The Martin County
Defender
The e-newsletter for aware cit izens – No. 101

Good growth, bad growth
Old guard, new guard
A unified view for the common good

Recently the Stuart News published a debate in print to answer the question: Is growth good for the Community? The debater who made the most sense said: “YES: The only important question is how to grow.” Her name is Crystal Morphis, managing partner of a business development group that completed an economic development competitiveness assessment for Martin County.

Her information may be a surprise – or even a shock – to both expansionists (aka fast growthers) and preservationists (aka slow growthers). She said:

“Not all growth is created equal, and growth for the simple sake of growing is not a strategy. What is a sound strategy is aligning economic development policy with the community's economic goals.
“If one of your community goals is maintaining local government services with a reasonable tax rate, then tax base diversification is critical. Cost of service studies show what return (taxes) local governments receive for every dollar spent on services (utilities, waste collection, recreation). One such study (and these results are typical) showed that the residential sector contributed about 75 cents for every dollar spent by local government on services. Commercial and industrial sectors contributed about $4 for every dollar spent by local government. Relying only on residential development is not a sustainable strategy.”
RECOGNIZE THE TAX IMPLICATIONS OF THE ABOVE NUMBERS

What this pro-growth expert is saying is that local government loses as an unrecovered expense 25% of every dollar of tax money that it spends to support residential growth. In sharp contrast, local government gains 300% for every dollar of tax money that it spends to support commercial and industrial growth.
Therefore, it’s clear that the most rewarding kind of growth for residents is desirable commercial/industrial, not residential. Of course, with more jobs and businesses, we will need more homes at a level that is sustainable and historically stable. In Martin County that population growth rate has been less than 2%/annum during the peak growth period.
Burdening current residents is not news. DEFENDER has reported in the past about state studies which clearly conclude that residential growth does not pay for itself, primarily because of high service and infrastructure costs. Only the deliberately blind with vested interests refuse to see this fact.
BUILD MORE HOUSES, AND THEY’LL COME. YEAH, RIGHT.
One would think that with the implosion of the real estate market, the over-builders would have learned a painful boom-and-bust lesson: Build to demand, not to expectation. A sensible developer would look at our neighboring county, see the record foreclosures, peak unemployment, and school closing, and feel it’s time for caution. In Martin County, look at the huge sign on the high rise condos at the north end of the Roosevelt Bridge: 57% discount! Imagine how such news affects the values that everyone has invested in such housing.
Instead of a pause and a step back, too many of these residential developers and their associates simply want to remove Comp Plan protections so they will be positioned to cash in as in the bonanza days of yore. They want mixed residential-commercial use, not just in Redevelopment Areas, but all over the county. They want urban clusters connected by costly new roads. They want sprawl-inducing smaller (and cheaper) lots adjacent to the Urban Services District. They want millions of tax dollars spent on extending utility lines into the boonies.
The Comp Plan ain’t broken. It’s worked well as intended, preserving what’s wonderful about Martin County. Stop trying to fix it the way one “fixes” a cat or dog. Bad changes are irreversible … as many counties may attest.
This is not a local phenomenon. The Florida Department of Community Affairs added up all megaprojects either approved, pending or proposed since 2007. Many smaller projects are not included. The total comes to 410,126 acres with a potential for 630,965 new homes. Here are the counties and their planned new residential units:
Escambia – 15,000; Washington – 30,000; Bay – 6,100; St. Johns – 3,630; Flagler – 5,000; Volusia -8,500; Brevard/Volusia – 28,000; Indian River – 42,084; Sumter – 86,932; Pasco – 4,500; Polk – 11,016; Osceola – 100,000; Sarasota – 13,000; DeSoto – 12,518; Highlands – 54,600; Okeechobee – 14,000; Miami-Dade – 6,941. Even if all of these are not built, it reflects the residential developer’s mindset and intent.
YOUNGER EXECS VIEWING GROWTH WITH CRITICAL EYE
The Old Guard of residential developers have pretty much had their own way in controlling the posture of the business community. They’ve had the money, the connections, the political influence, dominating positions on business organization boards, and – until the past year or so – a commanding prestige.
So when the Old Guard has wanted cluster housing in rural lands, they’ve dragged others along with them. When they’ve wanted to drop impact fees, ditto. When they’ve wanted water and sewer extended beyond the Primary Urban Service District, ditto. And so on.
But a New Guard of business executives and entrepreneurs is rising in Martin County. They feel less bound by what has gone before. They are more analytical in evaluating how changing conditions affect economics and our quality of life. These younger leaders-to-be have seen home construction jobs last only as long as the boom does, while non-residential development jobs turn into long term careers.
And let’s not forget the high Return on Tax Money expended for commerce/industry, versus the loss of public funds expended on residential growth.
Partly the inconsistent pro-growth views within segments of the business community are a generational thing, and partly the post-traumatic impact of what so many of us have been going through financially. Like it or not: Change it is a-comin’.
A unified view for the common good
If the citizens of Martin County can arrive at a consensus that the thrust of our efforts must be to support the expansion of established commercial/industrial companies – both blue collar and white collar – and the attraction of new companies, then we will have reached half way to our goal of improving our community. It is achievable if we pledge to preserve the protections that have made Martin a uniquely wonderful place. We rarely encounter a preservationist who does not favor diversified industry.
A few years ago, Martin County wasted $50,000 by hiring Urbanomics, a consultant charged with recommending steps to attract business. They offered a simple solution. Slap business-industrial zones all over the county. They were all but shooed out of the Commission Chambers. Currently, some self-interested folks have proposed much worse and been foolishly applauded.
As important as promoting commercial-industrial growth is for our future, it is even more important that we preserve our quality of life by retaining all the protections currently in our Comprehensive Plan. Only the combination of the two augurs a bright future.
Florida Hometown Democracy update
The petition drive for the Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment gets closer to the number needed to get on the 2010 ballot. If approved it would allow voters to decide on Comp Plan changes. Despite roadblocks thrown up by the real estate dominated legislature, the drive is moving ahead. The updated numbers are:
Signatures to get on ballot ……………...……………676,811
FHD signatures valid after 13,280 revoked ……..… 632,726
FHD signatures still needed for ballot ………..……. 44,085

If you have not yet sent in your signed petition for FHD, please contact DEFENDER for a blank petition form.

Martin County history: What’s in a name?
Henry Flagler named his flag stop railroad station Alicia, after his second wife. Later the name was changed to Aberdeen. When real estate developer Benjamin Mulford came to town, he thought the best name for the town would be, well, Mulford. And so it remained until a woman passenger was mistakenly let off here in the middle of the night instead of at Fulford near Fort Lauderdale. She was attacked by a horde of mosquitoes and sandflies. She sued the railroad. Consequently, the name was changed to Salerno. The year was 1913. In 1956, it became Port Salerno.
DEFENDER on the road
We’ve installed a scrolling digital message display in the rear window of the Defender-mobile (actually an old Honda CRV). The moving message reads: “SAVE MARTIN COUNTY … PRESERVE COMP PLAN RULES!” You can greet us on the road with one horn toot if you mean Change Those Damn Rules; or two toots if you mean Right On, Al!
+++++

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.
Al
Al Forman, Editor 5/1//09

The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2009 by WordsmithAmerica, Box 1828, Palm City, FL 34991. All rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE: All correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.

