Costco, Lake O and St. Lucie River; downtown Stuart mess

Treasure Coast Newspapers

Former commissioner: Stuart leaders play dangerous game, building moratorium

I had avoided getting involved in local politics, but when I heard that the Stuart City Commission wanted to return to the “good old days” before the Duany Plan, I felt I had to get involved.

As a former city commissioner and state coordinator for over 100 cities in Florida, I find the new Stuart City Commission to be the most inept and unaccountable I have ever seen.

As for the Duany Plan, it turns out none of the commissioners ever read it. They didn’t know that the Duany Plan was the framework for the revitalization of Stuart.

To be fair to the City Commission, previous commissions have made bad decisions regarding development, and the citizens of Stuart are angry and want change. They have tasked the new commission with creating a plan to achieve that goal.

Unfortunately, the commission is implementing a moratorium that could last six months. The moratorium does not apply only to new developments, but covers all buildings in Stuart, excluding single-family homes and buildings that do not increase the density or intensity of existing uses or structures.

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this: Can an awning be put on a building? Can a store owner change tenants if the new tenant requires exterior changes? Will a moratorium prevent positive change in East Stuart?

In practice, Commissioners Christopher Collins, Laura Giobbi and Sean Reed, whether they have backgrounds in community planning, architecture, engineering or business management, will oversee your property.

I believe that anyone who can prove a financial loss suffered as a result of this moratorium should be exempt from paying city tax on that property for a year.

Joan Jefferson, Stuart

Fertilizer going into Lake O and development are among the causes of St. Lucie River pollution

Cheryl Smith’s article on rainfall runoff into the St. Lucie Estuary addresses the tip of the iceberg. Consider some of the details:

First: On the 49-acre Costco property on Kanner Highway, imagine that one inch of rain could collect 23,779 gallons of polluted rain that would be discharged into the St. Lucie River. Imagine if our average annual rainfall were 45 inches.

The second concern is Lake Okeechobee. We are told that the pollution in the St. Lucie River is largely due to faulty sewage systems. This ruse diverts public attention true upstream pollution caused by massive fertilizer application on half a million acres of sugar cane in Lake Okeechobee and elsewhere.

Lake Okeechobee is a petri dish for cyanobacteria. Why? In part because tons of phosphate and nitrate fertilizers wash into the lake. This filthy soup is then released into our rivers whenever the Army Corps of Engineers plans a release. Compared to the polluted water festering in Lake Okeechobee, local septic systems are, in my opinion, the least of our worries.

The water quality problem in the estuary will not be solved until excess water from Lake Okeechobee is directed back into the Everglades so nature can take its course and our politicians stop approving projects like the Costco in Stuart where the St. Lucie River is used to remove dirty stormwater from giant parking lots.

Paul Vallier, Stuart

Let’s elect politicians who won’t want to arm our communities

I am a Vietnam veteran and served in the military for 30 years. I own a gun.

The National Rifle Association has advocated and promoted laws that if everyone carries a gun, we will all be safe. The Republican Party has repealed, passed, or opposed laws that have brought our country to a place where it is unsafe to go anywhere or be anywhere.

Their argument is that the possession of arms is enshrined in the Second Amendment to our Constitution. The sentence in that amendment reads, “A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

If the amendment only contained the last part of that sentence, it would justify arming every person in our country. The people who wrote the Constitution lived in a very different era than the one we live in today. That amendment became obsolete when a full-time federal army and state national guards were created.

Schools, shopping malls, the streets where we drive and walk do not have to be places where you can be shot with any weapon, especially an assault weapon.

I learned long ago that leaders—whether executive leaders, corporate executives, or coaches in any sport—set an example for the tone and direction they desire, hope, and expect from their subjects. To take the attitude that laws are meant to be broken or “it won’t happen to me” is naive, self-centered, or just plain hateful.

It’s time to take care of all people and elect political candidates who believe that not everyone needs to be armed. Elect politicians who are willing to change our laws, whether it’s here in Florida or across our great country.

R. Scott Penfield, Vero Beach

Animal-Eating Immigrants? How Easy It Is to Fool Some “Leaders”

“It is easier to deceive a man than to convince him he has been deceived.”

This aphorism was wrongly attributed to Mark Twain. The apocryphal phrase most recently gained popularity during Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and has since been posted on social media multiple times to challenge Trump’s widely debunked claims.

Well, we’re trying to make sense of his latest (but not last) disinformation tirade. JD Vance began by making this inhumane declaration: “Reports are now showing that people have had their pets kidnapped and eaten by people who shouldn’t be in this country.”

