CITY MANAGER GEORGE GRETSAS SANDBAGGED

January 12, 2010 - On November 17^th, the City of Fort Lauderdale underwent a sea change. Despite waves of support by a broad spectrum of city residents, City Manager George Gretsas experienced what Commissioner Bobby DuBose called a “public lynching”, after which he was placed on “hold” by the Fort Lauderdale City Commission. The event was the last Act in an unsettling blend of elements from C-SPAN, “What’s my Line” and “The Gong Show”.

FLOYD JOHNSON

City Manager George Gretsas nursed the City of Fort Lauderdale back to solvency after 5 years of gross mismanagement transformed a city with an $18.3 billion tax base into a municipal basket case in 2003. After pinning the budget disaster on City Manager Floyd Johnson, the City Commission awoke to the realization that they were next in line for ambient culpability. When it was discovered that Fort Lauderdale would run out of money before the end of the 2003 budget year, interim City Manager Alan Silva (Johnson’s temporary replacement) placed city government on a strict fiscal regimen, insisting that Commissioners and department heads must “learn to live within their means.”

Although Silva deciphered how the books were cooked and stopped the bleeding, George Gretsas was hired to direct the City’s recovery and, more importantly, change a municipal culture that marginalized accountability and valued longevity over merit. Although given 5 years to hit every major benchmark reflecting fiscal health (firewalled Reserves, good Bond Rating, ample Insurance Fund surplus, in-balance budgets, controlled overtime), he only needed 3. He terminated the practice of pandering to individual commissioners or department heads operating autonomous fiefdoms. Instead, he facilitated policies voted favorably by the City Commission “en banc”. He compiled a talented management team and built answerability into a flexible operational hierarchy.

CITY COMMISSIONER CHARLOTTE RODSTROM

The stage was set shortly before the March 10, 2009 Municipal elections by incumbent District 2 Commissioner Charlotte Rodstrom, former Police Chief Bruce Roberts and Statehouse Representative Jack Seiler - all City Commission Candidates. Faithful to the “Commissioner No” political caricature she fashioned following her entry into City government, Charlotte Rodstrom revitalized her obsession with eliminating City Manager George Gretsas. The District 2 Commissioner spent the prior three years blaming Gretsas for a myriad of nefarious actions, ranging from depressing employee morale to precipitating the recession. Commenting on Commissioner Rodstrom’s repeated attempts to fault Gretsas for fiscal problems fostered by the economic downturn, the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board concluded that Commissioner Rodstrom’s criticism “unfairly puts much of the blame on his (Gretsas’) shoulders.”

FORMER POLICE CHIEF NOW COMMISSIONER ROBERTS

Following a tough contract negotiation between the City and Police Union officials, Police Chief Bruce Roberts angrily resigned. In a bitter letter that explained his motivation, he accused the City Manager of micromanagement, intimidation, chilling morale, dismantling the Police Department and threatening public safety. While venting months of bottled anger, his parting shot framed the public nature of his accusations as prompted by concerns for “the safety of the community.”

FORMER COMMISSIONER CHRISTINE TEEL

In short order, he announced his intention to run against Commissioner Christine Teel for the District One Commission seat. Roberts had vitiated politics throughout his decades in Law Enforcement, expounding at dozens of local community meetings that his lack of political ambition enhanced the objectivity of his views on public safety. City residents that followed the adversarial events leading to the Chief’s resignation connected the dots and prepared for an acrimonious political campaign fueled by revenge. Local political reporters envisioned a prospective anti-Gretsas alliance with Commissioner Rodstrom. Surprised by his unexpected candidacy, District 1 residents from the Galt Mile neighborhood opined that Roberts sought to become Gretsas’ boss, dispense with the City Manager and install a replacement more amenable to loosening the purse strings and provide Police union officials a seat at the policy table.

As Chief, Roberts had a spotty relationship with police union officials who intermittently subjected him to the stick and the carrot. After abruptly quitting the force and announcing his City Commission candidacy, the mercurial union leadership suddenly steeped him with unqualified support. Union President Jack Lokeinsky and union attorney George Tucker (and wife Phyllis) punctuated their endorsement with September 7, 2008 contributions to Roberts’ campaign. Tendered one day after the police contract was finalized; Roberts’ rancorous letter of resignation clarified his sympathies with elements of the union’s agenda.

When the recession sliced Police and Fire Pension Fund values from $491 million on January 1, 2008 to $378 million on November 30, 2008, taxpayers faced making up the $113 million in market losses. The Mayor and City Commissioners prompted the City Manager to revisit the unsustainable pension formula as applied to new employee contracts. While most parties left any animosity from the complex and contentious bargaining sessions at the negotiating table, police union officials instead launched a post-negotiation political agenda to eliminate their negotiating adversary, a tactic with which they enjoyed some familiarity.

LT. AL LEWERS JR.

At Town Meetings convened by the local NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) in 2006, more than 80 Fort Lauderdale residents testified about personal experiences with racial profiling and police misconduct. Police Chief Bruce Roberts acted appropriately, endorsing an email to officers sent by the coordinator of FLPD’s Recruiting, Background Investigations and Training Unit Lt. Alfred Lewers Jr., encouraging officers to join the NAACP as a means of increasing understanding and easing tensions.

BROWARD NAACP PRESIDENT MARSHA ELLISON

In a response that fueled mass apoplexy in the civil rights community, FOP president Jack Lokeinsky sent another memo to membership outlining a strategy to depose the local NAACP President, Marsha Ellison. Appending Lewers’ positive memo, Lokeinsky wrote, “The FOP is tired of the current position of the President of the Broward Branch of the NAACP. In an effort to vote out the President and her views of the police, I support the membership drive. A one-year membership allows you to make the change and get rid of this us against them attitude.”

FLORIDA NAACP PRES ADORA OBI NWEZE

Shocked by Lokeinsky’s “throwback to Jim Crow” when faced with local examples of racial profiling, discrimination and police misconduct, Florida’s statewide NAACP president Adora Obi Nweze convened a press conference outside Fort Lauderdale Police Headquarters and warned “The NAACP’s national headquarters will scrutinize all new membership applications in Florida to counter attempts by the Fort Lauderdale Fraternal Order of Police to join the civil rights group and vote local president Marsha Ellison out of office. The national office will not accept the memberships of anyone who doesn’t support the organization.”

MAJOR ANTHONY WILLIAMS

Caught in the middle, President Anthony Williams of the 50-member Fort Lauderdale Black Police Association said “This by no means reflects the thoughts of the Fort Lauderdale Police Department. I would like to see it resolved and both parties come to the table to discuss solutions.”

ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER DAVID HÉBERT

While still negotiating with the City Manager, police union officials organized a no-confidence vote and called for his firing or resignation along with Assistant City Manager David Hébert. After stating “I’m asking that the city commission terminate both managers and restore our police department to its once-premier status,” Lokeinsky complained that Gretsas hadn’t treated him with respect.

CITY AUDITOR JOHN HERBST

Since pensions are often publicly faulted for the fiscal collapse of corporations and communities, they’ve earned a bad rap. When properly constructed, pensions are neither a threat to solvency nor unsustainable. They are, in fact, a critically important component of any benefit package. Opining that the formulas should be based on actuarial realities and the economic environment, City Auditor John Herbst explained that formula variables are negotiable. By subjecting them to political circus antics, the negotiating parties inflame public fears that interfere with a process that would otherwise balance the needs of employees with those of taxpayers. Sun-Sentinel Broward correspondent Michael Mayo exclaimed “The pension issue is just going to get bigger in the future. The unions have to wake up and grow up. The solution is not as simple as sliming the messengers.”

FORMER CITY MANAGER GEORGE HANBURY

Gretsas is not the first City Manager targeted by the police union leadership. When former Fort Lauderdale City Manager George Hanbury sought to similarly soften pension impact during the 1990 recession, the police union commissioned an airplane to fly over a Dolphins game in Joe Robbie Stadium - pulling a banner that read “Save Fort Lauderdale, Fire George Hanbury”. Hanbury described how “the unions that gave up lucrative contract benefits ultimately made them back four or five years later when things improved.”

When interim City Manager Alan Silva was holding the City together with crazy glue in 2004, 75 percent of the city’s $215 million annual budget was devoted to salaries, health care, and pensions. Investigating dozens of options to therein harvest savings, Silva considered outsourcing services. The Police union - long treated in City Hall as visiting royalty - went for the jugular. Waving an anti-gay placard caricaturing Silva, they staged protests at City Hall attacking Silva and blocked his subsequent attempts to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement. Although he worked “pro bono” for ten months, instead of receiving recognition for first discovering and then averting a potential fiscal disaster, Silva was politically dismembered overnight. “He was run out of town with torches,” lamented then Mayor Naugle.

BRUCE ROBERTS AT GALT MILE SECURITY PATROL KICKOFF

On the Galt Mile, Roberts’ decision to run elicited mixed emotions. In his favor, Roberts’ tenure as Police Chief was marked by integrity. While attending GMCA Advisory Board meetings over the years, Roberts was responsive to neighborhood concerns. He initiated the A1A Traffic & Noise Control program to stop unrestrained motorcycle and drag racing between Commercial Boulevard and Oakland Park Boulevard. He also supported the Galt Mile Security Patrol, acknowledging that it was the only way to address the “Quality of Life” crimes that plagued the neighborhood for decades. To clarify why tax dollars couldn’t initially fund the patrol, Roberts told the Advisory Board that Law Enforcement resources in every major municipality are of necessity allocated to areas afflicted by the highest crime rates and the most serious Part 1 crimes. While attending the June 2007 Security Patrol kickoff event at Galt Ocean Club, Roberts said “The Security Patrol will finally address the area’s specific security needs. Staffing the patrol with Fort Lauderdale officers will make it professional and effective.”

On the other hand, Roberts’ campaign was burdened by the widespread belief that his candidacy was primarily a vehicle for firing the City Manager and assisting the Police union leadership achieve their well-publicized financial objectives (which required a more “pliant” City Manager). A savvy politician, Roberts sought to dispel constituent concerns that he was a “one trick pony” whose elective goals end with replacing the City Manager and delivering “access” to political allies and supporters unrelated to his voting constituency.

JOHN AND CHARLOTTE RODSTROM

As anticipated, Charlotte Rodstrom supported Commissioner Bruce Roberts’ successful candidacy against Christine Teel, expecting his antipathy for Gretsas to take precedence over any campaign spin to constituents that he would “be their voice in City Hall.” When husband John Rodstrom was asked by former Sun Sentinel political writer Buddy Nevins to comment on the race, the Broward Commissioner answered, “I think Teel’s finished.” When Nevins asked about claims that he was pressuring lobbyists to donate to Roberts’ campaign, Rodstrom said, “I’m not going to comment on that. Charlotte is not involved in any way. She wants to fire City Manager George Gretsas and so does Roberts.”

GMCA ADVISORY BOARD

At District 1 and citywide candidate forums, when Roberts was asked if he intended to fire the City Manager if elected, his response softened as the campaign progressed. Whereas he initially equivocated, as he realized that the question actually probed his central motivation for running, his answer became more conciliatory. He told the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board that he could work with Gretsas under the condition that he “changes his management style.” Roberts found himself expending significant political capital denying that his candidacy was either prompted by personal retribution or part of the Police union agenda of blowing off Gretsas. When similarly queried by association representatives at a GMCA Advisory Board meeting, Roberts promised that a dispassionate evaluation of Gretsas would be based solely on his actions “after the March elections” and exclusive of his pre-election “differences” with the City Manager.

GALT MILE CANDIDATES FORUM

As Election Day approached, the suspicions that dogged his campaign abated as Roberts pounded home a promise to act as the voice of his District 1 constituency while denying campaign allegations that his candidacy was devised to enhance the influence of Police union officials on public policy via the removal of their contract benefits negotiating nemesis - the City Manager. While still unprepared to cast their votes for Roberts, many Galt Mile residents decided that if he was telling the truth, it was no longer necessary to actively protect the Commission seat from a surreptitious agenda that the former Police Chief roundly refuted. With the Mayoral seat locked up by Jack Seiler during the February 10^th primary and the hot-button issue surrounding the District 1 Commission seat defused by Robert’s promises, a majority of Galt Mile residents saw little reason to leave their living rooms and participate in the March 10^th municipal election.

The vote became a credibility poll for Roberts on the Galt Mile, with those who believed his campaign promises staying home and those who distrusted him coming to the polls. On Election Day, unconcerned Galt Mile residents stayed home in droves. While 70% of the local voters opted for Teel, only 10% of the electorate voted, defaulting a 69-vote squeaker to Roberts.

