Letters to the editor

Candidates support long-term growth plan

It has become apparent in the upcoming Winter Park election that there is a significant difference of opinion in the future direction for our city. Winter Park residents, city staff and the commissioners have spent the past three years in hours of discussion to come up with a long-range vision of how Winter Park should look and grow with our new state-approved comprehensive plan. This plan allows everyone to know the rules before a project is presented to the city. It permits substantial increases in the size of buildings on West Fairbanks Avenue and near Interstate 4. It also protects the unique character of Park Avenue and Central Park. We can increase our tax base without negatively impacting our downtown area. I hope you will agree that we want to vote for the two candidates who want to honor this plan and play by the rules set down by a diverse group of Winter Park residents.

—Nancy Shutts

Winter Park

Cooper supports smart growth, preservation of 'crown jewel'

What is Winter Park to you? Is it your home, your business, a sense of community? Winter Park is now at risk; our defining characteristics are being eroded. The following quote is an opinion clearly articulated, not by a shrill agitator, but by the much-respected National Geographic Traveler magazine: "The location does run the risk of losing its 'old Florida' feel to too much 'new Florida' architecture." This was the only caveat to the praise rating Winter Park 38th in the world as a historic place to visit — 38th in the world!

The crown jewels of Winter Park are Park Avenue and Central Park, the heart of the city. To understand this value is to understand the passions in the Winter Park City Commission races, passions which mirror historic struggles.

A century ago, Winter Park's leaders invested in oak trees with a keen understanding of the benefits long into the future. Decades ago when the Winter Park Golf Course was being considered for development, leaders with vision saw the crucial long-term advantage of retaining it. A dozen years ago, one of our most prized homes, Casa Feliz, was caught in a struggle between the hearts of great people and a wrecking ball. Ultimately, the hearts won. Most recently, the beautiful open space adjacent to Central Park was slated for a massive building, forever degrading the village scale that is Winter Park. This travesty was prevented only by the outrage of our citizens.

So why am I voting for Carolyn Cooper, and why do I hope you will do the same? Carolyn has the intellectual horsepower, researching fervor and ability to commit the hours necessary to understand the issues. Beholden to no one, she is driven to encourage higher density development on Fairbanks and U.S. Highway 17-92. She's dedicated to preserving the heart of our city; and she understands the issues with an unparalleled level of depth and integrity.

Let's be bold enough to address the 800-pound gorilla in the room: many of us are concerned about allowing higher density development in our downtown core. Winter Park's downtown is likely the most valuable space in Winter Park. Multiply downtown's square footage times two, three, five floors; simply add the floors and add the dollars. The dirt down there energizes investors and developers like few places in Florida, and with good reason. It is our crown jewel.

Supermajority-Amendment 10 plain and simple. Our comprehensive plan is and should be a sacred document. Commissions and mayors, like avocado-green refrigerators, have come and go. The document that spells out our long-term vision should never be left to the political whims of a simple majority (3 out of 5) vote. If a supermajority of commissioners (4 out of 5) vote to make a change in the most important document for the city then it should be. Tyranny by the minority, as it's been painted, or is it a reasonable step to preserve an agreed upon vision? I'm voting yes on Amendment 10 for its reasonable approach.

I'm a native of Winter Park, a family man, I own property and a business in the downtown district, and I follow a well-worn path of people before me. People who base their decisions on what will help make the world, and our city, a better place long after we're gone. I'm voting for Carolyn Cooper.

—John Skolfield

Winter Park

Campaign transparency: It's just for the other guy

Last week Winter Park citizens received another campaign mailer from an anonymous entity, this one asking for our vote in support of minority rule (Amendment 10). It would appear to be sent from the side of the argument that likes to pontificate and worry about others' unspecified lack of ethics and the need for more campaign money transparency. After a clear rejection of Amendment 10 by the handpicked Charter Review Commission, three current city commissioners forged ahead and with a 3-2 vote, put this amendment on the ballot. Now an anonymous group who agrees with these three is spending money trying to influence us on the issue. Why?

This mailer in question arrived in our mailboxes just like several previous anonymous bulk permit campaign mailers since 2006. Many in Winter Park have provided lip service to higher ethics and transparency while behind the scenes, purposely anonymous groups (Ten For Winter Park, etc.), have been very busy working on their pet issues. These shadowy folks are determined to change the history and character of Winter Park's City Charter, now through minority rule, and they are not letting good government and transparency get in their way.

In stark contrast, the Vote No on 10 campaign is registered with the city and its proponents are out in the sunshine for all to see. In agreement with the Charter Review Commission, six former mayors have gone on record to oppose this amendment. More importantly, current Commission candidates David Lamm and Peter Gottfried are the only candidates voting no on Amendment 10.

Please vote no on Amendment 10 and for David Lamm and for Peter Gottfried. And in the waning days of this campaign, keep your eyes out for more anonymous influence peddling from the vocal minority.

—Elinor Lynn Warner

Winter Park

Maitland nonprofit group can't endorse candidates

Many Maitland residents recently received an e-mail from June Flowers, executive director of the Performing Arts of Maitland (PAM), announcing that PAM supports Bill Randolph for Maitland City Council. (A later e-mail sent by Ms. Flowers disingenuously claims it was inadvertently sent with "the wrong signoff" although the body of the letter highlights the support from PAM.) PAM is a not-for-profit group that receives funding from the city of Maitland. The law requires that such nonprofits not endorse candidates as condition of their non-profit status. This pattern of ignoring rules and ignoring what is in the best interests of taxpayers like you and me is exactly what leaves Maitland in the undeveloped mess it is in. It seems to me that by ignoring standard business practices, like stipulating the terms of loans or requiring the owner of the old Winn Dixie property to pay his property taxes, Councilman Jeff Flowers and others have not been honorable stewards of our tax dollars.

The Orlando Sentinel endorsed Bev Reponen for the Maitland City Council (newspapers are allowed to give endorsements and do so after vetting the candidates and the city of Maitland does not fund the newspaper) noting that Bev has repeatedly been the dissenting vote on arrangements that did not protect the interests of taxpayers. We need good development in Maitland. We have been waiting too long for the new city hall and fire station while some on City Council appear that they have been making sweetheart deals with a handful of developers and not getting sound contracts in place. Vote for Bev Reponen so we can move this city into the future.

—Nancy Rudner Lugo

Maitland

Bipartisanship is dead

All the silly brouhaha about Winter Park's Amendment 10 captures the essence of Winter Park politics, which mirrors state and national politics. Bipartisanship is dead and gone; consensus is a thing of the past; fight for every inch of ground.

There could be no better surrogate for the political chasm in Winter Park than Amendment 10, but it addresses a symptom, not the disease.

There is irony though: For too long the Winter Park City Commission has been governed by a superminority of one; and that "control" hasn't seemed to engage very many folks before now. Many important Commission matters are split along "faction" lines with the fifth "swing" vote (Commissioner Anderson) claiming the decision, predictably in a 3-2 vote.

Winter Park politics mimics a very short pendulum stroke, each election hoping to reverse the previous Commission's "mandates." I predict this election will continue the status quo — one commissioner elected from each "side," side being defined as black and white, pro- and anti-development camps, in the minds of the public.

But the way Amendment 10 is being fought over, you'd think Winter Park's Comprehensive Plan was the 10 Commandments being etched in stone by God. Change is only one election away, and historically is won (here) by a very small simplemajority to govern over all the other important issues facing Winter Park. One step up and two steps back.

—William Shallcross

Winter Park