PRIMARY ELECTION CANDIDATES
We asked all the candidates for County Commission in Manatee County to complete our questionnaire on issues important to EMPA and its supporters. Here are the answers from candidates that will appear on ballots for the August 20th Primary Election. We will add a new post with candidates who will appear on the General Election Ballots in November after the August Primary Election. Thank you to all the candidates who took time out of their busy schedules to answer our questions so thoroughly!
East Manatee Preservation Association does NOT endorse candidates, but we encourage voters to be informed. Here are the candidates' positions on issues that are important to us!
(Click HERE to view the County Commission Race Questionnaire)
County Commission Primary Candidates
Question 1: Is there any language in our comprehensive plan or land development code that you believe negatively impacts agriculture and should be changed? Are there any safeguards you would want in place in our comprehensive plan to preserve some of our agricultural and rural lands?
---District 1---
Carol Ann Felts' Answer:
Our Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code create a “Constitution" for our land use that must be upheld in order to maintain its purpose to set standards for our present and project a sustainable future in how we grow as a county. There can be many valid reasons to amend or adapt this—from changes in our economy, environment, or even public input or opinion on how our communities can or will grow—but doing so must be done judiciously, fairly, and with proper intent.
Although the state does not require a complete or periodic update of the plan or code, constantly making piecemeal amendments or changes depletes the original intent and damages the integrity of the plan as a whole, not to mention the great expense to review and create an entirely new plan when many years have passed between such an endeavor.
Therefore, a measure that would be of benefit for all our county would be to include in our LDC and Comp Plan a mandatory ten-year review.
As specifically related to agriculture, but applicable to many other factors, is a limitation on the amount of acreage that can be rezoned within a fiscal year. Massive changes in rezoning create massive needs for supporting infrastructure: water, sewer systems, schools, first responders, roadways, etc. No matter how these items are paid for, it takes time to create this supportive structure, and approving too many changes at once burdens the existing services and does not allow a reasonable timeline to accomplish them or ascertain the budget or resources to fund such.
Rezoning agriculture land carries this and other burdens. We can rezone and replace or substitute structures, but once land is developed there is no turning back. The changes we make to agricultural land has a much farther impact on our environment and quality of life as a whole than building a bigger office center or strip mall. Not only does agricultural land support or complement our open spaces, wildlife and waterways, but also our nation's independence and security in our food production. The state of Florida has always been a valued area in that we can produce food year-round, and Manatee County has the ideal geographic location that has made this an important part of our history, culture, and economy.
Steve Metallo Did Not Send Responses.
---District 3---
Tal Siddique’s Answer:
Policy 2.1.2.8 allows subdivisions neighboring a master-planned community to seek approval if they can demonstrate the new community will not create a new infrastructure cost. The reality is that master plans, privately held, do not account for this policy when leveraged by separate firms. For example, East River Ranch and Lakewood Ranch are from Medallion Homes and SMR, Inc. respectively. SMR’s master plan would not have accounted for tie-ins with future subdivisions at the time of creation. This is the inherent flaw of this policy - there is no way a master planned community could have planned for non-master planned communities to tie into their amenities. I believe this policy must be eliminated as it is currently abused to allow “leap-frog” development of communities that neither adhere to a master plan nor develop to the same standards as a master- planned community.
April Culbreath Did Not Send Responses.
---District 5---
Bob McCann's Answer:
Comprehensive plans must “provide meaningful guidelines for the content of more detailed land development and use regulations” - §163.3177, Fla. Stat. Manatee’s comprehensive plan and land development code must include restrictive zoning that limits land use to agricultural activities and not convert agricultural land to urban or industrial use because it negatively impacts farming operations.
For agricultural zoning, the plan should ensure that there are designated agricultural zones that protect farmland from being converted to non-agricultural uses. This safeguard will help maintain the viability of farming operations and implement urban growth boundaries to limit urban sprawl. This stipulation will protect rural and agricultural lands from being
developed by establishing buffer zones between agricultural and urban areas to reduce conflicts and protect the integrity of agricultural operations. Planning should include policies that support sustainable agricultural practices, such as providing resources for soil conservation, water management, and organic farming.
Ray Turner Did Not Send Responses.
---District 7---
George Kruse's Answer:
I believe Policy 2.1.2.8 was a mistake and I’ve actively worked to remove it. This policy allows for excessive development further and further east, which will encroach on our rural lands and negatively impact operations. It will further drive traffic and commercial businesses out to these new residents, tying up rural roads as cut-throughs when our state roads hit and exceed capacity. Some may say this leads to an opportunity for agricultural land to be sold at a profit. I believe there are ways within our plans to allow for monetizing this land without developing it. I’ve advocated for meaningful transferable development rights provisions to allow developers to buy development rights off ag land without developing that land itself. I’ve also advocated using a portion of our ELMAC funds for conservation easements to create a wildlife corridor and protect this land. Both would allow current landowners to capitalize on the land without selling it. In the short term, the best safeguard as we look out east is to ensure we hold the FDAB line in place for the foreseeable future.
