Category Archives: Other

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.

How Economic Freedom Translates To Our Personal Freedom

Posted on by

In his first inaugural address, Jefferson stated that “a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government… ” All levels of government have strayed from that principle. But that Jeffersonian truth is as true today as it was in 1801.

In the 2015 Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom, the United States is ranked 12th in the world. This falls between Denmark and the United Kingdom. The US, a supposed bastion of free enterprise, has descended into the land of commercial subsidy and nihilistic crony capitalism. The individual’s needs in our society have been pushed aside to make room for our largest private companies to graze at the government trough. This has resulted in less political individual freedom in order to insure the special interests of government bureaucrats, politicians and corporate welfare recipients.

The U.S. needs to stop subsidizing business in any way, shape or form. The unforgiving free market should decide. In a truly free society, there will be individual economic dislocation. People will lose jobs, businesses will close and towns and regions will suffer. If the economy is left to market forces, any dislocations will be brief and temporary. Governmental interference with the markets only prolongs economic downturns.

What should be the role of government in our economy? First and foremost, similar to a doctor, it should do no harm. Government should do nothing to impede business from operating in a fair and responsible manner. There is a place for regulation, but it should be limited to providing an open environment for businesses to compete in an unfettered market place. Government should stop predatory behavior so that markets do not become corrupt. Taxation policies should be transparent and simple with the sole purpose of raising revenue not dictating policy and outcomes. There should be no governmental subsidies of any kind to business.

Free markets are efficient but ruthless. Therefore, government needs to protect individuals by having a social safety net. The countries listed ahead of us on the Economic Freedom Index have not sacrificed the individual for the corporation. In fact, just the opposite is true. Singapore, Canada, Australia, Switzerland and Chile, which ranked ahead of us, all have better health care systems than the U.S. Each of those nations has a stronger individual safety net than the U.S.

Beginning in the late 1970s, the United States mistakenly began to believe that we could curb governmental power by cutting taxes alone. This did not happen, and that policy has resulted in increasing the deficit but without any societal benefit. Government didn’t get smaller, it has grown increasingly larger. Individuals who were most in need were seen as “loafers” and “welfare queens”. The government cut individual benefits. At the same time the amount of money needed to run for office became larger and larger. The average American has less influence on the process because of the ever-increasing contributions from big business, public sector unions and the very wealthy.

Our national and state elected leaders are beholding to those special interests. The politicians began to enact policies that harm the individual but maintain the status quo of their contributors. New business formation is half as what it was in 1978. The World Bank has ranked the U.S. 46th in new business formation with New Zealand #1 and Canada #2. An article in the Atlantic proves that a safety net allows people to take the economic risks necessary to start a new business because their families will have their basic needs met in case of failure. Since we do not have that, entrepreneurship in the U.S. has suffered.

Our government needs to return to the basics. It should look after the welfare of people rather than companies. The government needs to go back to transferring risk to business instead of individuals. Tax policy has to be neutral and simple. Regulations should be written not to keep new businesses from forming but to make sure the field is level for all.

In the world’s most successful and freest economies, there is a free flow of capital, labor and goods. The building of walls to try and keep those elements in or out of a country is doomed to failure. Tariffs, corporate subsidies and any price supports do not work. They inhibit the necessary destruction of the old and the creation of the new. Stasis is the enemy of government and economies. Ultimately our individual freedoms depend on it.

Tom Campenni has been a small business owner for over 40 years. He has had ownership interest in real estate and other businesses during his career. He currently serves as an elected commissioner of Stuart, Florida.

(this is from an article written for Ezine)

 

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.

 

Own Versus Rent Even Government Has To Decide

Posted on by

In the near future, Stuart will be offering the Triangle Property to developers. I believe the city is on the right track. Possible developers will ascertain uses for the property that are market oriented and not tied to any bureaucratic interpretation of what should be on the site. While a public component is not out of the question, there is no mandatory one. I am also encouraged that the city is not insisting that we net lease the parcel but is open to all possibilities.

That does not mean that the eventual developer will have no restrictions. The parcel still must meet current zoning and building codes. This will result in the developer having the same freedoms and restrictions that any owner of property would have.  It is truly market driven and not subject to bureaucratic dictates such as providing public parking. When placing any property out to bid, the city’s only interest should be whether the proposed buyer can close on the agreed upon terms.

