Thursday, February 23, 2023

What Is Ron DeSantis Doing to Florida’s Public Liberal-Arts College?


New Yorker, Feb. 22, 2023

The Political Scene

DeSantis is not simply inveighing against progressive control of institutions. He is using his powers as governor to remake them.

By Benjamin Wallace-Wells

In the context of other universities—the sort of assessment the Princeton Review’s guidebooks might do—New College of Florida, situated on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico, a few miles north of downtown Sarasota, has a number of standout features. Its curriculum is unusually self-directed: it gives out no letter grades, and has an academic research project built around independent study in partnership with professors. Two-thirds of its seven hundred students are women, and there is a prominent queer community; in the past, New College ranked among the most “gay-friendly” campuses in the country. Those attributes make it seem like a progressive northern liberal-arts college, to which alumni often compare it, but New College is a public school, which means that in-state tuition costs under seven thousand dollars annually—a bargain—and also that it is subject to the influence of Florida’s state politics.

Early in January, the governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, announced that he would be making six new appointments to New College’s Board of Trustees, and, weeks later, the Florida Board of Governors appointed a seventh, which gave DeSantis’s incoming choices an immediate majority on the board. DeSantis’s chief of staff, James Uthmeier, told National Review that he hoped New College would become a “Hillsdale of the South”—a reference to the private, Christian conservative college in Michigan. Shortly afterward, Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist and one of DeSantis’s new appointments to New College’s board, gave an interview to the Times’ Michelle Goldberg that was even more pointed: he spoke of a “top-down restructuring” of the school’s curriculum and culture, and suggested that if professors and students weren’t in line with the changes, they could leave. The project, Rufo went on, could serve as a model for similar takeovers around the country. “If we can take this high-risk, high-reward gambit and turn it into a victory, we’re going to see conservative state legislators starting to reconquer public institutions all over the United States,” he said.

For the past few years, DeSantis’s culture-war campaigns have operated in American politics like a spooling synth loop: it keeps coming around. The Governor of Florida has sought to suspend the Walt Disney Corporation’s tax breaks because the company opposed his “Don’t Say Gay” bill; has moved to limit what teachers can say in public school classrooms about race and gender, and what books can be available in libraries; has encouraged state police to arrest and prosecute ex-felons for voting; and has flown migrants to Martha’s Vineyard as a political stunt. These campaigns have raised an enormous political war chest for DeSantis, and helped give him a regular perch on Fox News. But what distinguishes DeSantis from other culture warriors, especially in the eyes of conservative intellectuals, is that he not only uses his profile to inveigh against progressive control of institutions but also his powers as governor to remake them. After Rufo made his comments about New College to the Times, he called DeSantis’s aides. “I was, like, ‘Man, did I go too far?’ ” Rufo told me recently. “They were, like, ‘No, it’s great. Keep going.’ ”

Rufo (l.) first New College meeting

Rufo, a documentary filmmaker and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has had one of the most dynamic trajectories of any conservative intellectual over the past few years, having been at the center of the right-wing campaign against critical race theory, which is what initially drew him into DeSantis’s orbit. He has since consulted with the Florida Governor on the Stop woke Act and aided DeSantis’s campaign against Disney by writing articles about its theme parks employing dozens of pedophilic sex predators and indoctrinating their employees with diversity politics. (A Disney spokesperson said that insuring “a safe environment for children and families is a responsibility” the company takes “very seriously.”) Rufo seemed to see his arrival in Sarasota as an event unto itself: he had with him an aide, a cameraman, and a security guard—a large, loping, bearded guy, who, Rufo told me, had been a golden-glove boxer in Ohio—which seemed an extreme precaution for a conservative trustee visiting the campus of a hippie college.

But Rufo’s arrival was hard for the New Collegers to dismiss. DeSantis had just won a large majority by running on aggressively defending social conservatism. Florida’s constitution and laws gave him the power to assert control over its public universities. Rufo explained to me the story, as he saw it. New College was a struggling campus. The most recent data shows that it accepted seventy-five per cent of students who applied, but enrolled only thirteen per cent of those who were accepted. Twenty per cent of students dropped out before the end of their first year; a third were not employed or in graduate school a year after they got their degree; and, of those who were employed, the median salary was thirty-two thousand dollars. The source of these failures, Rufo went on, was a culture that valued protest and activism over work. Consultants’ reports found that the top words students associated with New College’s culture were “politically correct,” “druggies,” and “weirdos.” The environment had become a problem, he said. “The trustees need to reëstablish authority.”