MARTY AND SHELLY GLAZER

On March 31^st, newly elected Roberts met with GMCA officials to discuss the prerequisites for a Galt Mile Master Plan. Following the meeting, Roberts again confirmed that his relationship with the City Manager would depend on the substance of his contributions and his ability to adapt to the revamped Commission’s vision for the city. To further defuse any residual post-election suspicion, Roberts repeated his promises at the April 16, 2009 GMCA Advisory Board Meeting. Southpoint President Marty Glazer asked Commissioner Roberts if he intended to fire Gretsas. Roberts told him that he holds no animosity towards the City Manager and will base his decision on Gretsas’ post-election effectiveness.

CITY COMMISSION VOTES TO PASS BUDGET

At several Presidents Council meetings before the summer, Roberts reiterated his intention to judge the City Manager on his work product after the election. When Gretsas released the City budget in July, the Mayor and every Commissioner except “Commissioner No” Rodstrom extolled the City Manager for his work on the budget. At the September 17^th Advisory Board meeting, Vice Mayor Roberts discussed the five consensus priorities that the City Commission directed the City Manager to incorporate into the budget, including no property tax or Fire Assessment Fee increase, no layoffs, no service reductions and maintenance of adequate reserves. When GMCA President Pio Ieraci asked the Vice Mayor if he was pleased with the Budget submitted by the City Manager, Roberts opined that the City Manager did a good job.

During the October 15^th Advisory Board meeting, after the Vice Mayor updated Board Members about Downtown Development Authority Director Chris Wren’s search for a new Sun Trolley Executive Director, Ieraci asked Roberts how George Gretsas was adapting to the new commission. Roberts answered that he was doing well.

Originally hired for three years in 2004 and renewed in 2007, Gretsas’ contract was up for renewal again in 2010. As per clause 3-E in his employment agreement, unless the Commission voted against renewing his contract by September 30^th, ten months before the July 31, 2010 expiration date, it would renew automatically. Under agreement with Mayor Seiler, the deadline was postponed until the November 3^rd Commission meeting. When Commissioner Bobby DuBose’ mother suddenly passed away, the contract consideration was delayed for another two weeks.

GMCA DIRECTOR KEVIN SONGER

The November 17^th meeting was crammed with City residents. After filling the Commission Meeting room to capacity, the crowd of about 300 residents also occupied the stairwell, the lobby and the entryway while another 100 spread to the adjacent lawn (including GMCA Director. St. Lawrence Gallery proprietor and Galt Towers resident Kevin Songer). Residents crowded around the ground floor windows that surround the meeting room, seeking to view the proceedings. 59 attendees signed up to address the Commission at the meeting. After the meeting started, many groups of tardy hopefuls decided against joining the phalanx of viewers already staked out on the lawn and did an about face.

GROUND FLOOR WINDOWS WERE SURROUNDED AT CITY HALL

Once the agenda item was undertaken at 6:30 PM, it soon became evident that the crowd overwhelmingly favored renewing the City Manager’s contract. People from every district applauded Gretsas for his work ethic, his honesty, his fiscal skill and his passionate commitment to the City. Priests, a Bishop and a Rabbi all complimented Gretsas for his fairness, moral fiber and his refusal to compromise on ethical issues. Representatives of every minority applauded the diversity Gretsas brought to City staff. Residents from Lauderdale Manors, Northwest Fort Lauderdale, every beach district (including the Galt Mile), Coral Ridge, South Middle River, Lauderhill, Victoria Park, The Landings, Harbordale, Bal Harbour, Riverland, Imperial Point, Wilton Manors, Tarpon River, Melrose Manors, Lauderdale Beach, Sailboat Bend, Central Beach, Sunset, Poinsettia Heights and other neighborhoods each expressed how Gretsas improved life in their community, with much of the testimony framed as personal experience.

PARKING CHIEF JOHN HOELZLE "MORALE HAS NEVER BEEN BETTER"

With one exception, the business community steeped Gretsas with praise, as represented by members of the Broward Alliance, the Broward Workshop and the Downtown Development Authority. Given the challenges of the current economic maelstrom, they warned against “changing captains in the midst of a storm.” Former City Commissioners John Aurelius and Dean Trantalis agreed, characterizing those opposing Gretsas as motivated by politics and revenge instead of what’s best for the City’s residents. They were joined by former city parking chief John Hoelzle, who described employee morale as “the best I’ve ever seen.” Altogether, 50 speakers fervidly supported retaining the City Manager and 9 opposed renewing his contract.

FOP PRESIDENT JACK LOKEINSKY

Of those 9, several belonged to a contingent led by Police union President (and city police sergeant) Jack Lokeinsky. As expected, Lokeinsky warned the Commission on October 12^th that his animosity for Gretsas precluded any possibility of a “working relationship,” presumably a threat to cripple contract negotiations. One of Bruce Roberts’ Former Assistant Police Chiefs, Steve Robitaille (although he doesn’t live in Fort Lauderdale), felt compelled to attack Gretsas for attempting to drive the Organization of American States general assembly meeting from the city in 2005. Like most members of the Police union group, he repeated that “Gretsas manages by threat, intimidation and retaliation.” Other anti-Gretsas speakers included a disgruntled political activist and a cigar store owner that accused Gretsas of “taking money out of my children’s mouth,” by insisting he move some “Indian statue” from the sidewalk in front of his shop.

COMMISSIONER CHARLOTTE RODSTROM -EMPTY CHARGE

Following what Mayor Seiler, the Sun-Sentinel and several commenting residents characterized as a 3-hour “love-fest”, the Commission considered Gretsas’ contract. The Mayor vested each Commissioner with several opportunities to issue comments, starting with Commissioner Charlotte Rodstrom. Waving a handful of documents, Rodstrom exclaimed that Gretsas signed 18 employment contracts and “he could go ahead and fire these 18 people, and we as a city are crippled by the amount of severance packages that we’re going to have to pay for them. ... It’s wrong.” In fact, with the exception of Business Enterprise Director Cate McCaffrey’s June 25, 2009 agreement, all the other 2-year contracts were signed between December 24, 2007 and January 5, 2009 - before the new Commissioners were even elected. Nevertheless, Rodstrom painted this as economic blackmail and called it “despicable”. She neglected to mention that executing employment contracts with top management personnel - who lack any civil service or union protection - is part and parcel of the City Manager’s responsibilities, which he had performed several times during his tenure, as did his predecessors. The Sun-Sentinel’s Brittany Wallman pointed out that Bruce Roberts was similarly protected while serving as Police Chief. After reviewing the actual contracts, Wallman reported that Rodstrom’s “crippling” severance deals for top management amounted to 90 days salary and benefits - not exactly a “smoking gun”.