The CRA can then take any proceeds and re-invest in other properties in the district to foster development. The purpose of a CRA is to help and promote private development in a designated area of the city. Government should not dictate and demand restrictions and uses to a buyer of city owned property simply because government was the seller of the property.

When government perverts the market by insisting on what should be built, it can result in adverse consequences not only on that property but also on the entire community.  Business should be left to the private sector. Government is notoriously bad at picking economic winners as witnessed by Digital Domain.  That is why I am, on principle, against Stuart being a landlord in almost every instance. If there will not be a public use for a property within a foreseeable period of time, it should be sold.

For many years, life insurance companies built and owned large real estate developments so that they would have predictable cash flows in order to pay claims.  Several centuries ago, Gompertz developed what became known as the “Law of Mortality”.  This is a mathematical formula that actuarially predicts how many people of a certain age will die each year. By owning these income streams, insurance companies proved to the regulators that they would have the money available to pay claims. Government is not an insurance company which needs streams of income. Government should not be in the private sector.

Being an owner of commercial real estate requires nimbleness and flexibility that governments, by their nature, do not possess. For argument’s sake, I will assume that during the course of the lease the tenant and assigns will make all rent payments as stipulated (with a lease of 50 or 80 or 99 years, this is a huge assumption). While land cannot technically become obsolete, the improvements upon it definitely do.  So even under the best case, the government will receive back an asset that is economically or physically obsolete. Which means it will have very little residual value.  You must have collected the correct amount of rent during the course of the lease or a loss will have occurred. The parties to this lease agreement are agreeing to rent terms for an economic future that is impossible to forecast.

I have been in the real estate business my entire career. I currently manage 500,000 square feet of commercial space and I have two non negotiable items. The first is that no lease term is for more than 15 years (the overwhelming majority of leases are for only 10 years) and the second is that there is a minimum percentage increase of rent every year with a CPI. Even after all these years I can’t predict market conditions for more than about a decade under the best of circumstances. Long leases lessen the value of the real estate if and when it has to be sold. Should the government have different requirements for the people’s real estate?

 

The Meaning of A Holiday

Posted on by

Monday is a national holiday in honor of Dr. King. Our government, schools, banks and many offices will be closed. But, like so many of our holidays from the generic Presidents’ Day to Memorial Day to Veterans Day, we celebrate the day off but not the meaning of the day. Thanksgiving has turned into a national obsession to shop for Christmas gifts while forgetting why we are thankful and why we are giving gifts.

The commercialization of our civic and religious days ultimately blinds us to our beliefs as citizens and as a moral people. We need to reflect on the reasons why we have chosen to commemorate these few days in the year. The reasons are at the core and soul of who we are as a nation and a people. We should not be too busy or in too much of a hurry to forget what binds us together as Americans.

Our first civic holiday of the year is in honor of Martin Luther King. Before we rush out to the stores or a barbeque or just sit on the couch, let’s consider why we have chosen to remember this man. King recognized that a nation that said it believed in one thing but practiced another could not be truly great. The chasm between its stated principals and the way it behaved would eventually rupture and destroy our nation.

From the founding of the United States, we had the glowing rhetoric of Jefferson and the founders’ promises. Sadly, those promises were applied only to a very select group. In 1776, not only did the color of your skin matter, but your gender, religion and even whether you owned property determined if you could participate in government or hold office. Through the years, more and more Americans were accepted and were allowed to participate fully as citizens. Then, with Dr. King’s leadership, the last barriers to full civil equality began to tumble. The Plessey doctrine of “separate but equal” was no longer acceptable.

On Monday, we need to remember the time when your skin color determined where you went to school or rode on a bus. And, we need to remember the reasons for all our holidays. They were not proclaimed and instituted for a car sale or a football game. Those days are holidays to celebrate what we believe as a nation and as a people. Yes it is fine to relax and enjoy the day off, but never forget the reasons behind that day of leisure.

Why I Support the Infrastructure Sales Tax

Posted on by

Where does Stuart derive funds for its infrastructure projects? Some of the money comes from state and federal grants that usually require local matching dollars. We could borrow the money, but we are fairly conservative and have not typically resorted to that. That leaves either increased real estate taxes or sales taxes. Real estate taxes are 100% paid by city tax payers while sales taxes are paid by anyone who shops and dines in our city. This means we can have our entire infrastructure improvements paid for by an increase borne only by the residents or collect a good portion of the funds by non-city residents.