LPA TO HEAR REQUESTS FOR RADICAL CHANGES TO COASTAL, CONSERVATION AND DRAINAGE RULES

In DEFENDER No. 99, we presented in excruciating detail the efforts by developer interests allied with the Future Group to kill vital growth protections in the Chapter 4 Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. On Thursday, May 7, 2009 at 7:00 pm, the Martin County Local Planning Agency will consider some equally terrible proposals by the same group to eliminate protections for three other chapters, all part of the ongoing state mandated EAR (Evaluation and Appraisal Report).

We have not had the time to examine all of the Future Group proposals in detail, so we will touch on a few representative requests that are among those that are so bad that not only we, but county professional staff, disagrees with them.

Future Group wants to blur the difference between shoreline protection and wetlands protection.

Future Group wants to delete limitations on the location of marine facilities near population centers.

Future Group wants to delete criteria concerning preference for sites without land use conflicts with adjacent properties so marine development can be plopped almost anywhere.

Future Group wants to remove Martin County review criteria concerning environmental restoration.

Future Group wants to move key Objective and Policy statements from the Comp Plan to regulations that are easily changed by the Commission.

Future Group wants to tie in development rights transfer and “density enhancement” with acquisition of conservation lands.

Fuiure Group wants to eliminate the focus on public services in the Urban Service Districts, thereby pushing more development into less dense areas with cheaper land.

Future Group wants to remove the words “wetlands protection” from an important policy statement.

Don’t let this self-interested bunch ruin Martin County by overturning the rules that have protected us for years!

Our County Commission and District School Board are responsible for adopting an annual budget. As top officials, they also have an obligation to come up with cohesive overall strategies for paring the least necessary expenses from that budget. If they had the courage and sense of duty to do this, then the County Administrator and Superintendent of Schools could develop the best budget for board approval. It should be no different than in a corporation where the Board of Directors provides guidance for the CEO and CFO.

Instead, Martin board members duck the issue. They are afraid to stick their necks out. So they tell the Administrator or Superintendent to come up with a budget that board members can then snipe at to avoid blame. This kind of unprofessional thinking – five Commissioners with six disorganized ideas - led to the dismissal of the former Administrator, a Commission employee. Fortunately, Superintendent Kline is an elected official on her own right.

It’s no wonder that from Congress to County boards, those politicians are not held in high regard.

The Martin County Taxpayers Association does good work. We agree with most, but not all, of its positions. Recently MCTA President Don Pickard berated citizen activists who turn to litigation to oppose official actions. He does not like the costs such action imposes on government. He said: “These cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend positions already adjudicated.” Approval by governmental/political authorities is different from “adjudicated” (settled by judicial procedure), and Mr. Pickard should know better. Apparently he thinks that cost is more important than the principle of citizens availing themselves of the civil right to judicial review.

The principle applies even where we think the plaintiffs/appellants are wrong. For example, we agree with MCTA on the merits, and disagree with those who oppose, the FAA agreement and the County Commission ’s ordinance prohibiting commercial airline service at Witham Field. Surprisingly, WAAM, which tried to scare everybody about possible commercial service, ridiculously opposed the anti-commercial ordinance. Go figure. 94% of residents and all of the County Commissioners are against scheduled commercial service. Wrong-headed though their action may be, we still respect WAAM’s right – and any citizen’s right as provided by law - to challenge government actions.

Mr. Pickard cites failed legal actions by citizens. He neglects to note that sometimes citizens are proved right and government wrong – as in the effort to impose a Biotech Industrial Zone next to a residential neighborhood [See DEFENDER No. 4]. I was a co-plaintiff in that case. County had to reverse itself. Judicial review is a check on government misuse of power.

Our highly efficient Supervisor of Elections Vicki Davis reports that her office has checked 8,583 signatures on petitions for the Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment. 6,960 are valid; 1,623 were rejected, and 851 of those were duplicate signatures. More new signed petitions are needed.

One of the lies being promoted by the developer lobby is that if (and hopefully, when) the amendment passes in 2010, all changes – hundreds of zoning modifications, variances and land regulations – will require voter approval. That’s simply not true! Only changes to the Comp Plan would require voter approval, a tiny fraction of all changes. And well worth the effort to bring growth control from a back room of “influentials” into the light of day and resident control.

The term NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) has been a derisive description of people who want highways, schools, factories, airports, and strip malls – but want them near where someone else lives. Now a new kind of NIMBY has arisen.

As falling public revenues have dictated significant reductions in government spending, those affected have expressed their supposed understanding of the problem. However, too often the solutions proposed by various department heads and grant recipients is that more of the cuts should be made elsewhere, rather than in their own operations.

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Q: Why do slower-growth preservationists repeatedly lose elections to developer connected faster-growth advocates?

A: (1) Because faster-growthers are much better funded; and (2) ego driven slow-growth spoilers undermine unity

Developers (and their lawyers, planners, financers, builders, real estate reps, etc.) have more money than ordinary taxpayers. Under the concept that a business has to spend money to make money, the developer allied fast-growthers generously fund political campaigns. For example, they contributed much of the $200,000 to Commissioner Doug Smith’s campaign this past November. Smith is their most reliable advocate on the Commission.

Developer related supporters may be less generous in the 2010 election because the downturn in residential construction has, unfortunately, caused severe losses. So less money for political campaigns may be available.

Slow-growth advocates have been losing elections. A major reason is foolish factionalism. Each little splinter group is led by an ego driven, would-be kingmaker (more on those individuals in a moment), with a rule or ruin attitude Each splinter group has a minimal following, and most of the time they don’t matter. However, when a race is extremely close, even a small number of votes can sometimes make the difference.

An example of the close vote scenario is the 2008 Commission election in District 1. The top priority of the slow-growth movement was to defeat Doug Smith. In Martin County , recent history records that the winner of the Republican primary becomes the winner in the general election. A well qualified, slow growth opponent of Smith in the primary gained just a hair under 50% of the vote, missing victory by a mere 188 votes. A clique of spoilers withdrew their support from Smith’s opponent, giving Smith the victory. The spoilers’ own compliant candidate lost with only about 37% of the general vote.

Here’s the ridiculous irony: These same spoilers on the circular firing squad are trying to turn the truth on its head by blaming, not themselves of course, but Commissioner Sarah Heard for the District 1 loss. Now they want to bring their message of divisiveness to District 4.

What brings this subject up 18 months before the 2010 election is a prominent article in the May 7 Stuart News. In it, two disgruntled spoilers – both with a long record of failure and wrong headed opinions - attack Heard with falsehoods.