I asked for details about how the curriculum would change. “I’m the narrative guy, the political guy,” Rufo told me, waving off the question. “I’m a soldier in DeSantis’s army.” The sun was setting over the Gulf, leaving just a fuzzy pink line on the horizon. To our south, past downtown Sarasota, were the rich, beachy hubs of Longboat and Siesta Keys, with day-drunk strips of restaurants and residential roads that tracked the shore; most of the houses had a dock with a big boat out back. This has long been politically conservative territory; now it’s DeSantis country. “This is really a brilliant strategy on behalf of the Governor to say, we are losing our democratic control of these institutions because we aren’t using our democratic power at all,” Rufo said. “Let’s actually use the power of the Board of Trustees in the way that it was intended, in a way that is authorized in the Constitution, to turn political will into institutional outcomes. New board, new trustees, new majority, new vision. It’s either turn around or shut down.”

The next morning, Rufo and another new DeSantis-appointed trustee, Jason (Eddie) Speir, who co-founded and is the superintendent of a Christian school in Bradenton, held a public Q. & A. session with New College’s faculty and staff. (Someone had e-mailed the University threatening Speir just beforehand, and the Sarasota Police and campus administration had tried to cancel the event, only for Rufo and Speir to overrule them.) Rufo was challenged about whether he thought members of the L.G.B.T.Q. community were a threat to campus life. At one point, Rufo responded, “We should have a unified standard by which we treat people fairly. Identity-based preferences are policies that I strongly disagree with.” Mostly, though, the faculty tried to defend the curriculum. One reason that so many students quit after their first year, someone suggested, might be that New College was a very specific educational environment, and they hadn’t realized what they were getting into. Amid a generally tense conversation, some members of the faculty seemed to be searching for “where we can find common ground, particularly around the ideals of a liberal arts education,” as one history professor put it.

The academics in the audience might not have much liked Rufo—might even, in many cases, have feared what he represented—but there was no confusion: he was prepared and aggressive and camera-ready, a facsimile of DeSantis himself. Nearly all the questions went to him. Speir, buff and bearded, with a spacey manner and an elliptical speaking style that at times scanned as Christian and at others as stoner, was somewhat harder to fathom. He spent a couple of minutes detailing his complaints with his treatment at the hands of the local Sarasota paper, and his failed efforts to suspend the “unwelcoming” comments section. Later in the day, at a meeting with students, Speir spoke out in favor of increasing the number of Christian students on campus. When he was asked whether he favored open carry on campus, he said that “we cannot sacrifice our freedoms for safety.”As a conciliatory gesture to the faculty, Speir acknowledged that his own school’s philosophy was designed to be self-directed in a way somewhat similar to New College’s, but he also kept hinting that the Governor would send more money if the campus were to “go along” with the imminent changes.

At one point, when a student accused Rufo of being anti-science, Speir took out his microphone and said, “If there’s somebody that would be anti-science, that would be me.” He mentioned a social-media thread he had made, questioning whether the Buffalo Bills safety Damar Hamlin, who went into cardiac arrest after being slammed in the chest on the field, owed his near-death experience to the fact that he had taken the covid-19 vaccine. “I think questions need to be asked. I think that’s the beginning of science,” Speir said. (The following week, Speir would propose that the new Board of Trustees summarily fire every single faculty member—most of them unionized and most of them with tenure—by asking the Florida legislature to authorize a “financial emergency” as rationale. His idea was not formally presented to the board.) If Rufo represented a modern, media-savvy social conservatism, then Speir embodied a more atavistic traditionalism, both more wandering and more truculent. But that is part of DeSantis’s coalition, too.

DeSantis came to Sarasota a week later. He delivered a speech outlining some legislative proposals regarding public higher education in Florida: he would ban diversity, equity, and inclusion (D.E.I.) programs and the teaching of critical race theory, give trustees broader powers to review and fire faculty, and compel colleges to deprioritize fields deemed to fit a “political agenda.” At New College, the action was more direct, and swift. With each of DeSantis’s appointees voting in favor, the Board of Trustees fired the college’s president, Patricia Okker, a scholar of nineteenth-century literature, and replaced her with Richard Corcoran, a former Republican speaker of the Florida State House and DeSantis’s first Commissioner of Education. “It was very illustrative of their intentions, because with Dr. Okker you had someone who was a career educator,” Alex Obraud, a junior majoring in anthropology and a leader of recent student protests against DeSantis’s appointees, told me. “I didn’t agree with her about everything, but she was in it for the right reasons, and she was smart and effective. Getting rid of her summarily to pay more than twice as much money to a career politician who is coming in with an agenda—that’s not someone who’s in it for the students.”

