BRADENTON — Commissioners have decided to delay a vote on whether to approve a homeless veterans' affordable housing project that is slated for a county-owned property in west Bradenton by at least six weeks. The board had previously directed staff in April to bring back the item which would convey the site to Stephen Siller of Tunnel to Towers Foundation, Inc., a New York not-for-profit corporation.
Tuesday’s meeting agenda item sought approval from the commission for the conveyance of the county-owned property located at 4410 66th Street West, Bradenton. Previously, the commissioners had unanimously thrown their support behind the proposed project during an April 25 meeting.
The 8.7-acre parcel and facilities are the current home of the county’s utilities office—which will be relocated to accommodate the project. The intended future use of the property by Tunnel to Towers is for the creation of affordable housing for homeless veterans, and supportive veteran services.
The property has an appraised value of $6,064,000 which would be “donated” to the nonprofit by the county.
Tuesday’s meeting item included that the board would also approve the Land Use Restriction Agreement (LURA) between the county and Tunnels for Towers at the time of conveyance documents. The terms of the LURA would restrict the future use of the property for the development of multi-family units for rent to eligible Veterans.
However, on Tuesday, Commissioners Jason Bearden and Kevin Van Ostenbridge expressed several reservations about the requested approval which would finalize the deal.
Bearden told his fellow commissioners that he had visited at least seven other sites run by the organization, and those visits raised concerns for him.
According to Bearden, U.S.VETS works with Tunnel to Towers Foundation, Inc to manage the sites constructed by the nonprofit. Bearden also stated that the arrangement required capacity goals and shared that he had concerns that in time, the future project in Bradenton could become the home of nonlocal veterans in order to meet capacity.
Tunnel to Towers Foundation Vice President Gavin Naples clarified that in this instance his organization would be controlling and managing the site—not U.S.VETS. Naples also explained that capacity requirements (or goals) were not something that Tunnels to Towers requires as a part of its programs.
“Permanent housing is the real need here,” Naples said, addressing Bearden’s concerns. “If you’re a veteran experiencing homelessness, there are places to lay your head in the form of transitional programs, but that can be a never-ending cycle.”
But Naples' reassurances did not appear to be enough to quell Bearden’s concerns.
During his comments, Van Ostenbridge—the commissioner of the district where the proposed project site resides—agreed with concerns raised by Bearden, before saying that he had multiple concerns of his own.
Van Ostenbridge said that the project had grown from an original plan to provide transitional housing with supportive services to now intending to provide permanent affordable housing units. He also said the total number of units proposed was higher than he originally understood would be the case, with the proposal before the board on Tuesday showing a potential total number of units of over 500.
Van Ostenbridge noted that should the county approve the item as presented, his fear was that the county would have no control in the future should the project negatively impact residences and businesses in his district. In addition, said Van Ostenbridge, the organization had not held any community outreach meetings to receive feedback from interested parties.
Taking into account Bearden’s expressed concerns combined with his own, Van Ostenbridge said he desired that the county attorney and representatives of Tunnels to Towers should delay the project in order to tighten up the proposals before approval by the board.
Commissioner George Kruse, who had first rallied support from commissioners for the exploration of the project and its initial approval in April, strongly disagreed with the suggestion that the board should delay the vote.
“Tunnel to Towers cannot go through the effort of putting together a full site plan, and the costs and expense, until they have assurance that those expenses could result in a likely future development of housing for the good of the veterans in Manatee County,” Kruse argued.
During citizen comments on the matter, property owner, Gary Foreman, addressed commissioners stating that he holds office space in proximity to the proposed site. Foreman—whose real estate attorney submitted a letter to the board on his behalf prior to the meeting—stressed that upon speaking to other property owners in the area, he and his wife were unable to identify any who were aware of the proposed project and site location.
Foreman said that while he believes veterans deserve support and housing, he also believes the county should have sought public input before advancing the project.
Foreman added that it was also his opinion that delaying the vote in order to hold neighborhood meetings at this point, was not helpful because the overall site location was not suitable for the project—neither for area property owners nor the veterans it would serve.
Despite Kruse initially gaining support for a motion to approve the item from Commissioner Mike Rahn, significant board discussion and deliberation led to an amended motion and then a request from Van Ostenbridge to recess the meeting.
Kruse suggested that the board only take a brief recess to allow enough time for the county attorney to negotiate with Tunnel to Towers for a restricted number of units to a lesser amount of 150 to be written into the LURA.
Asserting again his desire to continue the item for 6-8 weeks, Van Ostenbridge pushed back on the idea of a shorter recess and instead suggested the board break early for its hour-and-a-half lunch recess.
Appearing frustrated by the suggestion, Kruse said while chuckling, “I’m well aware of how our lunch breaks work.” He later expanded his remark to include having witnessed items in the past that—once the board paused to take an extended recess—commissioners returned with new positions on the issue than they had prior to the break.
Regardless of his objections, Chair Van Ostenbridge paused the item discussion and adjourned the meeting for lunch.
Upon reconvening the meeting later in the afternoon, Commissioners Bearden, Rahn, and Satcher did not return to the dais as deliberation resumed on the item.