His name is Dave Shore , president of WAAM, aka Dave the One-Note Piano Player. His single issue is The Airport …. and how to strangle this important element in the County’s economic engine. While most citizens involved in public affairs also speak out about a variety of issues, One-Note Dave keeps hitting Airport, Airport, Airport over and over again, ignoring so many vital issues of great concern to most residents. Not many people want to dance to that kind of tune.

So how well has he done on airport issues? It’s been Lose, Lose, Lose. Consider:

- Shore’s group originally wanted to move or close Witham Field. When that effort failed, they just tried to hobble the airport.

- FAA has poured millions into the airport. By law that obligates us to follow their rules for the next 20 years. Shore tried unsuccessfully to sucker the County into suing the FAA, an effort that, win or lose, would cost taxpayers millions of dollars. And we were almost sure to lose.

- Guided by one of the nation’s foremost aviation attorneys, Commissioner Heard negotiated the best possible agreement with FAA. Shore fought the agreement, even though the majority of residents wanted it signed, and the unrelenting conflict ended.

- A survey was being conducted to learn resident attitudes about the FAA-airport controversy. Even before all results were in, Shore tried – and failed – to suppress poll results so the public would be kept in the dark.

- Only 6% of residents want Witham to be a commercial airport. The overwhelming majority do not want scheduled commercial airline service. So the Commission passed an ordinance prohibiting commercial service. That has not stopped Shore form falsely claiming, in order to scare people, that commercial service is coming. He even opposed the anti-commercial ordinance! Bizarre.

- Shore has always talked the talk about safety. However, when FAA agreed to install a multi-million dollar safety system called EMAS, Shore opposed that, too.

That’s a brief snapshot of One-Note Dave Shore . Should we take his irresponsible statements against Sarah Heard seriously when all they do is divide good government advocates? Not if we care for Martin County .

His name is Bill Summers, president of Consensus, Inc., aka Blustering Bill. His group with different directors was off to a promising start in 2007. Public forums were held most months. They brought a variety of local speakers to debate issues significantly affecting Martin County .

Alas, Consensus, Inc. has become irrelevant under the Summers leadership. In the past seventeen months, his group has held two open public meetings and one by invitation only. The two speakers involved (same one spoke twice) were from out of county, and discussed issues that are of marginal interest to Martin residents. No wonder that his small number of obedient followers have dwindled further as his credibility erodes.

One of Blustering Bill’s notable escapades occurred in the County Commission chambers. He took a newspaper ad, rushed up to the dais where the Commissioners sat in official meeting, tore it up and angrily threw it down in front of one of the Commissioners, to the shocked dismay of all in attendance. It was appalling. If one wants civility, self control and appropriate behavior in public discourse, Summers is not one to follow.

It does seem nervy and unrealistic that a pair of vendetta driven guys, who have done next to nothing for the people of Martin County for over a year, want to remove the best Commissioner and to promote their unannounced puppet in District 4. We trust that residents are wise enough to reject the false message of disunity and strife peddled by Shore and Summers.

The list of accomplishments achieved by Sarah Heard during her almost seven years of service on the County Commission would run longer than this entire DEFENDER issue. So we will suffice it to simply point out that she is the only Commissioner who has consistently fought against wasteful spending, including her opposition to the costly sweetheart contract given to the firefighters union. She fights against developer excesses, efforts to erode the Comp Plan, and more taxes. Sarah Heard was the first Commissioner to volunteer a cut in her own pay, a move not readily followed by some other Commissioners.

On a great many Commission decisions she is part of the unanimous vote, though she has the courage to be in the minority of a 4-1 or 3-2 vote when looking out for the ordinary citizen. Watch Commission meetings and see how she does her detailed homework more than any of the others. Self-serving applicants for rules changes may not support her. The would-be kingmakers who can’t control her apparently prefer to support a more pliable (and sure to lose) candidate to carry out their narrow agenda. But in terms of watching out for the interests of the typical Martin citizen, no one does a better job than Sarah Heard.

"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

The good news is that the petition drive is now only about 20,000 valid signatures shy of the required 676,811 needed to get on the 2010 election ballot.

The bad news is twofold. Petition signatures are effective for four years. Since the drive got going on June 21, 2005, signatures will start to go stale next month and be deducted from the valid total. So we need to step up efforts to complete the job. That’s where the second bit of bad news comes in.

Unlike developer/business opponents of Florida Hometown Democracy, FHD desperately needs more money. You can be part of this great grassroots undertaking by contributing what you can afford, be it $10 or $1,000, not tax deductible.

Long shot hope: The FHD appeal to the Florida Supreme Court to invalidate the politically driven law that has allowed petition revocations (13,280 of them) is still awaiting decision.

The Tax Collector will send out the 2010 property tax bills around the first week of November 2009. The bill will show that about 40% goes for schools, 30% for the county general fund, and about 14% for MSTU Fire/Rescue in the unincorporated county.

There are other MSTUs (Municipal Service Taxing Units) for such things as roads and parks. However, the one that is not identified by use is called MSTU District. It is labeled as Northern, Central, Southern, South Central, Western 2, roughly corresponding to the Commission Districts 1 to 5, or the split Western 1.

That District MSTU part of your taxes are spent, or not spent, at the whim of the particular Commissioner. Projects favored by the well connected are more likely to be chosen than those desired by Ordinary Citizens. It almost makes Congressional earmarks look respectable. That’s not the worst of it! The Commissioners have squirreled away about $6.5 million of our MSTU tax money, unused. Holding on to a rich slush fund provides political leverage.

When we consider the service cuts and layoffs required to create a tight 2010 county budget, it’s nothing short of greedy irresponsibility to let those millions sit there. The Commissioners have the power to turn the money into the general fund, and to do away with District MSTUs altogether. Will they do it? Certainly not until gopher tortoises can fly.

If you’ve been following some of our recent reports on the terrible proposals to weaken the Comp Plan, you will have the opportunity to weigh in at the public hearing by the Local Planning Agency (LPA) on May 21, 2009 starting at 6:00 pm. LPA will consider both the Chapter 8 Coastal Management Element, and Chapter 9 Conservation and Open Space Element. LPA meetings are held in the Commission chambers,

Many readers responded with a thumbs-up to our report about two former supporters of Commissioner Sarah Heard doing a turnabout, attacking her because she would not obey what they wanted. Numerous letter writers were highly critical of Dave Shore and Bill Summers for trying to split the slow growth, preservationist vote. It does not look as if the defecting duo will succeed.

DEFENDER’s readership is diverse. Our several thousand subscribers include residents who have been critical of Heard’s positions on growth/development. Readers also include the tractable little band of followers of One-Note Dave and Blustering Bill. Yet not a single one of them wrote in defense of the Shore/Summers braying against Heard.

Ity must be embarrassing to call for a revolt against a top slow growth leader who fights to preserve Comp Plan protections and always opposes wasteful county spending, when the only ones who turn out on the verbal battlefield are those who think that the divisive call for revolt itself is, well, revolting.

