The Triangle Parcel Finally Moving Forward

Posted on by

For several reasons, I decided to vote in favor of moving forward to develop the Triangle Property with New Urban Communities. Staff has vetted their qualifications extensively. I met early in the process with the principals of the company and their CFO not to speak about this particular project but rather to learn about their underlying philosophy. I researched the firm and looked at some of their other projects. I spoke with a variety of people who had worked with the company in the past, and everyone confirmed my initial feeling that they were able to complete a project and, just as important, ethical in their business dealings.

Using my own commercial real estate experience and CCIM training, I analyzed the financial numbers of different project scenarios. Their projections were based on market research from national firms plus a local realtor’s focus group and advice. The presentation to the CRA and Commission was thorough and informative. After questions, public comment and our deliberations, we voted unanimously to have staff negotiate the final terms. The project is for 48 new rental apartments with parking spaces in excess of our code.

As I have written in the past, I believe that the free market should determine what is built at any particular site. I am also a proponent of the city selling its non-municipal used real estate. In this case, because of the economics involved, New Urban Communities has demonstrated that a sale would scuttle the project. I further took into consideration what the market price as stated by a current appraisal is which is less than what we have invested in the parcel. Therefore rental would be best to recapture our investment dollars.

Some have suggested a structured parking garage on the Triangle lot. The construction cost for anyone to build is $17,500.00 per space without land costs. A garage for 100 cars with the land would cost over $3,000,000 dollars on that site. If you project what the ROI (return on investment) is, the garage would never pay for itself. In this instance, I believe the free market has spoken.

Others wanted to see a retail component to the project. The research, financial numbers and logistics of a mixed use building on the site prove that is less feasible than the proposed residential-only development. One of the important things to all of us is that the project be constructed and in scale with our codes and our “Old Florida feel”. The development will be 3 stories in height which is below our maximum height restrictions.  Once again, the free market has spoken and to our advantage.

A few people wanted a condominium development instead of rentals. After looking at the price to construct a project with the amenities necessary, it becomes obvious that the sales price would be higher than what research dictates people would pay for the units. There has been no new residential construction downtown in a dozen years. In order to secure construction financing, the banks would insist on a cash flow to pay the loan. A dedicated stream of rental income does that. Again the free market has spoken.

If this was an entirely private deal without Stuart being a party to the transaction, this project could go forward as a PUD. Our commission would look at the proposed plans and make our comments as we do all the time. We will be doing the same thing when this comes before us to receive final approval. Stuart still exercises the same amount of control over the project. The only difference is that we will be the land owner and will rent to the developer the use of that land. This is the free market in action.

Currently I see our downtown streets as a “Potemkin Village.” Without more residents, we will never truly live up to our potential as a downtown and a city. This project jump starts revitalization of Dixie Highway. It will spur more new construction instead of the current patchwork of empty buildings and vacant lots. What Stuart needs is additional residents who will expand our tax base. More full time residents will bring added vibrancy resulting in more jobs and commercial development. Projects like this will allow our “Millennials” an affordable option to remain in Stuart until they are ready to buy that first house or apartment, hopefully within our boundaries.

The proposed rent that New Urban Communities would pay would result in our land purchase cost being paid by 2028 and our soft costs in the project around 2036. The project beginning in 2019 is projected to pay the city $90,000 in TIF initially, and as value increases, so too will the yearly amount of real estate taxes. This does not take into account the various fees and other taxes that the residents and building will pay. I see it as a win for New Urban Communities and a win for the City of Stuart. This is an example of what the CRA does by allowing the free market to work.

There will always be those who believe something different should go on the Triangle parcel. Everyone has ideas and thoughts and opinions. Ideas, thoughts and opinion are meaningless in the marketplace unless you are willing to risk your money. New Urban Communities and their backers are doing just that. For the Triangle property, the free market has spoken.

The Safety of All of Stuart

Posted on by

Our City of Stuart is a good safe place to live. There is one neighborhood; however, that has experienced multiple shootings and criminal activity due mostly to the drug trade. It is plagued with greater poverty than other neighborhoods. This neighborhood is the historic African-American East Stuart.

