A few things critical in discussing how, if Sebastian should annex 1,984 acres | Opinion

I wasn't sure what I'd see at the Sebastian City Council meeting the other night when council planned to discuss a request to bring into city limits 1,984 acres of former citrus groves.

Would there be acrimony from residents opposed to a controversial 2019 council decision to annex 1,118 of those acres owned by Graves Brothers?

That annexation vote, which came after the city’s Planning and Zoning Committee stalemated, 3-3, on the issue, led to the ouster of three council members and a court’s eventual rejection of the annexation vote on technical grounds.

Worse, it seriously divided the city, leading to the election of three new council members eventually charged with violating the state’s open meetings law and other crimes. They later were recalled and replaced after a massive voter revolt. Two of them are appealing their convictions and sentences.

The city, however, has changed. The civil demeanor of participants at Wednesday’s council meeting showed the city has healed — though healthy disagreements persist.

More: Sebastian recall might be Indian River's most effective political citizen effort 

More: Not happy with Sebastian council or annexation of 1,100 acres?

More: Indian River ready for new 'municipality' west of 95, from St. Lucie line to 60?

Call for transparency, communication

Words of council members Bob McPartlan and Ed Dodd gave me hope the Graves Brothers’ proposal might not just be good for Sebastian, but for the north central part of Indian River County.

After all, the proposed annexation runs from County Road 510 to 69th Street and between 74th and 90th avenues. More on that later.

When I first heard about the meeting, I was troubled.

Troubled that for three years after Indian River County opposed the initial annexation, then demanded legal recourse, the County Commission and Sebastian City Council never met publicly to discuss issues of contention.

Troubled the annexation proposal came in the middle of the county’s efforts to re-envision its comprehensive plan, targeting rural areas — including a large piece that includes the proposed annexation acreage.

Extra: Read the Graves Brothers annexation proposal and city staff's comments

More: If Sebastian hasn't done anything wrong, council should meet with county

More: Indian River commission, cities need to work together

More: Amid rapid development, should Indian River County buy more land? Opinion

Just do the 'right' thing

(While the county hosted a visioning session in the city’s community center 6 p.m. May 16, county officials told me they didn’t know about the annexation proposal until it was posted on the city’s website later that week.)

Troubled that when I speak to good people who work for the county or city, they tell me the other side doesn’t reach out before making important decisions that impact the other government.

Troubled that no matter how many times I suggest the commission and city councils should meet publicly with each other before legal action starts, they usually don’t. That’s despite nearly every elected official in the county making campaign promises to work better with others.

I know. It’s not easy to pull off such meetings.

But it's also not easy to preserve paradise in Florida, as other counties have found.

McPartlan, one of the three council members ousted in 2019, understands the importance of collaboration.

“We should still meet with the county and let them know (about the annexation),” he said, noting the city should reach out to other stakeholders, such as environmentalists, water districts, and the Florida Department of Transportation, which is working on widening County Road 510 and extending 82nd Avenue. “We haven’t talked to the county at all about this.

“Why not do it, and do it right?” he added, noting the city does not need another legal battle.

McPartlan, who sought such conversations before preliminarily approving the annexation, didn’t get his way. The other councilmen voted to hold a final annexation hearing Sept. 14 after various meetings this summer.

There could be huge upside in engaging the county, now.

There are thousands of acres of rural land in the unincorporated county (and Fellsmere) adjacent to the Graves Brothers’ property that — if governments and property owners work together — could be planned in ways to benefit everyone. But everyone has to have a seat at the table to discuss the potential.

More: St. Johns River Water Management District: Water farms to help region

More: Sick of growth? Your chance to aid Vero Beach, Sebastian, Fellsmere future

Don't want to miss another column like this? Here's our latest membership deal

More planning; more opportunities?

Landowners should be engaged, too. Governments ought to know what landowners' long-term plans are. Can agriculture be sustained? If so, how? If not, what are long-term options for the property?

McPartlan and speakers such as Bill Flynn on Wednesday mentioned an important issue critical to the entire county: the lack of affordable housing. Working together, perhaps uniting property owners in the north-central county, it's possible more can be accomplished.

In planning, more land can create more opportunities.

Council members spoke of the importance of governing adjacent property such as that owned by the Graves Brothers. After all, whoever moves there will use Sebastian’s amenities. Council members make a valid point, noting that if the city annexes the property, council will not only control what goes there — which city officials say would be less intense than what the county has approved nearby — but also collect taxes to pay for services.

Council members cited several nearby properties, including Liberty Park — about 1,000 homes on 500 acres at 66th Avenue and 510 — the county has approved that could negatively impact Sebastian.

Council members said the county doesn’t consult Sebastian before OK'ing questionable projects on their border.

“They (the county) have their own procedures and they're not part of Sebastian's,” Dodd said.

He’s right. That leads to mistrust. It’s a two-way street. McPartlan suggested the city rise above it by reaching out to the county.

Dodd, meantime, wisely reiterated important points he made in 2019, calling on the city to hold “more workshops than we think we can have. … I would love to have everyone on the same page.”

More: Jailed: Gilliams, Parris join 'Banty Rooster,' one other in rare sunshine cases 

More: Gadfly Gilliams, snub of incumbents, to make Sebastian meetings must-see TV

More: Appellate judge halts Sebastian's annexation of Graves Brothers citrus property

His call is especially important given some of the misinformation spread by some in the anti-annexation camp during the 2019 council election campaign.

Residents should be able to easily get answers from city officials about what exactly is in the "mixed-use" element of the city's comprehensive plan and how such future development might affect the rest of the city.

Annexation just the first step

Annexation would be just a first step, but one that sets a potential runaway train in motion. The public would get to weigh in later on proposed zoning and land-use changes, then site plans in the coming years. It's why elections and prudence are important.

The good news is there seems to an opportunity for more transparency at City Hall, an opportunity to, with mutual trust, help shape the future of the north-central part of the county.

It's a future that will impact many of us — whether we cross the Wabasso Bridge to go to the interstate or drive to do other business north of State Road 60. Even if we don't live in the city, many of us love Sebastian's small-town charm and its waterfronts and want to see them preserved.

Collaboration can be a win-win-win, a blessing in a county whose legacy can’t afford to be just another South or Central Florida concrete jungle.

This column reflects the opinion of Laurence Reisman. Contact him via email at larry.reisman@tcpalm.com, phone at 772-978-2223, Facebook.com/larryreisman or Twitter @LaurenceReisman

This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: Here's how proposed Sebastian annexation might become win-win |Opinion