The next School Board Workshop on the Operating and Capital Budget will be held on May 26, 2009. The public is encouraged to attend. If you have any questions, Superintendent Nancy Kline invites residents to call her office at (772) 219-1200, Extension 30200.

On Nov. 14, 1888, John Lawrence Jensen received a Homestead Certificate, signed by President Grover Cleveland, granting him Homestead Settlers Rights to the land that became known as the Jensen Community. He cleared the land and planted pineapples with the help of Indians and residents from the Bahama Islands . The area produced one million crates of pineapples annually during peak years.

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

County Commission fails to support lawsuit against U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for polluting estuary

On Nov. 9, 2006, 22 owners of waterfront property, coordinating with the Rivers Coalition Defense Fund, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for “intentional and repeated discharge of pollutants into the St. Lucie River and estuary system, located in southeast coastal Florida , which has destroyed Plaintiffs’ property, including Plaintiffs’ riparian rights.”

On May 18, 2009, the City of Stuart filed an Amicus Curae (Friend of the Court) brief in support of the lawsuit against the Corps. To date, the Martin County Commission, which has paid informal lip service favoring the lawsuit, has failed to file an Amicus Curae in support of the lawsuit. We know of no good reason for this neglectful failure to act. An Amicus Curae brief does not involve the county deeply, as being party to the litigation would. If the Commission authorized such a filing, our able County Attorney and his staff could easily prepare such a brief in-house.

The following synopsis of the present estuary crisis has been provided by the Rivers Coalition (info@riverscoalition.org), which includes 43 organizations.

The St. Lucie River is now damaged to the point that it is a human health hazard. Fish and wildlife are virtually gone. Recreation on the river has nearly ceased. An historic river has been judged by the Florida Health Department to be unsafe for human contact.

Lives and the economy are affected by this ongoing disaster as never before. Legal action is no longer optional, it is necessary to obtain adequate changes in water management. There must be short-term recovery reforms while longer-term plans and projects of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan and other programs are supported and implemented.

Countless community leaders are expressing outrage at the ruination of the St. Lucie caused by unnatural discharges from Lake Okeechobee . These discharges total more than 100 billion gallons a year of polluted fresh water that is sent to sea through Martin County . An even larger quantity is discharged to the West Coast.

The multi-county Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council adopted a resolution (Sept. 2005) concluding that “persistent discharges from Lake Okeechobee have caused critical conditions in the St. Lucie River, Caloosahatchee River, Indian River Lagoon and Lake Worth Lagoon” and that “immediate actions are needed…to resolve the current crisis.”

The least that the County Commission can do is show that it really is a friend of Martin County waters by acting as a Friend of the Court.

The Rivers Coalition holds its monthly meetings at Stuart City Hall at 11:00 am on the last Thursday of the month. The highly informative May 28, 2009 meeting was well attended, including 16 Board/Committee members and County Commissioners Sarah Heard and Patrick Hayes.

Aerial videos showed brown silt discharging into the river and covering the reef. This has come about because the discharges from Lake Okeechobee were redirected from natural flow southward to being drained by canals to flow east and west. What kills the estuary is the muck sediment – a half million tons of it from 2003-2005 – consuming the oxygen in the water. Few aerobic organisms can survive this deprivation.

The reasons why asphalt, or flexible pavement, is often preferred are cost and traffic management. The details below have been provided by Lisa Wichser, Development Review Administrator of the Martin County Traffic Engineering Department.

The costs associated with the construction of concrete sections are higher than those with flexible pavement mainly due to the costs associated with maintaining the traffic during the construction. Imagine constructing each lane with formed concrete and waiting for it to cure (harden) before receiving traffic; the delays become excessive.

Although concrete pavement sections have a longer life than flexible pavement, in Florida , the maintenance costs are not as expensive as elsewhere (no frost, no freezing, upheaval, salt, plowing, etc.), so resurfacing a flexible pavement road every 20 years is less than reconstructing a concrete pavement road every 40 years.

So then, you ask why don’t we construct sidewalks the same way? Mainly because the paving equipment is not designed to work in narrow paths (between the road and the property line) on the types of sandy soils we have in Florida . So the installation is more expensive than forming concrete paths.

Concrete sidewalks are rigid and don’t heave as quickly as flexible pavement from tree roots that are adjacent (trees typically are not adjacent to roads, so this situation is not as prevalent), which leads to increased maintenance costs.

1000 Friends of Florida comments on proposals to drastically change Comp Plan

On May 11, Charles G. Pattison, president of 1000 Friends of Florida sent a public comment letter to the Martin County Growth Management Department decrying the massive changes to the Comp Plan proposed by Future Group. His opening paragraph read:

“We have reviewed and wish to submit comments on the Chapter 4, Future Land Use Element updates proposed by Martin County Future Group dated March 19, 2009. In our opinion the changes offered are not consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the existing comprehensive plan, and would not only undo years of effective growth management controls, but introduce policies that begin the transformation of Martin County into just another indistinguishable area of south Florida.”

The letter went on to explain why 1000 Friends objects to specific provisions. For additional information on the threat to quality of life in Martin County posed by the Future Group’s radical proposals, see DEFENDER Nos. 99 and 102.

Individuals and organizations that advocate political issues have been burdened by Florida statutes that place severe reporting and disclosure requirements for expressing “electioneering communications.” On May 22, 2009, Judge Stephan P. Mickle, U.S. District Court, Tallahasse Div., overturned these laws (Case No. 4:08cv445-SPM/WCS). The heart of the decision is made clear in a single sentence in the 19-page summary judgment:

“While it is true that the legislature has the power to regulate elections, it does not have the power to regulate purely political discussions about elections.”

The decision is likely to be appealed, but for now free political speech is alive and well in Florida …. in spite of the Legislature.

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Comp Plan proposals by county staff & Future Group downgrade sewer and water requirements …. good for development, bad for residents

On June 2, 2009, County Commissioners held a workshop to provide Comp Plan amendment guidance to staff regarding capacity of septic systems. Current county rules limit septics to 2,000 GPD (gallons per day). State limits are 10,000 GPD for residential and 5,000 GPD for non-residential. The Health Department has stated that larger septics cause larger problems.

Some Commissioners apparently prefer lower standards. So Commissioners Doug Smith, Ed Ciampi and Patrick Hayes voted for staff to use the state standard rather than the more protective Martin County limit. Commissioners Susan Valliere and Sarah Heard voted to retain the present 2,000 GPD County limit, but were outvoted.

The majority argument claimed that the larger state limit allowed more “flexibility” – a nice way of describing whim and special interest influence.

Speaking in favor of the more lax state rule, the executive director of the Economic Council said that “having more restrictive septic rules is like requiring a 20 mph speed limit on the Turnpike in Martin County .” Huh??? Using state authorized home rule, which allows us to do better than the state limit, is like overriding a state speed limit on a state highway? Please say that it was a simile given without thought.

