Category Archives: City of Stuart

Home Rule Comes With Responsibility

Posted on by

I favor the concept of home rule.

Home rule is nothing more than allowing localities the right to govern themselves. The best government is that which is closest to the people. The decisions that can be made at that basic level are those which the citizens can influence the most. That is why it is so perplexing when the “Lords of Tallahassee” continuously try to circumvent the Florida constitution to the detriment of their constituents.

But with home rule comes home rule responsibilities. Too often we encounter local commissions and councils that are not following all the rules. This is especially true when it comes to sunshine and public records. The debacle with the arrest of three Martin County Commissioners is an example.

From websites to Facebook pages, there are rules that must be followed. On every website the budget and audited financial statements must be posted. There should be a way to contact the elected office holders listed. It should not be like solving a puzzle to make a public records request or find out information. And those public records or information requests should be handled expeditiously.

When a constituent writes or telephones, his/her query should be returned in as little time as possible. One of the reasons that local government is so important is to make sure that citizens can be heard. Take away the ability to have their grievances and concerns addressed and you take away one of the most important reasons for local government to exist.

The larger the population of a municipality, the more it needs to strive to communicate and do so effectively. Televising and streaming meetings over the internet should be done as a matter of course. Websites should be intuitive to navigate and information easily obtainable. Interactivity and the ability to submit forms and requests online should be simple for citizens to accomplish.

Elected officials need to consult with their constituents on an ongoing basis to solicit their opinions and determine where those citizens think government should be going. Home rule isn’t a one-way street. Good local government means that local officials and their staffs are committed to more than just the slogan of home rule.

What Do Stuart & NYC Have In Common?

Posted on by

What do Stuart have in common with New York City?

At first look, it would seem not much. There are blocks in New York that seem to have as many residents as all of Stuart. There are no tall skyscrapers here, unless you count four stories as a skyscraper. And, while one is known for the hustle and bustle, the other is not. NYC is the “Big Apple” and Stuart is “the best seaside town.”

What they do have in common is a supposed dislike of anything new.  Any change is met with skepticism and foreboding. Just look at what happened with Costco here and Amazon there.

Both Costco and Amazon were offering to set up shop and provide relatively high-paying jobs for each area. In both instances, the NIMBY and “government by tee-shirt crowds” were right there to protest the new. A few politicians brought the rhetoric to demagogic heights of untruths, including economic guru Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Never mind that the majorities of citizens in both cases were in favor of the projects.

The United States is now in a world of alternate facts. Anyone can have his/her own reality. Instead of basing an opinion on provable statistics, when those statistics get in the way of what we want to believe, then we go with the heart and never the head. If it is economic, then apparently very few people (including our elected leaders) can remember that without taxpayers, there are no tax revenues. You need both sides of that equation to operate government.

So, in New York, Amazon is a dead deal. It died because the business was only providing $150,000 jobs to those who were qualified and would not commit to provide jobs to those who weren’t. You can’t be a tech employee if the extent of your knowledge is playing video games.

There are some serious problems with infrastructure and transportation that need to be addressed in Long Island City, the chosen location for the Amazon project. The state and the city should have committed to spending the bulk of the $3 billion slated for tax credits to funds for improving local infrastructure. That would have been much more palatable to existing neighbors and Amazon’s new workforce which would have overwhelmed the roads and public transportation in the area.

Politicians are not known for bravery. They may want to do what is right, but, when any opposition appears, they cave. Once in a while, a few elected officials will have a stiff spine even if it means not being re-elected. But as we have moved away from elected office being a civic duty to a lifetime job, showing fortitude can be an expensive proposition.

New York City has closed the book on Amazon. For all its supposed big city sophistication, they blew it. They allowed the clamoring few to rule the day. Stuart hasn’t quite definitively lost Costco yet. It may still come back. Costco may still want to provide some good-paying jobs that, in our case, can be performed by the bulk of our workforce.

Our local elected officials should run and not walk to be of assistance. They should not be throwing up roadblocks and demands that are not rational or economically feasible. The City does not have $3 billion in “giveaways” to give away. Nor should municipalities trip all over themselves to do so. At the same time, the City staff and Commission need to see businesses as economic partners, not the enemy.

Stuart has a chance to do something that will enhance the City and Martin County. We need to embrace the new and seize those opportunities. To be a city means to have development and economic progress. We are not a museum set in time. Stuart began as an economic and residential hub of the County, and we should want to see it become that again.

Impact Fees, Taxes, Jobs & Housing

Posted on by

What do Impact fees, jobs, taxes, businesses, and the lack of middle-class housing have to do with each other?

The answer is everything!

In Martin County (including the City of Stuart), we see the world through a time warp. Many pine for the good old days that were never that good. Some may want to harken back to that time, but it is just not possible. What we need to look at is how can we adjust to a changing world in a rational and sustainable way.