East Stuart was established because of segregation though it was a vibrant place in spite of it. During its economic and cultural prime of the 1940s and 1950s, the neighborhood thrived. It was the home to African-Americans from the most educated and prosperous to the poor and unskilled. Since these residents were denied access to the broader Stuart because of race, the people of this neighborhood were self reliant in all things.

When integration began in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, that broader world became available to many East Stuart residents. While once constrained by the geography of the neighborhood, this slowly changed. With the ending of legal segregation, new opportunities happened for many of the more educated and affluent. Everyone then could shop anywhere. Most of the businesses in East Stuart could no longer compete with the wider world. As norms changed, so did the make-up of the residents. While East Stuart is still primarily African-American, it is a neighborhood for the impoverished. Individuals now live there due to income more than race.

Poverty, lack of education and employment opportunities have brought the tragedy of drug addiction and an economy based on supplying drugs to the addicted of all neighborhoods. This underground economy has resulted in gang activity and violence to control this illegal market. We need to end this lawlessness as a perception of normalcy. The children of East Stuart should not have to grow up under such circumstances. The elderly of East Stuart should not have to fear being hit by a stray bullet while sitting in their homes. The pathology of this criminal pattern of behavior must not be tolerated.

This will require more police being assigned to East Stuart. If we are to eradicate indiscriminate shootings and drug dealing the city must be willing to devote long term the resources necessary. I want us, as a community and city, to stand firm against this plague. Our police must be fair and objective but do everything possible to accomplish this goal. Community policing should be a big part of this strategy. The hearts and minds of the community is as big a part of safety as is any law and order goal.

The police cannot do this work without community involvement. The people who live in this neighborhood must want to rid their community of this scourge. They need to be the eyes and ears of law enforcement. They have to stand and be part of the solution. When things are toughest, the East Stuart community and the rest of the city cannot afford to back down to those that have interest in the lawless status quo. For this type of behavior knows no geographic bounds or skin color.  Every neighborhood has an interest in eradicating the problem.

It is true the people who perpetuate these crimes are dangerous and have little regard for life. They want us to fear them because that is their ultimate weapon of compliance. They are home grown terrorists doing precisely the same thing as ISIS does in Syria. A healthy fear is natural but can’t be allowed to derail what needs to be done. Our children’s future is at stake and what we do will decide their destiny.

As a commissioner, I will ask that the needed funds are made available to support this effort. While a “Town Hall Meeting” may be called, all of us know what must be done. The actions needed on our part have to be more than just expressing complaints. The time for discussion is over. East Stuart and all of Stuart need to come together and expel the drug dealers and gangs from our city. Along with the police, we must make our city safe for all…especially our children as they are the future.

Do We Need “Open Carry”

Posted on by

As a kid, I would play “cowboys and Indians” or “soldiers” with my siblings and friends. All of us in the neighborhood would be involved. Even girls could be Dale Evans and fire a gun. Right after Christmas or a birthday, we would have new toy guns but as the year went by sticks or broom handles would substitute for our lost or broken make-believe weapons. We were kids running around the sidewalk or park making explosive sounds and playing dead.

Then one day, I was no longer interested in playing with toy guns. I grew older and other things occupied my time and imagination. But somewhere in the back of every man’s mind is the little boy who wants to play at being that cowboy again…Wyatt Earp with a six shooter in a holster strapped to his hip. For what else could explain why the third most populous state in the nation is so obsessed with guns and especially what is known as “open carry.”

I believe in second amendment rights. Law abiding citizens do have a right to own and possess fire arms. I have a concealed weapons permit. I can’t remember the last time I carried a weapon outside my home; but I want the right to do so. I should be able to defend myself and my family if needed. But I am not a law enforcement officer nor do I desire to “play” one in real life.

So why do we need “open carry” in Florida? Do we really have some inordinate fear or vulnerability that we would need to have a Glock 43 holstered at the hip? Will this make us safer as a an individual or a society? I think not.

