Category Archives: City of Stuart

Who Do I Represent?

Posted on by

Who does an elected official represent? It may seem like a rather straight forward question which should have a rather straight forward answer.  But it certainly does not? Since taking office last year I have had to wrestle with the very essence of what “democratic representation” means. There is nothing simple to that rather complex political concept.

My main career has been as a commercial real estate broker. As such when involved in a deal I have always asked the question to whom do I represent and owe a fiduciary duty.  Those of you who are real estate salespersons or brokers understand this concept well. In fact through the years the state has added mandatory disclosure forms that parties sign so that it is clear who a particular real estate licensee represents. That has been good training for my job as a commissioner. In the political sphere, each elected official needs to answer that very question.

There is no one answer for every situation because there are competing political interests. Is a businessperson with a retail establishment in the city though living in Palm City someone I represent as a commissioner? I don’t represent that person as a voter. It is part of my responsibility as a commissioner to listen to his/her complaint and act as an ombudsman if need be. If that person needs help I would make myself available to try and solve the problem if possible.

Even though that person cannot vote for me we need businesses in order to collect taxes and have a vibrant city. So I would consider it in the interest of Stuart to do my best for that business. When a business though is doing something that is generating complaints from residents, I would first try to mediate the problem. If it continued, I would consider it my duty to represent the people’s wishes that lived within the boundaries of Stuart as long as legal.

It becomes more difficult if one small segment of Stuart residents wish something that would not be in the interest of the entire city. In that case my duty would be to look after the well being of the entire city. Even if by doing so I would displease some of my constituents. I need to look to achieve the greater good.

What happens when the vast majority of my constituents are for something that I am not? Do I disregard the will and desire of the people and substitute my judgment instead? In cases where the people have made their desires known to me even if I don’t agree I would follow their wishes. In that case it has to be the vast majority and those wishes need to be lawful. I am not infallible and the collective wisdom is more often than not right.

If that collective opinion is in opposition to what I believe is moral and ethical then I would not side with the majority. I do think I first have to be true to my own code of conduct. The issue in that case is not a difference of opinion but rather one of belief. I could not possibly do anything other than follow my conscience. If people disagreed with my decision and it meant enough to them then they could oppose my re-election.

As you can see “democratic representation” is not a simple matter. Other elected officials may feel and act differently and it would not mean their ideas on the subject are incorrect. What I owe to you, my constituents, is my reasoning and thoughts on how I make decisions. Most votes I have in the past or will in the future cast have or will be non-controversial.  You trust in my judgment to do what is best for the welfare of the city. In those votes that are more controversial you now know the basis of my decisions.

What Is Our Future

Posted on by

Most of us, including myself, have an innate fear of the new. We look to the past as if life were better “then”. People were nicer, the grass was greener and there was a certainty of right which we see as missing in the present. How it was is usually seen through the prism of nostalgia without the facts and basis of reality. As R. A. Salvatore wrote in one of his books, “How many people long ‘for that past, simpler, and better world’, I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?”

Fearing the new, while natural, is limiting if we allow that fear to stop us from obtaining our rightful and true future. Time does not stop. The future will become the present in a second and then the past a second later. By inclination and training, I believe in the study of history. To quote Shakespeare, “What is past is prologue.” We should be cognizant of our past but not dwell within it. Life is not static; it is dynamic. Good or bad, our future depends on seeing clearly and acting in the present so as not to be consigned to a doubtful and unsustainable future. The continuation of Stuart as a city is not pre-ordained. To have a future, Stuart must work and plan to achieve it.

Martin County and Stuart are at a crossroad. Some would take us headlong into a future that looks like 1960’s American sprawl with one story shopping centers and dwelling upon dwelling on one acre plots, without care or thought to the roads and other infrastructure needed. This type of development leads to a devastation of our environment and a banality of our souls. The United States no longer looks like the Brady Bunch family and never really did.

Another faction would bury us in a past that was adequate for a city and county of 30, 40 or 50 years ago. This was a supposed idyllic time, where everyone was content and and the kids all played baseball in our parks. There were 60 distinct businesses in East Stuart and downtown had a Rexall and department store. But in truth, those businesses in East Stuart were products of segregation and shopping downtown with limited choices was more a chore than a pleasure.