In November, Florida voters approved $1.5 billion in local tax increases. That does not include millage or fee increases that do not need voter approval. In Martin County, the voters approved ½-cent sales tax increase for Martin County Schools’ capital needs and ½-mill increase in real estate taxes, primarily for increasing teacher compensation. In my opinion, both were needed, but it still makes living or owning a business just a little more un-affordable in Martin County.

Why would a business locate to Martin County? There is not much to choose from when looking for existing space. It is very difficult to build a building to meet your needs. Then, if an employer were to look at the skill sets of the local talent pool of potential employees, he or she would find very few qualified applicants in a number of fields. That holds true even if you use the entire Treasure Coast as your base to draw applicants. Why wouldn’t an employer just move to where the talent pool already exists and where it is easier to find built or to construct new space?

Even for a retailer like Costco, we have effectively created so many barriers by our rules and NIMBY mindset that they have fled. Those would have been jobs that do not require as much knowledge as most manufacturing, medical or office type jobs currently require. They would have paid $20 per hour, and more than 200 jobs would have been created.

On top of that, because of the excessive impact fees charged, the cost of construction becomes more expensive. These impact fees not only prevent the business sector from entering the market, they prohibit construction of middle-class housing. If you build a 1500-square-foot house, the Martin County impact fees are over $8000.00. That may be more than the profit margin to a developer unless the sales price is higher. The result is that more expensive units are built which leads to a shortage of middle-class housing.

There are ways around these government-made problems. How about lowering or eliminating impact fees in municipalities and County CRAs? These are our urban centers and the infrastructure is already in place. Here is where development should occur. Infill projects and more re-purposing of old strip centers and other antiquated uses should be encouraged.

Our governmental systems, including our taxes, are interconnected. If we continue to be unrealistic about how we approach government and economics, we will not succeed in the things we say we would like to achieve. Hoping for no development will ultimately lead to sprawl, which is everything we were trying to avoid. The actual result will be no jobs, little business, expensive housing, and high taxes.

Why Can’t We Just Get Along

Posted on by

Much has been made about the animosity that has existed between the City of Stuart and Martin County. It is true that, at times, there has been tension between the governmental entities. But why should it exist at all?

Simply put, both have forgotten why there are two governments and the differences between both.

This is an attempt to explain how the animosity occurred and what can be done to alleviate it in the future. Therefore, it is important to understand the differences between these two forms of local governments and how their roles evolved.

 

History of Cities:

Cities arose organically in the post-Neolithic Revolution period. The Neolithic Revolution was the period when humans went from hunter-gatherers to organized agriculture, including domestication of animals (around 12,500 BCE). Agriculture allowed for settlement in one spot. With an increased food supply available, man could live in higher density settlements.

Once a more stable food supply was established, there was enough of a surplus to allow a subset of the population to become specialized craftsmen. This allowed for bartering for food and other goods, leading to economic commerce which in turn produced more population density. With the rise of cities, came a formal hierarchical elite which ruled the inhabitants and made sure that the city would adequately function.

Taxation soon followed, along with the need for monumental public buildings. In order to support city resident services, different trades and occupations were developed. A system of writing to facilitate governmental and commercial records was invented. As a more complex society grew within cities, practical science and math were needed. The specialization of craftsmen led to the development of art.

In order to truly flourish, the city developed into the City-State which led to the exchange of goods and raw materials between Cities. A system of monetary valuation, economics, and the need for armies for protection and conquest arose. In every ancient civilization except for Egypt, large cities evolved and became the central point for the rise of empires.

The independent City-States of Classical Greece, led to a boom in the sciences, humanities, literature, architecture, and trade. Democracy first flourished there, as did the discipline of true city planning with the introduction of the grid plan. The Republic and Empire of Rome used that plan to lay out cities throughout the Mediterranean world. With greater urbanization came sanitation, providing of clean water, public housing, public buildings, and outside areas such as forums.

Throughout the Middle Ages in Europe, cities were the pivotal unit of government. They could be governed by a noble, the clergy or, in some instances, a merchant class.

Cities continued to increase in population and became centers of manufacturing, banking, the arts and increasingly acted as a refuge to those no longer needed in the production of food. In England, roughly 15% of the population lived in cities at the start of the 19th century. By the beginning of the 20th century, 75% did.

The first half of the 20th century continued to see cities increase in population throughout the world. During that same period In the United States, urban growth exploded as cities became more and more of a magnet for commerce and the arts. Then, with the widespread introduction of car ownership after World War II, cities (especially small and mid-size ones) began seeing their middle class move to the suburbs and become commuters.

