Critical City Attorney Performance Reviews Cited Staff Friction and Delays before Resignation

Posted Saturday, November 14, 2026 3:20 am

By Mike Lednovich

FERNANDINA BEACH - City Attorney Teresa Prince received sharply critical performance evaluations before submitting her resignation, with 14 of 18 reviewers giving her low ratings for operational effectiveness and teamwork and 13 expressing dissatisfaction with her communication.

Prince acknowledged the criticism in a response to the Fernandina Observer, stating the evaluation results led her to conclude that her approach to practicing law was not the right fit for city staff and the organization.

"Upon further reflection, results indicated that my style of practicing law was not the right fit for city staff and the organization," Prince said. "As a result, I have decided to pursue other opportunities."

The evaluations, obtained by the Observer through a public records request, describe concerns about staff turnover, strained working relationships, delayed legal advice and difficulties coordinating with city departments.

Prince disputed some of the criticism in a separate written response to the city, citing staffing shortages, a backlog of legal work and major litigation that demanded extensive attention.

Individual performance appraisals by commissioners James Antun and Joyce Tuten also offered a more favorable assessment of Prince's legal abilities, although both identified problems with timely service to city departments.

Antun and Tuten did not respond to the Observer's request for comment on the matter as did Vice Mayor Darron Ayscue and Commissioners Tim Poynter and Genece Minshew.

City Manager Sarah Campbell confirmed that the 360-degree evaluation results were emailed to commissioners and the city's three charter officers on Oct. 5. Prince subsequently met individually with each commissioner to discuss her annual performance review.

"I greatly appreciate that each commissioner approached my charter review with respect, professionalism and provided thoughtful feedback," Prince told the Observer.

The 360-degree evaluation was the first of its kind used to assess Fernandina Beach's charter officers.

Campbell said Commissioner Genece Minshew proposed adding the review during the Sept. 15 City Commission meeting after the city updated its charter officer evaluation forms earlier this year. The commission agreed.

A 360-degree evaluation gathers feedback from people who work with an executive, offering perspectives on leadership, communication, teamwork and professional performance.

The city's survey included 18 responses evaluating Prince, Campbell and City Clerk Caroline Best across 10 performance categories.

Prince described the evaluation in her written response as an anonymous review by department heads. The SurveyMonkey report does not identify individual respondents or explain how they were selected.

The results for Prince were particularly unfavorable in operational effectiveness, where 14 respondents, or 77.8%, assigned ratings of 1 or 2 on a four-point scale.

Thirteen respondents, or 72.2%, rated her communication and transparency at 1 or 2.

Workforce engagement and team building produced similarly critical results. Fourteen respondents gave Prince a 1 or 2, two assigned a 3 and two selected not applicable. None gave her the highest rating.

One respondent wrote:

"The lack of soft skills fractures relationships and is a disruption to normal City operations and processes."

Another complained:

"High staff turnover makes it difficult to have consistent synergy with the department."

Other respondents described legal advice as difficult to interpret, communications as unnecessarily lengthy and delays as disruptive to departmental operations.

"The City Attorney doesn't seem to follow a solutions approach and has been known to impede processes," one respondent wrote.

The survey does not identify specific projects delayed by Prince or establish that her legal advice was incorrect. The comments represent the respondents' assessments rather than independently verified findings.

In an Oct. 28 letter to the city's Human Resources Department, Prince responded to the evaluations and asked that her explanation be included in her personnel file.

She said the City Attorney position had been vacant for approximately eight months before she took office in August 2025. During that period, an interim attorney provided part-time coverage while maintaining a separate legal practice.

Prince said she inherited a backlog of contracts, pending legal matters and departmental review requests.

Shortly after her arrival, the office's legal assistant and paralegal of seven years transferred to another city position.

The replacement search began during the holidays. Prince said the initial hire did not work out, leaving the office without experienced support for another extended period. A temporary employee helped until a second search produced a replacement.

Prince acknowledged that some departments waited longer than expected for legal assistance.

"I recognize that some requests took longer than departments expected. Their frustration is understandable," she wrote.

She attributed the delays to the volume and complexity of legal work handled without an experienced assistant.

Prince also described the demands of several high-profile city controversies, including paid parking and related litigation, the first citizen-initiated ordinance and subsequent litigation, recall petitions involving two commissioners, the proposed RYAM bioethanol facility and the Tringali property dispute.

Although outside attorneys handled portions of some cases, Prince said her office remained responsible for coordinating and overseeing the city's legal work.

Those matters were in addition to regular commission meetings, advisory board responsibilities, contract reviews and requests from city departments.

Prince said her office reviewed, revised and approved as to form and legality more than 400 contracts during the 2025-26 fiscal year.

She also cited work on the paid parking ordinance, changes to city utility regulations, an electric bicycle ordinance, special events regulations, code enforcement procedures and updates required by state legislation.

Prince's written response also addressed complaints that her legal advice impeded city projects.

