x
Breaking News
More () »

Jacksonville General Counsel answers legal questions on confederate monument removal

Jacksonville City Council members asked questions about the legal memorandum written by the General Counsel.

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Jacksonville City Council members held a workshop Thursday morning to discuss the legal opinion written by the city's General Counsel on the mayor's authority to remove the confederate monument from Springfield Park back in December.

General Counsel Michael Fackler answered questions and clarified concerns raised by city council members. They questioned why Fackler's initial legal memorandum written right after the monument was removed was different from the version he gave city council before the Rules Committee meeting on Jan. 16th. 

"There was a mistake made on my part by not incorporating my team that had the expertise and the knowledge of how the process works," Fackler said.

The legal memo outlined his opinion and reasoning for why Mayor Donna Deegan had the authority to remove the monument using private money. City Council members felt as though the changes between the initial draft of the opinion and the one provided to council last week were the result of political pressure from the mayor's office.

Fackler said he was not told by anyone in the mayor's office to change his opinion. He while the advice remained the same, he should have been more thorough when researching and compiling supporting information.

"The second opinion is consistent with the code. It's consistent. And so the advice I gave was correct for the wrong reason," Fackler said.

In a statement, Deegan also denied claims of influencing Fackler's opinion.

"At no time before or after the initial opinion was provided did I ever pressure the General Counsel in any way. I wish I could say the same for some council members," Mayor Deegan said.

Still, some council members said there had been a breach of trust.

City Council President Ron Salem also raised concerns about the safety of the community when the monument was removed. Salem invited Jacksonville Sheriff T.K. Waters to speak. Sheriff Waters said he was not aware the removal was happening. According to Salem, there was security on Dec. 27th provided by the company First Coast Security. The construction company contracted to remove the monument also hired one JSO officer for a "park project." Sheriff Waters said he would have provided more protection.

"Had I known what was going to take place, first I would have made sure everything was in order and then made sure we would have had enough considering the volatile nature of what was happening, make sure we have enough because you’re really putting a young police officer there by himself and you’re really putting him in a risky position,” Waters explained.

Karen Bowling, the chief administrative officer for the mayor's office, said they did not tell the sheriff because they knew officers were busy and they had their own security. Deegan also responded and said they had "had adequate private security on site during the removal process and there were no incidents." Bowling said in hindsight, Sheriff Waters should have been informed.

There was also a question about whether this monument removal was actually performed at no-cost to the city. First Coast Security is contracted with the city to provide security at a number of facilities across Jacksonville. Usually there is one security guard at Springfield Park; however, on the 27th, there were six. Kim Taylor, the city council auditor, said the city was charged $902 for the extra security guards. Bowling said the city should be able to be reimbursed for the additional cost.

After the meeting,  Salem said he was satisfied with the answers he received, but it will take work for Fackler to regain their trust. He said he is even considering seeking outside legal counsel for the city council. As for what is next, he said he will need to consult his colleagues about how to move forward from this.

“Clearly, he's the general counsel, and I want to give him an opportunity to repair that relationship. I am not in favor of putting the monuments back up, but the process was a bad process that we went through. And my bill will prevent this from happening again. He's offered to make some changes to it. So I think that's the first step," Salem said.

Deegan continues to stand by her decision to remove the monument.

"I asked if there was anything that would impede my executive authority using private dollars to remove the Confederate monument. The General Counsel gave me an opinion that I did have the authority, so we moved forward. That conclusion remains the same and it is the binding opinion," Deegan said.

Before You Leave, Check This Out