INTERIM CITY MANAGER ALAN SILVA

Next, District 1 Commissioner and Vice Mayor Bruce Roberts was recognized. Hours earlier, when GMCA President Pio Ieraci addressed the panel, he exhorted Commissioner Roberts to “Keep a promise made to the Galt Mile to rate George Gretsas on his performance, not on issues long gone.” After stating, “Pio, I intend to keep my promise,” Roberts launched into a tirade against Gretsas. He opened with an admission that he was really upset. Referring to the improvements ascribed to Gretsas, Roberts blasted, “You can have all these good things that happen, but how you get there, to me, is more important,” claiming that staff was “verbally abused and mistreated brutally and incorrectly.” Roberts complained that the City was being managed “from the top down” instead of allowing employees doing the work to decide what was needed and “feeding it up.” Roberts insisted that Gretsas didn’t guide the City’s financial recovery, crediting temporary interim City Manager Alan Silva with that achievement. He said, “It was mentioned before that the City Manager is the one who came in and saved us all this money. That’s not what happened, people. That’s not what happened. Was he astute enough in how to use it and doing some of the right things? Well of course! You, you, you (pointing to audience members), me and anybody else up here could have done the same darned thing!” He then repeated Robitaille’s allegation that Gretsas tried to drive out the Organization of American States in 2005.

IN-CAR POLICE VIDEO CAMERA

Referring to Neighborhood Development Criteria Revision - a series of neighborhood meetings designed to elicit local input for community development - Roberts said “We’ve had big town hall meetings on what’s going to be done with that. We’re supposed to have another big town hall meeting in November. We’re already passed November. [Actually, the date was only November 17^th – editor] We didn’t get there. And that’s because it may not meet the certain criteria, or what the Manager wants to see. It’s not what the people want to see and what the Commission wants to see. It’s not being done in the openness.” After stating that Mayor Seiler learned that a $400,000 technology grant could be used for reasons other than installing cameras in police cruisers, Roberts turned to Gretsas and said “Where's the transparency? Where’s the honesty in that? And I subscribe to the integrity issues in that, too.”

SOUTHSIDE SCHOOL PRESERVATION

Roberts said “Southside School is another example. That started out as a $3 million renovation. I support historic renovation, but what’s supposed to be 2 to 3 million dollars is now, in my understanding, ... 9 to 10 million dollars. That’s way over budget. Where are we going with that type of direction? We should be discussing that all the time. ... We as a Commission shouldn’t have to bring up these issues and go hunting for these problems. They should be brought to our attention and we should be able to deal with them in the open and in the public and in the sunshine.”

BRUCE ROBERTS ATTACKS GRETSAS

Roberts leveled a litany of additional attacks on Gretsas. In each case, Roberts described bits and pieces of some event or statement followed by an accusation intimating a lack of candor. He characterized Gretsas’ “Goals and Objectives” presentations as inaccurately portraying the City’s pension dilemma. Roberts disparaged the City Manager for using a retired Assistant Police Chief to demonstrate some of the larger pensions subsidized by taxpayers. He accused Gretsas of ignoring Commission orders, ostracizing those who disagree with him and stonewalling public records requests. Roberts complained, “If you don’t ask the specific right question, you’re not going to get what you asked for.” To seemingly marginalize the overwhelmingly pro-Gretsas sentiments expressed by the attending cross-section of city residents, Roberts opined that the City Manager’s opponents were afraid to attend the meeting and risk being “cut out of the processes.”

CITY MANAGER GEORGE GRETSAS

The Vice Mayor’s accusations were largely formulaic to most audience members. After some disjointed narrative in which he would partially frame some incident, Roberts would angrily accuse the City Manager of “not operating in the sunshine”, outright dishonesty or “borderline” criminality. With few exceptions, since Roberts didn’t fully explain exactly what Gretsas did that was so inappropriate, irresponsible or damaging, the issues seemed more personal in nature than indictments of his competence or commitment.

CITY COMMISSION BEING SWORN IN

Early in his attack, he described meeting with Gretsas two weeks after having been sworn in to review behavioral issues disturbing to the Vice Mayor. Although Roberts may have planned to clinically enumerate incidents demonstrating the City Manager’s subsequent failure to improve, the umbrage driving his eruption prompted Roberts to ask the audience’s indulgence for his “being all over the place”. Examples supporting his accusations were heatedly drawn from conflicts going back to 2003 that Roberts apparently compiled to becloud the City Manager’s motives and dispute or belittle his accomplishments. Given the hundreds of decisions the City Manager makes each week, the “offenses” described by Roberts were less than damning. However, in contrast with the Vice Mayor’s ordinarily soft-spoken demeanor, the passionate anger with which he mounted each confusing recrimination was disarming.

COMM. ROBERTS READS PART OF GALT MILE EMAIL

Within minutes of vehemently condemning the City Manager for having verbally assaulted some member of the public at a City Commission meeting, Roberts attacked GMCA President Pio Ieraci. Fulfilling a promise to email Galt Mile Advisory Board members upon learning the date of the City Commission meeting at which the City Manager’s contract would be an agenda item, on October 28^th, Ieraci notified them that the relevant meeting was scheduled for November 3^rd. When the meeting was subsequently postponed until November 17^th in deference to the sudden passing of Commissioner Bobby DuBose’ mother, Ieraci sent another email two weeks later.

PIO ASKS ROBERTS TO KEEP PROMISE

The first email listed Advisory Board agenda items from years past wherein Gretsas’ actions benefitted the community or the entire City. Along with applauding Gretsas for removing a rotting shipwreck from the beach and soliciting neighborhood association input for the Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT) A1A resurfacing plans, Ieraci added “Galt Mile residents did not suffer a municipal millage increase because George successfully implemented a Reserve Fund over the objections of commissioners that wanted to spend the money as fast as it was collected,” an issue intermittently undertaken by the Advisory Board since the 2003 municipal fiscal implosion.

SHIPWRECK ENDANGERS GALT MILE BEACHGOERS IN 2008

After isolating the final item and reading it aloud, the Vice Mayor called Ieraci disingenuous and proclaimed “This commission doesn’t waste money.” Ieraci was stunned. He has been one of Roberts’ staunchest supporters since the election and regularly extolled his performance throughout his reign as Police Chief. Anticipating the possibility that Roberts either hadn’t read the entire message or overlooked the fact that every issue listed therein took place under previous commissions, several Advisory Board members in the audience told the Vice Mayor that the stated events ran from 2004 through 2008. Unwilling to let “facts” derail his strategy of smearing Ieraci, Roberts blasted away, “Well your email is dated on October 28^th, 2009 and it doesn’t say anything in the entire email, and I’ll pass this around to the Commission. Anybody in the public who wants to read this, I’ll send it to anybody. It doesn’t say anything about the previous Commission. And that’s what you used to get your people here.”