The following assessment of proposed EAR Amendments have been provided by Commissioner Sarah Heard

Following are some preliminary comments on the staff proposals for the EAR amendments for the Sanitary Sewer Services, Potable Water Services, and Solid and Hazardous Waste Elements. All are bad proposals. Certainly, they are not the results of the required changes that the DCA ordered.

Staff concurs with the Future Group recommendation to adopt the State standards for septic tanks. This removes the restriction of less than 2000 gallons per day (GPD). Section 10.2A and Section 10.2B.2.c.

In a strongly worded document dated March 18, 2009, the Health Department disagrees with the eased restriction. It says that "the 2000 GPD is best for the health of Martin County residents." The Health Department found that systems with high wastewater flows had/ have high failure rates. Today, they still find failure issues with these large capacity septic systems INSIDE the urban area. Large systems create large problems, which could result in the extension of regional systems to rural areas, the Health Department asserts. They further warn that the owners of large systems are not required to maintain the systems. Many fail to do so because of high costs, resulting in neglected systems that malfunction and present a hazard to the environment and public health.

The Health Department further states that several jurisdictions, including Palm Beach County , have stricter septic system standards than state code requirements.

Why would we even consider putting our public health and environment at greater risk?

As for regional waste water systems, they can be publicly owned or investor owned. The language that the systems must be in Martin County has been eliminated. Does that mean that some entities (investor owned) have grand expansion ambitions?

10.2.A. Regional sewage treatment facilities. It adds "owned by public or by investors". But, only Martin County ones will be required to comply with FDEP's tertiary treatment standards. There is no language at all on investor owned requirements. Which could mean that they would fail quite quickly, and then would have to be connected to the County utility. No word on who would pay for the connections.

10.2.B. Deletes the word "individual" in the following sentence: Several areas in Martin County have experienced individual system failures." Therefore, Martin County will require septic tank areas that experience problems to connect to regional service. Again, the problems are that we are proposing to increase with no upper limit the size of septic systems, which will most certainly fail, and then we will require them to hook up to regional services. Who pays?

10.2.C. Package sewer plants are allowed outside the Primary and Secondary Urban Service Districts.

The language detailing how many package plants are currently under FDEP enforcement actions has been deleted from the Comp Plan in this version.

10.2.F. The following sentence, "Proliferation of new systems will be costly and environmentally unacceptable" has been deleted. Which isn't surprising. If you're encouraging their proliferation all over the county, you want to erase the facts of their risks.

10.3 Future needs. In the following sentence, "In extending sewer service, priority will be given to existing developed areas", the word existing has been eliminated.

10.1.A.4 All language about documenting and listing reasons for failures of interim systems is stricken/ deleted.

10.1.A.6.(2) Allows the extension of sanitary sewer lines to commercial, industrial, or residential development exceeding a density of 2 units per acre (which is anywhere if we adopt the new Chapter 4). This, along with the support for package plants, will form the infrastructure for rural clusters.

10.1.A.9 The following sentence, "The interim wastewater ordinance shall be reviewed to ensure that it is consistent with the policies in this plan and effective in reducing the proliferation of wastewater plants." has been deleted. Again, not surprising. You can't cheerlead for their proliferation in your laws if you acknowledge that they are harmful risks, as the Health Department warns.

10.1.A.0 All the language pertaining to the requirements for interim waste water systems is deleted, including their complete prohibitioin outside the Primary and Secondary Urban Service Districts. Another legal wedge in which to allow urban clusters.

10.1.C.9 The County will develop detailed service area maps of government owned and investor owned sewerage systems that will be used to implement the Martin County Land Development Regulations. Quite perplexing. The county and Jupiter Island had a long term turf war over this very subject several years ago. We definitely established our respective service areas. Expansion ambitions??? Whose? Where?

11.1.C. Defines unclearly an interim water system. What is it? Why would we allow/ encourage one?

Table 11-1 Indiantown's population skyrockets from 5466 in 2005 to 16,422 in 2025. (The 2025 population, stated as 10,677, is scratched out. A note under the table states that a larger share of the population was distributed to Indiantown than shown in the Upper East Coast Water Supply Plan. Why? Are we anticipating some rural clusters?

Table 11-2 Martin County 's population skyrockets from 78,679 in 2005 to 102,725 in 2025.

Table 11-7 South Martin Regional Utility population skyrockets from 19,534 in 2005 to 37,536 in 2025.

Among these 3 utilities, 53,004 new persons are added to our population in 20 years. That averages to 2650 new residents per year, or 2.5% per year. That is a high growth rate.

11.1.C.9 Martin County will develop detailed service area maps for utilities. Same concerns as the sewage service maps. They are already developed. What new things are we planning?

12.1.M.1. Martin County will allow biosolids that meet local, State and Federal standards to be spread on approved sites in accordance with applicable laws and ordinances. We rightly banned sludge spreading in Martin County nearly a decade ago. In the last month, we have received alarming new reports of off the charts phosphorous loading in our waterways. We need to figure this out right now, fix it, and ban it forever. We're spending billions of dollars to implement the Indian River Lagoon Plan to clean up our waterways and at the same time spreading biosolids?? Doesn't make sense.

Let’s recognize the pattern here. Combined with the radical developer-instigated proposals by Future Group to change Comp Plan land use rules [see DEFENDER No. 99], the thrust of these proposals is to facilitate sprawl into lower cost rural lands, and to shift more infrastructure costs onto resident taxpayers.

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Background: About 18 years ago, Martin County recognized that interstate highway travelers may need conveniently accessible basic services such as restrooms, gas and food. So Exchange Oriented Transient Commercial Service Center (EOTCSS) zones were established at I-95 and Turnpike exits.

To develop an EOTCSS highway-road intersection, whoever builds on the first corner has to provide the water and sewer facility for all four corners. This was sensible because it prevented the proliferation of package plants. However, such facilities are expensive, so it has discouraged development at such locations as the juncture of I-95 and Martin Highway (SR714).

Some time ago, Tom Kenny, a leading developer, proposed that the county extend its utility lines from the Urban Services District to the I-95 Martin Highway interchange (Exit 110) to facilitate development. That’s about a 5 mile extension …. and it would cost millions of taxpayer dollars to push lines through rural areas. In addition, it would mean many months of dreadful traffic conditions.

Future Group has recently been, so to speak, carrying water for the Kenny approach, proposing EAR Comp Plan changes to support long utility extensions. Such extensions would completely undercut the anti-sprawl and good economic purposes of the Urban Services District boundary, though it would save developers a lot of money.

It gets worse: The Future Group, which has participated in good civic projects, also unfortunately proposed that water lines be extended to the Correctional Facility, which is many miles beyond even the 5-mile distant

Professional Engineer Sarah Lynn Cunningham, in a report for the Southern Regional Environmental Finance Center, stated the following:

“Development of land that requires utilities to ‘leap’ over adjoining land tracts that lack utilities often creates significant extra costs, usually requiring many years of subsidies by the utilities and their ratepayers.”

