Palm Harbor takes step toward cityhood

CLEARWATER -- Pinellas County legislators voted today to support a bill allowing voters in Palm Harbor to decide if they want their unincorporated community to become the county's 25th city.

The measure passed over the objections of Pinellas County Commissioner Susan Latvala, who said she was appearing in both her official capacity and as a Palm Harbor resident.

"There is no groundswell of support for the initiative," Latvala said. "What I'm hearing from people is, 'We don't want to be bothered with this.' "

Palm Harbor residents are not the only ones who object to the passage, she said. The County Commission is concerned about the costs of setting up a city as well as running one.

"We can't fathom in these economic times how it would be feasible to create a new city," Latvala said.

Palm Harbor activists who have urged cityhood have indicated they want to contract to have the county provide services to them, Latvala said, but the county is having its own financial difficulties and will likely be cutting people and programs. The county will not guarantee it will provide services even if a city of Palm Harbor offered to pay for them.

"If a new city is formed, they are on their own," Latvala said.

Palm Harbor spokesman Jim Kleyman disputed Latvala's claim, saying he had given legislators 1,500 letters of support and a petition with more than 3,000 signatures asking that the bill be passed. The Palm Harbor area has about 60,000 residents.

Kleyman explained that Palm Harbor needs to become a city because it is a "donor community," meaning it gives the county more in taxes than it gets back in services. The excess money is spent elsewhere in Pinellas, he said.

State Sen. Mike Fasano, R-New Port Richey, who represents the Palm Harbor area, said the bill does not automatically make Palm Harbor a city. It only requires that voters be allowed their say.

"In no way is this a mandate," Fasano said. "Let the people decide."   

If passed by the full Legislature, the measure would put the question of cityhood on the 2010 general election ballot. The Legislature must first conduct a feasibility study to make sure cityhood makes fiscal sense.

Anne Lindberg, Times Staff Writer

*

Comments

[Michael Berg]

3000 signatures on a petition is not the majority of 60,000 residents in Palm Harbor. If I wanted to live in a city I would have bought a house in one! Most Palm Harbor residents feel the same way. PS: I also live in a NON deed restricted very nice neighborhood for a reason. Government used to pick away at our rights. Now there using sledgehammers.

[Michael B]

Follow up / Look at Tierra Verde. It's too late for them.

CLEARWATER -- Pinellas County legislators voted unanimously this morning to support a bill intended block St. Petersburg from annexing part of Tierra Verde.

The measure, commonly known as the "all or nothing bill,'' would require any annexing city to take the entire island. That would trigger a referendum at which Tierra Verde voters would decide whether they want to be annexed by St. Petersburg.

The local bill would have to be approved by both houses of the Legislature and signed by the governor before becoming law.

Tierra Verde residents asked legislators to sponsor the bill as a way of blocking the annexation. But the city says that won't happen because the City Council has already approved the annexation and the legislation cannot be enacted retroactively.

[sealoquesea]

Kleyman is an Indian Trails resident who fancies himself "king" of Palm Harbor. Palm Harbor is a disparate area whose only "sense of community" is the bestowal of an arbitrary service territory name by the US Postal Service. There has been no recent incorporation in the state that has not resulted in higher taxes for the newly incorporated area. This is an absolutely wrong-headed idea that will be overwhelmingly crushed by voters. Interesting that Fasano & Nehr sponsor bills to allow the vote but play Pontius Pilate by washing their hands of the hot potato under excuses of "let the people decide." We will decide NOT to elect these two sycophants when they decide to run again for public office. In the mean time, Kleyman and his cronies are in for a fight as incorporation and the pro-incorporaters will be defeated.

[A Real Floridian]

I have owned a home in Palm Harbor for 23 years. Palm Harbor is just fine as it stands and moreover has improved over those years in its unincorporated status. We are not short of any necessary services.

Kleyman is a clown who needs to manage his own circus tent in Indian Trails and leave the rest of Palm Harbor as it is.

[Mrs. Anderson]

I moved out of the "city" of Clearwater and bought a home in Palm Harbor 11 years ago. I too live in a nice NON-deed restricted subdivision. I think they should leave Palm Harbor alone. What "services" do they think being a city will provide us with? I can pay for my own garbage pick up! I also agree that our taxes will go up if they change it over to a city. Leave us alone. Kleyman is not speaking for everyone. I will definitely vote NO if they try to pass this bill!

[SHark]

This is motivated by a few people who want more soccer fields in the area. Can't see any other motivation, and can't imagine another layer of government costing us LESS money.

[Scott Fisher]

Let the people of Palm Harbor vote. I am a fifth generation Floridian and have lived in the area since 1980. The first Post Master for Ozona was a relative. As an unincorporated area Palm Harbor has no legal rights or protections. Commissioner Latvala voted recently to allow Tarpon Springs to annex 35 acres of our community. Incorporation is the ultimate protection from annexation and guarantees that our tax dollars come back to us and our community.

