- March 24, 2025
-
-
Loading
Loading
All it would have taken was one phone call to Sam Staley. Building moratoria, he told us, “are really bad ideas.”
Staley knows this well. He is the director of the DeVoe Moore Center in the College of Social Science and Public Policy at Florida State University. He is widely known nationally and in Florida for his expertise on economic development, land use and regulation, urban policy, economic development, public-private partnerships, growth management, transportation and regulatory re-form.
When we informed Staley of Manatee County commissioners Robert McCann and Carol Felts pursuing a building moratorium in their districts, Staley responded: “They are a sledgehammer trying to pound a finishing nail — more likely to destroy the nail than drive it in for its intended purpose.”
Twenty years ago, Staley penned a commentary on moratoria for the Reason Foundation, where he was a senior fellow. The headline and subheadline tell it all.
Headline: “Moratoria on growth signal failure of planning.”
Subheadline: “Moratoria are bold evidence of poor political leadership.”
Staley’s commentary went on to say: “Sound infrastructure planning also isn’t a short-term fix. It’s a long-term process that requires diligence, commitment and pro-fessionalism. This is why growth moratoria are unsuited to solving a community’s infrastructure problems.
“Moratoria have to be short to avoid becoming a government ‘taking’ — a seizure of private property requiring compensation to private landowners. They typically span a year or less. That’s not enough time for a long-term planning process to correct past wrongs.
“Moreover, moratoria may add to local problems if they put communities at risk to lawsuits or investment falls dramatically because developers scoot off to more hospitable (and usually greener) pastures.
“When does a growth moratorium make sense? Rarely, and only as a last resort.”
Commissioners McCann and Felts repeatedly make the claim “my constituents want a moratorium.” They don’t really know that to be true. McCann says the 41,700 people who voted for him is proof.
Sure, there are many who say they want a moratorium. But if they thought through the consequences, they probably would ask what McCann and Felts should be asking: 1) Is there really a lack of infrastructure for what exists and to accommodate additional homebuilding? 2) What are the consequences of a moratorium? And, 3) What are options beside a moratorium?
McCann cites the flooding that occurred after Hurricane Debby, making it sound as if flooding is a constant problem in Lakewood Ranch. Debby was a once-in-500-years occurrence. What’s more, we quoted 25- and 30-year residents of Lakewood Ranch who said Debby was the one and only time they have seen floods in Lakewood Ranch.
And, if McCann had ventured to visit with Schroeder-Manatee Ranch CEO Rex Jensen and his staff, he would learn that Lakewood Ranch has gone far beyond what is required with its roads, drainage and sewers. Flooding is not a major issue.
First, can anyone think of the upside benefits to a construction moratorium? Sure, residents who have their homes and don’t want any more near them would be thrilled to stop construction. But watch out what you wish for.
They would quickly learn the consequences of a moratorium affect everyone — negatively.
No construction equals loss of jobs (contractors, trades, building suppliers; every place where all those workers and their families spend their weekly earnings).
No residential construction means higher housing prices. Limit supply in the face of growing demand, that’s Econ 101. There already is a shortage of workforce housing; stopping construction would make a bad situation worse.
Home prices would rise not only in Lakewood Ranch. They would increase all over. Contracting supply always drives up prices.
What’s more, if McCann thinks there are too many cars on the roads now, what does he think will happen when the employees of Lakewood Ranch businesses can find affordable housing only in Parrish, Duette or Wauchula? They’ll crowd the roads even more.
This defies logic as well: to shut off Manatee County government’s taxpaying money tree. Take a look at the accompanying box summarizing the fiscal impact of Lakewood Ranch. It makes no sense to halt success.
Halting success is also damaging to future success. Capital flows where it is welcome. When politicians impose moratoria and more restrictions and regulations that interfere with a market-driven economy, investors, business owners, corporations and developers go elsewhere. It takes years to wipe away a bad, anti-growth reputation. Just ask the founders of the Argus Foundation in Sarasota County.
Argus came about in 1982 to defeat a referendum in Sarasota County calling for a construction moratorium. Business leaders and owners coalesced and educated voters on the damage a moratori-um would cause. Voters rejected the moratorium. But for 20 years thereafter, Sarasota County had a widespread reputation as one of the worst places in Florida to deal with county government on development issues and business climate.
In that vein, the Lakewood Ranch Business Alliance and Manatee Chamber of Commerce should speak forcefully against any moratoria. While their message may sound self-serving and selfish, surely the other five county commissioners recognize the importance of a vibrant local economy and how population growth fuels a healthy economy.
What’s done is done. Call it poor political leadership in the past. So learn from it. The charge for the new Manatee County Commission is to determine the best path forward and not halt success.
That path is not a moratorium. And it’s not demonizing Lakewood Ranch or the region’s homebuilders.
There are better options. Commissioner George Kruse voiced a few options at the Jan. 28 meeting — full impact fees; a supermajority vote for any comprehensive land changes. Likewise, Pat Neal, CEO/owner of Neal Communities, is ready to present multiple options that are far from the destructiveness of a moratorium — private-public road partnerships, half-cent sales tax and state appropriations.
