There has not been time to do much research on the history of DCA. But any organization reflects the top person, in this case the Secretary.
Mr. James Murley, who preceded Mr. Seibert, was appointed by then governor Lawton Chiles. Shortly after he assumed office, Florida Trend Magazine published an interview with him entitled “A green light for developers.”
Mr. Steven Seibert appears to have a strong inclination for “consensus building.” He has ties with groups interested in encouraging growth in the state.
In the matter of comprehensive plans, DCA’s role is one of review, not writing.
DCA has the responsiblity to review a comprehensive plan submitted by a local government. DCA does not write the plan and cannot dictate how a community wishes to grow.
There is a process established by Florida Statutes and DCA regulations:
- The local planners develop a document using the 9J-5 standards.
- The local elected officials vote to adopt the plan if they feel it meets the needs of the local community.
- The plan is transmitted to DCA for review. They have one question to answer; is the plan consistent with 9J-5? If it is, even though DCA staff might not agree with it, the local government prevails.
- If DCA finds it consistent, they publish an ad announcing their intent to find the plan consistant. Parties who disagree have 21 days in which to contact DCA to raise objections.
- If DCA finds the plan inconsistent, they must notify the local government of what is lacking. DCA and the local planners work together to make any changes necessary to bring it into compliance. (Note that at no time does DCA have the right to dictate the actual content of the plan.)
9j-5 "(4 As minimum criteria, these criteria are not intended to prohibit a local government from proposing, considering, adopting, enforcing, or in any other way administering a comprehensive plan which is more specific, detailed, or strict, or which covers additional subject areas, whether within required or optional elements, as long as the comprehensive plan is in compliance with Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., Chapter 163, F.S., and any other applicable statutes, laws or rules."
Jim Crews, representing Secretary Steven Seibert, made a telling statement.He said the proposed plan is *probably in compliance* with 9J-5 standards, but that it might set a precedent for other communities to do the same. In other words, people all over the state might want to put a stop to the kind of devastating growth that has occurred in south Florida. And even more telling, they would be in compliance wtih DCA’s own 9J-5!
The county commission has the responsibility to approve the proposed plan and transmit it to DCA for review. That will set the proper procedures in motion. If affected parties wish to challenge on the basis of inconsistency, they have that right. However, it seems absolutely clear that the proposed plan is consistent.
Many people in this community worked long hours to elect officials who said they stood for the control of runaway growth. This is their chance to live up to those promises. This is a chance for our 5 commissioners to lead in the effort to save what is left of the state. It will take courage.
Let the normal process take place. Transmit the proposed plan on Thurs, Aug 23 according to 9J-5. It will still be possible to talk with Sec. Seibert and Sec. Bronson on Aug 30.
Commissioners, stand up to the pressure. We are behind you, and we will not forget.
By Ellie Schwab