In Your Corner

Several weeks ago we offered our “preliminary support” for an offer by the City of Stuart to “donate” 8 acres of land adjacent to the Courthouse for a new County Constitutional Officers’ building. Their offer was in response to Martin County’s recent request for proposals to consolidate our Constitutional Officers, (Tax Collector, Property Appraiser, Clerk and Supervisor of Elections) and County Utilities Department into County owned buildings. Our support was specifically for the concept of City and County working together to achieve efficiency and savings for the taxpayers. We fully understand that there are many questions to be answered and a number of potential problems.

We continue to thank the City for making the offer because it provides an opportunity to fully vet the issue. Our Board spent most of our February 11th meeting developing questions that we believe need to be answered before a judgment on the proposal can be made: How much space is really needed? How much unused space do we have? Can we reduce the space needed by combining operations? How expensive are the current leased facilities? When do those leases expire? Can these leases be renegotiated to taxpayer advantage? How will the construction be financed? What are the positions of the Constitutional Officers? What are the cost, timing and feasibility of replacing Sailfish Park? How will the City handle the increased traffic in downtown Stuart? What about parking? Can a consolidation at the Sailfish location actually bring business to downtown Stuart? Can the City Sewage Facility be removed to provide a more suitable environment? Are their more favorable consolidation options/locations available than those currently on the table? In short, j ust because the land is free doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. The offer and consequences have to be thoroughly vetted before we can judge how good it really is. It may be great, but we could end up with a very unpopular, unpleasant and costly facility.

The County Commission decided last week to agree to the City’s offer of 90 days (with an additional 60 day option) to study their offer before making a final decision. We applaud that decision, but continue to ask: What is the hurry? Timing often influences conclusions. Are 90 or even 150 days enough to make a final decision on a project of this magnitude? Until we know all of the questions, and there are certainly many more than we came up with in an hour, we can’t know the best alternative to the County’s needs. We do not believe that this can be achieved by just assigning the task to County Staff, especially with a time limit imposed. Their approach in such circumstances is usually to provide only the answers the Commission asks without an appreciation of market realities.