Spending Priorities

Last evening our commissioners spent over $425,000.00 to purchase a piece of land adjacent to Bayfront Park. I believe this was an unwise expenditure that accomplishes little, when the money could have been spent to enhance our community's attractiveness to visitors and perspective residents in more effective ways. Instead, we hear claims by the commission that a large project at Bayfront Park will somehow contribute to the island's welfare.

The money could have been used to create an island-wide municipal wifi network that would benefit all residents and visitors while modernizing our telecommunications image. Imagine the benefits for our community from having access to broadband internet access from our beaches, motels and businesses while creating income for our community.

A small part of the money could have been used to build several Bocce Ball and Pickle Ball courts at several locations around the island to attract people to share their time with one another. Instead we now have another acre of land.

About a decade ago the voters were asked to approve a bond for a proposed community center at Bayfront Park. The referendum, backed by our current mayor, was resoundingly rejected by the voters. Mr. Brown will not give up. He thinks the town's attorney and suspended, but soon to be returned, planning director will help him find a loop-hole in our weak codes in order to build a multi-million recreation center without having to ask the residents.

Longboat Key developed as an exclusive seasonal retirement community. Developers created large self-sufficient enclaves complete with swimming pools, recreation areas and spaces for social activities. Additionally, our population has aged and is now less mobile than ever before. Even if it is  desirable, it will take decades to reshape the social structure of Longboat Key to the point where the residents of all our self-sufficient condominiums are willing to take the extra effort to get in their cars, fight our seasonal traffic and participate in activities at a community center. If a community center is designed to accommodate our in-season population then it will be an expensive white elephant the other 8 - 9 months of the year, when few people are living on the island. Of those few summer residents, many are working or have families and will be unable to make use of a community center during the day.

The yearly cost of maintaining a large recreation center will far exceed the hundreds of thousands we already spend to maintain Durante Park, which is a wasteland most of the time. I frequently ride past Durante Park and seldom see any activity there. Why then do we want to build yet another expensive public facility that will be under-utilized and not attract tourists. Tourists are here solely for the beach experience, not a workout. Why build a costly recreation center for a community that has shown little propensity to engage in communal social activities.

Last week I sensed a further decline in town staff moral when they saw an eager commission effortlessly spend $450,000.00 on a piece of property, while at the same time not being willing to spend any money on long overdue employee raises for over three years. I complained at a commission workshop about this paradox. I was told that funds could not be moved to facilitate pay raises for employees. Now we see a token bonus to a hundred hard working staff with families that equals about 2/5ths of what the commission just spent for an acre of land. I look at this as being counterproductive. Our residents want great service and a functioning town government. Instead, the commission sends out signals that the entire staff is worth less than a piece of land that few residents will ever use.

To pay for the proposed community center, the current commission will probably ask that the town manager re-instate Ms. Simpson as the planning director, perhaps even with a raise, and once again rely on Ms. Simpson and Mr. Perssons to find a way to pay for a ten million dollar plus edifice at Bayfront Park, without seeking the approval of the taxpayers. I am so sure of this commission strategy that I have bet a lunch on it.

Several months ago, I wrote an article advocating utilizing available space in two existing buildings adjacent to the Publix property to quickly create an inexpensive community facility. If it was found that there was strong community support for a large community center, then the taxpayers could probably be persuaded to approve a bond to build a structure at Bayfront Park. Instead, the commission looks like it's willing to speculate with millions of your dollars for a project that has no previous credibility in our community.

To Advance or Not to Advance

One cost of advancing the Longboat Key beach project to 2011 from the scheduled year 2012, on a $45 million bond at 3%, is $1.3 million in yearly interest on the bond a year early.

So far the town manager’s sole reason for advancing the project is the Port Dolphin sand and the possible loss of up to $5 million in payments from the pipeline company, if Port Dolphin decides to construct the pipeline.

The following considerations should be part of the cost/benefit analysis of advancing the project one year.

1. The taxpayers will receive one less year of value for the current $26 million bond or $660,000.

2. The taxpayers will have one fewer years when they are not paying for a beach bond.

3. The taxpayers will pay $1.35 million dollars interest on the new bond one year early

4. Exactly how many cu/yds of sand from the Port Dolphin borrow-sites will be used on the proposed beach project? We should know this.

5. Is there a sand transportation differential between the sand coming from the north end of Anna Maria Island and the sand coming from the more distant Port Dolphin borrow-sites?

6. How is the town reimbursed by Port Dolphin, by the yard or as a lump sum? The town manager has stated that the town may receive up to $5 million so I expect there is some sort of yard/dollar formula.

7. The beach consultants say 2 of 5 sections of the beach on Longboat Key will receive the darker courser Port Dolphin sand. If the total project is 1.8 million yards of sand, then perhaps approximately 2/5ths of that amount will be taken from the Port Dolphin sites or 720,000 yards of sand.

8. By advancing the project by 1 year, to receive possible compensation form Port Dolphin, each yard of the 720,000 yards from Port Dolphin will have an added cost of $1.80 to cover the added early interest on the $45 million bond.

9. I estimate that the town has already spent over $500,000 fighting the Port Dolphin pipeline, so there is another $1.40 added on to the cost of each yard of sand coming from the Port Dolphin sites. These are only approximations and are not represented as actual amounts. However, we should know the actual figures before we move forward.

If the Port Dolphin sand does have hidden costs in the range of $3.20 per yard, is it worth advancing the beach project one year, even if we do recive some money from the pipeline company? Remember we will be getting one less year of life from the current beach bond which makes that taxpayer transaction 14% more costly, while at the same advancing payments on the next beach bond by one year.

The Longboat Pass inlet management study may produce findings that preclude needing as much sand as projected in the currently proposed beach project. Why encumber the residents with additional taxes that may not be required after the completion of the inlet study.

The interim sand placement at the north end alleviates the necessity to act this year as all the other beaches are performing on schedule for the original 2012 beach project.

If Port Dolphin is the sole reason being advanced as the driving factor in advancing the beach project by a year, I say we should know a lot more about what we will actually receive from Port Dolphin and then run a cost/benefit analysis. Uninformed decision-making usually has its problems.

The town and the taxpayers might save a lot of money if an alternative beach maintenance technology is evaluated and found to be effective in acquiring sand, at no cost through accretion, and then retaining the sand for extended periods of time.