Martin County can be a strange place for the uninitiated. Even for those of us who have been here for a while need to put on our “Martin thinking caps” before seeing things in the special light endemic only to this county.

Take masks for instance. Local governments like the fact that the governor has relieved them of having to decide whether to have mandates or not. There need be no angry public comment about how masks suck the oxygen from your system or hurt your eyesight. Most local government members would probably like it better if the governor had a statewide mask mandate. But taking the decision out of their hands is the next best thing.

No local government board in Martin County is going to buck a Republican governor. It would be suicidal. There is no percentage in doing that.

I am in favor of masks being worn by everyone who steps into a school building. It makes scientific sense to me. I will now probably see 20 comments telling me that masks are wrong and even the work of Satan. If I keep my Martin hat on, it doesn’t bother me and, frighteningly, I understand that point of view.

School Board Member Victoria Defenthaler, the subject of a recent Stuart News column, was born in New York (as was I) so I understand where she is coming from. She wants to have the medical experts explaining things to her is natural. Yet what is the point since other board members believe they are powerless to issue a compulsory mask order without bucking the governor’s prohibition recently upheld by an appeals court. All it will do is make hundreds of people come out and threaten the school board for even considering doing such a thing.

Pinterest

The governor has signed an order prohibiting local boards from issuing mask mandates. Like Caesar crossing the Rubicon in defiance of the Roman Senate, going further could result in becoming a test of political purity. It does not matter what side of the river you are on…most people just want to live in peace with their neighbors.

Information can lead to conflict. The Martin County School Board (and every other local government entity) feels they have enough to deal with without asking to be placed in a no-win situation.

How many people in Martin County do not believe in the lethalness of Covid? The naysayers do not believe that vaccines are effective or that masks are needed. You can cite the statistics regarding hospitalizations for the unvaccinated until you are blue in the face. The non-believers come back with some strange theory about guns being taken away next after imposition of masks.

The individual beliefs of people in both camps must be respected. Those of us that are vaccinated and a bit careful should pull through alright. The others need to fend for themselves. Unfortunately, kids under 12 are not eligible to be vaccinated so they are the ones being sacrificed to the political gods.

The United States is caught in a time warp of mid-20^th century housing patterns, and unfortunately Martin County exemplifies why.

The entire nation does not have enough housing for its residents. From big cities to the rural countryside, people are having increasing difficulty finding adequate shelter. One of the key factors is our antiquated zoning rules that sadly work all too well as intended.

Those rules were and are enacted to limit the type of housing that can be built in neighborhoods. It restricts and excludes new development from occurring, particularly in established communities. Zoning is a political tool to keep people out.

By limiting the type of housing built through zoning to single family homes, it results in fewer new units that are needed being constructed. In 2019, California passed an accessory dwelling law that recognizes a property owner’s right to construct a “granny flat” on his property. While permissible zoning such as that would have limited value in most urban areas, in places like Martin County, it could provide a considerable amount of affordable housing.

And the people who speak out against multi-family dwellings within municipalities and CRAs are the same ones who look aghast at an apartment over a garage in a single-family home neighborhood. To them, it doesn’t matter what you build. It is the very act of building anything that they so hate.

COURTESY OF DWELL

Stuart and Martin County have a warped sense of what development is. That is why in the past 50 years, the ranches of Palm City have been traded in for vast gated communities that are the very definition of sprawl. The car is essential to shop for groceries, go to work, recreate, and attend school. It is the kind of unsustainable development and lifestyle that our children and grandchildren find harder and harder to maintain and, very often, do not want as their way of life.

What is better for the environment…a walkable semi-dense city or a cul-de-sac development? The never-will-we-agree-to-anything crowd is creating the very thing in Martin County that they so despise to our south and north. How often have I heard from those that moved here a year or two ago into one of those new housing developments that any more people will ruin the character of Stuart or Martin County. It is absurd and irrational.

AZUL DEVELOPMENT

We should protect existing homeowners from living next to an industrial plant. But when services such as a place to buy groceries, drop off your cleaning, or have a cup of coffee requires a car ride instead of a stroll, we are contributing to sprawl.

You can live within an urban setting and still enjoy your single-family home. Just let others enjoy the neighborhood by living in a variety of housing stock. They may not be able to afford a house but still need a place to call home.

I have been to Key West several times. It is quite a place!

Key West is not for me, however. Now that I have made the tour of the conch style homes, been to Duval Street, Hemingway Museum, President Truman’s vacation residence, Conch Tour Train and seen several incredible sunsets, I have no reason to go back.