For many years, the American Society of Civil Engineers has rated America’s infrastructure at a D. We are not spending enough to maintain our roads, bridges and water systems. Unless your dream is to have our 20th century civil improvements disappear, then it is urgent that we spend money to fix and improve our aging infrastructure. You would not allow your home to go unpainted and the roof to leak. It is the same for society’s homes and roofs.

Stuart’s city manager, Paul Nicoletti, has put together a video which is on the city’s website, and I urge you to take a look as he explains what the city will use some of the proceeds of the sales tax to do. Beside road and water projects, Stuart wants to finally install bathrooms at Memorial Park, improve the only recreational center for our children and expand our down town Riverwalk. In order to continue to be a place that people want to live and visitors and tourist want to shop and dine, these are needed improvements.

A city doesn’t remain static…it either grows and improves or shrinks and deteriorates. We do not need to sacrifice our old Florida feel and charm to accomplish the former. But we do need to provide amenities so that our young people want to remain and raise families and our seniors can stay and age in place. This question of livability does not come by burying our heads and saying nothing needs to change. We need to spend our dollars carefully in procuring the needed infrastructure maintenance and improvements. But maintain and improve we must.

Within the city’s borders, we collect 65% of all sales tax generated in the county. Yet because of our small population in relationship to the total county population, we receive less than 10% of the taxes collected. Imagine if every penny of the local portion of the sales tax stayed in Stuart, would there even be a need for ad valorem taxes? Lewis Mumford wrote, “The cities and mansions that people dream of are those in which they finally live.” Stuart is a good place to call home. Let’s continue to improve on the good and make it great.

Our House With The Leaky Roof

Posted on by

Peggy Noonan’s WSJ column of July 12th was regarding our current immigration crisis. In the column she compares how Washington sees the crises as political and everyday citizens in a much more alarming way. We never imagined that America would have refugee camps housing thousands of children? Then who would have thought that our political system would become so dysfunctional? She compares the nation to a house where the owners can’t both make their mortgage payments and keep up the property.

The metaphor continues that on top of that you wake up one morning to find that there are people standing on your property just looking at you. They begin to gather in your garage and crawl through a window to your cellar. You call the police and when they finally come they take a few people away, always to be replaced by so many more. Your elected officials can’t stem the tide and the news media after a day go on to the next story. Our political leaders shout that the other party is to blame. It appears no one is in charge. No one will take responsibility.
I not only feel that no one is responsible about immigration but that no one in Washington will take charge and will take responsibility about anything. The adults have fled and the children can’t come up with solutions from our failing tax system to social security to our roads and so many other things. The other party or political opponent is to blame. Our elected representatives whether in their first term or tenth say they are powerless to correct what needs to be corrected. It is reminiscent of Pogo’s “we have met the enemy and it is us”.
Closer to home we have AAF that wants to barrel through our community after getting our tax dollars to build their new track. The summer rains will result in the Corp releasing water from the lake again devastating our lagoon. Our governor now claims to be with us except when it impedes FEIC or Florida Crystals. Our former governor, who wants to be our next governor, panders to those he once called liberal Democrats when he pretended to be a conservative Republican.
Our nation and state are not political board games where politicians get to manipulate and move citizens as if they were pawns. We elect people to office and send to Washington or Tallahassee to solve problems and fix things. They are not there to collect money for the next campaign or rig the system against the people to enhance the coffers of big business or labor.
We need a change and that must begin with us. We need to vote and not leave elections to the extremes on either side. We can’t be so dogmatic in our beliefs that we would encourage our leaders to destroy rather than fix the system. As citizens is it too much to ask, that we sacrifice and work with all our fellow citizens, whether we disagree or not. We all need to help America pay the mortgage and fix the roof.

MAKING STUART STRONG

Posted on by

I was at a fundraiser for Building Bridges last Friday evening. If you don’t know about this program, it is an East Stuart based organization providing guidance to the kids of that community. While there is help with school work, it primarily strives to give the participants moral and ethical guidance to serve them in life. The whirl wind behind this endeavor is Ollie Harvey ably assisted by her husband, local businessman, Philip.