Developer thinking looks beyond current EOTCSS development. We can be sure that if long utility line extensions were implemented, then some future proposal would run something like this: The capital and maintenance costs of the utility line are so expensive that we need more taps along the way to help pay for it. So let’s change the rural zoning to allow clusterizing with more dense residential development.

Stretching water and sewer lines out into the rural countryside is a guarantee of costly sprawl that our Comp Plan tries to minimize. We’ve seen enough of that in the rest of South Florida .

It looks increasingly likely that the grassroots Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment (FHD) will be on the 2010 ballot (petitions required – 676,811; unofficial current valid petitions – 691,896), but district requirements and expiration obstacles still remain.

Anticipating the probable voting success of the FHD Amendment, developers across the state are deluging county commissions with large scale speculative development plans. The FHD amendment would give voters control over Comp Plan changes – a prospect that strikes fear and loathing in the hearts of developer interests. FHD does not affect ordinary zoning and rules changes.

Instead of trying to manage such proposals, some counties avoid their responsibility and just rubber stamp the plans and pass them along to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). This prompted DCA Secretary Tom Pelham to observe:

“Far too often, it appears local plans or local planning are being driven by individual landowners’ development applications for [comp] plan amendments that are acted upon in a vacuum without any comprehensive evaluation as to how it affects the entire plan. Local government just becomes a conduit for transferring the applications on up to the department.”

Martin County is about to begin negotiations with the Teamsters Union on their 2010 contract. Don Pickard, president of the Martin County Taxpayers Association (MCTA), has proposed a sensible way to approach the negotiations. His proposals include the following:

1. Bring pay in line with both other government entities with which they compete for employees and with the local private sector, which has historically been underrepresented in these calculations.

2. Review and either amend, reduce, or eliminate entirely, all HR practices and policies that are outdated, ineffective or unnecessary. Many are carryovers from days when local, state and federal workers were underpaid in comparison with employees in the private sector. This is no longer true and the county should take appropriate short and long term actions to correct these anomalies.

3. Consider new benefit packages that incorporate the intentions of previous policies in a more cost effective parcel.

Many of the policies and practices currently allowed in public sector employment are ineffective and often times unnecessary in order to recruit and retain employees. Policies such as banked sick pay, banked vacation pay, retention bonuses, etc. are not considered best practices in either government or industry and were eliminated years ago in the private sector.

A major public sector issue is the outmoded practice of paying cost-of-living allowances on top of merit increases, step increases, etc. No private sector companies can provide such a fiscally lethal combination of compounded personnel cost. Neither should the public sector.

One of the most important points made in the MCTA draft proposal, one also advocated by the DEFENDER, states:

We continue to recommend that an outside professional negotiator be used to provide perspective and personal insulation from those they work with on a daily basis. We have recommended for years that all union negotiations and even senior personal employment contracts with the County be accomplished by outside professionals.

Are you interested to learn more about the EAR proposals to reduce Comp Plan protections? Learn more at the Citizen Roundtable: “How the EAR Amendments could change Martin County ,” sponsored by the Martin County Conservation Alliance.

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Conservation Roundtable reveals WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN and WHY of ruinous proposals to change Comp Plan

The June 15, 2009 Roundtable sponsored by the Martin County Conservation Alliance lasted only a little more than an hour, but it shed considerable light on what is involved in the Future Group’s proposals to make radical changes to the county’s Comprehensive Plan.

We respect the two people who contributed to developing those proposals, but had the courage to show up at the meeting. What we don’t respect are their lame efforts to “explain” that the proposed changes were not intended to cause the dire damage that will result. Unfortunately, the supposed benign intent is not stated in the proposals that would become law. Only legal words matter, not PR commentary.

There are 25 members of the Future Group’s “Citizens Work Group.” Their names are: Ken Natoli, Noreen Dreyer, Terry McCarthy, Jeff Dougherty, Dan Martinelli, John Yudin, Michael Houston, Tammy Simmoneau, Patrick LaConte, Rick Hartman, David Smith, Jeff Bower, Tom Kenny, Toby Overdorf, Melissa Corbett, Ron Bunch, Dave Kuiper, Linda Hake, Susan O’Rourke, Nancy Oliver, Tyson Waters, Don Cuozzo, Mike Grzelka, Danny Strauss and Ken Baker.

These individuals, who represent Martin County ’s developer/business associations, include developers, lawyers, engineers and planners who work for developers, builders, real estate people and mortgage investors, among others. The great majority of them stand to personally benefit financially from the proposed Comp Plan changes!

Some 159 pages of proposals that would strip the Comp Plan of most of its important protections could not be discussed in a one-hour meeting. So the focus was on a few of the issues that are likely to have catastrophic effect on our quality of life.

One issue is the proposal to “Establish TCD [Traditional Community Development] as the preferred form of development and promote it through Future Land Use goals policies and objectives.” TCD is to the health of our county what STD is to the health of individuals. The essence of TCD is that it allows commercial, business, institutional and industrial construction to be mixed in with residential.

Not only is this mish-mash of uses with eliminated buffers preferred, but the Future Group proposes that that the county “shall [not “may”] provide incentives and opportunities for those developments which contain a diversification and integration of uses.” More plainly stated, it means that our tax dollars will be spent to incentivize – nay, force – commerce and industry on residential neighborhoods to benefit the growth machine.

Almost anywhere, “implemented in all Future Land Use categories except Conservation, Recreation and Power Generation.” That includes all residential and agricultural land uses!

This would be the death knell of the anti-sprawl protections of the Urban Services Boundary (USB). It would mean huge tax increases for roads and infrastructure to service dispersed towns in western county where land is cheaper than in the Urban Services District.

The county is scheduled to discuss the various changes at workshops scheduled for this summer. The critical Future Land Use element is tentatively scheduled for July 9, 2009 at the Local Planning Agency (LPA), and August 11 at the County Commission . The Commission’s Transmittal Hearing in preparation for sending changes to the state’s Department of Community Affairs is set for September, with the adoption hearing in December.

The implementation dates for Comp Plan changes are embedded in the proposals. The dates must be adopted for the Land Use Map in 2010. Deadlines include the proposed mandate that about 17,000 new homes must be built by 2025, setting the stage for another boom-bust cycle. Since it is highly unlikely that all these homes would be accommodated within the USB, it almost requires TCDs in rural lands well before 2025.

The reason for developing the Comp Plan changes noted above and in previous issues of the DEFENDER is to make money for themselves and those they work for or represent. This should be eminently clear to everyone who no longer believes in the tooth fairy. However, those who concocted all this know that they need a more high sounding reason to justify their proposals for the public. So they falsely claim that Martin County is an economic basket case that requires major “improvements.”