Both those visions of the future are shaded by a past that was not idyllic. We cannot build a future on a history that never was. We have to learn from the factual past. Residents must recognize the social, fiscal and technological realities of today in order to take us to our rightful tomorrow.  That tomorrow should be sustainable and affordable for our county, city and …. our children.

We can remember our past and build upon it but not to the exclusion of the steps necessary to have a future. Martin County cannot afford to have no growth. The growth can occur within the Urban Service Boundary by doing infill development and repurposing old one story commercial and residential structures. Stuart needs to increase population and become geographically larger. The number of current residents cannot afford to sustain the operations of the city. We need growth, and we can do so without sacrificing our Florida charm or heritage.

Our county, and especially Stuart, will not look the same in coming decades. As a community and government, we can either have a modicum of control or abdicate our responsibilities for a viable future. I believe in a Stuart and Martin County where people will be able and want to visit and live. A place where there are jobs and opportunity. Those things cannot be accomplished by wishing for a past that we think we remember. We cannot afford to base our future on nostalgia or unrealistic economic dreams.

Be On Guard!

Posted on by

As another legislative session approaches in Tallahassee, it is once again time to be on guard for legislation that, if enacted, will diminish local control. Local control is so very important because it places decision making as close to the citizen as possible. The U.S. is not a direct democracy but rather a representative democracy where the voters elect representatives to make policy and law in their names. The farther political power is removed from the citizens, the easier it becomes for those representatives to disregard the will of the people. Local control allows the people, through local representatives, to initiate solutions that best fit their localities.

Our entire system of government is one of balance. In our federal structure, no one branch can become too powerful as to be tyrannical. The ongoing struggle between states’ rights and federal supremacy is to limit the power of both. This results in a competitive tension that serves the people best. However, states and their political subdivisions (e.g. municipalities and counties) are different than the relationship between federal and state governments. Local governments only exist as creatures created by state governments.

We often hear of the Law of Unintended Consequences. This happens when the legislature mandates that local government must provide or pay for something without the state giving the locality the necessary funding to accomplish the task. This results in less money available to do what the locality wants or needs to do. Similarly this can occur when the legislature passes a bill that supersedes local control in a particular area. An example is the case of regulating short term rentals. Why is the state involved in this very local matter? By not allowing local control of rentals the local market may suffer economically. If the citizens of Vero, through their local governmental body, pass an ordinance that all leases must be for at least six months, why should the legislature care? If an ordinance such as this goes against the will of the community, then it would not be enacted. If the local elected body insisted, they would most likely lose their seats in the next election. The constitutional rights of any aggrieved party are protected through the courts.

By thwarting a city from exercising local control within their boundaries, the legislature perverts the very idea of democracy. One size does not fit all. The beauty of the American system is that one citizen can make a difference within his/her community. A single person does have the power to exert influence on local government. As a nation and a state, we must stop the concentration of power in the hands of a few…no matter how good their intentions.

I urge the legislature and governor to stop and think before enacting a law or promulgating a regulation which mandates what a locality must do or is prohibited from doing. They need to ask whether this either real or perceived problem is something that can be handled more effectively and efficiently at the local level. Does the state have a compelling reason and/or interest in preventing a county or city from doing something…whether it is raising revenue or passing an ordinance?

“That government is best that governs least” is as valid today as it was when the quote was attributed to Jefferson over 200 years ago. The farther the governmental body is from the electorate, the less it should impose its will on the citizens. C.K. Chesterton wrote in What I Saw In America “The only purely popular government is local, and founded on local knowledge. The citizens can rule the city because they know the city; but it will always be an exceptional sort of citizen who has or claims the right to rule over ten cities…” We all should remember that.

 

Stuart CRA Expansion

Posted on by

As many of you may know, Stuart is looking to expand the CRA (Community Redevelopment Area) to other neighborhoods.  When the idea was first mentioned I was in favor, if the expansion resulted in infrastructure projects moving forward in the new incorporated areas. I further wanted to see the operation of the CRA treated as a fund and not as an independent department or division within city government. This is not a reflection on the city staff, but in a city of our geographical and population size, I don’t believe that we need to have a government within a government.