A1A RESURFACING PLANS REVIEWED IN 2008

The basis for Roberts’ attack on Ieraci was surprising. The email was sent to members of the Galt Mile Advisory Board and Presidents Council, many of whom participated in the meetings wherein the enumerated issues were discussed and vetted. Since the Advisory Board and the Vice Mayor had mutually resolved to tackle community and municipal issues together, Advisory Board notifications are copied to Commissioner Roberts as a courtesy. As to the timing and accuracy of the itemized events, the shipwrecked “Seas a Lady” washed up on the Galt Beach in autumn of 2008 and Gretsas engineered its removal on October 7, 2008, following a month of bureaucratic paralysis by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Initial GMCA participation in the A1A resurfacing plans ran from September through December of 2008, when the City Manager invited GMCA officials to preliminary meetings with consultants and participating City staff. As to the contention that City Commissioners eyed Reserve Funds for other purposes, Gretsas first rigorously safeguarded the Reserve Fund in 2004 – his first Fort Lauderdale budget – since Commission spending left a puny $875,000 for the previous year’s Reserves; an amount that interim City Manager Alan Silva derided as “not enough to pay the City’s bills for one day.” Subsequently, former Commissioner Christine Teel had informed the Advisory Board on several occasions that Gretsas had to fend off attempts by Commissioners to inappropriately draw down on Reserve Funds in 2004 and 2006.

SHIPWRECK REMINDED ROBERTS OF 2004 JURISDICTIONAL CRISIS WHEN CUBAN REFUGEES LANDED ON GALT BEACH

Despite the fact that every one of these challenges took place before Seiler, DuBose, Rogers and he were elected; Roberts enigmatically decided to characterize the issues listed in Ieraci’s email as veiled attacks on his integrity or that of the current City Commission. Since Roberts was serving as Police Chief while every one of these events took place, they weren’t exactly “news” to the Vice Mayor. The email was dated October 28, 2009 because that was the date Pio learned about the Commission Meeting and sent out the notice, not because the issues therein described took place on that date. In fact, Roberts commented about the shipwreck at the October 2008 Candidates debate held at the Beach Community Center, calling it “a bureaucratic mess” that reminded him of the jurisdictional crisis precipitated by the landing of Cuban Refugees behind Regency Tower in 2004. Why then did Roberts suddenly think he was being blamed for these issues?

GALT MILE ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER FRANCES KONSTANCE OF L'HERMITAGE

In a nutshell - he didn’t. It is highly unlikely that the Vice Mayor was confused or unaware that the date on an email refers only to the date it was sent. Roberts was livid during his passionate attack on Gretsas when he suddenly decided to focus his anger on Ieraci. The rationale for his attack on Ieraci is couched in an earlier remark. Roberts said “God bless you, Pio, you got your people here, and I know George was involved in that too – I mean the staff was involved. Not specifically George. I know how this works anymore, because you gotta rev all these things up and get everybody on board.”

ROBERTS MISREPRESENTS EMAIL INVITATION WHILE CALLING CONSTITUENT DISINGENUOUS

That was pure spin! Roberts was seated adjacent to Ieraci during the October 15^th Advisory Board meeting when the Galt Mile President announced that he and other Gretsas supporters would attend the contract renewal meeting when it was scheduled. As scores of Galt Mile residents and association representatives informed Roberts that they supported Gretsas both before and after the election, he harbored no illusions about his constituency’s expectations. However, since Roberts had repeatedly responded positively to constituents when asked about the City Manager’s progress (the primary criteria by which Roberts pledged to evaluate Gretsas), in addition to providing an explanation for having voted against renewing the contract, he would have to frame his sudden reversal as unplanned, devoid of revenge, and based only on the City Manager’s performance since the election. If unsuccessful, his credibility would plummet. He would be held responsible for deliberately mischaracterizing his intentions, rescinding his word and betraying his constituents’ trust. Additionally, his campaign commitment to be their “voice” would recede into jokefare. It appears that the Vice Mayor decided that the best defense is a good offense. His attack wasn’t a spontaneous transference ignited by anger; it was a carefully planned strategy using elements of a “bait and switch” marketing deception.

GMCA PRESIDENT PIO IERACI'S NOVEMBER 17 EMAIL TO ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS

Unknown to the Vice Mayor, the Sun-Sentinel’s Brittany Wallman had decided earlier that day to publish the content of Ieraci’s email in its entirety. City residents following the events on her newspaper’s blog found none of the language described by the Vice Mayor. That’s because Roberts elected to ignore that email and instead make a copy of an email sent three weeks earlier on October 28^th to notify Advisory Board members about the subsequently postponed November 3^rd meeting. When District 1 audience members prompted the Vice Mayor to read the email aloud, he snapped “You spoke, I’m speaking now.” Reading the brief email aloud not only would have given proper context to the snippet targeted by Roberts, it would have belied the Vice Mayor’s statement that it “disingenuously” spurred that evening’s Galt Mile turnout since it clearly invited members to the November 3^rd meeting that was cancelled. Roberts had also received the second email on November 17^th, alerting members to the rescheduled meeting that night (as published in the Sun-Sentinel blog). Since it contained no content useful for undermining Ieraci, he decided to ignore that email and deliberately misrepresented the earlier message as the one used by Ieraci “to get your people here!”

IERACI: YES TO CONTRACT

By claiming that Ieraci fictionalized issues to Galt Mile residents in order to engineer their attendance (That’s what you used to get your people here!) and that Gretsas had, in turn, manipulated Ieraci’s attendance (and I know George was involved in that too!), Roberts was intimating that Gretsas’ support was an illusion garnered by trickery and lies, unworthy of consideration. The Vice Mayor implemented the same strategy of marginalizing opinions inconsistent with his own throughout the evening – including with his peers on the Commission.