Kevin Van Ostenbridge Did Not Send Responses.
Question 2: Solar fields are popping up across our county and state, most of them encroaching rural lands. Is this cause for concern? And if so, is it something you believe could (or should) be addressed at the local level?
---District 1---
Carol Ann Felts' Answer:
Solar fields on a mass level have not proven their benefit and have posed a detriment to rural areas as they have taken the place of food production, impaired the culture and economy in small communities, and posed unknown environmental changes in temperatures, weather, and the health of surrounding life forms.
Utilizing our sunshine for power and independence from other fuel sources is a positive and productive resource on a small scale or individual basis, but doing so in a corporatized manner has too many alternatives in areas other than rural land that should be considered.
Steve Metallo Did Not Send Responses.
---District 3---
Tal Siddique’s Answer:
- I believe in the long run solar fields will be preferable for residents in rural areas to golf courses and single-family subdivisions. I think the reduced water consumption, lower air and water pollution, and reduced activity on the land makes them more desirable than other developments.
- In Manatee County FPL has been the driver for the development of solar fields. Currently FPL owns and operates four solar energy centers with another two on the way. I do not believe they raise the same cause for concern as single-family subdivision, industrial, or golf-course developments do for many concerned about rural land preservation and conservation.
April Culbreath Did Not Send Responses.
---District 5---
Bob McCann's Answer:
Solar fields result in the loss of agricultural land and can take up significant amounts of land that might otherwise be used for farming. This affects the production of food locally and decreases the amount of acreage that is available. Local ecosystems, drainage patterns, and soil health are all impacted by the installation and upkeep of solar farms. Solar fields cause soil erosion and compaction, which can lower land quality and have a detrimental effect on property prices.
To protect key agricultural fields, the County Commission can enact zoning rules that set aside particular regions for solar development while preserving wetlands, farmland, and agriculture. Comprehensive land-use planning can help balance the need for renewable energy with the preservation of rural and agricultural lands by setting aside certain areas exclusively for agricultural use.
Ray Turner Did Not Send Responses.
---District 7---
George Kruse's Answer:
I’m not an expert in solar fields. I’ve spoken to both landowners and FPL about this in the past, however. I’ve certainly heard the arguments against them. However, as mentioned above, I can also appreciate a private landowner monetizing the land in a manner that doesn’t increase development and further strain our infrastructure. It’s a two-edged sword and this, for now, seems to be the less intense option.
Kevin Van Ostenbridge Did Not Send Responses.
Question 3: Are you concerned about the future access and availability of water from our aquifers, lakes, and reservoirs—for agricultural and residential use—in our county? If so, what, if anything, do you think should be done locally or regionally to address future water concerns? Do you believe residents in eastern Manatee County are right to be concerned their wells may run dry?
---District 1---
Carol Ann Felts' Answer:
Water and waterways in Florida have always been a challenge as the majority of the land mass lies below sea level. Each era in the history of our state has attempted to tame, alter, or redirect it—sometimes with productive results, but most often finding in the next generation an unanticipated consequence or error. Our wells in East County may run dry if unmitigated growth continues to deplete or poison our aquifer, and we pollute our waterways with substandard consolidated waste systems. To address that, we need measured growth, timely infrastructure, and conservation practices such as native horticulture, rainwater retention systems, and upgrades to our solid waste systems with more innovation in their function.
Steve Metallo Did Not Send Responses.
---District 3---
Tal Siddique’s Answer:
I am concerned about water availability as our county continues to grow. Already today we are considering deals with Peace River to pipe water for growing demands in Manatee County for the future.
- I believe what we can do is limit the allowable density for development on agricultural lands to reduce water consumption. Additionally, preserve the Future Development Area Boundary (FDAB) to limit development on agricultural lands while fighting to defend against lawsuits initiated under the Bert-Harris Act.
- Residents are right to be concerned their wells may run dry. With how much water Mosaic and other entities pump from our aquifer for their daily needs most agricultural users do not have wells deep enough to prepare for a future where wells will run dry at higher levels. We should support efforts to protect natural ecosystems that play a crucial role in maintaining our water supply, such as wetlands and watersheds.
April Culbreath Did Not Send Responses.
---District 5---
Bob McCann's Answer:
Concerns about future water access and availability are certainly compelling, especially given the increasing demands on water resources due to rezoning and overbuilding. We will run out of water by 2030, and the suggestion is to buy water from Peace River, but at what cost? Establishing buffer zones with vegetation around water bodies can help filter out pollutants before they reach aquifers. Put back the natural wetlands and buffers. Protecting aquifers from pollution is crucial for ensuring a sustainable and safe water supply. Planning for the future is crucial to ensure sustainable water access for both agricultural and residential needs.