In the public forums I attended, the students seemed more likely to perceive the takeover as an effort to make the campus less welcoming to gender difference, while the faculty were more inclined to see it as a misunderstanding of what made the college educationally distinct. Donal O’Shea, a math professor who served as New College’s president before Okker, told me, “If you think about the state-university system as an educational portfolio, then New College is an alternative investment that occasionally paid enormous dividends.” One year, O’Shea went on, New College had supplied four of the state university system’s six Fulbright scholars; another year, the school’s student scientists had won forty per cent of the Goldwater scholarships awarded in Florida.

Universities, like cities, often look politically uniform from a distance but have a dense and highly contested internal politics. The argument that New College was a political monolith is complicated by the most famous story told about the campus before the DeSantis takeover: the conversion of R. Derek Black, who had grown up in a prominent white-nationalist family, in West Palm Beach, before coming to New College in 2010. While on a study-abroad program, Black was exposed in campus-wide chat forums as the host of a white-nationalist Internet radio show. Demonstrations ensued. Black had chosen the school because it had an excellent medieval-studies department and because it was affordable. Family lore also held that one thing that the Blacks did at college was learn to argue with leftists. But after he had been exposed, Black found himself being drawn away from white nationalism by his classmates. There were small gestures—people making conversation in the lunch line—and large ones: a Jewish student invited him to attend weekly Shabbat dinners. By graduation, he had split with the white-nationalist movement and his family and now considers himself something of a progressive; he also married one of the women who had engaged with him after his return to campus.

Black is now a doctoral candidate in medieval history at the University of Chicago. When I spoke to him last week, I asked whether he thought his conversion would have happened at another college. “I really don’t think so,” he said. The key, Black went on, was New College’s small scale. In the school forum, “there were all these threads that said ‘Don’t speak to him, don’t acknowledge him, we want to make him feel like a pariah,” Black said. “But the underlying thing is that is so difficult to enforce.” Black has been involved in the campaign against the trustees. “I think the school is a good enough institution that the state should want to support it,” he said. His hope is that “DeSantis loses interest or it proves too difficult or they can’t figure out what victory looks like.”

I had been wondering about what victory might look like to the new trustees myself. Another new DeSantis-appointed trustee, Matthew Spalding, a former official at the Heritage Foundation and now a vice-president at Hillsdale College, took pains to explain that Hillsdale is “a private, Christian college” that accepts no government funds, while New College is public and funded by taxpayers. “That will not change,” Spalding wrote to me. “The legislatively defined ‘distinctive mission’ of New College is to be ‘the residential liberal arts college of Florida.’ This is important.”

Another board member I spoke with, Mark Bauerlein, a retired English professor at Emory, took a similar line. Bauerlein, a “vigorous, ruthless, and relentless” opponent of D.E.I. programs, has some quirky points of view—he wanted more organized sports and was bothered by a campus that was sixty-five per cent female. “Any society with that kind of gender imbalance is inherently unstable,” he said. But he also sounded like he mostly wanted a “great books” liberal-arts education; he told me that he would like to bring the academic Stanley Fish to campus. “The work demand, the intensity of the liberal-arts education—that’s pretty good,” Bauerlein said. “I do not doubt the commitment of the faculty.”

For the people at New College, this has been an often confusing situation to read. The sort of reforms that Bauerlein and Spalding were suggesting did not really seem so scary, but they also did not seem like they matched the more aggressive rhetoric coming from the Governor and Rufo. This is a characteristic of DeSantisism. Andrew Spar, the President of the Florida Education Association, which has battled DeSantis over separate laws regulating how race could be taught in Florida classrooms, how gender could be taught in Florida classrooms, and what materials should be allowed in school libraries, pointed out to me that, in each case, the law had created enormous confusion about what exactly schools were supposed to do, and led to different districts and teachers following the rules in different ways. “All three of those laws are really vague,” Spar said. “And because the laws themselves are so vague, and there’s so much confusion, the impacts of these policies are really damning, because people don’t know what to do.”