Addressing the four present commissioners, Tunnel to Towers attorney Mark Barnebey explained that the LURA language had been clarified during the recess and that there was a maximum number of “affordable housing units for veterans” revised to 150.
With Rahn—who had provided the second to Kruse’s earlier motion to approve—absent from the dais, Kruse was forced to make a new motion to approve the item with the amended 150 unit restriction as explained by Barnebey.
Kruse’s motion failed for a lack of a second, as the only commissioners present at the time, Ballard, Van Ostenbridge, and Turner, declined to support the motion.
“What are the odds this would happen right after lunch,” Kruse could be heard saying following his motion’s failure.
Commissioner Ballard then motioned to continue the item for “up to six weeks” to provide Van Ostenbridge his desired time to hold a town hall to seek input from area property owners on the project.
Van Ostenbridge readily supported the motion which then passed by a vote of 3-1 with Ballard, Van Ostenbridge, and Turner in support, Kruse in opposition, and Bearden, Rahn, and Satcher absent.
5 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
pdsinc
Shame, Shame. No compassion for Veterans with problems or NIBY ?
Wednesday, August 9, 2023 Report this
parnell1959
There is no doubt Veteran and homeless housing is a need in this community and clearly it should be a community-based decision as to how it is addressed. With substantial impending increases in utilities (water, wastewater and solid waste) bills to all MCUD customers as presented to the BoCC on several occasions over the past year, how does a $6M "donation" of UD property plus the added cost of "relocating" to another site make fiscal sense? Since all costs to operate and maintain the utilities must come from fees charged from services, how does the cost of this proposed action fit under UD services?
Wednesday, August 9, 2023 Report this
WTF
KVO had months to do his "Town Hall" meetings, did he NO. None of the members who delayed the project had any other solutions to proffer. Such hypocrites in their thinking. George Kruze was the only one who "got it" the rest are clueless. This was a legal BOCC meeting and Bearden, Rahn, and Satcher were ABSENT on such and important vote. You would think at 90K in salaries they could of been there in this all important vote. What disservice to the Veterans, Public and taxpayers who have to put up with their bad behavior. 2 VETS ABSENT speaks volumes to this voter. Shame on them. The sh-tshow starts at the 1:10:15 mark. See for yourselves and draw your own conclusion. August 8, 2023 - Regular Meeting - 2023-08-08 09:00:00
https://youtu.be/nFkfQ-iiJtA?si=snwzge_57ODlrmNO
What you allow ..... Will continue
Wednesday, August 9, 2023 Report this
barbaraelliott
It is a disgrace to discriminate in housing towards veterans who fought for the freedom of county officials to be corrupt, self-centered, narcissistic.
There is no longer meat on the citizen and veterans rights bone because government and developers havebstripped it off the bone like a pack of grey nasty rats.......
The constant violation of open meetings law which includes timely notifications, accessible venues, rights to speak etc.are big weaknesses/ failures for county and city government as described by the Manatee County League of Women Voters article in this paper.
If the public meetings law is violated there are criminal penalties. File a complaint with local law enforcement. Stay with it. Get a case number. Your complaint will be resisted perhaps ignored. Do not let it go by the way. Get that bone like a dedicated dog. Criminal complaints have the power to negate government action, put them in jail or probation, cost them personal money , wreck their reputations, even worse than they have already done themselves, and much more.The Manatee League of Women Voters has laid out the violations of late , I think in this week's edition of the Bradenton Times, where they have a regular column or on their website. They should file first.
However, their article is your complaint template. The more complaints the better. The key is Florida Sunshine Law/open meetings rules. A Florida Commission on Ethics Complaint will be returned if it refers to statutes that carry criminal penalties. So file with law enforcement.
Discrimination in housing is against the law. So complain to DOJ that the county government is discriminating in housing vets. Put a lid on that pressure pot. The BOCC will lose their minds. The more collateral damage the better. Pressure them to provide vet housing. After all, when you comment at BOCC and COB officials at meetings all you get is a blank look with no questions, comments or replies to your concerns. If you want their attention go criminal. Besides open meetings laws, Florida statute 838 come to mind, 'Misuse of Public Office'.
Go get them you dear, citizen pitbulls. I'm here for questions
Barbara Elliott
Stone Soup Manatee Inc
stonesoupmanatee@yahoo.com
941-447-9929
Saturday, August 12, 2023 Report this
Dianna
Commissioners wanted a guarantee written into the contract which tunnel to Towers Foundation readily agreed to- watch the video. KVO refused to take a 10-minute break to adjust the contract to state they would only build between 120 and no more than 150 units, and in commissioners’ own words they "wanted to wait so they could fix this at lunch" which obviously they did. Satcher, Rahn, and Bearden cowardly chose not to return for this vote, which is a tactic they have used before during other meetings, then they magically appear a few minutes later after the vote was taken? This was a really nice project for homeless Veterans. Personally, I think the commissioners "developer bosses" want the property for the 550 units they want to build there. Interestingly, KVO had no desire for a town hall during the first meeting and now he wants one? Again, want to see what kind of antics our commissioners pull, and Bearden’s odd rantings, just watch the video. It says it all. Dawn was actually quite kind in the article.
Saturday, August 12, 2023 Report this