Law enforcement professionals receive hours and hours of training in the art of firing and holstering a weapon. Proper procedure and technique is drilled into them before being sworn and throughout their careers. Because of their training, officers are better able to know when the use of deadly force is appropriate. The average person does not have this extensive training, and the vast majority of us do not have the required temperament.

Florida leads the nation in concealed weapons permits at 1.3 million. When a weapon is concealed, the carrier has an advantage. The person can defend himself if necessary and if he believes his life is in danger. No one knows you are armed. You are far more able to walk away from situations that may not, at its inception, be life threatening. Once you take it upon yourself to openly carry a weapon, you may be putting yourself in situations where you are provoking a problem.

What happens during a traffic stop and the police officer sees you are carrying a weapon? Now, when the officer approaches, if you have a weapon in your glove box or concealed on your person, you have an opportunity to calmly tell the officer that you pose no threat. If you carry in the open, that stop may become quite deadly. Misunderstandings occur. With guns in the mix, there is a far greater chance of deadly force being used.

You know the first thing Wyatt and his brothers did when they became deputies or marshals in a place was to make sure no one was carrying a gun within town limits. Common sense dictates some sensible measures for the common good. Crime has never been lower. In Stuart or Port Saint Lucie or anywhere on the Treasure Coast, will we be better served by the openly carrying of weapons? I think not. Let’s leave the make believe to the kids and the law enforcement to the professionals.

What Annexation Really Is!

Posted on by

In this morning’s Stuart News, a letter appeared regarding the city’s recent annexation of a parcel on Federal Highway. As a member of the City Commission, I did vote for the annexation. Unfortunately, the letter writer is misinformed on several matters regarding that particular annexation and annexation under Florida statute.

Annexation is allowed under Florida statute when a property owner petitions a municipality to be allowed into the city. The municipality then has the option of incorporating the parcel or not if that parcel meets the criteria of the statute and the municipality decides that it is in the interest of the city to do so. Annexation is permitted and encouraged under the law in order to expand municipal services to newly urbanized areas outside the current geographical boundaries of the city. Unfortunately, too many people in Martin County do not understand the differences between municipalities and county governmental functions … including a few county commissioners.

Counties were never meant to be anything other than local arms of state government. That is why each county has a sheriff, property appraiser, supervisor of elections, tax collector and clerk of the court. Each of those functions carries out state duties as recognized by our state constitution and statutes. The state government is making sure that state residents have vital state services throughout Florida. Counties are a political arm or subdivision of Tallahassee.

Municipalities are the local governments. They were meant to provide urban services such as water and sewer, fire/rescue and a host of others. As population grows and demand increases for such services, then annexation of newly urban areas (if contiguous) are supposed to occur. In non-contiguous areas, then new municipalities should be formed in order to provide urban services as outlined by statute. Unfortunately, Martin County wants not only to be a county government but also a municipal one. This is the root of why the county currently has an unsustainable budget.

I most certainly do not want to emulate the unbridled growth to our south. But if you were to look at Palm Beach County, there are 38 municipalities representing the local views of 38 distinct areas. Martin County has 4 municipalities. Instead of encouraging annexation and the formation of more municipal governments to provide urban services, county government is trying to do so.

In all instances of providing urban services, the county is less efficient than Stuart. For instance, it costs homeowners roughly 50% more to hook up to a county sewer than a homeowner in the city. In every instance, from fire/rescue to police to roads, the city provides urban services cheaper and more efficiently.

A city is able to do this for several reasons. The first is because we operate within a compact geographical area with higher density than most of the county. In most cases, the county has taken on the duties and responsibilities of providing services to all unincorporated areas regardless of density. A paid fire/rescue department was never meant to respond to fires or accidents in rural areas…volunteer departments were.

The second reason that the city is able to keep costs in check is because it has a locally elected body in charge that is close to the people. I, as a city commissioner, represent a little over 16,000 people as opposed to the more than 160,000 people in the county. I know the different neighborhoods and constituencies very well. I hear from residents in the supermarket and at the doctor’s office. People see me at the park and at their kid’s school. My cell phone number is on my business card. I am accessible. I try to make sure that every penny collected from the limited number of taxpayers Stuart has is spent in accordance with their wishes.

