Amelia Park Candidate Forum – The vision thing

Submitted by Adam Kaufman
Legal Analyst filling in for
Suanne Z. Thamm, Reporter-at-Large
October 1, 2014 1:00 a.m.

The candidates for the two seats on the City Commission to be filled this November appeared at a forum on Tuesday at Holy Trinity Church at the invitation of the Amelia Park Neighborhood Association. Over one hundred City and Amelia Park residents and campaign supporters were in attendance for the two hour event.

Incumbent Sarah Pelican and her opponent Robin Lentz and incumbent Charlie Corbett and his opponents Tim Poynter and Roy G. Smith addressed questions formulated by the Association. The candidates had been given the seven sets of questions or “discussion topics” on September 12 and spoke to the issues raised without debate or cross-questioning.

The candidates were introduced by Bob Combs, Chair of the Association’s Long Range Planning Committee (R). Dan Scanlon, reporter for the Florida Times Union moderated (L).

The “discussion topics” were multifaceted but in summary asked the candidates to address their “view of the ideal Fernandina Beach” and what is “the most important thing” you would like the Commission to achieve; “what factors will influence your decision making;” why do you think prior City Commissions “were not able to implement any actions;” what is the role of public/private partnerships; how would you balance “the needs of the port” with our “local quality of life;” what is the role of the City in the “health of the local economy;” do you have a view with regard to holding “recipients of City funds accountable;” and last “explain your approach to serving all of the citizens of the City” and how would you work with other City Commissioners, elected officials and staff “to get things done.”

Each candidate was asked to distill his or her thoughts on those topics and provide three minute responses.

Fundamentally the focus was what George Herbert Walker Bush, with some exasperation, described as “the vision thing” when it was suggested to him in 1987 that he should contemplate where he wanted to take the country if elected President. Having given the candidates the opportunity to prepare, the Association was seeking from each candidate their ideas for the future of Fernandina Beach together with an explanation of how each would serve as a City Commissioner.

Undeniably, what emerged from the forum was that each of the five candidates was clearly committed to serving the City but that there were real, however nuanced, differences in how they viewed the role of the City Commission and its members.

Noticeably absent from the Association’s prepared questions, given our City’s Manager/Commission form of government, was any direct reference to the role of the City Manager in the governance of Fernandina Beach and the vision of its future.

All the candidates would agree with Commissioner Pelican that Fernandina “was special and unique” but, when the candidates were asked to describe their view of the “ideal Fernandina Beach” Charlie Corbett stated “what it was like when I was a kid” and Pelican agreed that “how it was back in the day” was probably Fernandina at its ideal best. Corbett and Pelican appeared to limit City development efforts, including the funding of permanent capital projects, to “pay as you go” while Poynter argued that such a policy burdens only current City residents for the benefits that future residents would enjoy without cost.

Only Charlie Corbett was born and raised in Fernandina Beach all the other candidates choose to live in the City within the last 20 years. Lentz, the mother of two young children, noted “no one represents her generation.”

Pelican stated she first ran for the Commission because there were actions by the prior City Commission that she “did not and could not agree with.” Citing “improvements in City Hall” she asked those present for their support to “stay the course.” She cautioned, however, that the City government could not be all things to all people and noted that proposed revitalization of 8th Street may have the potential of “intruding on private property rights.”

Lentz is a school guidance counselor at Fernandina Middle School, whose community involvement was precipitated by taking her pre-school child to the downtown library, (“their favorite place to go”) and learning of the effort to fund its expansion. But going to meetings in support of that project she found that there was no one of her generation in the room. She promised that she would be a voice for her generation, one that is not currently represented on the Commission, but also committed to tap the “plethora of knowledge” that abounds in the community available by direct interaction and by social media. She would represent everyone whether they voted for her or not, seek “common sense” solutions, and not be afraid to ask questions. She stated that ultimately “we need to get things done.”

Smith a retired business man whose experience is in road and bridge construction promised to be a “full time” Commissioner who would “not kick the can down the road” but who would not vote to spend taxpayer money without clear explanation of how funds were to be utilized. Smith is fully funding his campaign so as to be not beholden to any interest group. Smith suggested he was the prime mover in stopping Port expansion and the trucking of coal.

Poynter acknowledged he was a known entity both as a downtown business man and employer, as well as, a former Commissioner. Noting he was clearly “business friendly,” he stated, somewhat tongue in cheek, that the hurdles of starting a business downtown were “so difficult” to overcome “I ran for office.” Poynter decried the fact that the current Commission is now taking credit for projects, including the Library and railroad depot that are funded, in part, from the loan obtained at historic low interest rates by the Commission upon which he served. The loan members of the current Commission campaigned against. Poynter speculated that if incumbent Commissioners Pelican and Corbett had not “returned” the proceeds of the loan, the first phase of the waterfront plan would be completed instead of the fits and starts that have now led to the fragmentary effort at Parking Lot B. “The City,” said Poynter, “deserves better than bits and pieces of ideas.”

Corbett “a life-long” resident of the City cited his role in casting the deciding vote for the City portion of funding library expansion, progress at the depot, waterfront and the Marine Visitors Center. He asked for support based upon his record, specifically lowering the mileage rate and his support of “non-profit” agencies. While noting he served on the Tourist Development Council he suggest that that group would provide $1,000,000 to fund beach re-nourishment.