Key West (Pinterest)

Some people would feel the same about Stuart and Martin County. I understand that. Not everywhere is the place for everybody. Florida is a big and diverse state with many unique feels and moods for all different people. The state may not be very wide ocean to gulf, but as you traverse north to south and even east to west, places are distinctive.

And, because of that diversity, the 1968 Florida Constitution gave local government “home rule.” The concept provided that a citizen didn’t have to go to Tallahassee to obtain permission to change local zoning codes and state-level government could not define how to make a local code complaint or even how a front yard should look.

Unfortunately, Florida voters have allowed that beautiful concept to be squandered. The examples given above have been taken away from the control of cities and counties. In the minds of the legislators, Florida should be homogenized with local uniqueness unneeded. I guess you can call it the Disneyfication of the state.

The “Lords of Tallahassee” i.e., the legislature and governor, have chipped away at the concept of home rule… at first slowly and today as fast possible. They have done so year after year without much of a squawk from the voters. The concept of home rule has become a joke to state representatives and senators. It is the voters’ fault.

Local elected officials have tried to keep regulation as tailored to their jurisdictions as possible. They are the only ones that strive to make sure that the community’s fate is controlled at the municipal and county level. I was on many trips to Tallahassee and in district legislators’ offices to advocate for our communities.

What I heard from the legislators in not so many words was “you guys do not control any votes, campaign contributions, or soldiers to get us elected.” And it is true. The voters re-elect their state politicians regardless of how much they continue to impede local control. Control, once gone, is not coming back.

Which brings me back to Key West. The voters there passed three referenda having to do with the scaling back of cruise ships from docking in the city. If you have ever seen what it looks like when several thousand tourists disembark in small Key West, you would think of an invasion force landing.

The thousands of shipboard tourists spend money on cheap souvenirs but hardly anything in restaurants and bars and nothing on hotels. All of which is provided back on the mother ship. Only 7% of their tourist income comes from these behemoth floating cities. The environmental debasement of the “Conch Republic’s” water quality is hurting fishing and other parts of the environment.

Yet the legislators decided local sentiment does not matter…even the referendum that received 80% of the vote in favor. They passed a bill that overruled those referenda. The governor signed the bill, so what the citizens of Key West wanted did not matter.

Those voters did not try to pass a constitutional amendment banning cruise ships in the entire state. The residents of Key West only wanted a local say in what was going on in their town.  But that was of no concern to “The Lords of Tallahassee” who are in charge and know they will not be voted out of office. Even when the legislators ignore the will of the voters.

The governor and legislators will talk about how they are saving us from tax increases, petty laws, and just making our state business friendly. Voters will continue to fill in the ballot bubble for them because of the letter after their names, while the decisions of what happens in their town or county is being taken away by the very people they keep returning to office.

At the last city commission meeting, those most ardently against the Costco development spoke even though there was nothing on the agenda regarding the matter.

A couple of things have happened since the approval of the development on first reading. A development of more than 10 acres (that has subsequently been amended to 50 acres, but this application predates the change) must be sent to The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) for comment and possible challenge. The DEO looks to see whether a development is in violation of the comp plan.

The DEO had two technical assistance comments. The first was particularly interesting since it stated that the density for the site is much less and intense than the comp plan and Future Land Use Map allows. Despite all the uproar regarding density, the state has said that this project could support much more density on the nearly 50-acre site.

In a recent presentation to the commission, the development director explained that of the 2978 total units approved between 2017 and 2021 on 220 acres, the developers could have built an additional 2300 more units on that same acreage as of right. Is there any wonder why within the city and the county there is a shortage of housing units for every type of need?

The second recommendation from DEO is for the city to coordinate with SFWMD on all matters pertaining to regional water supply, water conservation, water supply planning and water use permitting. The developer could not proceed to build one wall of anything without the approval of the district.

After the debacle of the quasi-judicial process at the first Costco hearing, staff asked the commission to tighten up procedures during the hearing process. The Costco hearing is only the latest example of the problem when there is an intervenor involved. It is not reasonable for the commission to act as judge and jury when rendering a decision. Unfortunately, being politicians, they have tendencies to bend over backwards to accommodate people. Accommodation does not always lead to being fair. When the same rules are not applied to all there could be a charge of being prejudice to one side or the other.

