- March 28, 2025
-
-
Loading
Loading
I read Manatee Commissioner Bob McCann’s nonsense in the East County Observer (Feb. 13, Implementation of moratoriums are crucial to District 5). I asked ChatGPT to assist me in crafting a response to his lamebrain idea. Here is how Chat GPT responded:
"The proposed one-year moratorium on building permits and development approvals within District 5 is an unnecessary government overreach that infringes upon property rights, restricts economic freedom and disrupts responsible growth.
While proponents argue that this measure is needed to address stormwater management and infrastructure planning, a moratorium is an excessive and misguided solution that will ultimately harm homeowners, businesses and the broader economy.
At the heart of this issue is a fundamental principle — private property owners should have the right to develop and improve their land within the bounds of existing laws and regulations.
This moratorium arbitrarily would strip property owners of their ability to make decisions about their own land, whether that be building a home, adding a pool or making improvements that increase property value.
Property rights are the foundation of a free society, and any policy that restricts them should be met with strong opposition. The role of government should be to ensure fair and reasonable regulations — not halt economic activity through heavy-handed interventions. Free markets, when allowed to function without excessive restrictions, naturally promote responsible development and innovation.
By imposing a broad moratorium, the county is taking an unnecessary, one-size-fits-all approach that disrupts economic progress instead of allowing the private sector to drive solutions. Infrastructure improvements should be achieved through smarter planning and collaboration with developers, not by placing a stranglehold on growth.
A thriving local economy depends on the ability of individuals and businesses to invest, build and grow. This moratorium will disproportionately harm small businesses, construction workers, real estate professionals and homeowners who rely on a steady flow of projects for their livelihoods.
Preventing new development and property improvements not only restricts economic activity but also discourages investment in Manatee County. Overregulation and uncertainty drive businesses elsewhere, stifling job creation and economic opportunities for residents.
Supporters of the moratorium claim that halting development is necessary to address stormwater management and infrastructure concerns. However, responsible planning and growth are not mutually exclusive. The county already has tools at its disposal — such as zoning regulations, impact fees and infrastructure investments — to address these concerns without an extreme measure like a moratorium.
Rather than halting progress, the county should focus on targeted infrastructure improvements, incentivizing sustainable development and enforcing existing regulations. If this moratorium is allowed to take effect, what stops future governments from imposing further restrictions on property use and economic activity?
Policies like this open the door to increasing government control over private enterprise and land use, setting a dangerous precedent for further overreach. Residents and businesses should not have to fear that their rights will be arbitrarily restricted based on shifting political agendas.
This proposed moratorium is an unnecessary and heavy-handed attempt to address issues that can and should be solved through better governance, not economic suppression.
Property rights, economic freedom and limited government intervention must be protected. Rather than imposing blanket restrictions that harm property owners, businesses and workers, Manatee County should focus on policies that encourage responsible growth, uphold individual rights and promote economic prosperity.
A government that respects its citizens should not impose excessive restrictions on their ability to use and develop their own land. A smarter, more balanced approach is needed — one that prioritizes freedom, fairness and common sense over bureaucratic control."
–Walter Winship, Lakewood Ranch
As a reminder to the residents and newcomers, please be on the lookout and very careful while driving around town for the beautiful Sandhill Cranes and their babies trying to cross the roads.
Unfortunately, with their large stature, they cannot easily lift themselves up off the ground if a vehicle is approaching.
They walk across the streets at a slow pace, with their babies following as well.
Since their bodies are a greyish color, they blend in with the concrete roads which makes it harder to see them in the distance. Because of this situation, it would be a benefit to reduce our speed so that there would be enough time to react and come to a full stop while they cross the road.
Their population has decreased significantly. They are highly intelligent and very exquisite birds. They are constantly trying to acclimate themselves to new surroundings each and every day due to the fact that a lot of their territories and nesting sites have been demolished from urban development.
Hopefully, we can all try to make a difference and protect these wonderful Sandhill Cranes as much as possible.
–Michele Starr, Lakewood Ranch
I enjoyed your article (Feb. 6, Jay Heater, Transparency remains a cloudy issue) and agree 100% that the price tag for all the stuff at Premier is too high and warranted more transparency.
We have no plans to use any of those amenities ourselves. The G.T. Bray park is awesome for kids and families and everyone. We also love the Bob Gardner park and the Adventure Park, and I bet they didn’t cost near as much as the Premier's amenities.
I also love that you brought up the gates in all these communities.
When we moved here we specifically did not want gates. We wanted to be in an "old school” type neighborhood with low HOA and no amenities.
These gates give a false sense of security, and I’m not sure why people even want to have them. When I have gone to pick up a friend or my daughter’s friend, they are usually broken, or we wait for someone and slide in. Where is the security in that?
Many are open during daytime hours as well. So why all the aggravation? Why does this area feel the need to offer gated communities as a perk as it’s nothing more than an aggravation for most with a false sense of security. We like our non-gated “old school” community, but, unfortunately, these are becoming less and less common around here. I wish it wasn’t so.
Thank you for your great article.
–Kerri Glynn, Lakewood Ranch
“Growth is good.” That’s what you claimed in your Feb. 6 (Matt Walsh, Moratorium madness) column opposing moratoriums. I’m sure cancer patients are now ecstatic to learn their growths are good.
Imagine what every one of today’s slums, regardless of location, was like 100 years ago. What’s the common factor that led to their becoming today’s slums?
Yes, I know that today’s environmental restrictions and minimum lot sizes prevent extreme population density (people per square mile). But do you want one house on every one-acre lot covering all of Florida?
I wish Americans would grow up and get over the ridiculous notion that more is better and greed is good. Instead of being envious and desirous of the garbage we see on TV, we should be content with the many blessings and things we already have and take for granted, especially considering conditions in many parts of Africa and even as close as Port-Au-Prince, Haiti.
Lakewood Ranch is like a cancer metastasizing, with the Observer doing its part by glorifying high home prices to discourage the “wrong type” from moving in and rarely having police reports.
Oh, I forgot: Lakewood Ranch is a crime-free utopia.
–Raymond Kostanty, Lakewood Ranch