In order to have an effective CRA (or for that matter a city), the citizens who reside within those boundaries need community outreach and resident input. The time has come to have the city focus on more than a few blocks of historic downtown. The many neighborhoods that make up Stuart should have more attention paid to them. Plans and goals are fine, but without a dedicated funding source and a desire of the residents to move forward, nothing will happen.

The CRA fund or TIF is created by keeping the increased taxes that result from increased value on a property. Those funds do not come from any additional tax being levied as another taxing unit. That increase amount collected would have gone to the county and city general funds. Not one more penny is collected from property owners who are in a CRA. However, the increased taxes generated because of an increased property value must be spent within the CRA. The fund is a catalyst for infrastructure improvements and economic development within the district.

It has been my observation that change is inevitable. Ideas blossom, technology improves, the economy develops and societal norms become different.  Whether any individual desires changes or not is immaterial to whether change occurs. It is government’s role to guide those changes to produce outcomes that benefit their constituents. As a commissioner and a member of the board of the Community Redevelopment Agency, it is my responsibility to provide the city staff with the tools and direction to implement the changes.

Therefore, for greater citizen involvement with the proposed expansion, the Community Redevelopment Board should now consist of 9 members from the present 7 with at least 6 members (including the chair) being city residents and no more than 3 members being non-resident business owners within the CRA.  The two non-commission members of the Community Redevelopment Agency Board would be appointed by the Community Redevelopment Board from their board members who are residents of the city.

The city staff must also be reorganized to best carry out the CRA objectives. I would like to see a Department of Community, Tourism and Economic Development. In a city our size, no tourist or economic initiative undertaken doesn’t impact the entire community. This department must know what the residents of the city want in order to attract those businesses and tourist dollars that are desired by the citizens. The Community Development division would be charged with holding workshops within the different neighborhoods. This process will ascertain what the residents needs are within their neighborhoods and then to incorporate those needs within the CRA plan as a whole.

Once the priorities of the projects are set by the boards, the implementation is done by the city departments in place to best execute the projects. For example putting in a side walk is the responsibility of Public Works whether it is in the CRA or not. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel or add a layer of bureaucracy to accomplish it. If we can simplify the lines of communication, responsibility and make the entire city government as transparent as possible, then our residents can see where Stuart is headed. We will then not only have a successful CRA, but also a prosperous and growing city.

An Economic Crossroads For Stuart

Posted on by

Stuart is at a crossroads. As a community, we need to face some unpleasant facts and choices. Founded over 100 years ago, our city will not be viable if we continue on the same course. This is not hyperbole but an economic fact.

The city exists because the Florida legislature gave us a charter. We were fortunate enough to incorporate and stay incorporated when “home rule” was advocated by our legislators. They had a Jeffersonian view that local people should be in charge of their own affairs. The less the state intruded the better. About 50 years ago, that view changed in Tallahassee. The legislature has come to believe that they know better than we do about what is good for our community. The regulation of business, taxing authority, property rental policies and almost everything else needs to be approved by them. The state has a one-size-fits-all mentality.  If it’s a good remedy for a local problem in Pensacola, then it must be good for Stuart even though we may not have the problem.

With the advent of “Big Government”, it became more efficient and beneficial to the legislature to erode home rule. Tallahassee takes decision making authority away from localities and concentrates that authority in the capital. The state government became more and more centralized. Less and less money and resources go to the municipalities. The ordinary citizen and Floridian has less influence on the course of his/her life. The ability of local government which he/she can be a part has less and less authority to raise money and enact locally-needed ordinances to solve local problems.

The sales tax is by far the largest Florida source of revenue. According to Stuart’s Economic Development Division, for every dollar collected in the city about 90% goes to and stays in Tallahassee. The county receives roughly the remainder. Of the amount that comes back to the county, the city receives 9%. So for every dollar in sales tax (not sales) collected by a business in Stuart, the city gets less than a penny of revenue. As a point of reference 65% of the sales taxes collected in Martin County are from businesses located within city limits. If Stuart could keep more of that revenue, our economic future would be more secure.

