FORT PIERCE — Fort Pierce City Attorney Sara Hedges’ future with the city remains uncertain after commissioners narrowly voted May 18 not to renew her contract following a tense and deeply divided discussion over her role and authority within city government.
Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky, who brought the matter forward, opened the discussion by distancing it from potential litigation involving the city and Hedges.
“That is not the purpose of the discussion that I brought forward and I do not intend to address those matters here tonight,” he said.
The comments came amid fallout from a letter of intent to sue sent to the city after Finance Director Johnna Morris was temporarily suspended when officials discovered she had a wage garnishment tied to a personal debt. The action raised questions about whether the city violated consumer protection laws that prohibit terminating employees over garnishment for a single debt.
The letter specifically referenced Hedges, alleging she conducted an invasive investigation into Morris’ personal finances that later became public record after being indirectly referenced during a City Commission meeting.
Previous comments from the dais also accused Hedges of preventing the city manager from seeking advice from outside counsel without her involvement.
Despite those issues looming over the discussion, Dzadovsky framed his concerns as broader questions about governance and the balance of authority established in the city charter.
“That includes circumstances involving administrative personnel matters, operational decisions, and situations where the professional judgment of engineering, planning, or building officials appears to have been overridden or altered through legal interpretation rather than technical expertise,” he said. “Authority must originate in the charter. It should not develop through assumption, custom, administrative practice, ordinance language, individual contract language, or evolving interpretation.”
Commissioner Michael Broderick rejected the idea that the debate was purely procedural, arguing Hedges was being unfairly targeted over her legal approach.
“I believe that there is a faction of the commission and administration that has targeted Ms. Hedges because they don't necessarily agree with her what I would consider to be aggressive legal perspectives, which from the city's perspective is a very valuable asset to have,” he said. “I certainly don't want somebody that's milquetoast sitting in that seat. I need somebody tough. She's tough.”
Commissioner Arnold Gaines said he had heard troubling concerns from city employees, though he did not elaborate publicly on the specifics.
“It's one thing to be a strong advocate, but when the city employees don't want to deal with someone, that's a problem,” he said.
Broderick disputed the criticism and said the allegations circulating inside City Hall were unfounded.
“Somebody's not telling the truth here, and we need to get to the bottom of this,” he said. “Again, we need to get to the bottom of this, because candidly, the attacks that are taking place, everybody in city hall knows what she's being accused of, and she's never, ever done it.”
Mayor Linda Hudson defended the often-contentious relationship between city managers and city attorneys, describing it as a normal part of municipal government.
“What we have is a natural tension between a city manager and a city attorney. This is true in every city, because the city manager wants to get things done, and we say, great, we want you to get things done. The city attorney says, wait a second, you might have to do it this way. We might have to do it that way,” she said. “These blurred lines are not anything new. They happen from time to time. Each of the charter officers is kind of a check and balance on the other charter officer. That's why we try to make things and do things right.”
Commissioner Curtis Johnson said he shared concerns about the charter and the review process, but objected to the timing of the vote.
“I feel short-circuited a little bit because I thought we were working towards maybe having that actual evaluation on June 8, but that was forced tonight by putting a motion on the floor that was seconded, which forced an actual vote,” he said. “I feel short-circuited because I've not had a chance to have an objectionable conversation.”
Hedges declined to comment on the broader controversy but addressed speculation about whether she planned to leave before her scheduled June 8 performance review.
“I do have a contract that says if I'm going to give you notice, I have to give you 90 days notice unless you agree to less time. So even if I walked in tomorrow and gave you my notice, I would still be here for 90 days,” she said. “So I'll be here on June 8. I'm contractually obligated to be here on June 8th, so I will be here.”
Johnson, Gaines, and Dzadovsky were the nay's in the 3-2 vote to renew Hedges contract. Broderick and Mayor Hudson supported the motion.
Commissioners ultimately tabled further discussion while Johnson and Gaines seek additional conversations with city staff as part of Hedges’ review process.
The matter is expected to return at the commission’s June 8 meeting. If the contract ultimately remains unrenewed, it is set to expire Sept. 10.