Discussions continue around possible east Manatee County building moratorium

Developments east of county utilities, fluoride in the water and speeding tickets are all on track to be limited.


Commissioners Tal Siddique, George Kruse and Dr. Bob McCann listen to a caller during the Jan. 28 commission meeting.
Commissioners Tal Siddique, George Kruse and Dr. Bob McCann listen to a caller during the Jan. 28 commission meeting.
Photo by Lesley Dwyer
  • East County
  • News
  • Share

Since the Manatee County Commission gained three new members in November, there’s been a shift in key policies. 

From wetland buffers to impact fees, the board is exploring new ground with Commission Chair George Kruse leading the way. 

The latest move by the newly formed board will repeal a comprehensive plan amendment that allowed development east of the Future Development Area Boundary. 

Commissioner Carol Felts made the motion Jan. 28, which was approved unanimously.

The original agenda item that led to the motion was the discussion of a building moratorium in District 5, which was brought up by the district’s commissioner, Dr. Bob McCann.

McCann was clear that he didn’t want to vote right away. He wanted a discussion with commissioners and the public, then the builders. 

The next day, McCann’s assistant, Ed Bailey, said Schroeder-Manatee Ranch CEO Rex Jensen had reached out to set up a meeting. Bailey was instructed to send invitations to Pat Neal and Carlos Beruff next. 

McCann has a space reserved on the Feb. 4 meeting agenda to revisit the issue and raise a motion. 

Commissioner Bob McCann is ready to sit down with builders to discuss options to avoid a building moratorium.
Photo by Lesley Dwyer

But in the moment, it was after 10 p.m., and Felts wanted to have “something to show” for a meeting that was headed into its 12th hour. 

The board did not have the authority to amend the comprehensive plan on the spot, but when the proper steps have been followed and the policy is removed, developers will no longer be able to present the board with projects east of the FDAB.

The FDAB marks where county utilities stop, and thus marks where development stops as well. 

Two projects, Taylor Ranch and East River Ranch, were approved in 2023 because the prior commission voted to allow development east of the FDAB. Each project will add nearly 5,000 homes to the area.

While he was in favor of Felts’ motion, McCann’s focus stayed true to a moratorium. 

“This is going to offend some people,” he said, “But this is what the people in my district want.” 

Citizens have also been vocal about wanting the findings to be released from an investigation about the causes of flooding surrounding Hurricane Debby. Kruse said both topics will be covered during a work session Feb. 19. 

Brittany Lamont, president of the Lakewood Ranch Business Alliance, was keeping an eye on the possible moratorium for the business community. 

McCann said his target is residential development, but Lamont said it’s important for the thousands of businesses in the greater Lakewood Ranch area to have a voice in the collective conversation. 

By the time the board got to the discussion after 10 p.m., the chambers were all but empty. Only one citizen remained, and he was not there to talk about building. 


Fluoride on the floor

The other major discussion brought to the floor was in regards to fluoride. Should the county stop adding it to the water supply?

Dentists supporting both sides of the argument pleaded their cases, which were both essentially moot because the county’s fluoridation system has been broken since 2021. 

Commissioner Amanda Ballard didn’t know that when she added the item to the agenda. She wanted to carry on with the discussion because the ordinance on record requires the county to add fluoride to the water.

The board will have to vote in an upcoming meeting to decide if the county should reinvest in fluoridation or stop it all together and change the ordinance. 

Deputy County Administrator Evan Pilachowski said it would cost $2 million and take a year to replace the current system, or $1.5 million and three years to upgrade to a “superior” system. 

The main argument against fluoride was a lowered IQ in children, and the main argument for it was the prevention of tooth decay. Studies that favor either argument can be found. 

Steve Tinsworth, DMD, is pro fluoride, but he takes a look at the opposition's information during the Jan. 28 commission meeting.
Photo by Lesley Dwyer

However, the conversation brought up more issues than just oral health. Jen Hamey, former candidate for District 1, wanted to know what happened to the over $500,000 a year that Ballard said was spent on fluoride injections. 

Ballard said it costs, on average, $1.23 per citizen per year for fluoridation, but she got that information from an outside source. 

Pilachowski said if the county decides to resume fluoride injections, they would cost between $60,000 to $80,000 per year.

But the question was raised as to how commissioners weren't aware the fluoride system has been broken for four years.

The 2023 Water Quality Report on the county’s website shows only naturally occurring levels of fluoride were reported in samples taken from Jan. 23 through Dec. 23, 2023. Yet the report has the “likely source of contamination” listed as a “water additive.” 

“I was actually relieved to hear we haven’t been fluoridating the water for the last four years,” Myakka City’s Elizabeth Arnold said. “But I was a little concerned to hear that the whole commission only just found out that the system was broken for the last four years, and it makes me wonder what else is going wrong with our water.” 

 

author

Lesley Dwyer

Lesley Dwyer is a staff writer for East County and a graduate of the University of South Florida. After earning a bachelor’s degree in professional and technical writing, she freelanced for the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. Lesley has lived in the Sarasota area for over 25 years.

Latest News

Sponsored Content