She said the City Attorney's responsibility is to advise elected officials and departments about legal requirements, including circumstances in which a proposed action could expose the city to litigation.

"My goal is not to obstruct progress, but to help the City achieve its goals lawfully, avoid costly litigation, and maintain public trust," she wrote.

Prince said legal advice sometimes requires recommending changes to projects or advising against proposed actions, even when departments are eager to proceed.

She also questioned aspects of the evaluation process, saying she would have preferred opportunities to discuss concerns directly with department heads before the anonymous survey.

In her letter, Prince asked for clarification of comments accusing her office of duplicating work, hindering contract software implementation and impeding city objectives.

She said contract software implementation was not a responsibility assigned to her office.

Prince also questioned the use of 360-degree evaluations as part of formal performance assessments, citing management author Patrick Lencioni's argument that such reviews are better suited to employee development than compensation or employment decisions.

"Although I believe the evaluations' timing and approach were not ideal, I take the concerns seriously," she wrote.

Her October letter expressed a willingness to develop a plan to address the criticism if she remained in office.

In her subsequent response to the Observer, Prince explained why she ultimately chose to resign.

"While looking back there are certainly things I could have done differently, I am grateful that this separation is amicable and am fully focused on ensuring a smooth transition for the City," she said.

Commissioner Tuten and Mayor Antun submitted written evaluations.

Commissioner Antun's performance appraisal was more favorable than many of the anonymous survey responses.

Antun gave Prince a rating of 3, meaning meets expectations, in six of eight categories. He rated her a 4, exceeds expectations, for legal, regulatory and policy compliance.

His lowest rating was a 2 for leadership, operational effectiveness and results.

"My experience working with Ms. Prince has been overall positive with regards to her interfacing with the city commission," Antun wrote.

But he acknowledged that other city employees did not share that assessment.

"I am aware that multiple staff members do not share this sentiment, and I wish to understand more about what issues have come up with Ms. Prince and other staff members."

Antun praised what he described as an improvement in the quality and structure of legal updates during commission meetings compared with Prince's predecessor.

He identified collaboration with city staff as an area requiring continued development.

His stated goal for Prince's next evaluation period was to improve upon concerns raised in reviews submitted by other staff members.

Commissioner Tuten's Oct. 12 evaluation also distinguished Prince's legal expertise from her operational performance.

Tuten gave Prince ratings of 4 for legal compliance and risk management, while assigning ratings of 2 for leadership and operational effectiveness. She rated Prince a 3 in governance, fiscal stewardship, collaborative legal counsel and communication.

Tuten praised Prince's ethics and integrity, describing them as deserving the highest rating.

She also credited Prince with thorough legislative updates and work with the Planning Department and Code Enforcement to update city codes.

Tuten described Prince's individual legal briefings to her as excellent, thorough and understandable.

But she repeatedly identified delays in providing legal assistance to other departments.

"Organizational outcomes can suffer because of timeliness in work completion," Tuten wrote.

She said department directors experienced delays that could increase costs and interfere with their work.

"Staff needs more timely input to achieve their goals more efficiently," she wrote.

Tuten's overall comments also recognized the staffing difficulties Prince described.

She said the departure of the longtime paralegal Katie Newton to a downtown coordinator position caused a substantial loss of institutional knowledge and efficiency. The subsequent need to hire another legal assistant further delayed the office's progress toward full productivity.

Tuten credited Prince with guiding the city through major lawsuits involving paid parking, commissioner recall efforts, the Tringali property and RYAM.

She also praised Prince's efforts to educate city advisory board members about legal requirements, particularly during quasi-judicial hearings.

Her goals for Prince included improving the timeliness and efficiency of legal services to reduce delays affecting other city departments.

The broader 360-degree survey was not uniformly negative.

Thirteen of the 18 respondents gave Prince ratings of 3 or 4 for legal and regulatory compliance.

Several credited her knowledge of statutory requirements, attention to legislative developments and commitment to ethical conduct.

"No question of ethics for any of the Charter officers," one respondent wrote.

Another described Prince as knowledgeable and willing to explain her decisions.

The City Commission is scheduled to consider a proposed agreement that would cost the city $73,551.60, consisting of $44,923.87 in severance salary, $14,974.62 for accrued paid time off and $13,653.11 in employer taxes and benefit costs.

The severance salary would be paid in six installments between Jan. 22 and April 2, 2027.

Prince's original employment agreement required 90 days' notice for a voluntary resignation but did not provide severance pay under those circumstances.

The proposed agreement would amend that provision to authorize 12 weeks of severance.

It also includes a mutual release of potential legal claims between Prince and the city and provisions for assisting with the transition of the City Attorney's Office.

Neither party admits wrongdoing or liability under the agreement.

The city says sufficient funds are available in the City Attorney's departmental budget, although a future budget amendment may be needed to compensate an interim city attorney or outside law firm.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here