In spite of the accusation, Manatee County is not suffering from “overdevelopment.” It’s growing, and that’s wonderful. Population growth is essential to the flourishing of prosperity.
What’s more, population growth will not stop. This is Florida, a growth state for 100 years. So prepare for it, commissioners. Your job is like that of the owners of a fast-growing business whose demand for your products is outstripping your ability to supply them.
Raise the capital you need; charge rational prices for your goods and services and speed up production. Growth is good. Moratoria are bad.
There’s a saying about American elections. After the votes are counted, all we have done is swapped one set of tyrants for another.
That comes to mind after seeing how the pendulum has swung on the Manatee County Commission.
Oh, the poor taxpayers. It’s going to be another long four years.
When the 2024 votes were counted, Manatee taxpayers ousted the aggressive, arch-conservative, limited-government, pro-business, sometimes tyrannical Kevin Van Ostenbridge from District 3, and in exchange, chose an unknown populist, Robert McCann from District 5.
Granted, it’s early to put McCann in a behavioral box. But after observing his presentations at the past two commission meetings, you get the sense he sees himself as the “I’m pretty smart” Big Shot legislator. It’s like watching on C-Span a puffed-up U.S. senator bloviating at a Senate confirmation hearing.
Watch the video of his 20-minute ramblings at the Jan. 28 County Commission meeting (YouTube.com/Watch?V=V6WLSoOqYjc). Take note of attitude and tone.
This was McCann’s big moment. He was to explain his calling for a residential building moratorium in his district, which encompasses all of the Manatee portion of Lakewood Ranch.
“That’s my district,” McCann began, pounding his stack of papers on his desktop, as a map was projected on the commission monitors.
Throughout his remarks, he repeatedly pounds his papers. It’s either a tick or an attempt to send the Al Haig message that he is in power and the smartest and cleverest person in the room — or, at least on the dais.
“Get comfortable,” he began. “Bring your boat. We got a guy who can help you park it.” What?
A pause, and then he goes on.
“Everybody knows that I am humble, lovable and gun shy.” (Was that a joke? Not from the look on his face.) “I need to start speaking up. Don’t get much press, so I’ll start writing my own Substack. Because I want to be twice as good as anybody else who is out there, I think I’ll call it ‘For lack of a fourth.’”
What is McCann talking about? His glib quips fell flat. No one laughed. Then more …
“I’m going to answer questions today: Why? Can I get support? What is a moratorium? I’ll get there in a roundabout way. OK, if you don’t want a roundabout, all you gotta do is call Rex Jensen and the red shirts, and they’ll change it to a street light for you.” (Pounds his papers.) “But these roundabouts are now going to go up. We’ve got 16 of them coming up. That’s great.”
No laughs.
Later: “Lakewood Ranch. I don’t know much about that, but looking at the name. After Debby, I found the lake. After Milton, I found the wood. I still can’t find the ranch.” …
“SMR has won many awards for development, but no awards for flooded homes, traffic congestion, bankrupt individuals or ruined dreams.”
And on and on. It was as painful as watching a young comedian bomb on his debut.
More than halfway into his riff, McCann gets around to the subject of moratorium.
“The builders want to build houses. They want to put those houses in before we have roads, before we have stormwater drains, before we even have the river cleaned out.
“Rex Jensen said, ‘I would really like to avoid a moratorium.’ If he is serious about coming to the table and working out what we can do together, I am going to send him an engraved invitation. He knows where the office is; so does Pat Neal; so does Carlos Beruff.
“I’d like to see all of them. I’d like to start this dialogue. They had this dialogue in Palm Beach, and they avoided a moratorium.”
By the end of his lecture, McCann issued another snarky invitation: “I hope Rex Jensen is listening. I would like you to come to my office. I’ll have my aide contact you. And if we can actually get a good dialogue, that would be fantastic. If you want to trade insults, we can do that too.”
We are recounting all of this to illustrate the opening point — trading one tyrant for another and what happens when people impressed with themselves get power.
Who is the servant here? Who is serving whom?
McCann repeatedly says he ran a “people-first” campaign. He makes the claim — unsubstantiated with proven data — that the 41,700 people who voted for him all want a building moratorium.
But with his remarks, McCann clearly distinguished and established a we-they confrontation when he said Jensen, Neal and Beruff know where his office is and wants them to come to his office.
And, what is this? “If you want to trade insults, we can do that too.” What a great way to set the stage.
If McCann sees himself as a public servant for the people, he owes everyone equal respect. Jensen, Neal and Beruff are no different than any of the other District 5 voters and constituents.
Rather than immediately cast them as enemies, create confrontation and grandstand on the commission dais with a jerk attitude, McCann could have ingratiated himself with all voters and with Jensen, Neal and Beruff by being a learner. Before dropping his moratorium grenade in early January, McCann could have and should have been the one to go to them.
Be the public servant who goes to constituents to learn and understand their perspectives and possible alternatives; talk to economists and others to understand the potential consequences of a moratorium.
Power always corrupts. Instead, an effective public servant works to collaborate … To bring people together, not tear them apart. An effective public servant is an exemplar of humility.