However, in the past few decades, the suburbanization of America has slowed as people have begun to rediscover urban living. The 21st century is witnessing the rise of the international city. As the knowledge-based economy has expanded, places like New York and Los Angeles have more in common with London and Tokyo than with American cities such as Buffalo or Detroit. Just witness that Amazon choose two cities that are categorized as international cities to locate new facilities.

As the century progresses, it will be fascinating to see whether a knowledge-based economy can be transported to smaller cities. The technology to allow that to occur is available today. What we have not seen is a work force that wants to be dispersed from its peers.

 

Governance of Cities:

Cities, towns, and villages are classified as municipalities and, depending on the state, those terms are interchangeable. All local government, both counties and municipalities, are the purview of the states. Municipal governmental formation is done usually by a state charter. The authority that municipalities possess can be altered by charter and/or state statute depending on the state’s constitution.

In New England, municipalities are the prime local governing units with counties having much less governing authority than in Florida. In fact, in Connecticut and Rhode Island, counties have been abolished, except for statistical purposes. There was never a strong tradition of county government in those states since residents adopted direct democracy, having all white male landowners vote directly on issues. Even today, many New England towns hold annual town meetings during which important decisions are made.

In Virginia, for instance, there are both counties and independent cities. The 38 independent cities are not part of counties. Hawaii has no incorporated municipalities and Puerto Rico has no counties but 78 municipalities.

There are no legal distinctions in Florida between cities, towns, or villages. Local government has “home rule” authority under the Florida Constitution. However, that authority can be pre-empted by an act of the legislature that is signed by the governor. Cities are formed by an act of the legislature granting approval of a charter after a vote of the residents within the proposed boundaries. There are currently 413 municipalities in Florida.

 

History of Counties:

While cities evolved organically, counties originated from territory that was given by a sovereign to a liegeman, usually known as a count. When the Normans conquered England, they brought the term with them. Under Anglo-Saxon rule, a kingdom’s political subdivisions were called shires. These political subdivisions were formed to extend the authority of the king and were administered by those that owed their loyalty to him.

As the American English colonies were settled, the political subdivisions known as counties became established. Virginia established the first counties in 1617 in order to bring colonial governmental services to settlers far from the capital in Jamestown. Throughout the English Mid-Atlantic and South, the colonies established counties throughout the colonial period. Counties, though established as political subdivisions in the New England colonies, never attained the same authority as counties to the south.

The U.S. Constitution does not mention local governments. Therefore, under the 10th Amendment, it is up to the States to control political subdivisions within their borders. Of the 50 states, 48 have or had counties as political subdivisions while in Louisiana the subdivisions are called parishes and in Alaska boroughs.

Until the mid-20th century, counties as arms of the state provided very little municipal-type services except those things that the state was required to provide. For example, courts (usually in a town known as the county seat), a tax collector, and law enforcement through a sheriff. The state capital could be far away, and it was not reasonable for locals to travel that far.

The criteria for establishing new municipalities was generally when enough people settled in an area and the population density required that a more organized entity was needed to provide municipal services. Achieving potable water, sanitation, and better roads would necessitate asking the state to allow incorporation. The provision of these services is the root cause for the animosity between the Martin County and Stuart.

Originally county commissioners were elected primarily to take care of county roads. The county sheriff’s role was to enforce the state criminal statutes and serve warrants and court papers. Elections, courts, tax collection and the property appraiser are state constitutional officers. They are there to make sure that the people have access to state governmental services. County government was never meant to provide other services. For example in Martin County, you hear county commissioners referring to the Martin County Golf Course as a “municipal course.”

Florida was the first place Europeans visited and settled in the now-continental United States. Spain founded St. Augustine in 1565, and it is the oldest continuously inhabited city in the U.S. Throughout the colonial period, England and Spain continuously battled in Florida and the Caribbean. In 1763, Spain ceded Florida to England by the Treaty of Paris, ending the Seven Year War.

The British divided Florida into two colonies known as East and West Florida. As part of the Treaty of Versailles that granted American independence, Florida was returned to Spain in 1783. Madrid ceded the territories to the U.S. in 1821after pressure from American settlers and Washington. Florida became a state in 1845.

Sources of Friction:

Florida originally had only two counties for the entire geographical area, Escambia and St. John. All other counties were formed from these two. Stuart was a long-established town in 1925 when Martin County was created from parts of St. Lucie and Palm Beach counties. Stuart was the long-dominant county seat with about 40% of the county population in 1930. By 1960, it had 25%, and then by 2000, less than 10%. Today, the population has stabilized at a little over 10% of the county population.

Likewise, at one time, Martin County’s wealthier residents and citizens lived within Stuart. But, just as most of the population is now centered outside the City, so too have those with greater assets. The median household income for Stuart is $47,736 and in Martin County $53,244.

