Death of a Manager -- the final, final sequel, absolutely the end, really, we mean it this time
In early 2003, newly elected Councilman John Moore raised some questions about the land lease that the city was entering into in a lease-renewal with Sharky's on the Pier Restaurant. City Attorney Bob Anderson deflected responsibility by stating that then-City Manager George Hunt had kept him out of the loop.

Still not happy, Moore reviewed the lease in an open city council meeting and, to the horror of Hunt, Moore had found some addendums to the lease that had blank spaces in them. These addendums were documents that Hunt had failed to provide copies of to council. In fact, council was totally ignorant of their existence until Moore produced them at the February 25, 2003, council meeting.

Hunt freaked out on the record and a war between council and Hunt erupted, one that would fester for quite some time and would eventually play a significant factor in Hunt's later decision to resign his position as city manager. Hunt's temperamental behavior at the February city council meeting was so over-the-top and gob-smackingly dramatic that this web site published an exact transcript (in a theatrical script format) entitled Death of a Manager.

It was an unusual way to tell a non-fiction news story, but the Sharky's lease story was perceived by the public at the time to be so back burner that neither newspaper ever referenced the flare-up or the blank lease issue until months later. The theatrical script format seemed to be the only way to tell the story for both the drama that the story was chronicling and to give out all of the details without totally confusing a first-time reader.

If you read that script carefully, it'll tell you most everything you might want to know about the dispute between city hall and Sharky's Restaurant.

Ten months later, on December 12, 2003, an enraged Hunt stormed out of a lease negotiation meeting between the city and Sharky's owner Mike Pachota. Hunt was angry at what he perceived as unnecessary meddling by Moore for the councilman's attendance at the meeting and at Moore's insistence that the city attorney be present at all negotiations. Moore's continued questioning of Hunt's motives and methodology in the lease negotiations probably wasn't helping to calm Hunt.

Thus, the seeds for threats of legal battles were sown, which eventually blossomed into quite a spectacular real legal battle.

All of which leads us to the present. The city and Sharky's are facing a January trial date. Both sides have come to a tentative agreement that neither side is entirely thrilled with but that both are willing to live with.

Problem: how do you explain this to a skeptical public that is already shell-shocked from malfeasance fiasco after malfeasance fiasco? Answer: hold a public meeting and explain the mess to the public.

In one of the few times that city hall has turned a potential PR disaster into something that the public could understand and digest, council held a special open meeting on the morning of November 25 (less than a week ago). All sides, including the public, were allowed to explain their positions, and there was (thankfully) quite a bit of back-and-forth dialog between citizens and council during the public input portion of the meeting. The openness on the part of council in this meeting dispelled a lot of the negative feedback that both council and Sharky's were likely anticipating.

In the video below, Moore gives a brief summary of how and why he dragged the city into this battle and why he thinks it is time to end it. Councilwoman Sue Lang agrees, but states her reservations about what the city would like to have been able to negotiate.

John Patten is the editor and publisher of Venice Florida! dot com and had previously worked in broadcasting for over 12 years. He can also be incredibly rude at times.