Lakewood Ranch Resident Group Exposes Holes in Incorporation Study

LAKEWOOD RANCH -- A packed Lakewood Ranch Town Hall showed up last night to hear the ”other side of the story“ regarding incorporation and the feasibility study (PDF 1.86 MB) conducted by Dr. Hank Fishkind. Led by CDD District 1 Supervisor Gary Berns, a 10-year LWR resident, the ”Friends of Lakewood Ranch“ presented a rock-solid rebuttal that may well cool the heels of the developer-driven incorporation bid.

Berns pointed out that the study’s numbers and development projections admittedly have no historical basis, but are instead based on numbers that were engineered by the group that commissioned the study.

”Where are 2006, 2007, and 2008 in their analysis?“ Berns asked. ”They’re not there, because the numbers weren’t based on historical data.“

Berns indicated how little of the taxpayer’s county burden would change (4%), while going over the myriad of defined and potential expenses that a new city would take on, including infrastructure maintenance. He also demonstrated several farcical aspects of the study’s assumptions, including a projected third of the 2020 revenue coming from fines and forfeitures.

”They’re talking about trying to run a government on fines and forfeitures“, said Berns. ”Anyone who wants to see how well that works out should take a look at the city of North Port, which is now in a position where they have to do just that. Their legal fees and court costs were right around $2 million last year, but this study shows those kinds of revenues without such expenses. Where are the lawyers getting paid from?“

Berns feels that 8.4% compounded growth in revenues, right from the start, is unlikely in this economy and even calculated the cost of just a 5% error in the revenue/expense ratio, showing an expense of 7.8 million over 10 years. In his mind, these things all point to the likelihood of raised taxes or lowered services.

”Right now, we’re governed by districts in which our neighbors are economically similar to us and the assessments and services reflect that,“ argued Berns. ”The people who live in Summerfield Forrest don’t expect the same services or costs as Lake Club and they don’t want it, the same as someone in Lake Club doesn’t want a lower level of maintenance because they’re paying for other neighborhoods and they shouldn’t have to.“

Many residents expressed concerns over the charter and the idea that the city council would be comprised of 5 members, two of whom would be at large. That would mean that one neighborhood could potentially have a three councilmen majority and control the fate of the entire city. And because three members would constitute a quorum, as little as two people, again potentially from a single neighborhood, could decide important issues.

Some long-time residents of the villages were distressed by the fact that the proposed city boundaries would be many times the size of their combined area, much of it still to be developed. It concerned them that so much of what is now decided amongst neighbors would go before a small council where they would have comparatively little representation.

The group refused to take a position on the motives behind the incorporation committee and referred all questions to them directly. In truth, they didn’t have to. The flimsy study was commissioned using an economist who has admitted to having worked for the developers that hired him to do the study for the last 20 years. Over 90% of the funding for the study was provided by two developers and a major insurance company.

The incorporation of Lakewood Ranch is about zoning and land use; development density and control, not for the residents, but for a smaller group than holds it now. Judging from the mood of the room, it’s hard to imagine the requisite straw poll needed to move the incorporation bid forward getting anywhere, at least for the time being. In fact, my guess is it’s close to being dead in the water. That is until the next time this seemingly never-ending saga rears its head.

Related Article: Lakewood Ranch Incorporation May Not be Prudent Path