Unfortunately, the state has rejected changing the revenue sharing formula with the county. We do not have and have not been given the authority to levy our own sales tax even with voter approval.  If we could levy our own sales tax, then the bulk of the collections would come from people who do not live in Stuart yet shop at our businesses and use our city services from roads to fire rescue when visiting. Food and medicines which are residents every day necessities are exempt from sales tax.

Except for property taxes, municipalities have very little authority to raise income. With the enactment of “Save Our Homes” and other exemptions, fewer and fewer people are paying “ad valorem” taxes. That means commercial and newer residents are paying a disproportionate share. “Ad valorem” is Latin for according to value. So if you own a house, whether it is worth $1,000,000 or $50,000, you should pay “X” % of the value every year in property taxes. What the state has done is shift the basic tenet of what property taxes are from value of the asset owned to the income of the owner of the asset. In effect property tax has taken on the characteristics of an income tax. This has resulted in less income being collected since the pool of taxpayers is smaller. As an example, someone living in a $1,000,000 home can literally pay no property tax which inadvertently removes a valuable asset from the tax rolls.

The unintended consequences of this, along with the proliferation of non-profits, have been to eliminate 60% of the city’s lots from paying real-estate taxes. As anyone can see, Stuart cannot continue on this path. We, as a city, and even Martin County will not be viable if this trend continues. There are things that can be done, but we must advocate in Tallahassee and Washington.  Both must change the way they govern.

Urbanization and County Government

Posted on by

The topic of CRAs has been in the news lately. Both Stuart and Martin County are and will be going through discussions on what are the next steps for these areas. It seems that the city and county are going in different directions. Stuart wants to enlarge its CRA and the county wants to do away with theirs. The philosophies of both entities are different regarding what is to be accomplished within those areas. It is rooted in the differences between municipalities and counties.

According to the enabling legislation (which is Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes), both counties and cities can have CRAs. The definitions of what neighborhoods would qualify for designation as a CRA are usually found in urban settings. The acronym stands for Community Redevelopment Area. When one thinks of that term, one does think of areas in cities … not unincorporated county areas.

Counties were originally established as arms of the state to provide state services. That is why there are mandated constitutional offices such as Tax Collector and Property Appraiser in every county in Florida. With Florida’s rapid growth and urbanization, counties took on the role of municipalities in the services they provide. This resulted in Urban Services Boundaries. What should have happened as populations and densities increased? There should have been the formation of municipalities to provide urban services. Counties should have remained in their original roles instead of doing a bad imitation of cities.

Hobe Sound, Rio and Jensen Beach are not independent municipalities with an elected government representing their communities. Instead Martin County created CRAs there and in other urbanized parts of the county to substitute for local elected government. This does not work. The County Board of Commissioners valiantly tries to provide services for the entire county, but the services provided in an urban environment are different than those in a suburban or rural one. Their needs are different and, in some cases, irreconcilable. This results in higher taxes being levied on all county residents regardless of if they use or want the services being offered.

You cannot substitute the CRA mechanism for the legitimate desire of the urban residents of unincorporated Martin County to have their own representative bodies determing their needs. The agricultural areas of western Martin County should not be paying for the services demanded by those in the urban sections. The county should have encouraged the development of more municipalities and the annexation of the more urban unincorporated areas into municipalities.

This would have resulted in dramatically reduced taxes for all county residents being levied, since only those functions mandated by the state to be provided by counties would be needed. Wherever urban services were demanded, only those affected would be taxed by their local municipalities to provide those services and only those services the local residents wanted. The one size fits all system Martin County currently has is undemocratic and fiscally irresponsible. CRAs are not meant to be municipalities and that is why there is a political disconnect.

I supported the county when the elected county commissioners became the Community Redevelopment Agency Board because they are elected. Appointed people should not have control of tax dollars. However, the better course would have been an elected government closer to the residents of those areas deciding urban issues. Being a resident of a municipality does not mean you are not a resident, voter and taxpayer of the county. Let’s return to the original intent of what a county and what a city is. Each should do what it does best.