Finally, since the government is so much closer to the people, we only provide those services that the local population wants and is willing to pay to have. This is in stark contrast to county government where there is no differentiation in what is provided to Indiantown or Rio. Each is a distinctive community, but there is no local representative government or any variation in the tax rate for providing those services whether wanted or not. It costs more to respond to a fire in rural Martin than in Salerno.

The last misconception regarding annexation that should be cleared up is the notion that the property is taken away from Martin County. To the contrary, Stuart and the three municipalities are all in and a part of Martin County. Municipal residents pay taxes to Martin County. We vote for county commissioners and the constitutional officers.  Every person and parcel, even those in a municipality, is part of the county.

In the particular annexation referenced by the letter writer in the newspaper, I would say the development that is now proposed for that site is a far cry better than what they could have built under county zoning. Under the county rules, a 24 hour convenience store could have been built. Under the county rules, a restaurant/bar with music could have been located there. The county’s zoning would have resulted in double the retail area that we granted. Yes, it is true under the county’s zoning; the developer would have had a 60 room hotel instead of the 80 rooms that the city allowed. But I am sure the residents of Palm Lake Park would rather have a well buffered hotel than a night spot with music until 2 a.m.  Even though we do not represent the Palm Lake residents, the city commission exacted better uses from the developer than what was permitted under county zoning. It was a win for the county because of the increased sales, property and bed taxes, a win for the Lake Park homeowners because of our requirements in uses, buffering and setbacks, and a win for the city in increased property taxes.

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.

Can Martin County Represent All of Us?

Posted on by

In Martin County, we are fortunate that we did not follow the lead of St Lucie or Palm Beach Counties in pursuing unbridled development. That doesn’t mean we haven’t changed and grown. It means we have been more measured in that growth and change. Was that a bad thing? The answer is more complicated than just a simple yes or no.

In some instances it was exactly the right thing to do especially in the western parts of the county.  However, within the Urban Service Boundary, the county has been too restrictive in many instances. This approach has not resulted in the best outcome for the residents of many areas within the boundary. We need to have growth in population and business in order to increase our tax base. In most instances, within the Urban Service Boundary the infrastructure and other governmental services are already in place negating the need for costly new investment. More residents and businesses would increase the number of taxpayers which would result in our existing base paying less in taxes.

This strategy is a balancing act between acceptable and sustainable growth for our county. Our challenge is how our county commission manages such a strategy. Since Martin County is so diverse, can the needs of urban, suburban and rural constituents all be met by five people sitting on a dais? I would contend that it would be nearly impossible.

It definitely cannot be accomplished by a one-size-fits-all governing style. Currently, I do not believe that the County Commission brings enough nuances to Martin County’s divergence. Suburban families living in the gated communities lining Martin Downs Boulevard have completely different governmental expectations than the rancher or farmer on the Okeechobee County line. Jensen Beach’s needs are not the same as Indiantown.

Martin County has many distinct areas such as Rio and Hobe Sound. What it does not have is local democratic representation within those areas. It is not the number of people who live throughout Martin that is the problem but rather it is the many different needs of our communities that are not being met. Martin County has four municipalities. Each (Stuart, Sewall’s Point, Ocean Breeze and Jupiter Island) has a commission or council that represents the residents of those areas. The citizens of Rio, Indiantown, and Jensen Beach do not. Their unique problems are not and cannot be addressed by a county commission that is trying to be all things to all residents.

There are five chambers of commerce in Martin County. Hobe Sound has one as does Indiantown, Palm City, Jensen Beach and Stuart/Martin County. Local businesses have decided that their areas are so distinct that one chamber cannot represent their unique interest. Counties were formed in order to make sure state governmental services were provided to all Floridians wherever they lived in the state. Counties were never meant to be towns or offer municipal services. Today county government is doing more than what was intended. This has resulted in our diverse communities and their residents not being adequately represented by local government.

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.

 

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.