The county is looking out for their best interest, not the best interest of Palm Harbor. They have diverted over $50 million dollars away from the unincorporated area budget since imposing full cost allocation on us in 2003. Our property taxes are already higher than neighboring municipalities. Latvala and the rest of the County Commissioners do not care that we pay higher property taxes because they are diverting most of the Sales Tax Revenues that they receive on our behalf towards the countywide budget causing our property taxes to be 25% higher. We also barely get any of our tax dollars from Penny for Pinellas back for local community projects. They have been able to build a huge county reserve fund literally on the backs of the citizens of unincorporated Pinellas.

Creating the Town of Palm Harbor would not create another layer of government it would take the un-elected default layer of government (Queen Latvala, etc.) and move it closer to the people. During the good times when the county was sucking up all our tax dollars, there was barely a trickle back. Now that things are tough we need to take greater fiscal control of our tax burden.

[James Kleyman]

My response to several comments:
Fact: I have publicly stated I have no interest in running for any office. My interests only lie in improving the quality of life in the community I live in, and the communication and coordination between local community groups. Toward that effort I volunteer for local organizations and add my voice when/where I can when I deem it appropriate.

Fact: Three thousand petition signatures is a statistically significant number - these signatures were collected randomly at Palm Harbor establishments. National polling over election issues is done with a smaller sampling size.

My opinion: The argument over whether this creates "another layer of government" is specious. I think it replaces a more layered government (County) with a more responsive, and vested government (local). I think that residents of many other cities within this County would agree.

The residents of Palm Harbor should be entitled to vote on whether they want to remain unincorporated, or become a Town. They should be entitled to hear all the facts, both supporting and opposing incorporation. And they should be entitled to voice their opinions - in public forums open to all.

I respect the opinions of those that do not want our community to become a Town. However, I hope that any discussion as to whether Palm Harbor would benefit from incorporation is based on facts, not emotions. Personal attacks only serve to demean the message, and devalue the person delivering them; the dialogue should remain objective, and civil. The debate should be public. Only then should you make a decision. We all should have the right to vote on this.

[Sophie]

I want to direct people's attention to Ms. Latvala's comment above about the county not being able to guarantee services to the Town of Palm Harbor, if the vote is in favor of incorporation. What nerve! First, I would like to say that Senator Fasano is absolutely correct in supporting the right to vote. Nehr is also correct in supporting this right. This is America after all and supposedly the best democracy in the world. Second, what is eerie is the Commissioner's vehement response. I was not at the delegation meeting but let me assure you that when a public official says something like that, it sounds a lot like emotional anf financial blackmail. If you want to be city the county can't guarantee services? What official would deliberately want to put county workers out of business based on a personal agenda? Isn't she supposed to ensure the employment of county workers? If I was a county worker, I would be absolutely shocked that she has the nerve to simply discount my contributions and play Russian Roulette with my job! I am appalled at her statement. She is capitalizing on the fears of the people and insinuating that the economic times would not look favorably upon incorporation. Let's look at the facts first, at least I am open to that. www.palmharborcoalition.org is a great place to start - I read it and happen to like the concept of city-lite which is so much more amenable that the traditional city organizational structure. What exactly are people afraid of? Change? Didn't we all vote for change when we voted for our new president? Wouldn't we like ALL our money in taxes be spent in our own community? Wouldn't it be wonderful to preserve our own community? Engage our neighbors? Become a model green city? Maybe everyone should examine their own fears and take a non partisan look at what is being offered and come to the meetings to learn about how our county has taken care of us, where our dollars have been going. After all, aren't we all responsible in how our money is being spent? Shouldn't we ask for more accountability through incorporation? And how can anyone draw conclusions from a city such as Clearwater when clearly they don't understand that it will NOT be anything like Clearwater! If the county wants to blackmail us, sounds to me as if we ARE a gold mine to the county and they are the ones fearful of our possible success.

[Cindy]

We wonder if those who wish to make Palm Harbor a City have actually looked into the costs to do so. After working in City Government for many years and experiencing how costly it is to run a city, we don't see any reason for such costs to be placed upon its' citizens. To become a city, you would first need to elect a Mayor, City Council and appoint a City Manager and City Clerk/Records Department, unless the people would want a strong Mayor government, therefore a City Manager would not be needed. Then a Public Works Department would need to be formed with a Planning and Zoning Division, Streets and Drainage Division, Sewer Division, Engineering Division, Code Enforcement Division, Parks/Recreation Division, Finance Division, Human Resources Division, Management Information Systems Division, a Community Development Division and employees hired to staff these divisions with benefits, such as health insurance, vacation time, sick time and retirement benefits. Also structures would need to be built or acquired to house personnel and equipment. Of course all of these services could be contracted out for a cost to the taxpayers, however we feel these costs would be higher than what the County is presently charging us for these services. The County presently owns the infrastructure (above mentioned divisions) so where does that leave Palm Harbor as a City? Would they have to be bought from the County and again at what cost to the taxpayers? What does the committee propose concerning the infrastructure? We've heard talk that the Sheriff's Department services would be eliminated and another agency would take over. We are very pleased with the Sheriff's Department services. Bottom line is, in these tuff times, why is anyone willing to spend more money on something that has worked so well for years?