Of course, so many of us are suffering from the national recession. However, the real measure of good or bad for our local economic situation can only be determined by comparison with other counties. Let’s look at the facts from Florida Abstracts:

FACT: Martin County is in the top seven counties for best per capita tax base.

FACT: Of the ten counties with under 200,000 population, only two have higher wage earnings per job than Martin County .

FACT: Martin’s manufacturing jobs as a percent of all jobs (6.4%) is higher than the state average, and higher than St. Lucie (5.5%) or Palm Beach (4.4%) counties.

FACT: The millage tax rate in slow growth Martin County , including schools, was 13.5892. In fast

So Martin County is not an economic basket case. The push to make radical changes – which go far beyond what the EAR law intends – is driven by greed.

What should residents do about this take-no-prisoners assault on the Comp Plan? One choice is to sit snug and smug in condos and gated communities and mistakenly believe that we are insulated from the impact of the Future Group proposals.

Another choice is to do what we can to prevent our beloved county from becoming another South Florida disaster. Here is our four-step suggestion:

ONE: Phone and email all of our elected and staff officials to let them know that you do not want Comp Plan protections eliminated, that TCDs are a disaster in the making, and that you oppose Future Group proposals.

TWO: Forward this issue of the DEFENDER to all locals on your email list. Print copies and distribute them to friends and neighbors, urging them to do the same.

THREE: Explain to groups you belong to – churches, condo and homeowner associations, civic and trade groups, social organizations, etc. – why they should join with you to oppose the irreparable damage to our community that these proposals would cause.

FOUR: Attend Commission and LPA meetings and workshops. Speak up to express your objections to Comp Plan proposals that demolish our protections.

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

ELECTION DIVISION CERTIFIES FLORIDA HOMETOWN DEMOCRACY AS AMENDMENT 4 ON 2010 BALLOT

Despite the lies told by state business and developer organizations (eg., that FHD will require a vote on everything), and the failed attempt of their subservient legislators (eg., allowing petition revocation, overturned by Supreme Court), the voice of Florida’s residents will be heard.

On June 22, 2009, the Florida Division of Elections certified that the Florida Hometown Democracy (FHD) proposed constitutional amendment will be on the 2010 ballot as AMENDMENT 4.

FHD President Lesley Blackner stated: “Our goal now is to spread the word that that this important reform is definitely on the ballot. Amendment 4 will give Floridians who are tired of government of the developer, by the developer and for the developer an avenue to change the status quo.”

Blackner reminded Floridians to beware of the deceitful proposed amendment hiding under the name Floridians for Smarter Growth. She said: "This ridiculous proposal pretends to give a vote on growth but the devil is in the details: Voters get a referendum on a comprehensive plan change only if 10% of the voters go in person to the supervisor of elections office to sign a petition within 60 days of passage. It discriminates against many, many Floridians, including the home-bound and military deployed abroad, who are excluded by design from participating in any such petition process.”

Furthermore, Blackner commented on the misrepresentation by Palm Beach Post’s editorial writer Joel Engelhardt: “This proposed [FHD] amendment to the Florida Constitution will simply give voters a veto over those changes to growth plans that get approved by elected officials. It is false to say that voter approval would be required for ‘even the most minute change in a property's land-use designation.’ Hometown Democracy would not cover rezonings, site plans or variances.

“The Florida Hometown Democracy amendment will be on the November 2010 ballot. We expect the developer machine to spread lies, but we would hope that The Palm Beach Post would not do it for free.”

Four amendments have been certified so far for Florida 's 2010 ballot, with the first three proposed by the Legislature and the fourth through a petition drive. They are:

Amendment 1: Would repeal a constitutional provision that requires public financing of campaigns for governor and the three Cabinet positions for those candidates who agree to spending limits.

Amendment 2: Would require the Legislature to provide an additional homestead property tax exemption by law for military personnel including reservists and National Guard members deployed in the previous year outside the continental United States , Alaska , or Hawaii in support of military operations designated by the Legislature.

Amendment 3: Would lower the cap on property tax assessment increases on businesses and other non-homestead properties from 10 percent to 5 percent and require the Legislature to provide an additional homestead exemption for people who have not owned a principal residence during the preceding eight years.

Amendment 4: Would require voter approval of new city and county comprehensive plans or amendments to those plans.

On June 19, 2009, a joint meeting was held by the North Palm Beach / Southern Martin County Water Resources Group. Participants included the preservation specialists and political leadership of the counties and municipalities in the target area, including Martin County Commissioners Patrick Hayes, Ed Ciampi, Sarah Heard and Doug Smith, and Acting County Administrator Taryn Kryzda. Representatives of the South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection were also present.

The thrust of the meeting was land acquisition and the work to restore the land and water flow to the natural state that existed before it was drained and chopped up as long as a half century ago. Particular attention was paid to the Northeast Everglades Natural Area (NENA), which stretches from

NENA encompasses lands included in the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) and the Loxahatchee watershed. The area is also involved in concerns relating to Lake O discharges polluting the St. Lucie Estuary.

The governments and agencies responsible for restoring the land and its natural water flow have done a fine job with local, state and federal funds. NENA currently includes over 165,000 acres with two state parks, a national wildlife refuge, 25 preserves and parks, and over 300 miles of hiking and horse trails. To achieve this feat, authorities have had to acquire parcels, then remove berms, fill in ditches and canals, repair culverts, eliminate exotic plants and get rid of old roads that block water flow and wildlife movement. Lots of hard work. The resulting natural flow and storage will help clean the water and recharge the aquifer.

It was stated at the Water Resources Group meeting that by the time this excruciatingly slow restoration project is completed, it will have cost about one billion dollars. How did it get so bad that restoration should be so costly? Starting back around the 1960s, there was a manic desire for economic growth. Developers and land speculators drained the wetlands, with varying degrees of success, to sell lots for houses that were never built. And big agricultural wanted more water. Now a later generation has to clean up that mess. There are consequences to bad planning.

There is a lesson to be learned. Absence or reduction of protective growth controls breeds costly disasters. We must think of the potential impact of policies that spread easy development to pristine and rural areas.

Palm City had its start in 1910, when it was part of Palm Beach County . The Palm Beach Land Company purchased 12,000 acres, divided it into 10-acre farms, and promoted sales across the U.S. A ferry, the Pearl H., provided transportation to Stuart from 1912 until 1917, when the first Palm City Bridge was built across the St. Lucie River.

The national debt at the end of 2007 was 37% of gross domestic product (GDP), and at the end of June 2009 it is $11.7 trillion, or 83% of GDP. Based on President Obama's 2010 budget, it is expected to increase to 97% of GDP at the end of 2010. The national debt in 2010 will be about $40,000 per American. To put this in perspective, the national debt for a family of four is almost as high as the average home value of $169,000 in 2009.

