Opinion: City Attorney's Contract Says No Severance for Resigning. So Why a $73,551 Payout?

By Mike Lednovich/Editor

Fernandina Beach taxpayers deserve an explanation of why the City Commission is being asked to approve a $73,551 separation package for City Attorney Teresa Prince, who is resigning after less than 17 months on the job.

Her employment contract is explicit: An attorney who voluntarily resigns is not entitled to severance pay.

Yet commissioners will consider a negotiated agreement next Tuesday that provides Prince with 12 weeks of severance, accrued paid time off and continued benefits. Her departure would take effect Jan. 2, 2027.

The question goes beyond the money.

Who negotiated the departure of a charter officer who answers directly to the City Commission?

How were those decisions reached?

Florida's Sunshine Law generally requires discussions between commissioners about foreseeable commission business to take place at publicly noticed meetings. Individual negotiations do not automatically violate the law, but commissioners cannot use intermediaries to conduct private deliberations that should occur in public.

The public deserves to know whether Prince initiated her resignation independently or was encouraged to leave.

And more importantly, who negotiated the settlement and who authorized its financial terms.

The proposed agreement offers no explanation for the severance payment. It contains a comprehensive release of potential legal claims, including those involving discrimination, whistleblower protections and other employment laws. Such provisions are common in negotiated settlements and do not establish wrongdoing.

But they warrant another question: What potential legal or financial exposure, if any, is the city paying to avoid?

Prince was appointed in May 2025 by a 3-2 commission vote and began work Aug. 4 at an initial annual salary of $180,000. As a charter officer, she reports directly to commissioners, who are responsible for her employment and compensation.

Her original contract provides 20 weeks of severance if commissioners dismiss her without cause, but none if she resigns. The proposed settlement would pay $44,923.87 in severance salary, $14,974.62 in accrued paid time off and $13,653.11 in employer costs.

The paid time off is not the issue. Prince is already entitled to eligible accrued leave under her contract.

There may be a sound financial reason for the negotiated departure. Perhaps commissioners believe a settlement is less expensive than dismissal or potential litigation. Perhaps they consider Prince's assistance in transferring pending legal matters worth the additional compensation.

If so, they need to explain their reasoning.

Prince's departure also comes while the city faces major legal challenges, including unresolved litigation with Rayonier Advanced Materials over its proposed bioethanol facility. The city has also confronted contentious legal issues involving downtown paid parking and airport operations.

Those matters will require continued legal representation. The proposed resolution acknowledges that a future budget amendment may be necessary to pay an interim attorney or outside law firm.

The $73,551 settlement may therefore be only part of the cost of this transition.

Commissioners should also explain their plans for the City Attorney's Office. Will they hire another full-time attorney or rely on outside counsel? What will either option cost?

Negotiated departures can sometimes save taxpayers money and avoid expensive litigation. Nothing in the available documents establishes misconduct by Prince or an improper motive by commissioners.

But the city has provided no public justification for making an exception to a contract approved just 17 months ago.

Will they provide the answers before voting, we'll see.