From the County’s inception until the 1980s, the City of Stuart was pivotal in electing County Commissioners. As the City’s percentage of population has decreased in proportion to Martin County’s overall population, Stuart has become less and less a factor in countywide elections. This loss of political power translates to a loss of governmental influence. Unfortunately, City policies that continue to limit development within its boundaries have the impact of making the City less relevant. Thereby encouraging the County to act more and more as a provider of municipal services.

However, culturally and historically, the residents of Martin County have looked to Stuart as their “city” regardless of where they live in the County. This has created an economic burden on the actual taxpayers of Stuart to provide for these perceived “citizens” and their expectations. The recent Sailfish ballfields are a good example since most of the people using them are not from Stuart.

At the same time, Martin County has been providing municipal services to unincorporated residents for decades. This has acted as a barrier to municipal incorporation throughout the County. As an example, one does not have to proceed further than the recent Hobe Sound defeat of incorporation. These two factors, history and culture and the county providing municipal services are the two main reasons for the discord.

Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and St. Lucie counties have proportionately few residents in unincorporated areas. Martin County has less than 20% of its population living in incorporated areas. Early on, Martin County began providing services instead of encouraging incorporation. Now the formation of new cities is much harder than in the past because the main reason for them has been usurped by County government.

In the past, Stuart and Martin County have been antagonists and competitors, much as Macy’s and Gimbles were in the movie Miracle On 34th Street. Instead of toys and clothes being sold, the governments are selling water and fire services. The County has won that fight because of its sheer size and budget. In the 21st Century, county government, especially in Martin County, does not only act as a political subdivision of the State but it is the largest municipality.

 

Conclusion:

So, what outcome can be expected? In the past, both governments have been too quick to impugn the motives of the other. Further, County Commissioners did not understand and act as if residents and taxpayers of Stuart were also residents and taxpayers of Martin County. As an example If the City annexes, the County does not lose ad valorem taxes. Their General Fund continues to collect tax revenue regardless of where residents live…unincorporated Martin County or The City of Stuart.

What is not collected by the County in municipalities are the MSTUs (Municipal Service Taxing Units.) Those additional revenues are how Fire/Rescue and Parks, for example, are paid for in unincorporated Martin County. Since these services are not provided by the County in the City, they can’t be charged through the County’s General Fund.

One of the sources of the friction is how the cost of providing the services is allocated between the specific MSTU and the General Fund. For instance, when calculating the Fire/Rescue MSTU, are the costs such as Human Resources or the Legal Department’s time allocated at all? If so, whether it is an accurate amount charged to the MSTU. If not, then the General Fund would contain costs associated with providing the services that should not be included. There are several other items, such as impact fees, that have contributed to the antagonism.

However, there are bright spots that have appeared in the last year. Both City and County are willing to look at issues in a more holistic aspect. Now most County Commissioners do not believe that annexation in and of itself is necessarily a bad thing. In fact, judicious use of that tool can be beneficial to both entities.

If you believe that western Martin County should keep the ranches and farms and not succumb to sprawl, then development needs to occur in Stuart and the CRA areas. There are literally hundreds of acres within those areas that can and should have infill projects and redevelopment of under-utilized sites. Density belongs within cities. Many of the problems we see in Martin County in this respect are brought about by the County trying to provide municipal services to suburban and rural areas while the City has a fear of growth and continues to act as if Stuart was the same farm town it was 70 years ago.

For example, Martin County’s transit system is underutilized because it is an urban mechanism for moving people being used in a suburban and rural setting. The routes are too few and the scheduled times of service make it unappealing for most people to use. At the same time within Stuart, their micro-transit system operates not as a true transit system but as a shuttle between parking lots and Downtown. Because of the lack of funding, it does not service the entire City. This is a good example of two systems not working very well because one lacks passenger density and the other lacks the money to operate in a city setting.

These and other problems could be remedied If both can acknowledge their different roles, then every taxpayer in Martin County would benefit.

Virgin Trains, Fort Pierce & Stuart Can All Be Winners

Posted on by

The Treasure Coast and Virgin Trains are no longer adversaries.

With the signing of the agreement with CARE and Martin County, the court battles are over. So, what is next for the future of the relationship? Will we be able to work together to find mutual benefits for all of us? Of course, we can! Further, I believe that both Fort Pierce and Stuart can both end up with a stop.

Virgin Train’s primary market was always going to be those going from the cruise ship ports of Miami and Fort Lauderdale to the amusement parks of the Orlando area. But another market can be developed between the Treasure Coast and South Florida. It is an ideal mode of transportation for the South Florida resident looking for a quick getaway. The same is true on the Treasure Coast for those of us wanting a weekend in Miami or Fort Lauderdale, or for the college student going to and from school.