My involvement with the organization began with the Centennial project of painting tiles for the East Stuart gateway sign which was supported by a grant by Women Supporting the Arts. The kids and senior citizens from the community (with the assistance of artist Maggie Blizard) hand painted tiles that were then kiln fired. City Commissioner Eula Clarke was instrumental in having the city agree to have the tiles placed on the gateway sign.

Over the course of the past year, the Harveys have suffered their own tragedy with the untimely death of their son. It was only their absolute trust and faith in God that have seen them through the hard times. The couple seems remarkably free from rancor as they devote themselves to Building Bridges, the East Stuart community and the city in general. They are inspirational in their wanting to help and improve the life of others.

They are one of the important reasons that Stuart is a good place to live. The greatness of a city is not the buildings and streets but the people who live and work and raise their families there. We need to remember that as we move forward. There are no panaceas or easy answers as we confront the future. But with people such as the Harveys, we can overcome any of our problems and Stuart will continue to be the place we want to live.

My Pledge to Stuart

Posted on by

As a Stuart City Commissioner I look forward to serving the city, the residents and all stakeholders. We are facing some tough economic, environmental and developmental challenges in the next few years. This will be a critical time for our future and our quality of life. Any one business or project will not be critical to our overall economic development. However, any one business or project could have major repercussions that can seriously affect our future. This is precisely why I believe that growth needs to be organic and in keeping with an overall vision for the city.

I will continue to listen and speak to every individual to understand what is important. During this transition period before taking my seat I will attend, as I have for the past eighteen months, commission and other governmental and civic meetings so that I can “hit the ground running” in a few months. I did not run for the commission not to become involved on a daily basis with our government. I ran to use my experience to help guide and just as importantly see the city grow and expand. In that way Stuart will be around to celebrate its bi-centennial year in 2114.

We can have more residents, jobs and businesses and at the same time keep our “Old Florida Charm” and way of life. For I firmly believe that we should not strive to be a replica of Delray or Boca or even Naples. We are Stuart with our own values and traditions. I pledge to do everything I can to make sure that our ties with the past are not severed on our way to the future.

 

MY REMARKS ON ALL ABOARD FLORIDA AT JUNE 9TH COMMISSION MEETING

Posted on by

Like many other residents I always believed that the train track running through Stuart was part of our city’s charm. The few freights running were sometimes a pain but as I waited at a crossing it was quite manageable. I would listen with a certain fondness to the whistle almost nostalgically for an earlier America as the train rumbled through at night.

But I no longer view the train track running through our city with charm. Nor when caught now at a crossing waiting for what seems to be an interminable amount of time am I so placid. And the night whistle of the rumbling freight is now not nostalgic to my ears. For I foresee a time when emergency vehicles can’t get through or boat traffic is paralyzed. For now I realize that what I thought was small town charm can possibly destroy much of what Stuart has accomplished in the past 30 years.

“All Aboard Florida” or FECI or FEC or The Fortress Group or whatever they create and call their selves tomorrow is taking away 108 parking spaces from downtown. Increasing the amount of money we need spend to maintain crossings. With the additional track we probably will have to reroute traffic in places and loose turns and create a real confusion at confusion corner.

The worst however is what we don’t know. How much more will the freight traffic increase in the years to come? We hear about the Panama Canal doubling. The Port of Miami and Fort Lauderdale are expanding and the opening of Cuba in the coming years could be a factor. The company is using our tax dollars in the form of federal loans to lay that entire new track. It is as if we are giving them the very means to affect the damage they will do to us.

“Big Cho Cho” and their political allies are telling us how little power, we on the Treasure Coast have to stop them. The governor and maybe the president and his administration is all for this. Well this is not a party issue. It is as nonpartisan as something can be. This will affect our property and our quality of life. Al of us need to be of one voice and mind and prevent this travesty from occurring.

Stuart is celebrating its 100th birthday and Flagler’s railroad was instrumental to our early growth. But we do not live in late 19th or early 20th century Stuart or Florida or America. An entire modern state with millions of people have grown up around the tracks that ceased to be anything more but a charming nostalgic sight with a few rumbling freights fifty years ago. You can’t now try to bring back an earlier business model and devastate the surrounding communities.

I have no doubt that you will take the appropriate step tonight. For what tonight symbolizes is a mark of solidarity with all our Treasure Coast communities and a determination to fight for what is right. This resolution in this fight, to quote a much more polished and gifted person than I, is “not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps the end of the beginning.