not appearing surprised might also mean they were having similar thoughts about terminating City Manager Martin.

Richard Cain
Richard Cain(@richardcain)
1 year ago

First, the article states how “those of us who lived through” the City’s constant rotation of City Managers in years past … I think all five commissioners “lived through this” as none are newcomers to the City. So I’m sure they can successfully factor that in.

Second, we have one comment where it is proclaimed that the “republican commissioners, who seem to vote as a block” … which follows another comment where an actual vote result is presented on this and the two new commissioners voted opposite each other.

Lots of suggestions of conspiracy with not much to back it up.

John Findlay
John Findlay(@jfindlay)
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Cain

When did James Antun arrive here?

Richard Cain
Richard Cain(@richardcain)
1 year ago
Reply to  John Findlay

OK … I stand corrected about how long Antun has been here. I’m not sure why how long any one has been here factors into anything … I believe Mayor Lednovich had been here for something like ONE year before he was elected.

But the “Republican commissioners” have not demonstrated voting as a bloc so a bit much to say otherwise. And as Mr. Allison points out … if City departments were actually instructed to make budget cuts look ugly … that needs to be investigated and confirmed.

And someone not looking “surprised” is pure conjecture and not worthy of reporting.

I personally like the job Mr. Martin is doing but I’m not privy to all the details in making any decision on whether he should be retained. I don’t think that decision is something an informal poll should be dictating.

Ashley
Ashley(@faith)
1 year ago
Reply to  John Findlay

I don’t know specific dates but I think he’s been here just about as long as Lednovich was when he ran for office

Bob Allison
Bob Allison(@bob-allison)
1 year ago

I know there are a lot of smart people commenting on this site and I have a question some smart person can likely answer. In previous years citizens were able to communicate with City Commissioners on their own private email addresses. Now, we are instructed to communicate with them only through a City managed email address at fbfl.org. Here is my question: Does City Hall have access to the email sent to Commissioners at this address? Is it monitored for content?

Doug Mowery
Doug Mowery(@douglasm)
1 year ago
Reply to  Bob Allison

I can only speak from “other” organizations. Answer to the first question is most likely “Yes” they do have access. Is it monitored? Most likely “No”.

Jacek Bigo
Jacek Bigo (@guest_67213)
1 year ago
Reply to  Bob Allison

This is the correct way to do it. It’s public information. Emails should be accessible in case an investigation is warranted.
You also have their phone numbers (what looks like personal cell numbers).

Frank Quigley
Active Member
Frank Quigley(@frank-quigley)
1 year ago
Reply to  Bob Allison

Bob, you could check with Caroline Best, the City Clerk. She would know the policy and procedure on this.

Al MacDougall
Al MacDougall (@guest_67220)
1 year ago
Reply to  Bob Allison

Commissioner email addresses are available–introducing the “form” seems unneeded and contrary to the small town feel and method of doing business…..Most of the Commissioners will respond to a direct email….and value direct input (so they claim).

DAVE LOTT
DAVE LOTT(@dave-l)
1 year ago
Reply to  Bob Allison

Best practice is for communications to be to the commissioner’s city email address. That makes it certain when there is an information request that the City Clerk is sure that all relevant information requested is provided.

DAVE LOTT
DAVE LOTT(@dave-l)
1 year ago

Some truth to “constant rotation of city managers” statement but not consistent in tenure. Bob Mearns was here for 3 years, Mike Czymbor served for 6 years, Joe Gerrity for just over 3 years and Dale has held his position for 7 years. Mike Czymbor went to Hardeeville SC where he has been City Manager for 7 1/2 years. Joe went to Atlantic Beach FL where he retired after 2 years as CM. A tough position when you have multiple bosses.