The last time we spent a long weekend in Miami, it took us nearly three hours to drive from Stuart to Miami Beach. Once there, the hotel charged us $30 a day to park our car. We never once drove our car until the return drive. We caught cabs and Ubers. We would have gladly taken a train that brought us to our destination without the hassle.

Fort Pierce and Stuart are not competitors but rather we compliment each other in what we can offer. Virgin Trains and the two cities should see how they can work together to bring stops to both places. In Fort Pierce, the property is available for a station and hotel complex. In Stuart, the railroad already owns property right downtown that can be used.

The agreement states that the cost of the station will be split between the station location and Virgin. For Stuart, I don’t believe that the City should contribute, nor can we afford to do so. What the City can do is work with Virgin to go after Community Development Block Grants, transportation funds and any other possible funding. There may even be a way to obtain federal funds to rebuild the bridge and raise it so that boats can pass under.

This is the time to use our imaginations and work with our federal and state elected representatives to make this a win-win for all of us. Will Virgin succeed financially? I don’t know about that. If the history of railroads is to be believed, the answer is no. But, if we can further transform our City, then we should, and the same is true for Fort Pierce. And, if funds can be made available to rebuild the St. Lucie River bridge, then, once it is raised, it will remain that way regardless of Virgin’s success. The freight trains are not going away no matter what happens with Virgin.

We should not let the feuds of the past stop us from having a better future.

We Live Local

Posted on by

Recently, I attended the Treasure Coast League of Cities annual dinner. It is at that event where the new officers and board for the local League are sworn in. The dignitary performing the honors this year was none other than Florida League of Cities President Leo Longworth.

Leo is a long-serving public official from Bartow. After his hard work for that City, he has devoted his efforts to the League. His presidential theme this year for the Florida League of Cities is “We live local.”

What exactly is meant by that phrase?

For anyone who has read my blog, newsletter, or Facebook posts, you realize that I believe the closer government is to the people the more representative it will be of its citizens. Unfortunately, Tallahassee wants control to rest with the centralized state government. Every year, the Legislature attempts to pre-empt counties and cities from enacting local ordinances on things like zoning to taxation. Their argument is that they are protecting the public from mistakes that are made by local representatives.

That idea is flawed in its reasoning for a variety of reasons. If you don’t like what a city or county commissioner is doing, it is simple to vote someone new in at the next election. How does someone who lives in Martin County vote out the State Representative from Tampa or the Senator from Fort Walton Beach? Because if the legislature was in charge, then the state elected official that is the chairman of a committee with jurisdiction over an issue will decide. The chairman’s perceptions, experiences and viewpoints will prevail.

There may even be a more sinister reason. If control is kept in Tallahassee, then lobbyists will only have to deal with 160 elected officials instead of the thousands of locally elected county commissioners, town councilors and city council members. While it may be more efficient, it certainly is not more representative of the diversity of Florida’s 67 counties and 413 cities. Within Martin County, Ocean Breeze and Stuart are not alike. In St. Lucie County, Fort Pierce and Port St. Lucie are not alike. And, in Indian River County, Sebastian and Vero Beach are not alike.

I don’t live in Tallahassee nor do I want the House Representative from Jacksonville making local rules for me. Stuart’s elected officials should oversee what height our buildings can be. Martin County’s BOCC has a better handle on where our Urban Services Boundary should be drawn than does the Senator from Pensacola.

Leo Longworth is correct when he says that we live local. That is where decisions affecting us should be made. If it isn’t unconstitutional, then the State of Florida should stay out of it. The power to govern should rest with the people as much as possible, and with their locally elected representatives.

Every citizen should be involved with this effort. Don’t let a faraway place populated with strangers take away your rights to the City and County that we want. “We live local.”

Commissioner Matheson’s Letter

Posted on by

December 10, 2018

Dear Juan Carlos Gil,

On behalf of the City of Stuart, I would like to apologize that our website was not ADA compliant prior to you filing suit with us. The City of Stuart has nothing but the best of intentions when attempting to provide for its residents. Our city has and will always do whatever it takes to help accommodate persons with disabilities, which is why the city made a sincere attempt to provide an accommodation in our offer to have someone read any pages to you over the phone or in person.

Juan, I know this to be true because you and I have something in common. I am legally blind as well. In the future, if you have any need for accommodations, I encourage you to contact me directly prior to filing suit in the courts for financial gain.

With this settlement, the hard earned tax dollars of my friends, neighbors, constituents and your countrymen, who I am honored to serve, now increases your bank account instead of providing them services.

Thank you,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Merritt Matheson

Stuart City Commissioner

Mmatheson@co.stuart.tl. us

Sail Fish & Development

Posted on by

Friedrich Nietzsche was a 19th century German philosopher.

