GUEST COMMENTARY/BY KEN DAIGE
The religious, political and philosophical positions of Mayor Craig Fletcher and Vice Mayor Tracey Carroll should come as no surprise to those who elected them.
Candidates campaign, holding meetings, fundraisers and parties, attend church and participate in numerous civic events. Those in attendance have an opportunity to get to know the candidates.
It is important to remember that their fellow City Council members, not the citizens of Vero Beach, elected the Mayor and Vice Mayor to their largely ceremonial positions.
You often hear politicians state from the dais that they represent the voters. While that may be what some elected official believes, it is not completely accurate. Once in office, a city council member takes an oath to represent everyone in the city, not just those who voted for them, or who contributed their campaigns.
Those on city council who are intolerant of dissenting views have threatened some citizens with arrest or removal from City Hall.
This council has verbally attacked anyone seen as being in disagreement with their point of view, yet the council majority has allowed those who agree with their positions to stand at the podium and discredit others who do not embrace their agenda.
Freedom from a government established religion and freedom of expression and speech is not the only controversial issue stirred up by the current council majority.
The majority of council:
*Voted for a policy proposed Fletcher in November 2010, without a formal agreement in place with Florida Power & Light at that time, that any employee not in favor of a sale to FPL be given the “iron boot.”
*Fired the city attorney based on personal prejudice. Only after public outcry did the council allow the city attorney the dignity to retire.
*Were willing to hire Turners neighbor as a headhunter consultant without following proper procedure, and only after being called into question followed proper procedure.
*Were called in question regarding a possible Sunshine Law violation which ultimately required a cure meeting involving a land deal with FPL at the Vero Beach Airport. This matter has yet to be resolved.
*Chose a headhunter consultant without experience working with city government. That consultant brought to council an individual with a questionable background who the council was willing to hire as the city attorney. Only after public outcry was their decision reversed.
*Signed a contract with FPL without resolving the FMPA contracts, agreed to a land swap not available to other taxpayers and agreed to penalties if the FPL contract cannot be closed.
The elected members of the city council represent you the resident of the City of Vero Beach, not just the voter.
The actions of the city council will not change without public outcry.
Indian River Guardian 
Ken,
The laundry list of issues you take exception to is interesting but if the intent of this article was to bring focus on the events at the recent city meeting I would suggest sticking to that issue. The mayor in his official capacity stated on the public record that he would “have nothing to do” with those who do not share his religious belief. This would be tolerable for some in his private life but not acceptable in his official duties as mayor as it is constitutionally not acceptable for any governing authority in these United States to take any action “respecting the establishment of religion.” The mayor was very wrong and this issue needs resolution. The vice mayor jumped into the fray and joined the mayor adding insult to injury. The same sanction or action by the majority of the council should apply to her as well. From my perspective a reorganizational meeting is in order and a new mayor and a new vice mayor should be appointed until the November elections.
Brian Heady