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

The Martin County

Defender

The e-newsletter for aware citizens – No. 110

Jensen Beach Group presents excellent public issues forum

On July 1, 2009, the Jensen Beach Group (JBG) presented a wide ranging forum at Indian Riverside Park with community leaders discussing important public issues. It’s been about two years since Martin County residents were treated to such an informative, well attended presentation. Those in 2007 were sponsored by another group that has since languished due to poor leadership.

The forum title was “Taking the Pulse of Martin County.” By allocating just 10 or 15 minutes for each topic, plus question and answer time, the program chaired by Henry Copeland moved along at a lively clip.

-Two Florida State Senate candidates squared off for the August 4 special State Senate election to replace Ken Pruitt.

Joe Negron (R) spoke about his determination to eliminate pollution from Lake O, and to clean up the Everglades. He emphasized that the state must live within its means. In reply to the question of whether he supported Florida Hometown Democracy, he took the developer position that he opposed because voters would be micromanaging growth, a false claim.

Bill Ramos (D) spoke about supporting the natural floway south from Lake O. He is determined to eliminate special interest exemptions in the tax laws, and wants to rely on new industry for jobs rather than reviving growth and development. In reply to the question of whether he supported Florida Hometown Democracy, he said he absolutely does.

- Taryn Kryzda, the highly competent Acting County Administrator, focused on the county budget, services and taxes. The goal to keep the $141 million ad valorem tax level requires a rate increase from 7.23 to 7.98 due to lower property values. The budget reduction of 10%, of which the Commission controls $6 million, is being met with employee furloughs of one day per month, reduced contract services, elimination of positions, reduced Fire/Rescue overtime, health insurance savings -- and even warmer air conditioning settings. The sheriff’s budget is held to the same as last year. She believes that an employee health clinic will produce savings, and a plan is expected to go before the Commission in four to six weeks.

- Jan Huffert, Martin County’s well informed Legislative Affairs Coordinator, our pipeline to the state legislature, reported that county priorities include home rule, providing services, and improvement of the economy. State appropriations voted on May 8 included: Education – up $28 per K-12 student to $6873; $65.5 million for low income energy assistance; $15 million for beaches; $50 million for Everglades restoration; and $21.3 million in local library grants. The 2009-10 budget imposes over $1 billion in new fees. It is uncertain how Senate Growth Management Bill 360 will play out.

- Lesley Blackner, Florida Hometown Democracy (FHD) President, described by one observer as the woman with three Bs – Beauty, Brains and Balls – said that Florida citizens are ready to take back control of growth from developers. She urged the audience to spread the word that FHD will be on the 2010 ballot as Amendment 4. She noted that a competing so-called “smart growth” amendment proposed by business organizations, which have spent $5 million so far, was bogus. It would require 10% of voters to personally visit the elections office to petition, thereby disenfranchising the military and the disabled. No other state has such a suppressive law.

- Sarah Heard, the independent minded County Commissioner, was the keynote speaker. She predicted that the coming fight over FHD will provoke unprecedented mud slinging and fear mongering by opponents. Martin County is being damaged by a Commission majority determined to boost development. Heard said the big immediate issue was the Future Group proposed Comp Plan changes to create new towns and mixed use clusters that violate existing requirements. She noted that the latest data shows 2030 county population at 170,000, not 205,000 as erroneously claimed. Her own proposals for the future include retention of the 20-acre requirement, implementing the IR lagoon plan, no utility extension outside the urban services boundary, keeping transitions and buffers, imposing fair impact fees, and retaining traffic concurrency.

We hope JPG will sponsor another such forum soon.

Vallieres found guilty of election campaign violations; fined $2,000 each

The following is a summary of highlights in the 48-page opinion issued by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) relating to charges filed by the Florida Election Commission against Susan and Jim Valliere. The summary was prepared by Attorney Virginia Sherlock.

ALJ Robert Meale has determined that Susan Valliere and Jim Valliere each violated two counts of Florida Elections Laws violations brought against them by the Florida Elections Commission. Each has been fined the maximum fine of $1,000.00 per count -- $2,000.00 each.

The remaining counts have been dismissed. The ALJ found no proof of coordination of activities between the Valliere Campaign run by Susan Valliere and the PAC run by her husband Jim Valliere.

The 48-page opinion essentially finds that Jim Valliere was "controlling and manipulative" and that Susan and Jim literally split up during the months prior to the launching of her campaign, with Susan running her own campaign and Jim left to run the PAC as he chose, without coordination or agreement between them (despite the fact that Jim was also the treasurer of Susan's campaign). The ALJ's decision appears to turn on his understanding that Susan Valliere had little or no control over Jim Valliere and simply let him do whatever he wished without her knowledge or participation.

This passage sums up the ALJ's apparent understanding of the situation:

"After spending many hours in hearing with Mr. Valliere, the Administrative Law Judge finds it highly likely that, at various times during the campaign, Ms. Valliere was fed up with him, aggravated with him, and estranged from him. It is equally unlikley that Mr. Valliere would be deterred by Ms. Valliere's feelings about his actions, ostensibly on his wife's behalf . . . Mr. Valliere was obstinately going to attend to the myriad, detailed tasks that he had set for himself in his political committee, regardless of his wife's desire, consent, or even knowledge."

The ALJ found various facts "suggestive" or "suspicious" of unlawful coordination of activities between the Valliere Campaign (Susan) and the PAC (Jim) but ultimately concluded there was no proof of "the level of coordination that robs the political committee's expenditures of their independent status."

The ALJ also accepted the Vallieres' assertion that it was Jim's son, Jonathan, who put an incorrect disclaimer on the campaign signs (Approved by Susan Valliere), finding no evidence proving that Susan Valliere actually approved the signs before they were erected.

The Counts on which Susan was found liable were willfully failing to sign and certify two campaign treasurer's reports. The Counts on which Jim was found liable were filing an incorrect treasurer's report and certifying that Bob Lennon was a member of the PAC's finance committee when, in fact, Bob Lennon had never been asked or agreed to serve. (This latter count was previously dismissed by the same ALJ, so it's likely the finding of liability on this count will not stand, and Jim Valliere will be liable only on one count.)

"The violations involving campaign treasurer's reports are serious, as they undermine the reporting obligations that are the cornerstone of Chapter 106, Florida Statutes," the ALJ wrote. Also, "neither party exhibited good faith in trying to comply with the laws that they have been proved to have violated."

As a result, "the fines for the two offenses that the (Florida Elections Commission) has proved against each respondent should be the maximum allowed by law, given the seriousness of . . . the violations, the lack of good faith, and Mr. Valliere's role in the two violations of Ms. Valliere."

AN IMPORTANT LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING

On July 9, 2009, the Local Planning Agency (LPA) will hold a public hearing on the EAR-based Future Land Use Element at 7:00 pm in Commission Chambers.

July 4 is more than picnics and fireworks. It is a commemoration of the spirit and courage of earlier Americans who stood up against tyranny. We can learn from them.

+++++

For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com

Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.

Al Forman, Editor 7/2//09

All previous issues of the Defender are archived at our website:

www.MartinCountyDefender.com