In 1992 Absentee Ballots Decided Fernandina Beach’s First Commissioner Recall Election

By Mike Lednovich/Editor

In April 1992, Fernandina Beach voters were asked an unprecedented question: whether to recall a sitting city commissioner.

The target was A.J. Smith, a controversial and outspoken member of the City Commission whose turbulent term in office sparked Nassau County’s first recall election — a contest ultimately decided not at the polls, but by absentee ballots.

Smith was elected to the Fernandina Beach City Commission in the late 1980s, representing one of the city’s at-large seats.

Fernandina News-Leader coverage from the period consistently described him as a blunt, independent voice on the commission, often at odds with fellow commissioners, city staff, and established political leadership.

Smith cultivated a reputation as a populist critic of City Hall, frequently questioning legal advice, administrative decisions, and the conduct of other officials. Supporters viewed him as a watchdog unafraid to challenge entrenched interests. Critics, however, characterized his conduct as confrontational and destabilizing, arguing that his actions exposed the city to legal and financial risk.

Those tensions eventually crystallized into a formal recall effort.

According to News-Leader articles, the recall campaign began in September 1991, when roughly a dozen residents met to discuss how Smith could be removed from office. Petitioners later filed a recall statement alleging that Smith had:

• Made racially offensive remarks while serving as a commissioner.

• Caused the city to incur approximately $14,000 in legal costs by filing an unauthorized lawsuit against city officials.

• Engaged in conflicts of interest.

• Improperly confronted city employees regarding their jobs.

A city-appointed committee reviewed the allegations and reported that there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the racial-remarks charge. The remaining claims were described in the newspaper as unproven, though recall supporters argued that Smith’s behavior warranted removal regardless of whether the allegations met a legal threshold.

Smith denied wrongdoing and described the recall as a politically motivated attempt to silence what he defined as a dissenting voice on the commission.

The recall election was staged April 14, 1992, concurrent with Fernandina Beach’s regular municipal elections. Nassau County Supervisor of Elections Shirley King told the News-Leader it was the first recall election in the county’s 168-year history.

On election night, preliminary results showed Smith trailing by 22 votes, with 138 absentee ballots still to be counted. To survive the recall, Smith needed to win at least 81 of those absentee ballots.

When the absentee votes were tabulated, Smith won 92 of the 138, reversing the apparent defeat and narrowly retaining his seat. The final outcome stunned recall organizers and shifted the focus of the controversy from Smith’s conduct to the mechanics of absentee voting.

Following the election, recall leader Debbie Stalego publicly questioned how two of Smith's supporters had obtained a combined 29 absentee ballots, raising concerns about influence and ballot handling. City Attorney Clyde Davis confirmed to the News-Leader that Florida law at the time placed no limit on how many absentee ballots one person could obtain for others.

Letters to the editor in subsequent weeks reflected lingering bitterness, with recall opponents accusing Smith’s critics of attempting to undermine the election results, while recall supporters warned that the process exposed vulnerabilities in Florida’s absentee voting system.

Smith, for his part, said the election result vindicated him — particularly on the racial allegation — and accused recall backers of pursuing a personal and political vendetta.

Smith remained a political figure after surviving the recall. A later retrospective item in the newspaper archive reports that in 1993 he retained his seat against challenger Clyde Goodbread by 94 votes after absentee ballots were counted.

By the mid-1990s, Smith’s relationship with city government moved from electoral combat to federal court.

In 1996, the News-Leader reported that U.S. District Judge W. Terrell Hodges issued a consent final judgment in a case brought by Smith — by then described as a former city commissioner — challenging parts of a city ethics ordinance on constitutional grounds. The ordinance, the paper noted, had never been signed by the mayor and was later repealed, and the settlement included $42,500 in attorney’s fees for Smith’s counsel, Holland & Knight, with costs to be covered by the city’s insurer, Fireman's Fund Insurance Company.