L'HERMITAGE MANAGER PAT QUINTERO "MANAGER GRETSAS IS EXCELLENT"

After implying that a decerebrated flatworm could have mirrored Gretsas’ contributions to the City’s recovery, Roberts repeatedly sought to disabuse supposedly “hoodwinked” supporters of the City Manager of their “delusions” about his achievements, competence and character. When unsuccessful, he attempted to cast aspersions on their motives or credibility. During his bombastic diatribe, he intimated that many of those expressing support for Gretsas had “been benefactors (sic – beneficiaries) of” special favors from the City Manager, hoping to becloud their motives. When Commissioners DuBose and Rogers each lamented that Roberts had placed his painful “history” with the City Manager above what was best for the City, he retorted that their respective judgments were based on views formulated during the eight months since they were elected while his indictments and those of Commissioner Rodstrom were drawn on “a much longer experience with the City Manager.” While all four new commissioners promised to evaluate the City Manager based solely on performance forward of the election, that pledge assumed heightened significance for Roberts’ constituents. It spoke directly to his motives for seeking a seat on the commission. During the meeting, Roberts repeatedly denigrated the City Manager for conflicts that arose during his tenure as Police Chief, eviscerating that pledge.

FORMER COMMISSIONER DEAN TRANTALIS "DON'T TAKE REVENGE"

Although understandably uncomfortable with the overwhelming support that Gretsas received from the vast majority of roughly 400 city residents and scores of constituents, the Vice Mayor appeared particularly stung by comments from residents, former Commissioners, civic and municipal advisory board volunteers, religious leaders, business people and city employees advising against allowing “politics and revenge” to impact the vote. Despite his redundant remonstrations to the contrary, most onlookers seemed convinced that the emotional scars he sustained from confrontations with the City Manager were so egregious that he perceives anyone who supports Gretsas as suffering from historical misconceptions, ethically challenged self-interests, intimidation or chronic naivety.

COMM. ROBERTS ISSUES ANTI-GRETSAS MANIFESTO

A moment later, Roberts shouted “I cannot support a City Manager who does not reflect the values of this city and this Commission and will not implement the policy of this Commission. I am not going to support a City Manager who is going to do his own policy, stonewall things. ... He tells people we set policy, but he’s the bureaucracy and he will determine how that policy is implemented. WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! The way it was spoken tonight, we might as well all go home. You only need one Commissioner up here – you need the City Manager. WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! Things are out of skew. Things need to be put back in place. In fact, I’d like to make a motion that we not renew ANY contract with the City Manager.” In a heartbeat, Commissioner Charlotte Rodstrom seconded the motion. Not surprisingly, a few minutes later, Roberts flipped the script. In a testament to his own integrity, the Vice Mayor opined that since many of those who spoke on behalf of the City Manager were his District 1 constituents, he demonstrated strength of character by “doing what’s right” instead of “doing what’s politically correct.”

COMMISSIONER BOBBY DUBOSE

In view of the unimpressive reasons offered by Rodstrom and Roberts for opposing the City Manager’s contract renewal and the venom with which their objections were delivered, Commissioner Bobby DuBose referred to Roberts’ tirade as “Grandstanding” and likened the proceeding to a public lynching. He refuted Roberts repeated claim that the morale of city employees is bad, stating, “Morale is good. What I gather is that morale is high and that is a tribute to the City Manager because it starts from the top down.” DuBose continued “The cherry on top of everything is the diversity of our staff. I think it's very important that our staff reflect the makeup of our city. It’s not important; I think that it’s crucial. And I think that says a lot about our City Manager.”

DUBOSE: THIS WAS A PUBLIC LYNCHING

Declaring that he was “bothered to the core” by the attacks on Gretsas, DuBose denied that the City Manager was responsible for several of Roberts’ salvos, including the multiple meetings it took to determine whether the funding for cameras in police cruisers was dedicated or flexible. Intimating that Roberts and Rodstrom should do what’s best for the City’s residents instead of pursuing personal agendas, he said “Although I know that there are special interests driving this issue, I hope my colleagues behave as statesmen.” Before voting to renew the City Manager’s contract, DuBose applauded Gretsas’ integrity and insisted that Gretsas had earned the trust of City residents by his actions, explaining “Every district in this city you’ve seen strong support for this City Manager, and I think that’s telling.”

COMMISSIONER ROMNEY ROGERS

Commissioner Romney Rogers said he evaluates a person “First on character, second by how hard they work, how smart they work, and third by how they handle their management style.” Crediting Gretsas with satisfying his criteria, Rogers added that Gretsas loves his job, “he’s a doer not a talker, he listens and gets it done, he works well under pressure.” After expressing the belief that voters empanelled the new Commission primarily to “watch out for your dollars,” Rogers evaluated the City’s fiscal condition under Gretsas’ watch, stating “Even though we are possibly in the worst economic times that we have ever been in, our city – it’s probably in the best condition it may have ever been in. While no one person is responsible, the leader, and the manager, should be given some credit for that. And I think it’s obvious that this city has momentum. This city is in the best position of any city in South Florida, maybe even in the whole state of Florida, to really take off once the economy does come back.”

ROGERS: THIS VOTE SHOULD BE ABOUT THEM

An attorney who formerly headed the Chamber of Commerce, Rogers noted that under Gretsas’ management, the city’s reserves went from less than $1 million to peaking at $85 million, with a $10 million surplus in Insurance Reserves. Envisioning a management void, Rogers warned the Commission members that acting precipitously and losing Gretsas could derail the momentum thus far enjoyed by the City. Debunking trepidations about splintering the Commission, Rogers concluded “I think that this group, this body will stay collegial, I think this body will continue to work hard - I have no doubt about that - and I think that George Gretsas is the appropriate leader at the appropriate time to move us to the next level.”

ROGERS: THIS WILL CREAT A VOID

Turning to Roberts, Rogers confirmed his respect for the Vice Mayor and said “I don’t know exactly what you went through, I’m sure it was not pleasant – whatever it was, because you wouldn’t be as passionate about it if it was.” Rogers continued “I really believe that this vote is not about us, but about them (pointing to the audience).” Defending his vote, Roberts shot back “I hope I didn’t convey that it was about me, I agree it’s about the people.” After stating “my past experience came back in a new form,” Roberts explained that he voted against Gretsas because he didn’t “see the ability to make the change.” Rogers retorted, “That’s not what I mean – I said ‘us’ – not ‘you’ – the Commission as a body.” Rogers was diplomatically imparting that the Vice Mayor was allowing his adversarial history with the City Manager imperil the entire commission’s credibility with the City’s residents.