The Sound Of Music

Posted on by

The city commission has once again decided to tackle the noise ordinance.  This is one of the most controversial matters that will come before the commission this year. People bring to the issue both emotion and hyperbole when discussing it. Some seem to want to make the issue solely about a few venues playing music. Noise that affects Stuart’s quality of life is more than just that.

As I sat on the dais last Monday night, I saw people take sides instead of trying to work through a problem.  And make no mistake that a quality of life issue is a problem. For that reason I made a motion to form a special committee. The committee will consist of each commissioner appointing one Stuart resident, a representative from Main Street and one from the Downtown Business Association. The committee will meet with staff and come up with recommendations for the commission within 90 days.

The issue is not only about restaurants and bars playing music. It encompasses your neighbor who has his MP3 playing so you hear it in your home. It is about the person using a table saw in his garage at night. The cleaning of grease traps after a restaurant closes. What everyone on that committee will wrestle with is how the City of Stuart will meet those competing interests… not only about a few music venues.

Stuart has a unique position on the Treasure Coast. We are a city of 16,000 residents but the downtown for 220,000 people. Our infrastructure, fire rescue and police need to provide services for every person that uses the restaurants, stores and venues in the city. This is regardless of whether they live here or not, pay taxes here or not. It is not an insignificant burden on our municipal government and budget. While the city does collect the bulk of the sales taxes in Martin County, we receive only 9% back from the county and that is after the state takes its percentage from those taxes.

I don’t buy the argument of economic ruin for the city if a few outdoor venues are required to lower the volume at which music is heard.  Our retail stores and our many restaurants attract residents and visitors alike not because of the music playing at these few venues, but because of good food, drink and merchandise being offered. There is a place for the listening of music outdoors. However, not all music is appropriate to be played outdoors in or close to residential neighborhoods.  Some of this music needs to be played at an indoor club in non- residential neighborhoods.

At the same time all residents need to understand that they have chosen to live in a city in close proximity to others. That does entail the acceptance of neighbors having parties, businesses operating and music being played. Stuart is not the suburbs though there are single family homes in residential neighborhoods. We are a place that wants to keep our “Old Florida” charm while moving forward.  Music and the arts are critical to our economic viability. Let’s come together and see if there is a way to embrace as many points of view as possible on the subject of noise.

Thoughts On A Birthday

Posted on by

This Saturday is the 239th birthday of the United States. Amidst the fireworks, hotdogs, flags and beer, what are we really celebrating? When those men gathered in Philadelphia that summer, what did they hope to accomplish? If you were to have asked them, they would have told you that they wanted to govern themselves and be left with a minimum of interference in their trades, professions and businesses. That is not very different from what we want today.

In trying to achieve that end, Jefferson expounded the philosophy of John Locke (with a smattering taken from scripture and Hobbes) in writing the Declaration. That document was the philosophical argument for achieving “home rule” and economic freedom for Americans. The 13 colonies were no longer to be ruled from afar by a tyrannical monarch and unrepresentative parliament but rather each colony would govern itself and form a loose confederation of member states.

The Declaration, while democratic, did not guarantee universal suffrage or equal rights for all. It is a document that enunciates broad truths that set the people of the United States on a path that is still unfolding.  We may interpret the U.S. Constitution, but we cherish the Declaration. Our Declaration of Independence clearly states that the people have unalienable rights that cannot be taken away.  Jefferson writes that governments are established by the people to secure and protect those rights. This is the revolutionary idea that the governed have the power to remove and dissolve the government. There is no divine right of kings or of other functionaries to rule without the will and consent of the people.

To paraphrase Joe Biden, this is a big deal. Even today, we forget that governmental bodies and officials can only rule us by our consent. That is why we must be active and engaged. In order to keep liberty and rights, the people must be ever vigilant and suspicious of those in power. It is the people’s duty to constantly be on guard against the usurpation of their unalienable rights.

Whether elected or appointed, our officials need to answer to the people. So the people must fulfill their duty of demanding that they do answer. From the president to the governor to the city manager to a commissioner, it is important that citizens engage, provoke and question their votes and decisions. For elected and appointed officials serve at your pleasure not theirs. On our 239th birthday, be especially vigilant to maintaining the gift Americans were given.

