In Your Corner

Public schools in Martin County are built according to state and federal codes, and have never been subject to County building permits or County Commission review and approval. The present County Commission says a new state law requires County review and approval of all new schools. The School Board disagrees. The School Board says the new law is to improve coordination and planning for roads, sidewalks, parks and other shared public facilities when new schools are built. They say this has been done in the past, and agree it could work better in the future. The School Board favors an improved Intergovernmental Coordination Element in the Comprehensive Plans of the City of Stuart and Martin County. Forcing the School District to undergo the full commercial permitting

process is unnecessary and expensive. When the two Boards failed to agree on this topic in 1999, they formed a Joint School Board/ County Commission School Siting Task Force to seek a compromise between the School Board's need to plan and open new schools, and the County Commission's desire that new schools undergo review and approval through the County land development regulations. This Task Force has been meeting since November, and expects to make recommendations soon.

School Board staff provided specific evidence that there are few vacant properties in the primary urban service area large enough to allow construction of new middle and high schools, which require 40 and 60 acres respectively, even if the County relaxes its land development standards. Also, we all know how expensive contiguous parcels of land could become. The County disagreed, but has failed to show any suitable areas. Both County and School Board agree that costs for land will increase substantially if new schools are confined to the primary urban service area. It is obvious that if schools are also required to meet County land development regulations, site improvement and building costs will further increase. We, the taxpayers, will bear these increased costs for land and site plan approval without any apparent gain. The new state law says that the County government's main objective in their dealings with the School District should be to assure there is enough vacant land for siting new schools, in the proper geographic places, so that parents and children do not travel excessive distances for education and for social activities after school. Forcing County land development regulations to cover new school construction will not help this objective, and may prevent it.

The School Board should cooperate with both the City and the County to build new schools where they compliment existing and proposed public services and facilities, so that taxpayer's dollars are used in multiple beneficial ways. If a new school site costs more in the primary urban area, but delivers more value to the community in the long run, it may be the best investment of tax dollars, but the advantages must be justified against the higher cost. In turn, if the School Board agrees to this approach, the City and County should coordinate facilities to support the new site, share part of the extra cost burden, and implement capital improvement plans for infrastructure such as roads and parks in

a timely fashion.

Our main concern is that the County not impose its regulatory machinery on the School Board, to the taxpayers detriment. The School Board should agree to some general planning principles, such as placing new schools in the urban service area if possible. It should not agree to abide by County rules generally designed to suppress development, and which have nothing to do with the quality of schools, but will greatly increase

their cost. The County's Comprehensive Plan and land development regulations are not more important than school children, parents and taxpayers. These documents are our servants, not our rulers.

This deja vu situation seems reminiscent of the County using "planning principles" as justification for lawsuits against the City of Stuart. We hope the County Commission does not force the School Board into a corner, and start yet another wasteful legal battle.

***

On Wednesday, March 16, a small delegation from the Taxpayers Association met with Martin County's Administrator, Deputy Administrator and Director of Administrative Services to discuss a selection of policies and procedures which impact spending. In a very productive session, we agreed to provide volunteers to assist the County in a study

to create benchmarks for department performance including comparisons of Martin County's performance with that of other governments doing similar tasks.

We also agreed to review other procedures, such as the justification of capital expenditures, including the purchase of real estate, justification for new hires and exit review procedures during future sessions. These special tasks will supplement our participation in the annual Martin County budget review process and are an attempt to

examine and hone, where appropriate, those policies and practices which form the groundwork for that budget.

***

Our 50th anniversary celebration at the Hobe Sound CC was a great success. A full house enjoyed our speaker's, Mr. Nathaniel Reed, reflections on the changes which have occurred in Martin County since the 1950's when our organization began and the population was a little over 1,000 people. He concluded by challenging all of us to remain ever vigilant and mindful of the tax situation in our county.

***

April 7 is the date of our next Public Forum at which we will be discussing various forms of government, annexation, incorporation and how those actions affect our taxes. This forum is being held at the Blake Library at 8:00 AM, and along with coffee and doughnuts, we are offering a lunch for an admission of only $5.00 per person. Please

attend and learn more about your local government.