One of Nietzsche’s ideas was “eternal recurrence,” also known as “eternal return.” The concept, that incidents in life continue to repeat, was proven to be correct by the Stuart Commission when they did not decide what to do for the umpteenth time with the Sailfish Ball Fields. For a decade, the City has been trying to determine whether those fields should be developed. To date, there still is no clear way forward…. only the same outcome of indecision.

Much of the problem seems to be that there is no systematic approach. Government, for all its vaunted keeping of records of past actions or inactions, refuses to ever read and learn from them. Consequently, the past is never studied by either staff or Commissioners to see what transpired earlier. While Nietzsche’s concept of “eternal return” is esoteric, the Spanish-American philosopher, George Santayana said something more apropos: “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

By not knowing what transpired earlier, there cannot be forward movement. At the meetings, the City Attorney attempted to give a history to the Commission, but it was not in prepared remarks and was superficially insufficient. Even the two Commissioners who had sat through discussions in past sessions appeared not to have remembered what was previously discussed and voted upon.

So, once again, there was the specter of Little Leaguers and their parents, the vast majority of whom do not live within the City limits and pay no Stuart taxes, crying about “their” ball fields. I resent the fact that, as a Stuart resident and taxpayer, I must subsidize the recreational pursuits of children that live outside the City. There are hard costs of $85,000 to maintain those fields which are not even under the City government’s control.

It is nice to hear about the past at Sailfish and the “poor” kids from Jensen Beach and Palm City waxing poetic about their baseball. The parents of those children pay taxes, not in Stuart, but to Martin County to provide recreational fields. So, why then, should City of Stuart residents pay for ball fields when only about 10% of the players are residents of the City? For the Commission to continue to allow this is ridiculous and a gross misuse of tax dollars.

The Commission and staff lost sight of the fact that there should have been no discussion about whether to sell those fields or not at the meeting. That decision was already a foregone conclusion, or so it would appear to any business person when the Commission decided to put out an RFP for developers to build there. Both the development applicants have spent considerable time and thousands of dollars to put these proposals together. Should that effort and expense be treated in such a cavalier fashion? I don’t think so.

Staff had an obligation to lay out a coherent vision of what was to be achieved by the Commission that night. If they had done so, then the Commission would have had the obligation to check the boxes outlined. Instead, the entire matter devolved into a morass of indecision. There were no rhyme or reason about how to proceed. The Commission concluded to once again make no decision.

Before this moves forward again, certain questions need to be answered. The first is whether the Stuart Parks and Recreation Department will provide recreational programs. Presently, besides the after school and summer camp program, programs are de minimis. In my mind, both are needed and should continue but so should sports, both organized and ad hoc.

Currently the role of organized baseball is filled by Martin North Little League and their sub-programs. According to the information provided by them to the City, there are currently 20 City of Stuart children enrolled in their league out of the 192 kids in total. Stuart tax payers are subsidizing the fields to the tune of $85,000, or $4,250.00 per Stuart kid. That is more than half the amount per capita that the School District pays to educate a child.

When I was a youngster there was Little League and Pop Warner football. I had friends and classmates that belonged to those programs. Most of us, however, didn’t play in organized sports. We showed up at the park and played ball. There were city recreational staff available to watch our behavior and hand out equipment, but you could just drop by and play ball on an ad hoc basis.

Life is different now.  I wonder if kids would come if they knew they could go to 10th Street and be given a football or basketball and be able to play ball. As to organized recreation, there is nothing wrong with our own City staff providing it for Stuart children.

Let’s spend Stuart tax dollars for Stuart kids.

In order to provide organized recreation, the City would need to appropriate some money for the Recreation Center field, as well as for equipment and additional staffing. The staff needs to present to the Commission a modest plan on how to pay for this. It does not need to be grandiose with 4 baseball fields, a soccer field, and a football field. The important thing will be to make sure that there are adequate programs for all Stuart kids to participate.

The Recreation Center is not just for East Stuart but for all of Stuart. It needs to accommodate residents from Bahama Street as well as Manor Drive. A City of Stuart’s size cannot afford to have more than one Recreation Center and 10th Street is it.

The second matter that needs to be addressed is the Public Works Garage. It is not practical to decide about moving Public Works without knowing the cost and, just as importantly, where it is going. Supposition and rough estimates may result in faulty decisions. It should be up to the Public Works Director and City Manager to devise a budget and location before any further thought is given to selling either the current location or the Sailfish Ball Fields.

Third is the question of housing. Staff and the Economic Council gave a masterful presentation of declining City economic projections. The Finance Director provided a very significant statistic. The City of Stuart is still not collecting the amount of ad valorem taxes that it did in 2006. The real estate taxes currently collected by the City of Stuart are only half the amount needed to pay the public safety budget.