New College is dealing with a similar vagueness. With his new trustees, DeSantis has assembled some leading intellectuals who represent different strains within social conservatism, but among them there are internal contradictions. Did the new trustees want a traditional liberal-arts education, or a university that sends graduates to higher-paying jobs? Did they want to defend the rights of the faculty to say whatever they pleased, or ask the Florida state legislature to fire all of them? A Christian college or a secular one? Should it try to grow dramatically, or stay about the same size? If a woke culture was supposed to be the problem, how were they defining “wokeness,” anyway?

At times, DeSantis’s vagueness has been seen as a cover for a hidden agenda—for instance, to drain resources from public schools for private ones, or to keep Floridians from publicly acknowledging the existence of gay people. My own view is that his politics are less programmatic than that. DeSantis has pursued some of these campaigns extensively, and quietly dropped others not long after they made a splash. The process underway in Florida and at New College is less about ideology than about power. DeSantis’s culture war has teeth because he is the governor of a large and growing state with unified political control and—unlike Trump—he understands and can make use of his bureaucratic powers. What makes DeSantis both distinct and formidable is that his campaigns are about not ends but means. ♦

=====

Statement of New College alumni


Saturday, February 18, 2023

- Public Statement of the Alumnae/i of New College of Florida -


Since its founding, New College of Florida has represented excellence in liberal arts education. As the New College Alumni Association (NCAA), we are charged with representing New College’s largest constituent community: its 7,500+ alumnae/i. We are also charged with supporting the exceptional college and educational mission that produced those alumnae/i.

For more than 60 years, New College has stood as a bastion of academic freedom and rigor: a place where a wide diversity of ideas are fiercely debated by independent scholars from all walks of life. New College students are empowered and encouraged to self-direct their education and to conduct bold, original research. They are supported by world-class faculty who celebrate differences of background and opinion and who reward real-world contributions over rote recitations.

As a result, New College enjoys a formidable reputation as a top-five public liberal arts college and as the public college with the single highest proportion of students who go on to earn PhDs (including in STEM fields). Our alumnae/i include 86 Fulbright scholars, a Fields Medalist, a Federal Reserve Bank president, elected Republican and Democratic officials and luminaries in virtually every field in which New College has granted a degree. New College accomplishes all of this while graduating students with the second-lowest average federal loan debt of any public liberal arts college.

The rapid and drastic actions undertaken by the Governor and the new Board of Trustees – and the promises of more such actions to come – threaten New College’s long-standing tradition of academic freedom, undermine its history of excellence, and flout basic principles of good governance and community consultation.

Namely, we cite: the sudden firing of President Okker and installation of Interim President Corcoran without consultation with – let alone endorsement from – the campus community; attempts to dissolve the Office of Outreach and Inclusive Excellence; and suggestions by trustees that they intend ideologically-motivated overhauls of the school’s faculty and academic programs, such as the termination of tenured faculty or the elimination of entire departments.

These extreme actions and statements have been predicated on a mischaracterization of New College as a politicized institution that enforces left-wing ideologies and indoctrinates students. We strongly reject this ill-founded caricature of our school, students and faculty. New College teaches students how to think, not what to think; impassioned, informed academic debate is a hallmark of the New College experience, and that debate relies on a diversity of views and experiences.

In keeping with New College’s emphasis on the importance of open discourse, we strongly object to the exclusion of the New College community in planning and executing these extreme changes. New College is a prestigious institution with a long track record of excellence. Any and all changes intended to address New College’s challenges should rely on deep and careful consultation with the students, faculty and alumnae/i who have earned the school its many successes.

In stark contrast to its long-standing reputation, New College is now receiving a different kind of attention from the academic community: concern. Dozens of major academic organizations have issued or signed statements denouncing attempts to undermine New College’s academic freedom and integrity. We thank those organizations for their understanding and support. New College’s alumnae/i are similarly concerned about the future of their alma mater’s reputation and legitimacy.

New College’s students and faculty have been resolute in affirming their commitment to a superb academic experience replete with freedom – academic and otherwise. Today, as representatives of New College’s thousands of alumnae/i, we formally join that chorus. We ask the Board of Trustees to avoid preconceptions; to listen; to learn; to ask questions; to truly seek to understand New College’s unique excellence – and to do all of that before seeking drastic changes to an irreplaceable school.