Residents in eastern Manatee County are right to be concerned about their wells running dry, especially if there is significant agricultural or residential development in the area that increases water demand. A comprehensive strategy that strikes a balance between zoning, building, preserving wetlands, and providing green spaces together with social, environmental, and economic issues is needed to preserve agriculture.
Ray Turner Did Not Send Responses.
---District 7---
George Kruse's Answer:
I am very concerned about it. I was on the Peace River Water Authority Board for three years and have done extensive homework on our water capacity and the costs associated with future supply. We are fortunate to have the dam at Lake Manatee but that supply will reach capacity in the next decade, give or take a few years. We will all be better off financially if we can manage our future supply internally. To do that, we need funds to buy well credits, expand capacity, and look for new options. To get those funds, our Facility Investment Fees (similar to impact fees but for utilities) need to be substantially higher. I can’t get the board to conduct a study but I’m hopeful they’ll come around soon enough.
Our worst case is to buy from the Authority, which we can do but it will come at a very high cost to the ratepayers. I don’t believe we’ll run out of water. We’ll just run out of cheaper, more cost-effective water.
As for the wells out east, I haven’t seen any studies on the level of the aquifers or risk of running dry. I’m sure it’s always possible as it’s happening elsewhere, in Arizona for instance. If that actually occurred, we would have a major cost issue as running county utilities out east would be extremely expensive. As a majority of our water is from the Lake, and multiple surrounding counties use the same aquifer, I don’t think that’s a Manatee County-only issue that needs to be looking into. That water supply doesn’t stop at the border. Any indication that wells could run dry would need immediate attention of a multi- county group and the state.
Kevin Van Ostenbridge Did Not Send Responses.
Question 4: What do you believe are the biggest threats to our county’s agricultural industry and what can/would you do, as one of our commissioners, to address it?
---District 1---
Carol Ann Felts' Answer:
Our biggest threat to agriculture is that, as a society, we have become too far removed from the origins or effort to produce a fruit, a vegetable, or any product that we casually buy on a Walmart shelf or order on line. Our goods are manufactured overseas, our food comes from foreign sources, and in that we have forgotten the vulnerability we have to the diminishing quality or control of availability.
Our county has the geographical location and resources to provide our citizens quality produce, meat, and dairy products. Preserving our agricultural land, limiting rezoning, incorporating a “buy local” culture in our local government policies, as well as emphasis on our agri-tourism industries to educate the public are endeavors that are worthy of pursuit.
Steve Metallo Did Not Send Responses.
---District 3---
Tal Siddique’s Answer:
I believe the biggest threats to our county’s agricultural industry are urban sprawl, regulatory burdens, and environmental challenges. Our agricultural sector is vital not only for our economy but also for preserving the unique character and heritage of Manatee County. As more people move to our county, there is increased pressure to convert agricultural land into residential and commercial developments. To address this, I would advocate for strategies that balance development with the preservation of farmland. This includes supporting the protection of agricultural lands and encouraging higher-density development in urban areas. I will work to streamline local regulations, ensuring they are not overly burdensome. This involves collaborating with state and federal agencies to reduce redundant regulations and advocate for policies that support the agricultural community, such as tax incentives and grants for ownership and preservation of environmentally sensitive lands. Water scarcity and soil degradation pose long-term threats to agriculture. As a commissioner, I would support research and development for innovative agricultural technologies and practices that can help our farmers adapt to the changing environment. By addressing these challenges head-on in collaboration with our agricultural community, we can ensure the continued success and sustainability of our county’s agricultural industry, preserving it for future generations.
April Culbreath Did Not Send Responses.
---District 5---
Bob McCann's Answer:
Overbuilding and agricultural land converted to residential or commercial use is a substantial threat. I would advocate for zoning regulations that protect agricultural land from conversion to other uses. The County Commissioners must balance development with preserving farmland and zoning regulations that incentivize land conservation. Water scarcity impacts irrigation and livestock. Collaborating with stakeholders, data-driven decisions, and community engagement giving farmers and ranchers a voice are essential for effective solutions. It is time to say no to the Developers and preserve agricultural zones and promote financial incentives for farmers who practice sustainable agriculture or conserve land while supporting rural infrastructure like roads, bridges, and irrigation systems.
Ray Turner Did Not Send Responses.
---District 7---
George Kruse's Answer:
Obviously, heavy growth and a lax development code has enticed many agricultural landowners to sell their land to home builders, further shrinking our industry. Cleaning up the code and finding ways to economically retain the agricultural aspects and operations of the land is both in our ability and necessary if the County wants to remain an agricultural center in Florida. The other issue, which is a bit out of our local hands, is a lack of workers and an ever-increasing cost of production making remaining in the agricultural business harder to justify economically. Those are more state-level issues but a commission could certain advocate for the needs of our landowners.
Kevin Van Ostenbridge Did Not Send Responses.