Former Manatee County Commissioner Betsy Benac, who retired her seat in 2020, sent an email to commissioners this week blasting them for their decision to surplus the infamous Lena Road property, calling it "inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan requirement to have a Capital Improvement Plan."

"As a Citizen of Manatee County and an affected party to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone application, I am objecting to the County Initiated proposals (PA-22-02/Ordinance 22-20 and Rezone Application PDMU-22-02(Z)(G))" wrote Benac. "As a former County Land Use Planner, Member of the American Institute of Certified Planners, and a Private Sector Planner representing numerous land owners/developers in Rezone applications for approximately 30 years in Manatee County, I have been qualified as an expert witness to testify regarding the Manatee County Comprehensive Plan. As a former County Commissioner, I am well versed in the County’s Code of Ordinances, and as I have previously stated-the County’s action to "surplus“ the subject property was NOT in conformance with Article XII Chapter 2-2 of the Code of Laws of Manatee County. Therefore, consideration of this comp plan and rezone amendment is premature and does not serve the needs of Manatee County Citizens."

Benac told commissioners that declaring land designated for the proposed sheriff’s fleet facility, as well as a new property and evidence building, the proposed transfer station for the landfill, and the east county animal services building to be "surplus," means that the county "is no longer consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which requires that Capital projects can ACTUALLY BE BUILT."

Benac called removing the location for the projects without plans for where they will be located "irresponsible" and said it "will cost taxpayers significantly more funds as you chase locations when you have already purchased the appropriate site."

The Lena Road purchase, which was initiated under former county administrator Ed Hunzeker and continued under Cheri Coryea, was made into a major campaign issue by three-developer backed candidates who won seats on the board in 2020: George Kruse, James Satcher, and Kevin Van Ostenbridge. Their efforts were supplemented by developer-funded PACs that attacked incumbent commissioner Priscilla Trace, who lost a Republican primary to Satcher. The matter was also offered as the reason Van Ostenbridge moved to fire Coryea just after being sworn into office.

Benac also scolded commissioners for the impact on the landfill, noting that the decision eliminated the ability to build a transfer station, extending the life of the landfill at a projected savings of $75 million.

"Your actions have created an urgent, and likely extremely expensive situation for finding a landfill in a short time period," wrote Benac.

Benac also found fault in the rezone, telling commissioners that a Mixed Use Category for the site does not comply with the comprehensive plan, which requires the Mixed Use FLUC to be located in an area with a high level of public facility availability.

"The proposed site has access solely to a dead-end two-lane road, which is currently operating below it’s adopted level of service," wrote Benac. "Although the county has recently added the extension of Lena Road to the CIP–the reality is that extending this road through wetlands and connecting the road to an unbuilt extension of 44th Avenue bridge across the interstate and through the east county wastewater treatment facility is unlikely to be done anytime soon, or for the estimated costs in the CIP."

Benac also argued that the rezoning proposal is inconsistent with many policies of the comprehensive plan.

"First of all, the site is designated UF-3. There is no guarantee that the Comprehensive Plan amendment will be approved, and not appealed as inconsistent. The Comprehensive Plan amendment contains language limiting the amount of development on the site-which the rezone and GDP proposed do not include, and therefore the rezone is inconsistent with even the proposed Plan Amendment. The proposal for residential development at a height of 250 ft is inconsistent with Polities 2.1.1.4, (the area does NOT have the greatest level of public facility availability as there is inadequate roadways and no utilities serving the site); Policy 2.1..1.5 which requires the availability of sufficient land are for the location of appropriately sited public and private utility facilities (removing the ability to have the landfill and other uses); Policy 2.1.2.3 consideration of new residential development COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING DEVELOPMENT (residential development to a height of 250 ft is NOT compatible with the existing landfill use; Policy 2.1.27 which requires a transition between land uses and availability of adequate roadways-neither of which are provided for in the proposed GDP and 2.6.5.5 which requires that proposed projects are compatible to their setting and designed to contribute to the overall enhancement of the project. There has been no effort to make this project compatible with the existing uses in the area of a landfill and industrial park."

Benac accused the county of "playing developer," and claimed that the affidavit of ownership, which was signed by a consultant, is inconsistent with the requirements to disclose who the developer/purchaser will be.

"This is another attempt by the county to hide who they are working with, as no buyer has been identified (as required when declaring a property "surplus“. Allowing wetlands to be wiped out with absolutely no justification is also inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code. And to add insult to injury-the stipulations require that the applicant-i.e. the County, will provide all utilities for the development."

Benac told commissioners that although the matter is taking up far too much of her time, she couldn't sit by while they tried to "sneak this by hoping no one has a clue what you are doing."

"I am trying to help the public understand what you are doing to them," wrote Benac. "Stop now before you cost us, the taxpayers more money as we have to sue you to comply with your ordinances."

BOCC Deems Controversial Lena Road Property as "Surplus"