I’ve been watching JEA for a long time—closer than most.

Years ago, I worked alongside the JEA leadership and helped shape governance policies for the board. Those guardrails were designed for one reason: when money, influence, and pressure collide, the system forces a pause before decisions are made.

That’s why this latest situation stood out.

According to emails and texts obtained by Action News Jax, a lobbying contract with Ballard Partners—a politically connected firm—was being pushed through JEA. The process raised questions: a limited review, direction to quickly move forward, and urgency around awarding the contract.

Then CEO Vickie Cavey stepped in.

She told staff not to execute the agreement. She questioned whether JEA should be hiring a lobbyist at all. In short, she did what the governance structure is supposed to do—slow it down and take a closer look.

And that’s when the narrative changed.

Instead of focusing on the contract and how it was handled, the story quickly shifted to Cavey herself. Allegations surfaced about a “hostile” work environment and leadership concerns, largely coming after the deal was halted and positions were reshuffled.

If you’ve been around government long enough, you recognize that move.

A contract is moving. Someone stops it.
The focus shifts—from the decision… to the person who stopped it.

Here are the facts Action News uncovered:

• A lobbying contract with a high-powered firm was being advanced
• Internal communications show direction to award the contract
• The CEO intervened and stopped execution
• The Chief of Staff involved in moving the contract was later removed from his position
• Claims about workplace culture surfaced after the conflict
• The JEA Board gave the CEO a 6–1 vote of confidence

This story may look like it is about personalities. Reality is: It’s about process.

JEA is a multi-billion-dollar public utility. Decisions like this aren’t small—they set precedent. And governance only works if someone is willing to apply the brakes when something doesn’t feel right.

From where I sit, having helped build those guardrails, this isn’t the system breaking. This is the system working—and “someone” didn’t like the outcome.

Because when process gets in the way of momentum, the easiest move is to discredit the person enforcing it.

But Jacksonville shouldn’t lose sight of what just happened.

A deal was moving. It got stopped by the CEO.

And the only real question that matters now is:

Why was it moving so fast in the first place?