As the forum progressed, Corbett suggested Main Beach improvements would be a priority in the future and Pelican focused on the City’s inadequate storm water system and infrastructure, the maintenance of existing City buildings and the need “to take care of the people who live here.” Poynter spoke to “protecting what we have” particularly the issue of beach re-nourishment, “looking to the future,” and the need for “strategic planning.” For Lentz it is building upon the people and the community we have, revising the land development code, eliminating the 8th Street “eye sore” and completing the redevelopment of the waterfront after “40 years.” Smith, agreeing that 8th Street required improvement, focused upon making the City business friendly, support of tourism, recreation facilities “for all ages,” a “fair” tax structure and the “need to get things moving forward.” During the forum Smith would suggest that he would like to see an amphitheater and a permanent waterslide at Main Beach.

With regard to beach re-nourishment Corbett emphasized that the Tourist Development Council had $1,000,000 for beach re-nourishment and Pelican expressed her belief that now that the County Commission primary is behind us, the County will be “more open minded” on the issue.

All the candidates underscored that they are or would be available and seek input from the community when making decisions. Pelican emphasized that she has been accessible virtually at all hours; Lentz, a school counselor highlighted the fact she was a “listener” by training and a gather of information, “a fact finder” and “fact checker;” for whom cost benefit analysis would provide a basis upon which to vote in the best interests of the residents of the City; Smith suggested that when making decisions he would be “analytical” as was required in his business career and would research to get both sides of the arguments and make a decision on “what I believe” is in the best interest of the City. Corbett stressed he was a fiscal conservative in making decisions again noting that he cast the deciding vote for the library which “got a $1,600,000 library for $600,000.”

Poynter suggested a somewhat different approach to gathering information for Commission decision making. Poytner proposed that, in large measure, he would “task the City Manager” and the City’s other professional staff “who have the knowledge” to provide the information the City Commission requires. What Poynter would suggest later in the forum was the need for the Commission to formulate an agreed to “strategic plan” so that it can work toward common goals over time and not place itself in the position of reacting to events. Poynter noted he would continue his prior practice of holding monthly meetings to seek input from the general public and that he was readily accessible at his restaurants downtown. Lentz also expressed confidence in the competency of City staff and their ability assist the Commission.

Under the City Charter, it is the City Manager’s duty to “recommend to the Commission for adoption such measures as he may deem necessary or expedient in the interests of the City” and, as stated on the City web site, the City Manager “is instrumental in preparing for the City’s future through strategic planning.”

Poytner stated that he was “not running to fire the City Manager.” Corbett stated he would tell City Manager Joe Gerrity he still had a job if Poynter was elected.

The past failures of the City Commission to implement plans were attributed by Smith to the Commission’s “inability to work among themselves,” the efforts of “special interest groups” and “their own agendas.” Lentz attributed such failures to a “breakdown in communication” and the need to provide the public with complete and accurate information through print, electronic and social media. Commissioner Pelican cautioned that those who fill the 64 seats in the Commission Chambers are not necessarily representative of the community as a whole or its needs.

Corbett contended that during his tenure the Commission had moved its agenda: for example the proposed development of parking lot B at the waterfront, the paving of the railroad crossings.

Every candidate was in favor of public/private partnerships with Corbett and Pelican touting the City’s commitment to $1 for every $2 raised up to $500,000 for the Nassau Humane Society shelter and Corbett emphasizing his role in the library project. Poytner directed attention not only to the large projects, such as the library, but the need for small grants by the City to private charitable groups that support services the City might otherwise have to provide or grants to provide incentives to up-grade property or facades on 8th Street.

All the candidates were in favor of the opportunity reinvigorating the CRA presents. Pelican noted the Commission has come full circle on the CRA, but cautioned Poynter the City will need to invest in development to “reap the benefits.”

No candidate was opposed facilitating the Port’s return to 2010 -2011 levels and profitability but all were opposed to expansion and absolutely to the potential delivery of coal by truck through the City. For all the “quality of life” of the City trumped the potential of profits for the Port. Pelican suggested there is currently an appropriate balance of resident interests, the Port, the mills and tourism and that balance needs to be maintained. With regard to trucking on 8th Street, for Lentz “enough is enough” and we should not entertain that which “would jeopardize our way of life.”

There was unanimity that the City should be “business friendly” although what precisely that means was called into question by Poynter. Poynter argued that the maintenance of City amenities, its beach, waterfront, harbor, parks and streets were business friendly investments that ultimately result in customers for City businesses. Pelican cautioned that many of the merchants rented space and it is a complex issue. All favored expedited permitting for new businesses.

The $8000 payment to Lynn Williams for the development of a “water injection device” to be used in place of dredging the harbor was call by Smith “irresponsible” and “a disservice to taxpayers.” Corbett and Pelican defended the contract with Corbett maintaining that if it worked it would save the City “hundreds of thousands of dollars.” Lentz stressed that any such future agreements should be specific and contain performance standards.

No one disagreed with the need for the City and County to work cooperatively on common interests and joint responsibilities such as policing and firefighting and the need to meet on a regular basis. Poynter called for the City to work with the County to provide tax incentives for businesses to locate in the City, noting that the City has limited capacity to provide those incentives.

The election is November 4, 2014. Early voting begins October 21, 2014 – November 1, 2014.

Editor’s Note: We thank Adam Kaufman, who normally covers our legal beat, for filling in for Suanne Z. Thamm who was unable to cover the forum. Adam received accolades from far and wide for his coverage of the two day trail of the complexed bond validation portion of the impact fee lawsuit.