During the commission discussion of the new ordinance on quasi-judicial proceedings, one speaker spoke twice when it came time for public comment. This is in direct violation of the rules regarding allowing a person making public comment to speak for 3 minutes only once. While he was speaking on the revision of quasi-judicial hearings, he pivoted to Costco. This should have been immediately stopped since the speaker must stay on topic.

At some point in July, the second reading of Costco will come before the commission. There are now two registered intervenors. Ms. Richards, who was there as an intervenor on the first reading, will continue. There is now a second intervenor who looks to me as if he should have no standing under statute and case law.

Ms. Richards falls in the category of a citizen who believes sincerely that Costco should not move forward. She may have the most tangential of claims as an intervenor because she is a neighbor. The second intervenor should have no standing. He is claiming a problem with wetlands allows him to intervene though he has no property anywhere near the site.

If I were the applicant, I would make sure I have made my record so that an adverse decision could be appealed in court.  The applicant may even challenge at least the second intervenor before the commission. They are responsible for making the initial determination. In that regard if Mr. Raynes, (applicant’s attorney) does, he will place the commission in the hot seat.

It was apparent that the first hearing was anything but judicious. Perhaps the second one will be better. The city should have a special meeting with only this on the agenda. There should be no commissioner comments, no proclamations, or anything else. The meeting should be the hearing alone.

The meeting should start earlier so that the public can have time to comment. Running to 2 a.m. is not acceptable. There should be a ruling that only new evidence can be presented by either side. There does not need to be a rehashing. This isn’t a new second trial but a second hearing. And it should be evidence from experts or relevant eyewitness testimony…not opinions. That is what the 3 minutes of public comment are for.

The Costco development is much needed and in conformity with Stuart regulations. To those that say put it by 95 or on Federal Highway, they forget that it isn’t up to the city to tell businesses where to build. The business model of the developer and Costco has determined that it should go here. As we have seen from both the state and the city’s development office, it complies with the regulations.

Municipalities and the county CRAs are where density development belong. It is not sprawl or wasting Martin County’s most valuable asset…land. If people wanted to preserve this site, they should have bought it and placed it in conservation, or in Ms. Richards case her family members should not have sold it. They chose to cash out. It is more NIMBY and illustrative of trying to use the perversion of regulation to prevent something that is desired by the majority and, more important, is both legal and within our comp plan guidelines and regulations.

I believe this will happen. It should happen. By having this development within the city, Martin County’s farm and ranches can be preserved, and sprawl stopped.

I read a statistic published by Bloomberg that there are now 105 million American memberships to Costco. That is more than the number of households that pay for cable television. Both may be pertinent facts but are irrelevant as to whether the development should move forward. It is also not relevant whether a family that lives next door or across the road from the development site will no longer be able to see empty fields.

If the developer is in keeping with the law, it needs to be approved. In this case, it has the added benefit of generally strong local support and it being good for Stuart and Martin County.

In our never-ending political spiral downward, we have decided that our men and women in law enforcement are props in the partisan circus.

From demonizing the police in the wake of the George Floyd murder by the left to the utter disregard for the Capitol and Metropolitan Police by the right beginning on January 6^th, the patrons of partisanship have tried to shape the narrative of the men and women who protect all citizens. The latest example is Sheriff William Snyder heeding the call of Governor DeSantis to send deputies to the Mexican border.

I am surprised at Snyder for succumbing to this request. Long before the calls for defunding the police and general disrespect for those that wear the badge, Snyder began thinking about how to prevent Floyd-like travesties from happening here. He also is doing something about how to better confront those who have mental health issues than just having deputies respond.

In any profession there are the 10% who excel, the 10% who are at the bottom, and the rest that just want to do the job and go home. This holds true for law enforcement. The top 10% live and breathe the job. They become the chiefs, directors, and in some cases derive new strategies to combat crime such as Jack Maple did with CompStat.

The guys and gals who fall in the 80% of law enforcement do their jobs whether it is preventing a robbery, chasing a suspect, or giving out a speeding ticket. When their shifts end, they change out of their uniforms and go home. But even off duty, most are inclined to help if they see an accident or a dangerous situation.

Then you have those in the bottom 10%. Most are just slackers. They are there for no other reason but to collect a check and do as little as they can. A few are racists and sadists (like Derek Chauvin) who like the authority that being in law enforcement confers but use that authority not to protect and serve but for their own ego trip.

Deputy Sheriffs on the Texas border 1910
                          Pinterest

Which brings me back to why using law enforcement to exercise political purposes is so wrong for the citizens and the cops. If we are trying to show every segment of the population why it is important to respect the badge, using the badge for partisan theatrics such as patrolling the border just makes that impossible. The police and the law need to be above the business of politics for them to be effective in the eyes of all citizens.

