Pinellas County - Clearwater Beach - Sand Key - Belleair Shore/Beach
Indian Rocks Beach - Indian Shores - Redington Shores - No. Redington Beach
Redington Beach - Madeira Beach - Treasure Island - St. Pete Beach
St. Pete Beach briefs
By Janaki Palomar
Charter amendment progresses at snail’s pace
ST. PETE BEACH - St. Pete Beach is in the process of gaining extensive public input on an important and controversial item for residents: the citizens’ role in city planning.
Residents of St. Pete Beach know that this process is never-ending, or at least that has been the case for four years. The citizens’ strong desire to be included in planning, especially as it relates to issues of increased height, density and intensity in the city, led them into a financial bind beginning in 2006.
At that time, residents voted to change the city charter such that it now requires them to approve all amendments to the city’s comprehensive plan (which dictates land use and development standards)
through city-wide elections. The unforeseen consequence was that taxpayers had to fund additional special elections just to pass even mandatory and insignificant updates to the comprehensive plan.
At the June 11 commission meeting, Ordinance 2009-12, an ordinance modifying the extent to which residents are required to vote on such amendments, came before the commission for first reading. This ordinance
would relax the rules on what comprehensive plan amendments required referendum, and would save the city tens of thousands of dollars per year in special elections, but it was tabled. Instead of passing the ordinance to be in a Sept. 1 election, the commissioners pushed it off for the election scheduled in November.
It would be easy to see the city’s postponement of the ordinance as more of the same tactics that delay any development in the city. However, the city’s decision to table the item was not done to avoid the issue; rather,
it was postponed to save money and ensure a thorough examination of the ordinance before placing it on the ballot for the residents’ vote.
Commissioner Jim Parent was the most adamant about moving the item forward at the June 11 commission meeting.
“In my mind, the city has a . . . history of taking a while to do things, and I believe a resident even said tonight, ‘slow, snail pace of government,’” Commissioner Parent said.
“Current budget has money for an election; we don’t have money budgeted for another election,” City Manager Bonfield said.
The city will need to vote on the annual capital improvements amendment to the comprehensive plan in November. While an affirmative vote from residents on the proposed ballot item would make the
November election unnecessary, a vote against the item would cost the city an extra $20,000 to hold the second election -- money that the city does not have.
Commissioners Beverly Garnett and Christopher Leonard, along with former Commissioner Linda Chaney, added more reasons to their request to postpone the item.
“I think this is an opportunity to work with the people within our community . . . and bring clarity to all of us regarding this matter so that we can make sure that we achieve the intention and the purpose,” Commissioner Leonard stated.
The commissioners unanimously voted to push the item back and spend time in workshops with the residents. They indicated that forming an ordinance that accurately portrays the desires of the residents and then
informing the public of the potential changes would be essential in getting this sensitive ballot item passed.
“When you have charter amendments or any amendment that you’re working on, your first responsibility are the people who elected you . . . to educate them very clearly on what they’re voting on,” resident Will Jacoby added.
The city is working hard to get the word out to residents about this impending change.
The commission held their first special workshop on this item on June 30. They will need to re-draft the ordinance for a first reading in August in order to have it ready for the November election.