Mayor question advances in St. Augustine. (SAR)

Is The Gang of Four now only three? Commissioner Nancy Sikes-Kline voted with Mayor Tracy Upchurch against this outrage, perpetrated by Commissioners JOHN OTHA VALDES, LENNNA SOPHIA AMARU FREEMAN and a reluctant ROZNNE HORVATH. 

I responded to the 3-2 Commission vote by enlisting the U.S. Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, Voting Section, to investigate and asked it to investigate and be prepared to file federal court litigation under the Fifteenth Amendment and Voting Rights Act.









Mayor question advances in St. Augustine
By Sheldon Gardner
Posted Oct 29, 2019 at 4:59 PM
St. Augustine Record

St. Augustine commissioners voted to create an ordinance that would put a question about the mayor’s selection on a ballot.

The ballot would ask city residents whether they want the mayor’s seat to be a regular Commission seat. In that case, commissioners would choose the mayor among their own ranks every two years.

As it stands, residents elect a mayor every two years.

The mayor controls Commission meetings and is the ceremonial face of the city but doesn’t have any more voting power than other commissioners. The city manager handles the city’s daily operations and is responsible for implementing policies set by the Commission.

On Monday, commissioners voted 3-2 to have the city attorney bring back the ordinance on first reading in November, with Mayor Tracy Upchurch and Commissioner Nancy Sikes-Kline dissenting.

The ordinance needs two readings and positive votes to be successful.

If the ordinance is adopted, the plan is to have the question go on the presidential preference election ballot in March, but the August primary is a backup if there’not a Republican presidential primary.

Commissioners supported having the question on a ballot in an election that will get the most turnout aside from the general election. Concerns have been raised about the general election ballot being crowded with other items.

The mayor issue came up as part of the city’s charter review. In addition to clarifying and updating other parts of the charter, the Commission is looking at more substantial issues.


That includes the mayor’s election and residency requirements for commissioners.

The Commission voted 5-0 on Monday to move to second reading an ordinance that would put another question on the ballot: whether commissioners should have to be city residents for at least a year before qualifying for election.

Commissioner John Valdes in April raised the issue of whether to change how the city handles the mayor position.

He said at the time that the city’s current method is confusing for newcomers who are familiar with cities where mayors have more power, and that “sometimes having a mayor that puts on the cloak of a big-city mayor causes turbulence that wouldn’t necessarily be there.”

Valdes made similar comments on Monday.

He supported having the mayor’s role rotate among commissioners based on seniority. But he also raised concerns about the road ahead.

“Also, it also troubles me putting it on the ballot because it will turn into a huge item with a lot of misinformation flying around and end up being divisive, probably,” he said.


Vice Mayor Leanna Freeman said the role of the mayor is a figurehead position, so the outcome of the referendum wouldn’t mean a substantive change for the city.

She said she’s heard from people who support keeping things the way they are and people who support changing things, and she said she supports letting voters make the decision.

Commissioner Roxanne Horvath said there is confusion among residents about the mayor’s role.

Sikes-Kline supported putting away the issue, and she said she’s heard from people who like things the way they are.

“Most of the time, it’s worked pretty well for us,” she said.

Upchurch said people already decided the issue in the 1980s after the Commission “unilaterally changed the mayor.”

“That’s how we got here, when Ramelle Petroglou, our first woman mayor, was removed late at night in a Commission meeting. That was the event that caused us to go to an elected mayor,” he said.

He said he thought the city should remove the item from consideration and move on.

“I don’t know what problem we’re trying to fix,” he said. “I’m unaware of ... sure, have there been tumultuous times under an elected mayor? Absolutely. Have there been tumultuous times under appointed mayors? Absolutely. Will there be in the future? Of course there will be.”