GRETSAS: I TRY TO HELP EACH COMMISSIONER DAILY

Afforded a brief opportunity to comment on the proceedings, Gretsas stated that despite disagreeing with many of the accusations, addressing them individually would be counterproductive. After thanking the City’s residents for their outpouring of support, he refuted contentions that he mutes dissention by exemplifying his long relationship with Bruce Roberts, who, despite their often contentious history, worked with the City Manager to achieve landmark crime rate reductions. Answering allegations that he was non-responsive to the Vice Mayor’s needs, he added “Of the 391 official requests received” from Roberts during the 7 months he served as Commissioner, “350 were done, 25 are underway, 11 are long term projects and 5 involved funding or policy issues” beyond his scope of influence. Before closing, he refocused credit for his achievements to the 2600 city employees he works with.

MAYORAL CANDIDATE SEILER

Mayor Jack Seiler appeared extremely uncomfortable. Seiler carefully cemented the building blocks of his public service career with integrity, diligence and brains. After surviving a 4-way mayoral split by grabbing 57% of the electoral nod last February, when asked about Gretsas, Seiler said “He’ll be given a fair shake. If he gets on board with the new vision of the commission, then he’ll be fine.” Later, Seiler changed the bar that Gretsas would have to meet. A few days before the meeting, he told GMCA Chair Pio Ieraci that the City Manager “would have to win the votes of three commissioners in order to get my vote.”

DUBOSE: NO-WIN CRITERIA FOR CITY MANAGER IS UNFAIR

Commissioner Bobby DuBose disparaged as unfair Seiler’s later requirement that the City Manager secure 4 votes, exclaiming that winning approval from either Rodstrom or Roberts “would have taken a miracle.” Since Charlotte Rodstrom made it clear that there were no conditions under which she would support Gretsas, Seiler’s requirement that he elicit 3 votes functionally created Bruce Roberts his judge, jury and executioner. Under his original criteria, if Gretsas won over the two unbiased commissioners and Seiler felt he had successfully adapted to the new commission’s vision, he would be rehired. Short of feeding Roberts a post-hypnotic suggestion, Seiler’s second challenge (the 4-vote minimum) was tantamount to a pink slip.

SEILER: GEORGE KNEW HE NEEDED 4 VOTES

After insisting that everybody knew about his 4-vote requirement for Gretsas, he looked around and added, “...except the Commissioners and the citizenry.” Quickly revising his statement, Seiler admitted that he previously only told Gretsas as well as several friends and associates about his requirement. Suggesting that the issue wasn’t as one-sided as it appeared during the meeting, the Mayor said that although 50 people therein spoke on the City Manager’s behalf, he’d received 45 emails that largely opposed renewing Gretsas’ contract. When Mayor Seiler declared “Based on his conduct and his performance as a City Manager, there’s no reason to fire this guy,” the crowd responded with a round of enthusiastic applause accompanied by grateful cheers.

SEILER: 2 FOR & 2 AGAINST IS BAD CHEMISTRY

Seiler then lowered the boom, “I can’t afford to commit to the City Manager when two Commissioners passionately oppose him and two Commissioners passionately support him,” instantly deflating the shocked audience. Attempting to clarify his rationale, he contended that a 3-2 vote for Gretsas would splinter the Commission, insisting that if one Commissioner changed their mind, the City would be at risk for Gretsas’ severance package. He said that since a 3-2 vote would leave Gretsas with no “buffer”, the City Manager would become disproportionately preoccupied with “maintaining his edge, which could impair his performance and disrupt the Commission’s synergy.” Clarifying that he had no issues with Gretsas’ performance, liked him as a person, admired his work ethic and was well satisfied with his character, Seiler admitted that his decision wasn’t based on the City Manager’s qualifications or performance. Instead he would vote against the renewal to promote a more harmonious Commission.

PASTOR LUCDEL HARRIGAN OF GRACE HAITIAN BAPTIST CHURCH

Incredulous audience members pleaded with the Mayor, asserting that if he thought Gretsas was somehow deficient, he should vote “no” but if he thought Gretsas was doing a good job, he should “step up and do the right thing.” He answered, “As a fiscal conservative, I believe I am.” Frustrated and angry, DuBose questioned how placating two City Commissioners with well-known personal and political agendas at the expense of the other two would foster collegiality. He said that the Mayor was setting a dangerous precedent by approving a “blueprint” for deposing future City Managers that could easily be abused by any commissioner. Rogers told Seiler that he was singlehandedly implementing a policy change since the City Charter only requires three votes for passage, not four or five. Others angrily pointed out the difference between doing what’s best for the City and doing what’s best for certain City Commissioners.

FORMER COMM JOHN AURELIUS

Although 100’s of exiting residents were disappointed with a process that former Commissioner John Aurelius characterized as “subverted by political agendas,” departing audience members were intent on preventing their frustration with the outcome from eroding their respect for the Mayor. Startled by the Mayor’s less than impressive reasons for voting against Gretsas, audience members explored other possible motives for the Mayor’s actions. One Pastor remarked, “There’s no way that the Mayor would vote against renewing the contract for the reasons he gave us. There is more to this than we saw tonight.”

SUN-SENTINEL REPORTER BRITTANY WALLMAN

Many were upset with Seiler for equally weighting emails or text messages with 100s of residents dragging themselves to a City Commission meeting during the work week. Sun-Sentinel correspondent Brittany Wallman reported that half of Seiler’s referenced email messages were replicated from failed Mayoral candidate Earl Ryneson’s virulently anti-Gretsas online blog. The Mayor later called the source blog “irresponsible” and its author “a fool.” Since the Mayor also characterized mass “cut and paste” emails as unworthy of credibility at the Commission meeting, when Broward Beat reporter Buddy Nevins asked why he justified voting against the contract renewal by citing tainted correspondences lifted from an irresponsible blog, Seiler answered “I bought up the e-mails to show that there were other opinions outside of the meeting.”

Over the next few days, emails flooded the Galt Mile web site. Most prevalent were messages (often anonymous) expressing anger over having been misled by Commissioner Roberts. A resident from Coral Ridge Towers East gave one of the more lucid expressions of disappointment in the Vice Mayor. She wrote “We’ve been played like a piano! While I understand that Commissioner Bruce Roberts never actually said he would support George Gretsas as City Manager, he certainly went out of his way to convince all of us that he would. First he said he would support Gretsas if he pleased the new Commissioners. Commissioners Romney Rogers and Bobby Dubose said they were pleased. Although he voted against Gretsas, Mayor Seiler also said the City Manager did a good job. That means all the new Commissioners except Roberts agreed that Gretsas had successfully adjusted to the new Commissioners. When asked directly whether Gretsas was doing a good job as City Manager, Roberts said yes on several occasions. Also, Roberts promised to judge Gretsas solely on his performance after the election. When Roberts listed his reasons for voting against renewing the contract, he included the OAS event from 2005; a “Goals and Objectives” presentation from last January and he accused Gretsas of appointing people that weren’t qualified, referring to the appointment of David Hébert to oversee Police Department affairs a few years ago. I also remember his promise to do what his constituents wanted if elected Commissioner. As far as I’m concerned, he distorted the truth, first to win votes and later to gain support. Mr. Roberts turned out to be a real politician. I guess the joke’s on us for believing him! I won’t make that mistake again.”