The tax bill for a median condo is $266 and single-family home $494. If you count every parcel in the City, 610 parcels pay nothing, 700 parcels pay $100 or less with 3102 parcels paying $500 or less. Yet, the cost per parcel for City services is $700. If, the City were a business, you would not like the trajectory.

Our housing stock is old. There is a useful life determined by both functional, economic, and physical obsolescence. Many of our homes have reached one or more of these forms of obsolescence. A home that is 60 years old but in good condition could be just fine for a resident that moved into the home in 1958 when it was new. That same home, even in good condition, would not be attractive to a 30-year-old because some of the features of that home are no longer functional for today’s families and the improvements needed cannot be economically justified.

There is a dearth of residential properties. From rental stock to owner occupied, there is not enough product. This results in higher prices being charged either to lease or buy in the Stuart market. The only way to solve the problem is to build new housing of every type. At last week’s Commission Meeting, a planner stated that there was a shortage of 4000 units in the City. That may sound high until you factor in the 21,000 people according to a DEO report that commute to the City every day because they either can’t afford to live here or the type of housing they are looking for is not available.

Does that mean that the City needs to make sure that there are units available for under market prices? I would say the answer is yes and no. A city of Stuart’s size does not have the resources or the expertise to provide those subsidies of under market rate housing. What it can do is make product more available by increasing supply through smart development policies.

I hear over and over that the proposed housing is too expensive and that it will fail. What exactly does failure mean? Take the worst-case scenario, which is nothing will be rented for the price needed to pay the mortgages and taxes. Then two things will occur. The bank will foreclose and sell the project to someone else at a reduced amount, and then the rents needed to carry the project will be less. The market will find what is known as equilibrium.

At the same time, if the project is successful from the very beginning and the rental rates are achieved, then pressure is lessened on the existing housing stock. The supply has increased but the demand will remain the same allowing those older units to rent or sell for less. The best thing that can happen to Stuart is to increase supply. In the rental real estate market, a 5% vacancy rate usually equates to equilibrium which means that supply and demand are in sync.

So, should the ball fields be developed? The answer is yes if the above items occur. It is imperative that the City not allow nostalgia or fuzzy thinking to influence what is best for Stuart. If you want to have an economically diverse and generationally friendly place to live and work, you cannot keep the existing quid pro quo.

As to “workforce” or “affordable” housing, I would like to see one example of a city of the size and with the economics of Stuart in the housing business. There aren’t any. You cannot compare Stuart to New York, Miami or even West Palm Beach. Those cities’ size and tax base afford different opportunities.

Here is what I believe can be done. The City administration can put together a pilot program of duplexes in East Stuart with one side owner occupied and the other a rental unit. They can be built on smaller lots. This type of project would encourage home ownership and demonstrate feasibility.

In respect to the ball fields, when the City does an RFQ, it can ask that a limited number of units be kept to 70% of the average medium income. The project needs to be mixed-use in nature. It needs to be open with residential and businesses fronting all streets including Martin Luther King Blvd. This should be planned as an economic generator for East Stuart, not a gentrification project.

There is a way forward, but it must be logical and methodical. The City Manager needs to take steps now. The Commission kicked this down the road for 90 days. That was idiotic. Once the steps that I outlined are taken, then the RFQ process should begin again, but only if the Commission realizes that, once an RFQ is released, the decision has been made to sell those fields. It cannot be taken back. At Monday’s meeting, City Manager Dyess said that the Commission needed to get off the merry-go-round. He was right.

Edmund Burke, an 18th century member of Britain’s Parliament, a philosopher and historian wrote: “When the leaders choose to make themselves bidders at an auction of popularity, their talents, in the construction of the state, will be of no service. They will become flatterers instead of legislators; the instruments, not the guides, of the people”.

It is time the City Commissioners show leadership for the good of the City of Stuart. They were elected to make decisions, not sway in the winds of fickle popular opinion.

Stuart Commission Needs More Deliberation & Fewer Motions

Posted on by

During Commissioner comment, Mayor Leighton read what I believe was a press release from Congressman Mast’s office condemning the South Florida water Management District’s Board for extending a lease on land to a sugar company where the reservoir will be built south of the Lake. The press release calls for the Board’s dismissal. The lease extension will run through March 31st, 2027.

 

With another lost summer behind us, I can more than understand why any hint of delaying the reservoir would evoke anger. But an elected deliberative board needs to have all the facts before doing anything. In this case that was far from true. In fact, the City of Stuart Commission, through naiveite and political manipulation, became a pawn in a struggle where Stuart does not belong.

