Fernandina Beach Vice Mayor David Sturges for the first time publicly commented Tuesday night on two ethics complaints naming him.
“The allegations against me are wholly untrue,” Sturges said in reading a prepared statement during the city commission meeting. “And I look forward to the eventual findings of the Ethics Commission. All elected officials are entitled to a defense against allegations regarding their performance of official duties serving a public purpose.”
Sturges’ comments were made just prior to a 5-0 commission vote approving a resolution authorizing City Attorney Tammi Bach to work with the city’s claims administrator to appear on behalf of and defend Sturges before the state Commission on Ethics over a complaint filed on October 18, 2023.
Sturges now is facing two separate ethics investigations. A different ethics complaint against Sturges was filed last March.
The complaints, and all ethics commission proceedings and records relating to the complaint, are confidential unless Sturges wishes to disclose them. He did not disclose the nature of either complaint in his statement.
“I have not in the past nor will I ever take any action to violate the code of ethics,” Sturges said. “Any citizen can file an ethics complaint against an elected official. These complaints are confidential while the ethics commission investigates the allegations. I will honor the process of confidentiality. But I look forward to the conclusion of the investigation. At that point details of these unfounded allegations will become public record.”
He said the complaints were the result of “those in our community who abuse the process by which all elected officials are held accountable. Whether the abuse occurs in the form of filing false complaints or by malice feeding false information through social media. This political gamesmanship is unacceptable.”
Sturges said the complaints were a distraction from his important work on the city commission.
“I will do everything in my power to represent all of my constituents to the best of my abilities,” Sturges said.
As the owner of a residential building contracting company and owner of numerous properties in the city and county, Sturges has often chosen not to recuse himself from voting on issues that related to the contracting business.
City Attorney Bach has cautioned Sturges in the past on his comments and votes in the debate over the closure of Brett’s Waterway Cafe because Sturges failed to disclose a conflict of interest when the Brett’s matter first was discussed and voted on by the city commission in 2020. Sturges has a business partner who also is employed by Brett’s.
After City Attorney Bach told him that he had a conflict of interest in the Brett’s matter, Sturges has since recused himself on Brett’s votes. The ethics complaint came to light when the city commission’s April 18 agenda was made public and the city commission subsequently voted to pay his legal bills.
There has been no determination issued by the Ethics Commission regarding the original complaint against Sturges.
Once Mr. Sturges is cleared, should the party that filed the complaint be responsible for the city’s legal expenses?
It probably doesn’t work that way but it would serve to shut down frivolous complaints.
The irony is financial advisers can break the law and buy products from themselves using deception, misrepresentation, and lack of disclosure while doing business with a senior citizen – and the governing authorities do nothing.
Worse than that you can have falsified financial statements with contrived Summary Page Numbers (which is pretty much all people really look at) – and nothing get done.
Generally – the elected officials you complain to are all funded by the people you are complaining about. And they stonewall you umpteen different ways.
It is as if the Marxists have taken over the financial services industry and those who are responsible for it’s regulation.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/09/jim-quinn/heroes-whores/
innocent until Proven guilty…… let’s just go with that…..
I concur with “Bob” who says “innocent until proven guilty” – that’s the way is should be.
And while I understand that according to FL law, the complaints are confidential until they are decided upon OR disclosed by the accused.
I would be more sympathetic towards the Vice Mayor if he either:
a) chose to remain mute about the complaints vs denying them
b) shared what the comlaints are while making his case that they are not based in fact and instead are a form of abuse by his opponents.
Claiming innocence against claims that you do not publish rings hollow to this reader – if you believe they are false, then let us in on the secret…..or refuse to comment until the process concludes