Trump, during the debate, once again blurted out a false remark, sounding quite deranged. In fact, if this guy were sitting next to me in a coffee shop and spouting such nonsense, I would have moved far, far away.

Do we want a deceived president? And a deceived running mate? If Trump is willing to spread such an absurd lie, what might he do with important security data or absurd conspiracy theories?

He seems to be quite easy to control and is incapable of critical thinking. What he is good at is fooling people who don’t seem to be too interested in substantiating his many false claims. Has he ever apologized for insulting a large portion of our nation’s population?

Let’s hope our country elects a candidate who is willing to “fight for our ideals” and not one who lives in a constant state of doom and turmoil.

Jan Williams, Vero Beach

Harris’ Higher Taxes Will Have Serious Consequences

As the immortal Jack Kemp said, “Nobody ever ended an economic recession by raising taxes.”

The unemployment rate is rising, the ISM manufacturing index has been falling for three years and the main economic indicators are deteriorating – this combination of factors sends a clear signal.

Kamala Harris proposes reversing the 2017 tax cut (which would cause citizens to lose money), raising corporate taxes (which would make the United States uncompetitive for capital), and increasing the capital gains tax rate to 44% (reducing long-term capital investment).

As Art Laffer says, “Taxes have consequences”

Contrary to popular belief, raising tax rates generally reduces tax revenues because taxpayers stop spending and investing. The result is stagnation. To counteract this, Democrats use stimulus measures (otherwise known as deficit spending) to put money back into the economy and encourage growth.

Donald Trump proposes cutting red tape and lowering tax rates in general—but corporate rates in particular. Lower taxes stimulate spending and grow the economy without more debt. Lower corporate taxes attract capital and jobs. Democrats love work but hate employers.

Trump will encourage drilling to lower the cost of everything and generate new revenue that he can use to start paying down the deficit (now over $35 trillion). He also plans to hire Elon Musk to lead a task force to reduce wasteful government spending.

Compare Harris’ Plan to Trump’s Plan. Who Wants Higher Taxes?

Tom Miller, Vero Beach

Let’s not let Democrats control all branches of government.

I am probably older than most readers and have had the experience of presidents, including Franklin Roosevelt. I have been a registered Democrat most of my life and have held public office as a Democrat, but I recently changed to an independent because the party’s primary focus has recently changed.

Before that, it was a great party that helped workers, citizens, and the working class, and I was proud to be a member of it. Since FDR, we’ve had some good Democratic presidents, like Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Bill Clinton, even with his sexual problems, and Barack Obama, who added 50% to the national debt.

No, I am not encouraging you to vote for Donald Trump, because I won’t do it anyway, but I am warning you that you should not allow the Democratic Party to take control of the presidency, the House of Representatives and the Senate, because it could lead to disaster.

In several cities controlled by the party, they allow undocumented immigrants to vote in some local elections. The House passed a bill to overturn that, but the party-controlled Senate refused to put it to a vote. I fear its goal is to eventually allow undocumented immigrants to vote in all elections.

Edward Marasi, Port St. Lucie

Editor’s Note: While some states allow undocumented immigrants to vote in local elections, it is illegal for them to vote in federal elections.

Why don’t leaders respond to the carnage with assault weapons?

I am old and a woman, so I know I am not expected to understand many things. In my defense, I am somewhat computer savvy, I read and understand books, I keep up with news and politics, I am still able to learn, and I often use Google to solve problems.

But here’s the thing: For a while now, I’ve struggled to understand why people would want to own an AR-15, so after the recent school shooting (40th school shooting; 261st mass shootings this year), I Googled what assault rifles are used for.

Google provided two answers: One is about hunting, although hunting with an assault rifle would have wiped out the animals. When they tried to identify children shot with an assault rifle a few years ago, they could only identify them by the clothes they were wearing.

The second goal is protection. Does that mean they plan on carrying this rifle when they go shopping, to the movies, to parties, or do they plan on leaving it next to their bed?

Children and young people seem to be able to reach for a rifle that their parents are sure they can’t. And if they want their children to learn to shoot like their old man, wouldn’t a regular rifle be enough?

Sandy Hook parents should be able to watch their kids graduate from high school this year. Whenever there’s talk of sensible gun legislation after a shooting, the immediate cry is “Second Amendment!”

Why do politicians believe it must be their party’s policy to vigorously oppose such actions, even though they know the vast majority of Americans want them to take action?

But as I say, I’m old and I’m a woman, so maybe I shouldn’t understand that. But I believe I can still vote.

Anne Brakman, Vero Beach