=====


Action Item: Sign Petition against turning New College into DeSantis propaganda machine


More reporting about New College:

25 days that shook New College: How Ron DeSantis swiftly transformed the Sarasota school

New College faculty concerned about draining Foundation to pay president's $699,000 salary

New board member says his assignment is 'to lead New College of Florida out of wokeness'

SEIDMAN SAYS: What qualifies Richard Corcoran to make up to $1 million at New College?


Monday, January 30, 2023

Reynolds of Sierra Club: Protect Grand Trees

Please email the County Commissioners and tell them not to weaken protections for Grand trees, and come to the public hearing Tuesday, January 31st at 1660 Ringling Blvd.

From: Gayle Reynolds

Dear Commissioners,

The Manatee/Sarasota Sierra Club urges the Board of County Commissioners not to weaken protective policies for grand trees, to allow developers the right to determine the health, function and value of grand trees and if it should remain or be cut down for housing and commercial development.
There are many reasons to value and protect grand trees in the urban environment:

  1. Trees reduce carbon pollution directly through sequestration and indirectly by lowering the demand for energy.
  2. Trees reduce the heat island effect and mitigate the effects of climate change.
  3. Trees play critical roles in controlling stormwater runoff, improving water quality and protecting surface waters from sediment and nutrient loading. 
  4. Trees reduce the amount of runoff flowing into stormwater and sewer systems and decrease soil erosion.
  5. Trees provide habitat for birds and endangered wildlife species.
  6. Many municipalities consider trees as utilities and include them as part of their stormwater management plans.
Nonpoint source pollution results from stormwater carrying and depositing contaminants into surface and ground waters, contaminating drinking water sources and adversely affecting the health of plants, fish, animals and people. Nitrogen and phosphorus feed Karenia Brevis and destroy sea grasses, marine ecosystems and endangered wildlife.   
Excess volumes of runoff from the conversion of forested lands to impervious surfaces from overgrowth and urban sprawl, cause stream scouring, property damage as well as loss of aquatic habitat and floodplain connectivity.

For the past twenty years, this board has incentivised development to occur through the use of "mitigation." As reported by Sarasota News Leader, Benderson Development recently clear cut every Grand Tree on the 24-acre Siesta Promenade site.  Despite the county identifying grand trees on the property, every tree on the parcel at U.S.41 and Stickney Point Road was removed. Sarasota County conceded to Benderson Development to mitigate the removal of these mature trees with the promise of planting 509 new trees. This mitigation occurred without public input and without transparency, via emails and edits to the original approved site plan.

Eighteen years ago Sierra's Conservation Committee lobbied Sarasota County Commissioners to stop issuing "after the fact" permits to developers who prematurely moved earth, clear-cut land and habitats and killed endangered species without permits.

A reporter for the Pelican Press, Jack Gurney, wrote a series of articles on the plight of Gopher Tortoises, when developers were burying tortoises alive with earth-moving equipment. Jack's articles created an outcry in the community and the Board of County Commissioners sanctioned and passed a Pre-clearing ordinance and an Earth Moving Ordinance.  
The County owes the public an explanation as to why Benderson was allowed to clear the Promenade site without permits, when staff and the developer knew that permits were required.  
  • Where is the oversight?  
  • When citizens invested untold hours getting these illegal practices stopped in the past, why are developers confident they can ignore regulations now? 
  • Because the Promenade property is located in a busy urban area, citizens noted that illegal construction was occurring without the required permits. But what happens when Lakewood Ranch South clear cuts hundreds or thousands of acres of agricultural lands and habitats east of I-75?  
  • Jensen clear cut land on Lorraine Road and many miles east out Fruitville Road, out of sight, where public access is denied and no one checks to see if wildlife, grand tree and habitat studies have been done, the required permits issued for preclearing, earth moving and the relocation of endangered species?  

This Board claims that Sarasota "stakeholders" are demanding that protections for Sarasota’s Grand Trees must be diminished, when clearly the rules applied to most trees in this county are inadequate and illustrate that Sarasota County trees need MORE protections, not less. 

Sarasota County Resource Protection and Development Services must be responsible for oversight of land development sites and impose realistic fines for illegal pre-clearing of trees and habitats, earth moving, destruction of grand trees and killing endangered wildlife. Developers break environmental laws and ordinances with impunity, because the fines imposed are so miniscule, they're but a small cost of doing business.

