Some sunshine needed in a hurry

It’s Wednesday, so let’s talk about ethics.

I went to bed Monday night knowing Tuesday’s blog would not sit well with certain people, including my business friends. Their view is whoever in the county government signed off on the $3 million Senate budget request to design the widening of C.R. 491 should be lauded, not criticized, even if it all happened in secret.

“It’s about damn time we have leaders who are thinking outside of the box to finally get things done,” wrote Josh Wooten, president/CEO of the Chamber of Commerce and a former county commissioner.

---

I’m with him 100%. Except for one thing. Ethics. The government, you see, has rules.

This isn’t about getting money for widening C.R. 491. It’s about a cozy relationship with a developer taking place entirely outside the public’s eye.

To recap:

Each year, the county sets its legislative priorities. These are usually in the area of funding for projects, such as the Cross Florida Barge Canal boat ramp and Halls River Road multi-purpose path.

The board discussed priorities. Board Chair Rebecca Bays has pushed for C.R. 491 funding, citing the 6,000-home Tuscany Ranch development planned near Beverly Hills and other growth. 

Bays also noted that 491 is a hurricane evacuation route, which should get the state’s attention. And there's a new industrial park on U.S. 41 near the C.R. 491 intersection in Holder.

The county is conducting a corridor study to see what an alignment would look like in widening 491 between Pine Ridge Boulevard and State Road 200. Many eyes are on this project.

When commissioners eventually voted for the legislative priority list, 491 didn't make the cut.

Let’s stop right there. That should have ended the discussion. If Tuscany and its lobbyist wanted the county to apply for 491 money it should have asked while the issue was being discussed publicly.

Instead, it all happened out of public view. Tuscany asked the county to request the money. Someone on the county staff — the form has Technical Services Director Walt Eastmond’s name, but I doubt it was him — took it upon themselves to bypass the public and ask for the money anyway.

So, two things happened:

• The board publicly declined to ask legislators to fund 491 widening.
• County administration did it anyway. With the board chair’s blessing.

See, we’re not talking about getting money for a very needed road project. We’re talking about ethics and process. There’s a right way to do this publicly, which makes one wonder why it wasn't done that way.

Interesting that one current commissioner and two former commissioners jumped into the blog conversation. My good friend Josh Wooten is of the opinion that there’s nothing to see here. If someone wants to use their influence to move this project along, what’s the issue?

Former Commissioner Vicki Phillips, who served with Wooten, had a different take. 

“My major point is these backroom deals are not acceptable,” she wrote. “You either handle these things in the sunshine or you don’t handle them.”

And Commissioner Jeff Kinnard weighed in: 

“Great catch Mike! This was never discussed with the board.”

Bays now wants to rectify the situation. She’s placed on Tuesday’s agenda a request for the board to “ratify” County Administrator Steve Howard’s signature on the paperwork. Kinda like an after-the-fact building permit, right? 

Along with getting to the bottom of this legislative request, commissioners might want to have a serious discussion about their official roles. Individual commissioners have no authority. Individual commissioners cannot make decisions that would normally require a board vote.

Like seeking $3 million from the state for a road project in partnership with a major developer.

State money for C.R. 491? I’m all for it — if done correctly.

A little sunshine, please.

Join the discussion on our Facebook page.

Enjoying the blog? Please consider supporting it at Venmo, PayPal, or Patreon.
​