Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sarasota commissioners pull Bayshore Drive surplus from agenda after debate over family deed and water access
Summary
The Board of County Commissioners voted 3–2 to remove Item 30 and to stop pursuing a surplus/sale process tied to a Bayshore Drive street vacation, citing need for more review and input from the Hardy family and county counsel. Commissioner Kutzinger disclosed a past interest and formally exempted his parcel.
The Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners voted 3–2 on June 3 to remove Item 30 from the agenda and to stop pursuing a county land surplus process tied to a proposed vacation of Bayshore Drive. Commissioner Ron Kutzinger—the motion’s sponsor—told the board he had owned a parcel in the area and had filed to exclude that parcel so there would be no suggestion of personal gain.
Why it matters: Residents and several commissioners raised concerns that the county’s historical materials and deed records show conflicting documentation about ownership and the intent of a 1998 Hardy family donation. Commissioners said they wanted more time to hear from the Hardy family and to ensure the county preserves the donor’s intent while protecting waterfront access rights for nearby property owners.
Kutzinger, who represents the district, said the item is intended only to restore riparian access for 54 waterfront lots and not to sell conservation lands. “All this is about is restoring the water access rights,” he said, adding he had removed his property from consideration “to clear the air and to remove any suggestion of personal benefit.”
At the hearing, opponents and supporters pressed the board on legal and technical questions about a century-old plat, whether a platted right-of-way can be used for future roads, and how prior memos and surveys treated a 1998 indenture donated by the Hardy family. Commissioner Knight urged the board to “get it right” and to hear from the family, and Commissioner Smith said she supported taking the item off the agenda to allow additional review and public input.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Smith. After discussion, the chair called the question and the motion passed, with the chair voting to break a 2–2 tie in favor of removing the item for further study. County staff and the county attorney were directed to circle back with more detail and with an opportunity to involve the Hardy family before the board considers the matter again.
What’s next: The board’s action removes the surplus step from immediate consideration but does not finalize a vacation or rezoning; commissioners said they expect a staff briefing and further public discussion before any formal vote on vacation or disposal of county-owned land.
