by Vernon Brown, the Shade Tree PHD
I am writing this letter to express my deep concern and strong disappointment regarding the recent resignation and abrupt departure of Mr. David Levin, the longtime City Attorney for Punta Gorda, during a City Council meeting. Mr. Levin’s sudden walkout in the midst of a public, highly consequential discussion was not only unprofessional but also an alarming display of poor business acumen and disregard for the principles of sound municipal governance. He is an unfaithful bastard in my opinion; and reminds me of a kid who takes his ball so other kids can’t play if he is NOT picked on the team.
Mr. Levin’s resignation may have been precipitated by personal or professional frustrations, particularly given that his contract, in place since 2005, was not renewed and set to expire in July. Nonetheless, the way in which he chose to handle his departure—abandoning his post mid-meeting, without forewarning or appropriate procedural transition—reflects a lack of maturity, professionalism, and respect for the city government, its officials, and, most importantly, the citizens of Punta Gorda who paid his salary. The city should sue him just to send a message.
Municipal leadership depends on structure, stability, and a sense of responsibility from those who hold key roles within its administration. When someone in a pivotal position such as the City Attorney’s office chooses to resign publicly and without notice, it disrupts the entire framework of governance. This kind of impulsive action is unbecoming of a legal professional and undermines the decorum expected in public service. Moreover, such behavior during a live meeting with residents present sends a damaging message about the professionalism of the city’s leadership to its constituents and the broader public.
Let us remember that public officials are held to a higher standard, especially when entrusted with legal counsel and stewardship. As the City Attorney, Mr. Levin had a duty not only to the council but to the people of Punta Gorda to ensure a smooth, efficient, and dignified transition of legal authority. Whether or not he agreed with the council’s decision to pursue new representation, he owed it to the office he held, and the community he served for nearly two decades, to honor his role until the conclusion of his contract or until an appropriate exit plan was in place.
Instead, Mr. Levin chose to exit with a curt remark—“I’m going to make this easier for y’all”—and left the meeting entirely. That is not leadership. That is not integrity. And that certainly is not a reflection of the values that Punta Gorda seeks to uphold in its public servants.
This sudden departure left the City Council scrambling to find an interim replacement on the spot. While we applaud the council’s ability to act swiftly by engaging Mr. Steven Leskovich, the fact remains: this should never have been necessary. Government transitions—especially those involving legal counsel—require thoughtful planning, open communication, and sufficient notice to ensure that critical operations are not jeopardized.
The role of a City Attorney is far from ceremonial. This position oversees essential legal matters, offers guidance on policy decisions, ensures the legality of ordinances, contracts, and resolutions, and advises on potential liabilities and legal risks. It is an office that directly impacts every aspect of city governance. A sudden vacancy, particularly in the middle of a heated discussion about that very office’s future, creates vulnerability, confusion, and potentially exposes the city to legal or procedural missteps.
Furthermore, the rationale provided by Mr. Levin for his resignation was deeply troubling. During the meeting, Councilmember Jeannine Polk criticized Levin for his timing in withholding concerns about an agreement with ICE until after it had already been approved. These are the kinds of legal and ethical questions that require the City Attorney to engage constructively and collaboratively—not defensively or vindictively. Rather than addressing these concerns professionally, Levin opted to terminate his relationship with the city in the moment, in front of his peers and the public.
This was not a dignified exit. It was an act of defiance and frustration. And while everyone is entitled to feel disappointment or disagreement, professionals in high-stakes roles must rise above emotion and do what is in the best interest of the institution they serve.
The resignation’s timing also had budgetary and logistical implications. Vice-Mayor Greg Julian posed a critical question about whether funding would be available to hire an interim City Attorney while Levin’s contract was still in effect—a question that rightly points to the need for financial clarity and continuity. By resigning on the spot, Levin left the council to sort through these issues without the benefit of legal continuity, adding unnecessary stress and ambiguity to an already delicate transition.
Moreover, in terms of broader business practices and organizational integrity, Mr. Levin’s actions run counter to the expectations we place on leaders and public figures. Any reputable legal professional or executive would understand that sudden resignations, especially in a public and adversarial setting, can have severe repercussions—not only for reputation but for operations, morale, and strategic planning.
This is not how one closes out nearly 20 years of public service. Such a lengthy tenure should be honored with grace and reflection, not ended with dramatics and haste. It is also disheartening for the city’s employees, many of whom likely respected Mr. Levin and expected a transition that mirrored the professionalism they strive to uphold in their own roles.
While Mr. Steven Leskovich has admirably stepped in to fill the gap and appears qualified, the fact that this decision had to be made within the same meeting—essentially off the cuff—further underlines the recklessness of Levin’s exit. Governance should never be left to react in real time to such destabilizing events. It should be given time, forethought, and structure—none of which were afforded to the City Council in this situation.
In the end, public service is about stewardship. It is about placing the community above self-interest. It is about leaving your post better than you found it. Mr. Levin failed in these responsibilities during the final moments of his tenure, and that failure should be acknowledged for what it was: unprofessional, disruptive, and wholly inappropriate for someone of his experience and stature.
I urge the City Council to reflect on this event not just as an isolated incident, but as a reminder of the standards we must hold for those in public service. A transition, even under strained circumstances, must be done with care, communication, and commitment to the public good. Mr. Levin’s actions fell short of these expectations, and his resignation, as it was conducted, sets a troubling precedent for how public servants may feel empowered to depart when circumstances no longer suit them.
The people of Punta Gorda deserve better. They deserve professionalism, accountability, and respect from all who serve in city leadership. Abrupt exits, especially those made in public defiance, do not represent those values. They represent abandonment—and in the realm of public duty, there are few things more damaging.
Good Riddens David! Thanks for letting us know how you really felt about your job as Attorney for the City of Punta Gorda.
