JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Tuesday night, Jacksonville city council passed a bill giving constitutional officers say in lawsuit settlements.
The bill would give Jacksonville Sheriff T.K. Waters a seat at the table, but not the final say.
“The council president is elected not only by the citizens of Jacksonville, but also by this body. So, it's the right individual to be the tiebreaker in the situation," Jacksonville city council member, Nick Howland, who voted for the bill said.
The city council president would act as the tiebreaking vote if the constitutional officer and risk management officer disagree.
The sheriff, clerk of court, property appraiser, tax collector and supervisor of elections are all constitutional officers.
“It gives him a voice of voice that he deserves to represent and protect those his colleagues," City Councilmember Michael Boylan, who voted for the bill, said.
"I'm looking at this from all of our constitutional officers, at some point in time, each one of them is going to have to face the situation, and they need the ability to do what they're elected to do, was supposed to do," city councilmember, Mike Gay, who voted for the bill said.
The bill was proposed after Sheriff T.K. Waters' displeasure over the city settling a recent lawsuit against one of its officers for $200,000.
In 2019, during a traffic stop, Florida A&M student, Jamee Johnson, was shot and killed by a JSO officer.
The state attorney’s office found the officer’s action were justified.
Waters said he was disappointed when he learned the city settled in November 2023.
“In his mind, thinking as a law enforcement officer. There was no wrongdoing, there was no prosecution. But, yet a check with six zeros was written to a person that sued,” First Coast News crime and safety expert, Ken Jefferson, said.
Jefferson thinks the Sheriff should have a say, but added risk is involved. “There's no such thing as a slam dunk on either side. So, you take your chances and trials may become expensive."
The financial ramifications were a concern for city council member, Rahman Johnson.
“This bill was about fiscal responsibility," Johnson, who voted against the bill, said.
Johnson created an amendment that would require a consensus among the office of general council, risk management officer, constitutional officer and the city's chief financial officer.
But it was voted down.
“I have a firm belief that no one individual should be tasked or able to put the city in a financial bind," Johnson said.
While he is against the bill, Johnson wanted to make it clear he isn't against the police. “I'm not anti-police....I believe that we have a responsibility ourselves as members of the council to do the right thing when it comes to people's money."
JSO did not respond to First Coast News' request for comment.
The Mayor's office voiced its concern about the bill as it made its way through committee and at Tuesday night's final vote.
It also said its concerned about employees who may have to pay settlement costs if they lose a lawsuit.