Is there a problem with our immigration and border control systems? Sure, there is. Under our Constitution that is a federal responsibility. The president and Congress need to solve it and as citizens it is up to us to make sure they do. Federal law enforcement agents are the ones charged with immigration and the border.

Like DeSantis, Texas Governor Abbot is up for re-election next year. Both want to show that they are tough on undocumented immigrants to woo their bases. Martin County deputies have no business going outside the state on such a blatantly political foray. By heeding the call, the sheriff is giving an unfunded mandate to the taxpayers of Martin County. He is also showing for some of our residents that his deputies are their adversaries instead of impartial servants of the law.

Is there a way to beat the power of incumbency in local political races?

That is a question that is asked not only in Martin County but in the entire country.  The lack of people running against incumbents can be for several reasons. Americans may really be satisfied with their local boards, or two no one cares enough to run. I believe it is a sense of despair for the hurdles of running against an incumbent. In many respects, the perk of incumbency is often too much to defeat.

Just last week, the qualifying period for two seats on the Stuart commission were up. One, Becky Bruner had no opposition and is consequently automatically re-elected. The other, Troy McDonald, will face token opposition from Caryn Hall, his same opponent in 2020.

When I went on the city’s website today, they were still advertising the 2020 election all the way on the bottom of their home page. As if a year later, it was relevant in anyway. There was not a mention of the seats up in 2021. This happened in the 2019 races also.

                         Dreamtime

It is not only the City of Stuart but every presently elected official in the county that seeks to minimize the competition. City races are non-partisan, but when it comes to the county commission, the race takes up a supposed partisan track. There are primaries that serve to act more as a barrier than anything else.

In Martin County, everyone that runs in a partisan election runs as a Republican. This is a one-party county, and it shows. Unless you have been here more than a decade, you probably have not seen a candidate run as a Democrat in a county commission race.

That is not because we do not have Democrats but only because they feel running as a Democrat will result in their defeat. In Doug Smith’s last race, his opponent, Jo Neeson, ran as a Republican. Jo is anything but a member of the GOP. In fact, she had changed party affiliation to Republican to vote in the last election for that seat so she could vote for Smith’s opponent. She just ran out of time to change back before the qualifying period.

In Florida, if there are only members of the same party running in the primary, then all voters can vote regardless of party affiliation. The primary is, in essence, the general election. Martin County is not known for Democrats running as Democrats. Therefore, if all registered voters were allowed to vote in a primary, it would be fair.

There is a little quirk in the election law that states a primary would be closed to those of a different or no party affiliation if someone registers to run as a write-in candidate in the general election. Their name will not appear on the ballot, they pay no qualifying fees, and do not campaign. They are, in effect when this tactic is employed, a ringer, which means that Democrats and all others who are not Republicans are prevented from voting in the primary.

While perfectly legal, is it ethical or moral? This is how Neeson, who had changed party affiliation from Democrat to Republican to vote four years before for Smith’s rival, had been stuck between parties so to speak. The Smith/Neeson race had a last-minute ringer file.

The same happened four years before in Smith’s race with Jacqui Thurlow-Lippisch. A high school kid filed as a write-in to close the primary. Where should we go from here? The legislature just completed changing voting laws to fix a problem that Florida did not have. Here is a problem they do have.

The legislature needs to enact term limits on all elected offices except constitutional ones. If eight years is good enough on the state level, it certainly should be for local offices. The City of Stuart’s recent charter review board recommended 2 four-year terms for the commission. The city commission decided not to go with those limits but instead increase them to 3 four-year terms or a total of 12 consecutive years. Local politicians will never do what is necessary in this regard.

Currently, municipal elections are nonpartisan. That should be extended to all local boards including constitutional officers. With that one change, there are no longer partisan primaries excluding voters. In the initial election in August, all candidates run, and if one receives more than 50%, then they are declared the winner. Otherwise, the two candidates with the most votes go on to the general election. In both instances, all voters vote, and no one is shut out of the process.

The Founders never wanted to have elected office become a career. I do not believe most voters envisioned a city as small as Stuart providing not only a salary but medical and retirement benefits. There are retired city commissioners receiving taxpayer supported pensions.

If we are looking for civic involvement, we need to take the career out of local officeholder and pursue the spirit of looking at it as a volunteer position. Americans, Floridians and especially Martin County residents have lost our way. Let us get it back.