Mayor Donna Deegan: 'Political retribution and gamesmanship' behind City Council criticism

Mayor Donna Deegan fired back at criticism from City Council members by saying they are "splitting hairs for political retribution and gamesmanship" in taking political cheap shots at the legal advice and contract award used for removing two statues from the Confederate monument in Springfield Park.

"If some City Council members want to continue litigating the Civil War for their perceived political gain, that is their choice," Deegan said in a statement Tuesday. "My administration will continue moving forward from this unnecessary distraction and keep delivering on policies and projects that are good for our city."

Deegan's criticism came as City Council will have a special meeting Thursday to question General Counsel Michael Fackler about his legal opinion that there was no need for the Jacksonville Historic Preservation Committee to issue a certificate of appropriateness for removing the statutes. The "Tribute to the Women of the Southern Confederacy" monument, installed in 1915, is in the Springfield Historic District.

Nate Monroe: Good riddance to Jacksonville's last major confederate monument

Legal opinion: City's legal office had vigorous debate on historic issues for Confederate monument

Chamber's view: Time to 'look ahead' after removal of Confederate statues

City Council President Ron Salem said council members have an obligation to examine the process used by Deegan.

"The City Council was elected and swore oaths to protect and defend the laws of our city, as did the mayor," Salem said. "We will continue to uphold that oath, and the public attacks of Mayor Deegan will not stop that."

The city's public affairs office put out a news release Tuesday that said some City Council members have shown "selective outrage" when it involves Deegan's decision to remove the statues.

The news release said the most recent example is a "manufactured controversy surrounding an administrative technicality" for the city's administrative award of a contract to Acon Construction for taking down and hauling away two bronze statues from the Confederate monument.

The removal happened on Dec. 27 but the Public Works Department did not submit a formal request until a week later to the Procurement Division for an administrative award to Acon. The city's Procurement Division staff made the administrative award on Jan. 3 by retroactively applying the date.

Procurement Division Chief Dustin Freeman then determined the Jan. 3 award was "null and void" and he recommended to Deegan in a Jan. 16 memo that she should cure the error by authorizing a contract with Acon, which happened on Jan. 17.

Privately raised money paid the $187,000 cost of the Acon contract. The city's award of the work did not involve any city money.

The city's news release said it's not the first time that a contract cure has happened. Over the past four fiscal years, the city has cured 32 "improper purchases" with 26 of those cures happening during the administration of Mayor Lenny Curry, the release said. The city has handled about 49,000 purchase orders during that time frame.

News release charges 'clear double standard' by City Council

The news release called it a "clear double standard" for City Council members to apply scrutiny of contract awards during the Deegan administration in a way council members didn't while Curry was mayor.

"The selective outrage of some council members only comes when it involves removing a monument that glorified the Confederacy and which was erected in the Jim Crow era to intimidate Black citizens," the news release said.

Salem, who leveled criticism last week about the process for the award to Acon, noted that when the removal of the statues happened on Dec. 27, a city news release quoted Fackler saying the Office of General Counsel "worked closely" with the procurement, public works and parks departments to ensure the work was done in compliance with the city's code for "how we contract for and complete these services."

"So he is saying it was all buttoned up, and if you're going to come out with a statement like that, you have an obligation to make sure it's all buttoned up," Salem said.

The meeting scheduled for Thursday will bring Fackler before City Council for another round of questioning about his legal opinion on the statue removals. The formulation of the opinion was debated this month within the Office of General Counsel, which is the law firm for the entire consolidated city government, according to emails obtained by the Florida Times-Union through a public records request.

Fackler will be joined by several other Office of General attorneys including Mary Staffopoulos, Craig Feiser, Lawsikia Hodges, John Sawyer and Jason Teal to answer questions, according to the meeting notice.

Teal wrote a legal summary in June 2020 that analyzed the city's requirements for removing monuments and markers related to the Civil War. Teal concluded the "Tribute to the Women of the Southern Confederacy" monument's location in the Springfield Historic District gave it special protections that would require a certificate of appropriateness from the Jacksonville Historic Preservation Commission.

Teal took the same stance in a July 2023 draft legal memo. Fackler took the opposite position in a December draft memo that determined the monument isn't a contributing structure to the historic district so Deegan didn't need to obtain a certificate from the historic preservation commission.

After Salem asked for a formal legal opinion from Fackler, attorneys in the Office of General Counsel worked again through the legal issues. Teal wrote an email to other attorneys saying he thinks the city must get a certificate of appropriateness.

The legal opinion issued by Fackler on Jan. 16 says the city has treated the monument as a contributing structure to the historic district, which is the interpretation that Teal advocated.

However, Fackler said that status does not require a certificate from the preservation commission for every change to the monument, but only for the kind of changes that were specifically listed in a legislative exhibit when the city created the Springfield Historic District in the early 1990s. Fackler said removing the statutes isn't one of the actions covered by that legislative exhibit.

Deegan said Fackler is the legal authority for the city's consolidated government.

"I will not stand by and watch the City Council continue to tarnish the reputation of the honest and experienced general counsel that we all share," Deegan said. "Let me be clear: advice from today's Office of General Counsel is the only opinion that matters."

She said the Office of General Counsel "is completely aligned" around the opinion Fackler put out last week. While City Council members have questioned whether Fackler tailored his legal advice to fit what Deegan wanted to do, Deegan said City Council members have been looking for alternative legal views.

Deegan said she never discussed Confederate monuments with Fackler during the process to select him for the general counsel post.

"Not once did we direct the general counsel to reach a specific outcome or discuss Confederate monuments during the selection process," she said. "What did happen is council members calling past general counsels to get the answer that they wanted."

Salem said his goal is for the session from 10 a.m. to noon Thursday with Fackler at City Hall to get all the answers to council member's questions.

"If we feel like we're not getting the full story, we could set up a special investigative committee and put people under oath," he said. "But I'm hopeful that Thursday will end this."

This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: Jacksonville Confederate statue removal war of words continues