by Mike Sharkey
Staff Writer
Three strikes may equal an out in baseball – but in politics, failed attempts sometimes mean a lawmaker will simply take another route.
State Rep. and Duval Delegation Chair Stan Jordan has tried unsuccessfully to gain City Council approval of a bill that would alter the way the City’s General Counsel is appointed. Tuesday night, City Council rejected the bill for the third time by approving a resolution that, in essence, is the Council’s formal rejection of the bill. Jordan said he plans to pursue the bill during the Jan. 30 meeting of the full Delegation, and he expects the group to support his resolution.
“It could have passed last year and it was defeated again this year,” said Jordan. “I was hoping there was a chance we could work something out, but the City Council has not responded in a very effective manner.”
The bill doesn’t require Council approval, but Jordan has chosen to pursue it through Council approval as a means of courtesy. Now, he has no choice but to seek the state legislature’s approval.
Jordan’s bill addresses the City position of General Counsel and how that job is filled. Since consolidation, the City’s top lawyer has been appointed by the mayor, a method that has created the impression the General Counsel is the “mayor’s lawyer” and not someone appointed to serve the entire City government, especially the city’s five constitutional officers. Those officers include the sheriff, clerk of court, tax collector, supervisor of elections and property appraiser.
Under the guidelines set forth by Jordan’s bill, the next General Counsel — Jordan stressed his bill does not affect current General Counsel Rick Mullaney or Mayor John Peyton unless Mullaney steps down — would be selected by a majority of five votes. The mayor would have two votes, while the City Council president, Duval County School Board chair and the constitutional officers as a group would each have one vote.
Jordan said he has met with Peyton and Mullaney about the issues and left with the impression the change would erode the “strong mayor concept.” Jordan stressed he wasn’t referring to Peyton, but rather the office of mayor.
“If the mayor has two votes and needs just three and he can’t get one more, is he a strong mayor?” said Jordan.
Tax Collector Mike Hogan is a strong proponent of Jordan’s bill. Hogan sent the Council an e-mail Tuesday explaining the bill and its advantages over the current system. Aside from eliminating the perception the General Counsel is the “mayor’s lawyer,” Hogan stressed two other points.
He said the change would “enable all the elected ‘stakeholders’ in our consolidated government to have a meaningful part in the selection of this government’s lawyer” and “ensure the necessary and absolute independence of that office. This bill is not an indictment of this or any past mayor; or this or any past General Counsel. The bill has never been about personalities. It’s as simple as the three points stated above.”
The new bill would also create a special review committee of local lawyers, who would make a recommendation to the selection committee. The mayor would have two attorney selections for the review committee and two votes on the selection committee.
“I look for us to pass this out of the Delegation,” said Jordan. “We had the votes (on the Delegation) to pass last time. It’s an idea that’s fair and one whose time has come.”
If the bill doesn’t pass the state Legislature, Jordan said he’s worried other alternatives will be pursued. He said many times during his 16 years as a member of the School Board, there was often talk of the board needing its own attorney. That thought process could, he said, become popular with the city’s five constitutional officers.
“That is a conceptual possibility, but not one I support,” he said. “This is a better approach.”