Manatee commissioners reject reconsidering $32 million contract as residents protest land buy
Despite an outcry from residents who complained that county officials paid too much, the Board of County Commissioners voted against a motion that would have brought the land purchase back up for review.
Manatee County’s plan to pay $32 million for the Musgrave Farm property at 8520 State Road 64, Bradenton, set off alarms for certain community members, arguing that the deal moved too fast and that the land was not properly appraised. Residents showed up again on Tuesday to voice those same concerns.
“We are well aware that this property isn’t worth $30 million,” said Kevin Van Ostenbridge, the Republican nominee for the District 3 seat on the commission in the Nov. 3 election. “Basically, I’m asking you to slow the process down, if nothing else.”
“To say the least, it’s very expensive,” added developer Pat Neal.
Board members first voted 5-2 to approve the land purchase at an Oct. 13 meeting. Commissioners Vanessa Baugh and Stephen Jonsson voted against the purchase, also citing issues with the cost of the land.
Manatee plans to use the land to build a Central County Complex, which will host facilities for the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office, the Utilities Department and the Public Works Department.
“The price is very fair, but when you look at the property around it will pay huge dividends,” Utilities Director Mike Gore said at the time, pointing out that the purchase is expected to extend the life of the Lena Road Landfill. “It’s going to satisfy three, possibly four departments’ needs going forward. This is a huge win for us as compared to traveling all the way across town.”
The contract also gives the county a 30-day due diligence period to inspect the land and search for any unforeseen problems that would negate the deal. Residents and some commissioners said they didn’t feel that was enough time to fully review the 161-acre parcel.
“Our job is to speak for the citizens, not staff. There’s nothing wrong with doing that,” Baugh said, pushing for an extended due diligence period for the county’s review. “Let’s take a closer look at the contract and the environmental permit. I think it’s a win-win and the community deserves that. We all talk about how we’re supposed to look out for the community, let’s do it.”
Listening to concerns from residents, Commissioner Misty Servia said she was concerned that the land wouldn’t be suitable for all of the county’s plans, including storage facilities and some offices.
But county officials said they put their faith in county staff to negotiate the best deal possible and voted 4-3 to turn down a proposal that would have allowed the county attorney to bring the contract back to the board for reconsideration.
Commissioner Carol Whitmore pointed out that county staff were first directed to find a suitable site to handle long-range growth in January 2018. According to Gore, the negotiations with the Musgrave family have been ongoing for about 18 months.
“Due diligence is done before it comes to the board. The staff has done that,” said Commissioner Reggie Bellamy.
Commissioners Betsy Benac, Priscilla Whisenant Trace, Bellamy and Whitmore voted against the proposal to reconsider the deal. Commissioners Baugh, Jonsson and Servia voted in favor of it.
According to county officials, the land’s main appeal is its central location, which will help improve response times for every department that uses the facilities. That should lead to cost savings due to less time spent traveling across the county.
This story was originally published October 28, 2020 at 5:00 AM.