The Stain Is Still Upon Us

Posted on by

Last Friday evening at St. Paul’s AME Church, I participated in a prayer vigil for those killed in their Charleston church while studying and praying over the bible. The service at St. Paul’s was mournful and joyful, thoughtful and exuberant, healing and reflective. I thought how many more such irrational hateful things must happen in our country? When will this sickness be gone and the stain that is older than our nation ended.

We call ourselves a great nation, an exceptional nation, even a transformative one, but when will we be a loving nation? The prism of color shapes our mind’s eye. To some the color of one’s skin is more important than anything else. Eugenics is alive and well instead of discarded along with Aryan superiority and the pseudoscience of phrenology. Skin color is only a characteristic like eye or hair color. It does not determine anything more. In 21st century America, it should not be how we define one person from another.

Though I did not vote for him, I believed that the election of President Obama would be a turning point for the United States. It hasn’t happened as I had hoped. For some Americans, it wasn’t good enough to oppose his policies because they disagreed with those policies. It became an irrational hatred based on race. When Obama’s birthplace was questioned or his being a Muslim was suggested, what was the inference to be that he was not an American or was a secret agent for Al Qaida? They were code words for being an African-American who, by the way, was raised by his white grandparents as a Christian in, of all places, Hawaii.

Our nation needs to end this bigotry. It is disgraceful that today so many of my fellow countrymen have such hatred in their hearts. This irrationality of thought leads to incidents such as Charleston. The deranged and delusional will be inculcated to weave the nonsense they hear into an act such as Mr. Roof did.

The color blindness I witnessed at St. Paul’s was a beautiful sight. I think for many of us in Stuart and Martin County, this idea may even be true. However, even where we live, we must continue and strive to end any racism that remains and is tolerated. Someday, to quote Dr. King “we will live in a nation that judges a person not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

Economic Development and Government

Posted on by

In Sunday’s Stuart News, Eve Samples asked business people to join the newspaper’s sounding board on the subject of economic development. I have been a business owner for many years and have some level of expertise on the subject. As an elected official, I would be ineligible to belong to that sounding board. That doesn’t preclude me from expressing an opinion. I will just do so here instead.

The News editorial is quite right that we need further diversification from the trio of Florida business mainstays of agriculture, tourism and construction. The paper correctly insists that when taxpayers’ money is used by government to fund incentives, the three principles of transparency, accountability and proven performance by the companies should strictly be adhered to. However, I would go further and categorically state that government or their agents, such as the Business Development Board, has no right using taxpayer funds to assist certain companies while ignoring others. This type of favoritism is nothing more than crony capitalism.

What we owe any individual or business is a simple non-bureaucratic means of opening or moving to our area. The City of Stuart, Martin County and Florida should look at ways to advance economic development rather than hinder it. Permitting of any new enterprise can and should be simple with as few barriers as possible. What I would like to see for Stuart is that when a larger business is looking to open or move to the city, a point person from our economic development department act as an ombudsman to all departments on the applicant’s behalf. This would avoid the frustration that many business people face when dealing with the bureaucracy.

Over and over again, we have seen the Digital Domains and the Torrey Pines story played out.  They are given millions in tax payer dollars that result in heartache instead of jobs and taxpayer debt instead of additional tax revenue. Government should stay out of the way of the private sector. What government can and should do is provide the basic infrastructure to have a great quality of life. Schools from pre-k to graduate school should be the best when compared with others in the nation and in the world. Amenities such as parks and libraries should be well maintained and free to the public. Our rivers should be able to be enjoyed. Roads, water and sewers should be first rate.

Elected officials and bureaucrats are not very good at picking winners and losers in the economic sphere. So why we continue to allow the same patterns and practices to continue is a mystery. What we, as government, can do is remain neutral and only pass regulations that further the public good. Let the market determine the feasibility of a particular business entity to prosper and survive. As taxpayers, we need to insist that government stop using our money to back bureaucratic-inspired schemes to allow slick characters to drink at the people’s trough. Government is never going to be smarter than the market.