 

The lease extension will run for an additional 8 years through March 31st, 2027. If that in any way would delay the construction of any part of the reservoir then perhaps it would be understandable that Stuart should be upset. However, in this case, if anyone read the lease extension before reacting, they would have seen that after the first 20 months the District could terminate the lease with 120 days’ notice.

 

At present, while it has been approved by President Trump, money is not expected to begin flowing to the project for several years. What the District did was smart stewardship by keeping the property producing revenue while we continue to wait for Washington.

 

What the Stuart Commission did was act not only foolishly but with hubris toward another governmental body. It is improper for an elected body to demand the removal of another governmental body not under their control. How would the City Commission like it if the County Commission demanded that the City LPA members be dismissed because they did something that the BOCC didn’t like?

 

It has become painfully obvious to this observer that the City Commission, which is a deliberative and policy board, has become “motion crazy.” Commissioner comments are the time when individual Commissioners can report on their activities and ask that staff look into a resident’s complaint. Turning it into a motion frenzy to have pet projects of Commissioners approved leads to bad policy and poor decisions.

 

If Commissioners wish to have a matter discussed, then they should speak to the City Manager and have it placed on the agenda of the next meeting under deliberation and discussion. In that way it can be fully vetted, and every Commissioner can have all the facts before action is taken. What is going on now is a Commission free-for-all. This is making the Stuart City Commission look amateurish and easily manipulated.

 

Commissioners need to realize that they should not let their personal beliefs interfere with what is best for the City. They should not be manipulated by each other or outside influences. There is almost no instance where a matter can’t wait until another meeting. Good government demands a deliberative stance.

 

Our two newest Commissioners ran on transparency. It is anything but transparent to vote on something without proper notice being given for the public. Staff has the obligation to make sure the Commission has all the information before action is taken. This Commission needs to start acting as a mature deliberative body.

 

Good Ole Boys

Posted on by

Are the “Good Ole Boys” at it again in Stuart?

It appears that they are. And, if so, why is this still happening, especially for something as mundane as Flagler Place?

First, a history. What is now known as Flagler Place was originally built as a USO center during WW2. It became a recreation center for Stuart until the “Great Recession” a decade ago. At that point, the City decided to cut staff and lease out the space. For a time, the Lyric Theater ran the facility but because of a few community “activists” the Lyric decided it was not worth the aggravation they were put through.

So, the City decided to lease out the place about five years ago. They put out an RFP and the Commission had to choose between two competing bids. One was an artist group and community members and the other was the current occupant. The current occupant bid less but received the lease anyway. It was pointed out at the time that the other group was not as fiscally responsible and business oriented. Fair enough.

But the real reason — I believe that the lease was simply given as part of the “Good Ole Boys” network. The owner was a business partner in another business with Stephen Leighton. At the time Mr. Leighton was married to Commissioner Leighton and the tenant was a good friend of the Commissioner. I was there that night at the Commission Meeting as a member of the public. Though Commissioner Leighton recused herself from the vote, there was no doubt who was going to get the lease.

But times change and friendships fade. When Ms. Smith (the current lessee) wrote a letter to the City exercising her option for renewal, the City wrote back that the answer was “no.” In his letter to Ms. Smith, the City Manager based his refusal to renew on the following reasons: she had not paid her rent on the first of the month  and that she had failed to do so several times. When she paid after the tenth of the month, late fees were charged in the total amount over the years of $597.86. Because of these reasons, the City sent her a letter refusing her option.

Only the City made an error. Since Ms. Smith books events for up to a year in advance, she sent her renewal in early to make sure she could book without causing problems for some poor bride. So, the City had to walk back their refusal, at least for another year.

Why is it important and why should citizens care? Because our government should not be treated as if it is the purview of a few insiders whether awarding a lease or taking it away.

Did a Commissioner step over the line in settling a personal score? What will the City do with Flagler Place? Does it intend to go into the banquet hall business? There already is a City Community Center where one can rent space for events. How many does a small city of about seven square miles need or afford? The last time the City ran this as a Community Center, it cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to do so. This was the “white center” and the other the “black one.” We do not need to go back to Jim Crow days.

When I spoke to staff, I was told that most Commissioners didn’t care about what it cost. When I spoke to Commissioners, they told me they did.  With so much in government, there is never a straight answer.

How many other City tenants owe money and or late fees? When I spoke with Ms. Smith, she claimed to be unaware of even being in arrears and upon receipt of the letter she told me she has paid those fees. If push came to shove, would a judge agree that this was enough of a breach to put someone out of business? It would be interesting, perhaps we will find out.

I do know that, if it was such a serious breach of the lease, why didn’t the City move against Flagler Place regardless of a renewal? I think it all comes back to what is going on behind the scenes — like the 55% Commissioner raise and the $3 million poison pill clause in the Mulligan lease. It comes down to being a “Good Ole Boy.”