The Jacksonville City Council will vote Tuesday on legislation that could change how the city handles lawsuits against employees. 

Currently, the city’s Risk Management Division decides whether city attorneys should take certain lawsuits to trial or if it would be more prudent to settle. Then, the director of finance and the city’s top lawyer sign off.  

The legislation would add another layer of approval: Constitutional officers and possibly the City Council president. 

Here’s what you need to know about it:

WHAT IS THE LEGISLATION?

Bill 2024-0045 was introduced on Jan. 10 to require the city to get approval from constitutional officers before settling lawsuits that relate to their offices.

That means the city couldn’t settle certain lawsuits without permission from the sheriff, tax collector, property appraiser, supervisor of elections or the clerk of courts if the lawsuit related to one of their offices. 

Essentially, it would expand the powers of those offices and potentially bring cases to trial that would have otherwise been settled out of court.

It could put individual employees at a greater risk, too. When the city settles lawsuits, it usually also ends claims made against individual employees, including police officers, without needing them to pay anything. If those cases went to trial, the employees may be made to pay up if a judge or jury finds them at fault.

WHY WAS THIS LEGISLATION FILED?

Jacksonville Sheriff T.K. Waters requested the legislation because he said he wasn’t told in advance about a $200,000 settlement related to the 2019 police killing of Florida A&M University student Jamee Johnson. 

Anna Brosche, the city’s finance director, admitted that there was a lapse in communication between the Office of General Counsel and Waters before the city decided to settle with Johnson’s family. She said that lapse of communication — which occurred under a previous general counsel and before Brosche took her role — was a one-time mistake.

Records show that the officer who was sued and two members of the Office of General Counsel, which included JSO’s attorney, were invited to the May 30 mediation meeting where the city agreed to the settlement.

Brosche offered solutions that she said would ensure a communication lapse doesn’t happen again, requiring officials to notify constitutional officers when the city receives a letter stating an intention to sue. She also said a designee from each of the constitutional offices would be able to attend monthly meetings with OGC and the Risk Management Division. 

General Counsel Michael Fackler suggested the problem be handled internally with a policy change, not codification.

Lara Mattina, a former prosecutor who is now the organizational strategic executive for the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office, fired back, saying what happened in the Johnson case is proof the city needs to codify the proposed legislation so that constitutional officers are guaranteed a seat at the table. She argued the office had suffered severe reputational damage due to the settlement.

“While we have learned that Risk Management is excellent at making a determination as to financial risk, they are ill-equipped to make any kind of analysis concerning reputational loss,” she said. 

Ken Amaro, one of the original co-sponsors of the bill, pushed back against that, saying he believed the community’s trust in JSO after Johnson’s death would have been affected regardless of whether the city settled the lawsuit.

WHAT AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE?

Several amendments have been made to the initial legislation, two of which softened the power constitutional officers would have to reject a settlement.

City Council Vice President Randy White proposed an amendment Monday that would allow the City Council to step in if the constitutional officer and the city’s risk-management professionals disagreed about whether the city ought to settle a lawsuit. 

The Rules Committee accepted that change, with Councilman Rahman Johnson being the only member who didn’t vote yes. Johnson said he supports the sheriff’s desire to be involved in these matters, but he does not believe one person should have that much power.

Brosche cautioned that the amendment would lead to the need for frequent shade meetings if a disagreement occurred, meaning the council would meet in private with its attorney to discuss possible settlements anytime there was a disagreement. 

On Tuesday, Carrico amended the legislation further to require just the Council President — not the whole council — act as the tie-breaker. That would eliminate the need for frequent shade meetings.

Everyone on the Finance Committee voted for the amendment.

Though he is not a member of the Finance Committee and could not vote on the amendment, Johnson voiced his ongoing concern about the bill, even with the amendment. 

“Whether it be a constitutional officer or whether it be the president of the City Council, there should not be one individual that could make the decision that plunges this city into a major financial liability that everybody would have to be a part of,” he said.

WHO SUPPORTS THE LEGISLATION?

Seven members of the Jacksonville City Council originally co-sponsored the bill: Nick Howland, Chris Miller, Raul Arias, Joe Carlucci, Ken Amaro, Will Lahnen, Terrance Freeman, Randy White – all Republicans like Waters.

During a Finance Committee meeting on Tuesday, Carrico, also a Republican, added himself as a co-sponsor. 

Councilman Reggie Gaffney, Jr., a Democrat, said he was on the fence about the legislation before Tuesday’s meeting, but he said he now approved of it.

Then, Councilwoman Ju’Coby Pittman voted for the last amendment change but cautioned that she could change her mind and vote no on the full bill during Tuesday’s City Council meeting.

The ordinance would pass with a simple majority when the 19-member City Council takes it up for a vote Tuesday. That will also be the last time the public has a chance to voice their opinion.

HOW DOES THIS AFFECT JACKSONVILLE’S INSURANCE?

Brosche warned members of both committees that passing the legislation could mean a potential raise in the cost of city insurance or being dropped by the city’s current provider altogether. No other municipality allows for this type of authorization, she said. 

Josh Becksmith, an insurance broker with Brown & Brown, told the council the same, adding that it might be hard to find an insurance carrier willing to insure the city if the current carrier drops Jacksonville. However, no member of either committee seemed overly concerned about the uncertainty of how the legislation would affect the city’s insurance. 

“I consider the fact that this policy change might put us in the realm of uninsurability to be pretty dubious when Serena Williams can insure her wrists and Lionel Messi can insure his feet,”said Howland, chair of the finance committee. “We’re a $7-plus-billion consolidated revenue company that’s sitting strong financially. I think we can handle these insurance risks and find an insurance carrier.”

If the city were to take a case to trial despite Risk Management’s recommendation to settle, the city would bear the financial burden of that decision, not the constitutional officer. Rejecting a settlement would also put the officer or other city employee at risk of being held liable at trial. 

“I’ve heard that not supporting this legislation is not supporting our officers and JSO, and that cannot be farther from the truth,” Brosche said. “When weighing all the facts and circumstances and the way they might play out in the hands of a jury … our risk manager and OGC attorney are protecting our men and women in blue from unlimited personal financial risk.”

She acknowledged concerns about damage to the Sheriff’s Office’s reputation from settlements but said the damage from lengthy trials, verdicts and the personal financial impact to officers could be more damaging.

Nichole Manna is The Tributary’s criminal justice reporter. You can reach her at nichole.manna@floridatrib.org or on Twitter at @NicholeManna.