POLICE CHIEF

COMMISSIONER

A Galt Mile resident from Ocean Summit disagreed, writing “I am not surprised at the outcome of the City Commission meeting. Commissioner Roberts resigned after more than 30 years as Police Chief because he hated the City Manager. How could anyone believe that he wouldn’t try to get rid of him when given the opportunity? To my knowledge, he only agreed to judge Gretsas fairly. Gretsas did a good job for the City but no one is irreplaceable. Even though I voted for Christine Teel, I believe that Bruce Roberts did a good job as Police Chief. He is in the first year of a 3-year term. After two more years, I will decide whether or not he did a good job as our commissioner. We need to move on.”

GALT MILE RESIDENTS HAVE FAITH IN MAYOR SEILER

An almost equal number of emails affirmed faith in the Mayor, asserting that he would work out some compromise with the City Manager. Several residents believe that the Mayor voted down the renewal as a negotiating tactic, to presumably force the City Manager to concede some measure of the severance burden referenced by Mayor Seiler during the meeting or possibly shorten the 3-year contract term. Other messages envisioned serious consequences deriving from the Mayor’s seeming requirement that a City Manager maintain a 4-1 approval majority, asserting that the addled process could summon a replay of the 2003 Budget Crisis.

A Plaza South resident wrote that “My primary concern isn’t whether Roberts played fast and loose with the truth or Seiler’s inexplicable willingness to replace successfully tested management with an unknown quantity during a worldwide recession, it’s the message sent by the Mayor to whoever will serve as City Manager in the future, whether Gretsas or some replacement. Mayor Seiler agreed that George Gretsas demonstrated all the qualities that he requires of a City Manager and even declared that he would have voted to renew his contract without hesitation if either Roberts or Rodstrom joined Rogers and Dubose. I watched an online video in the Sun-Sentinel blog in which the Mayor told George Gretsas “If you get 3, I will be the 4^th.” Mayor Seiler explained that the City’s best interests and the Commission’s “synergy” could be sacrificed by a City Manager preoccupied with maintaining a fragile 3-2 vote majority. The Mayor insisted that Fort Lauderdale’s City Manager will need a 4-1 vote majority to keep his or her job. I have always admired Jack Seiler and voted for him when he represented us in the Florida House of Representatives before the districts were gerrymandered. However, if he’s worried about a City Manager’s performance being compromised by having to always please 3 commissioners, shouldn’t he be more worried about the performance of a City Manager whose survival depends on always pleasing 4 commissioners? I’ve come to expect clear thinking and straight talk from Jack Seiler. Am I missing something?”

While the strong feelings expressed by Galt Mile residents about the Vice Mayor’s actions are understandable, some of the Galt Mile’s problems can only be cured in City Hall and Bruce Roberts is our City Commissioner. We need to move on. A GMCA Advisory Board member summed up the issue by remarking that “We have bigger fish to fry.” Since there are no politicians who haven’t occasionally disappointed constituents, it’s probably more productive to judge elected officials by the sum of their achievements while seated – and that jury is still out. When the authors of 8 reasonably literate email messages were asked permission to identify them by name, they refused for a variety of reasons, although the majority cited concern about some undefined “retaliation” by the powers that be in City Hall.

VOTERS WANT GRETSAS TO STAY 3 YEARS

As to the suggested dogma inherent in Jack Seiler’s strategy of shielding the City from a City Manager forced to continually nurse a fragile 3-2 Commission majority by requiring an even more tenuous 4-1 Commission majority, the Mayor was only referring to the predisposition of the Commission when faced with either renewing a contract or hiring a new City Manager, not a permanent benchmark. Alluding to the passion expressed by Roberts and Rodstrom, Seiler was seemingly convinced that any decision about Gretsas by either of them would be permanently skewed by their history with the City Manager. If any of the 3 commissioners unaffected by an adamant bias were to reverse their opinion, the City Manager could be ousted and the City would have to fulfill its severance obligation. Conversely, since many City Managers are discharged within a year or two for incompetence (both operational and fiscal), the financial risks attendant to installing a failed replacement would be much more devastating, virtually dwarfing the cost of a severance package.

IF IGNORED BY THEIR PUBLIC OFFICIALS VOTERS WILL SETTLE FOR 1 OR 2 YEARS

Despite the media focus proclaiming the Galt Mile a staunchly pro-Gretsas neighborhood, recent statistics suggest its residents’ opinions mirror those of Fort Lauderdale at large. In the only poll not operated by some virulently anti-Gretsas activist, the Sun-Sentinel asked “Should Fort Lauderdale keep City Manager George Gretsas?” Of the three possible options, 23,348 chose “Yes, give him another contract. He’s doing a good job running the city,” 77 selected “Yes, but only until his contract ends in the summer,” and 6,884 responded “No, get rid of him immediately and find someone else to run Fort Lauderdale.” The results demonstrate that 77% favor renewing the City Manager’s contract while 23% disagree. Three weeks after the November 17^th fiasco wherein a 3-year renewal was quashed, the Sun Sentinel sponsored another poll soliciting answers to “How long should Fort Lauderdale’s city manager stay on the job?” 393 suggested he leave between now and when his current contract expires in July, with or without severance. 2432 opined that he should be given a contract extension of a year, or two. As such, 86% favor extending his contract while 14% recommend he pack it in. Coincidentally, of the 59 speakers that addressed the City Commission, 85% (50) supported retaining the City Manager and 15% (9) voiced opposition to renewing his contract. 69% (79) of the emails sent to the Galt Mile web site over the next month favored Gretsas, 13% (15) were opposed and 18% (21) contributed opinions about other municipal public officials or addressed other issues. Of those expressing a coherent preference, 84% favored renewing his contract while 16% thought otherwise.

Will they find an acceptable compromise? 6 to 5 and pick ’em.

Click To Top of Page

Vice Mayor Bruce Roberts

FAA, Football & Fire-Rescue