Felts' Manatee County Commission seat remains empty

From committees to judges, Gov. Ron DeSantis has made a slew of appointments over the past three months. However, the governor has left one key seat in Manatee County empty, that of the late Carol Ann Felts. 

Felts was the District 1 commissioner who died at her home in Myakka City Feb. 24. DeSantis declared the seat vacant March 24 and ordered flags be flown at half-staff at the state capitol in Tallahassee and throughout Manatee County April 18, the day of her public memorial service. 

But three months later, Felts’ empty seat in the commission chambers is still marked by a black sash and a bouquet of flowers. Citizens in her district remain without representation. 

On May 14, Planning Commissioner Bruce Stamm attempted to make a motion to compensate for that lack of representation. 

“(Residents) don’t have a sitting district commissioner, and therefore, it’s not fair to them to hear those cases today,” Stamm said. “There is case law that was in the (public) comments, and so I’ll move to continue these items until such time as we have a district commissioner in District 1 so residents have representation.” 

The case law was presented by Glen Gibellina, a candidate for District 4. He cited the “due process argument (procedural fairness) in Florida” and Jennings v. Dade County.

“The case of Jennings v. Dade County emphasizes that the hearing must be ‘fair and impartial,’” Gibellina wrote into the record via online public comments. “You can argue that a hearing regarding a massive project like Parrish Lakes, which fundamentally changes the landscape of District 1, cannot be ‘fair’ when the seat specifically designated to represent that geography is vacant.”

Jennings v. Dade involved ex parte communication with commissioners, rather than a lack of representation.

Photo by Lesley Dwyer

Parrish Lakes was originally approved in 2017. The request was to increase the number of residential units from 3,401 to 3,778. But Stamm was requesting a motion for continuance on all upcoming applications in District 1. 

“I want it in there more than one time so the commissioners understand that I’m deeply concerned about the lack of representation in District 1,” he said.

Assistant County Attorney Sarah Shank said the items needed to be heard, but said Stamm could make a motion for a “global recommendation” at the end of the meeting, but it had to be made separately from individual projects. 

She also noted that due to Senate Bill 180, which prevents local governments from being “more restrictive or burdensome” on development, that commissioners were unable to impose any type of moratorium. 

Following the lunch break, County Attorney Pamela D’Agostino appeared at the podium with four points as to why Stamm’s motion should not be made individually or globally:

1. The action deprives applicants of procedural due process rights by delaying consideration of their application without a lawful basis to support the delay. 
2. It would violate statutory deadlines and procedural requirements imposed by Florida law for the processing and review of development applications related to land use matters.
3. It conflicts with the county’s own land development code and adopted procedural regulations governing hearing schedules, application review timelines and processing requirements. 
4. It would be construed as imposing a more restrictive and burdensome review procedure in violation of Senate Bill 180 and related provisions of Florida law. 

Courtesy image

Commissioner George Kruse agreed with D’Agostino on every point because not hearing an application is a denial and not hearing any applications in District 1 would be a “de facto moratorium," but he also added an observation. 

“When James Satcher was removed (from the District 1 seat because DeSantis appointed him to be Supervisor of Elections in April 2024), no one complained.” Kruse said. “He was a ‘yes’ vote.”

Kruse viewed the action as a way to stop development but noted that it is statutorily forbidden, would also prevent school and daycare applications from moving forward, and could also backfire because of a new law that places hard deadlines on approvals. If deadlines are not met, the development can be approved “as of right.” 

“Developers will stare at their watches until 90 days are up and get out the dump trucks,” Kruse warned.