Are citizens expected to trust the developer to oversee themselves and do the right thing, pay mitigation fees and save grand trees that don't benefit their site plans and bottom line?


The Sierra Club urges Commissioners to vote NO on weakening protections for grand trees.

Sincerely,

Gayle Reynolds
Conservation Chair
Manatee/Sarasota Sierra Club

Saturday, January 21, 2023

Call to Action - Sarasota’s Grand Tree Protections Are Not Enough

To: Sarasota County Stakeholders

    Email cc: County Commissioners Moran, Smith, Detert, Neunder and Cutsinger, County Administrator Lewis

Call to Action - Sarasota’s Grand Tree Protections
Are Not Enough

Date:   1/21/2023

Dear Friends, Business Associates, Acquaintances, Sarasota Institutions,

What more will it take to open our eyes to the destruction of Sarasota County’s natural beauty?

Despite certain protections for twelve species of Grand Trees, our County Commission will meet on January 31, 2023 to discuss further relaxing current rules to allow the “Grand” developers of Sarasota the right to determine whether a grand tree should remain or be cut down for housing.


Pictured below: Example of current Grand Tree ” preservation” in north Sarasota County.
Surrounding forest of tall pines was cleared to complete a townhouse complex.  

Despite certain protections that are lawful such as existing land planning codes, future land use designations or county preserved lands, time and time again our elected county commissioners have sought “input from stakeholders” and bowed to the recommendations of developers, the “One Percenters” of our beloved Sarasota County. 

For the past twenty years, our commissioners have greenlighted development to occur by use of mitigation. 

As reported by the Sarasota News Leader, Benderson Development recently clear-cut every Grand Tree on the 24-acre Siesta Promenade site. Despite the county identifying grand trees on the property, every tree on the parcel at U.S.41 and Stickney Point Road was removed, including nine maples, 26 oaks, 55 palms, 16 pines (two Grand Trees) and 17 trees of other species.

Sarasota County conceded to Benderson Development to mitigate the removal of these mature trees with the promise of planting 509 new trees. This mitigation occurred without public input and without transparency. This deal was done via emails with tweaks to the original approved site plan.

Mitigation, if you are not familiar, is when a small swath of useless land held by either the county or developer is traded for a desirable piece of land deemed buildable by the developer and the county. It doesn’t matter if the desired property is a bog or home to a bald eagle.Those trees and other natural assets are going to be paved over. It’s a sham of a land trade, and we, Sarasota’s stakeholders, are also getting paved over in a different sense.  It’s all smoke and mirrors. Mitigation ain’t saving a thing.

Turn the page to 2023 and now, in lieu of mitigation, the County Commissioners claim that Sarasota stakeholders are demanding that protections for Sarasota’s Grand Trees must be diminished. Last fall, Commissioner Maio even claimed that Grand Trees are “perishable items.” Apparently he is now a certified arborist.

On January 31, 2023, our Commission will vote to approve an ordinance which loosens protections for “grand trees,” including live oaks. I have read Sarasota Municode in relation to trees and grand trees. It appears that the rules applied to most trees in this county are lax and clearly from the picture above, illustrate that Sarasota County trees need MORE protections, not less.  Those protections must occur today. 

Please email our Commissioners and tell them to vote No on January 31st.

Email to: bcc@scgov.net or commissioners@scgov.net
Individual Commissioners: mmoran@scgov.net, mhsmith@scgov.net, ncdetert@scgov.net, jneunder@scgov.net, rcutsinger@scgov.net
County Administrator: countyadministrator@scgov.net,

Please share this message with friends and neighbors who care about quality of life in Sarasota County. We are running out of time, each day, swaths of trees in Sarasota County are being chopped down.

We, the majority stakeholders, of Sarasota County demand the following regarding Grand Trees:

  • The county must retain all current and existing protection for Grand Trees. 

  • The county must implement preservation protections designating grand trees as the following:

  • Economic value provided by Grand trees are a financial eco-bonus to the county budget.

  • Home values remain higher in established old growth-maintained trees.

  • Decrease impact of heavy rain and flooding through tree canopies which slow heavy rain and decrease flooding impact.

  • Decrease utility costs and overuse of energy resources for tree canopy cooling to most homes and roads, reducing use of air conditioning and watering needs. 

  • The county must implement and strengthen Tree Code. Grand Trees must be used as centerpieces of beauty, history and preservation. 

