To the editor:

The following letter is basically what was sent to the Mayor and Council for consideration earlier in this week:

I am having difficulty with the mayor selection process that you have set in place.

What is provided in the City Charter does not appear to sanction the present course that you have set upon. As best that I can determine, I have provided below the two areas of the City Charter that apply to the filling a vacancy. (Chapter 4.07. Council; vacancies., and 4.11. Vacancies; forfeiture of office; filling of vacancies. were provided.)

The charter refers to vacancies. The Charter does not provide for an “anticipated” or “impending” vacancy that would allow for a “Mayor in Waiting” appointment that you will be making with your current process.

The Charter refers to filling of the vacancy by the “remaining council members.” By your action you will be filling a “vacancy” that has yet to occur. In fact you would have in effect both an elected and appointed mayor. You have also determined that you will be filling an anticipated vacancy with a vote by full body of the city council, and not by the “remaining council members” as the Charter provides.

I am suggesting that you reconsider your current appointment process path. I am asking that you read the City Charter since contrary to some who believe council can do whatever it pleases; you all have taken an oath to abide by the provision of the City Charter. Not doing so opens you up to ethics violations charges. If you have any doubt I seriously suggest that you ask for an AG opinion on the intent of the City Charter. While I am not an attorney I have no problem understanding the meaning of the words, “vacancy” and “remaining members.” There are specific provisions that deal with appointments however they only apply after a vacancy occurs. This has not happened nor will a vacancy occur so long as Mr. Feichthaler occupies the seat as Mayor of the City of Cape Coral.

Currently it is being reported that there maybe a significant number (possibly half) of the current city council members who may be seeking the appointment for themselves. Based on this information it is difficult to comprehend and understand how there possibly can be fair and impartial evaluation treatment given to applicants from the general public.

Several of those applicants have already been compromised by the comments of one council member who stated in the media; “I’ve been elected twice, someone who’s been turned down by voters shouldn't be mayor.” This points to bias from a member of the determining body who will be passing judgment on applicants. I believe in the last city election there were 22 candidates for five seats. The remaining 17 candidates, although defeated in the election did in fact receive considerably more votes from the public than the votes that will determine the appointed mayor and possible subsequent appointed council member.

In my opinion the current action path and time frame is in direct violation to our City Charter and may be subject to challenge. Thank you for your consideration.



Ralph LePera

Cape Coral