The Essentials
• Special election “tentatively” scheduled for Nov. 4.
• Special election passes 4-1 after appeal from Charter Review Committee chair
• Proposal to consider a new charter preamble that removes DEI language fails 3-2
The Story
The City Commission reversed course at its Aug. 26 meeting and voted to put the recommendations of its Charter Review Committee in front of citizens in a special election as soon as possible rather than waiting for the 2026 general election.
If each of the charter amendments is approved in the referendum, the changes will be profound. The mayoral term will be lengthened to four years, a primary winner who receives a majority won’t have to run in a general election, the city clerk will be supervised by the city manager, the commissioners and mayor will receive a 50% raise, mandates for historic preservation will end, the arts will be declared a priority, and a charter review will be done every 10 years.
The new embrace of a special election was a reversal of the commission’s 4-1 vote on Aug. 12 against the idea, with Commissioner Valli Perrine the lone vote for it. One reason the measure failed in that meeting was the estimated $50,000 price tag of holding a separate election, when the amendments could be included on the ballot for the 2026 general election. Also, supporters of the city’s firefighters packed the Aug. 12 meeting and some cautioned the commissioners against setting up a potential raise for themselves while the city’s firefighters were fighting for a raise.
A letter sparks a rethinking
Opposition to a special election began to waiver Tuesday when City Manager Kevin Cowper read a letter from Mark Billings, a former naval medical officer and industry executive, according to his LinkedIn, who is chair of the 11-person Charter Review Committee. “If you asked us to perform the work now, why not complete the task by allowing the voters to decide now?” Billings wrote.
Rethinking the costs and benefits
The letter sparked a fresh look at the evidence.
Mayor Fred Cleveland argued the $50,000 cost of the special election was not the only expense to consider. He noted that a candidate who earns 50% of the vote in a primary won’t have to run again in a general election. That change would save “tens of thousands of dollars” that would otherwise be spent campaigning, “when statistically, as reported by the supervisor of elections, no one who won the primary was defeated in the general election.”
Vice Mayor Lisa Martin didn’t like what she was hearing. The expense of the special election was being “treated like throwaway money, and our minimum wage workers would really like to have some of that,” she said. Commissioner Perrine retorted that the $50,000 is already in the budget and not spending it would have no bearing on the pay of city employees: “We don’t pull from one pool to put in another pool when it has been allocated in our budget. So that statement needs to be stricken.”
No action was taken.
Fear of “ballot fatigue”
The pros and cons of a special election versus inclusion in the 2026 general election were also deliberated anew. “Even though it's a smaller turnout, more attention will — can — be devoted to the actual items that we want the public to vote on, if it's alone. If it's coupled with huge general election stuff, I just think that it wouldn't get a fair shot,” said Commissioner Brian Ashley.
Ashley’s concern about “ballot fatigue” gained traction. Commissioner Jason McGuirk said his point was a valid one: “I understand Commissioner Ashley's opinion on why the charter amendments or potential charter changes can get lost in a long ballot. People have voter fatigue. That's not a theory. That's a fact.”
Martin disagreed. “A special election in November will have the smallest possible turnout of any election, smaller even than primaries and the midterms. So without any sense of urgency, I am getting a lot of feedback from my constituents. I still think we are better served by having it on the November ’26 ballot,” she said.
When the time came to vote, the evidence was weighed differently this time by most of the commissioners. The special election carried the day on a 4-1 vote, with Martin voting no. The election is now “tentatively” scheduled for Nov. 4, spokesman Phillip Veski said by email Thursday.
Scrubbing DEI terms from the charter preamble
Like the U.S. Constitution, the city’s charter begins with a preamble. The current wording circa 2020 calls for “equitable participation” in the affairs of the city and a “diverse, inclusive” city government that protects and enhances the health, safety and welfare of the people.
Ashley announced at the meeting that he has drafted a new version that would avoid “outdated terms” that he did not specify.
The draft was not presented or read during the meeting, but the city released the text of it to Beat:
Under the authority conferred by the Constitution of the State of Florida, the citizens of the City of New Smyrna Beach enact this charter as the law of the city ("City of New Smyrna Beach") for the purpose of advancing the well-being of all of its citizens; to protect the environment by preserving our natural resources, rich history, coastal lifestyle; to improve our unique quality of life; to promote safety, responsible growth and sensible preservation which meets the broad needs of the community; to perform duties in a fiscally responsible, cost effective and timely manner; to allow participation of all citizens in the affairs of the city; to provide for efficiency, transparency, strategic planning, and ethics in governance and civil service. The government of the City of New Smyrna Beach supplies to employees an atmosphere of teamwork, learning and personal growth, encourages and emphasizes individual skills, unique talents and personal experience, resulting in positive and efficient service given to all. We espouse these values as the foundation of our city for both current and future citizens of New Smyrna Beach.
The text was accompanied by unsigned notes of Ashley’s meeting with City Attorney Carrie Avallone ahead of the commission meeting. The notes say: “According to Florida law, DEI is legal no more. Therefore, the new preamble will emphasize what is important to us, action and accountability coupled with customer service and efficiency. Therefore any reference to DEI is purged from the preamble.”
During the meeting, Ashley said his intent was to “encapsulate the principles that our city manager wants to put forth going forward to make it a better city.” He added: “The other stuff, to me, it’s incidental, you know?” He didn’t elaborate, but his comment came shortly after Avallone informed the commission that there was no legal requirement to remove DEI wording from city documents such as a preamble. The state law requiring removal of such wording “does apply to some state agencies and universities, but so far, it hasn’t reached down here,” she said, referring to municipalities like New Smyrna Beach.
Ashley made a motion to instruct the city attorney to draft an ordinance based on his proposed preamble. The motion failed 3-2, with Ashley and Cleveland voting for it.
Perrine suggested further discussion at a later date. “I would like to see a workshop —that we address all these little quirky languages that are outdated, including the preamble,” she said.
The commission took no action on the workshop.
Was this article forwarded to you? Subscribe to New Smyrna Beat so the next article lands in your inbox.