  • The county and developers must share and advertise Sarasota County as a destination where Grand Trees are as much of Sarasota culture and heritage as our abundant arts, science, charities, beaches, and natural habitat. 

  • It is proven that engineers and planners know how to work and design around grand trees with more than a hundred years of life. 

  • Mitigation for Grand Trees is not an option unless:

  • Every option to save the tree or trees has been exhausted, reviewed by the stakeholders (Sarasota citizens) and allowed public input to prevent further scraping of trees whether deemed Grand Tree or a someday “Grand Tree” that is growing to adulthood. 

  • Fatal rotting, blight, etc. has been verified and documented by a certified and accredited environmental expert/arborist with no connection to the county or land developer.   

Thank you for your consideration of our comments and request. 

Respectfully,

Adrien Lucas

Sarasota County resident


Source: Sarasota County Grand Trees published 2015

Sarasota News Leader published 1/15/2023


Tuesday, January 17, 2023

Will Sarasota County's New Administration Center violate the principle of walkability?

To: The Board of Sarasota County Commissioners:


Commissioners,

Tomorrow, January 18, 2023, you will be asked to approve a change to the interconnectivity element of the Fruitville Initiative Ordinance - an element that until now has remained in force despite other developers within the Initiative having requested to be excused from it. The entire premise of the Initiative, as put forth at charrettes held by Stefanos Polyzoides in 2010, invoked a model of a walkable mixed-use community. The Interconnectivity component was the core enabling element that guaranteed a grid of streets to render walkability possible.

Original Plan for Interconnectivity:



Revised Plan removing interconnectivity from the County Administration site (lower, far-right parcel):

Bottom right parcel without street grid

Having held all the other developers to this component, Sarasota County is now coming before itself - that is, this Board - to ask your permission to not be held to this core standard, with regard to the construction of the new Administration Building on a site known as parcel F7.

In its documentation, the applicant (Sarasota County) presents no site plan or other information explaining why this exemption is necessary. It would seem reasonable to ask the applicant for a detailed rendering of its plan, if such exists, or at the very least, some clear and sufficient explanation of why it is seeking this dispensation that has been denied to all other Initiative stakeholders. 

This seems even more significant when it's understood that this plan to flout the core value of walkability is for the county's Administration Center -- the tax-funded building serving as the County seat. Surely the public deserves a look at what architectural design the county has in mind, and an understanding of why the plan for the new symbol of Sarasota governance has to undermine the organizing principle of its own forward-looking Fruitville Initiative ordinance.

Consider that when this Board was asked to allow a completely incompatible plan presented by Benderson Development in 2015, it unanimously voted to deny that request. The vision of the Initiative was intact then, and deserves not to be ignored in 2023.

Please take this item from the Consent Agenda and request a public hearing that would give you and the public a first look at a project that can and should embody the values and vision of the people of Sarasota.

Respectfully,

Tom Matrullo
Citizens for Sarasota County

Sunday, January 15, 2023

Do Grand Trees need to make way for development?


Grand Trees

On 1/31/23, The Board of Sarasota County Commissioners will vote on an ordinance which loosens protections for “grand trees,” including live oaks.

Commissioner Ron Cutsinger was the first to address the Grand Tree issue during the Oct. 11 regular meeting, followed by Commissioner Michael Moran. 
A chart that Herman showed the commissioners suggested that Section 54-586(2)(c) of the County Code remain in place. That calls for staff to allow the removal of Grand Trees on platted lots for either safety reasons or if the location of a Grand Tree “would unreasonably prevent the Development of a Lot.” 

Chair Alan Maio pointed out on Oct. 11 that he had had many discussions with county residents regarding Grand Trees on platted lots. “Unincorporated Sarasota County has a lot of 80 by 100-foot platted lots,” he said. “Anyone who thinks [otherwise] is mistaken.” A Grand Tree might be “right square in the middle” of one of those, Maio continued.

Sarasota News Leader 10.13.22: Commissioners Cutsinger and Moran push for more flexibility in removal of Grand Trees to allow for new developments


From Adrien Lucas: 
Tell them to vote NO!

Individual Commissioners:
mmoran@scgov.net - Mike Moran
mhsmith@scgov.net - Mark Smith
ncdetert@scgov.net - Nancy Detert
jneunder@scgov.net - Joseph Neunder
rcutsinger@scgov.net - Ron Cutsinger

Please share this message with friends and neighbors who care about quality of life in Sarasota County.


Thank you!