Candidates tackle Key issues

Lenobel: With the economy in the serious straits it now finds itself, the revitalization of the business community seems a far fetched possibility.  When and if the economy improves will, at that time, have enough opportunity to consider methods for Longboat to accommodate to revitalization.

Younger: I feel the Town should become more pro-active regarding the Vision Plan. We should survey businesses and chambers of commerce to determine what could reasonably be done by the Town, within the framework of Town regulations, etc.  Any efforts will have to be for what is best for all of Longboat Key and its residents in the long run.

O’Connor: Remain business friendly. Provide the finest infrastructure possible to make doing business here productive and profitable. Listen to everyone.

Brenner: Implement the Vision Plan.

Rothenberg: Short term we can give a sympathetic hearing to any business requests, and long term we must strive to make Longboat the most desirable community on the West Coast in which to live so that we have more citizens to patronize local businesses.

Larson: The sign code is one example of a problem the business community and residents and visitors to the Town all experience.  The signs are not uniform in size, pleasing to look at, nor informative to customers who are looking for services.  When I was standing in front of Town Hall, during early voting in the primary, several people stopped and asked directions to the Bank of America which was in front of us.  We do not want neon signs nor large unattractive signs but we need signs which can assist businesses and others whether they are temporary or permanent residents.

Does the town need more bodies on the key such as tourists and more residential density to help struggling businesses, or should a number of commercial properties be allowed to rezone so the remaining businesses can be supported by the current population?

Lenobel: In regard to tourists, I believe too much emphasis is placed on catering to and providing for more tourism.  There are over 8,000 residential units as opposed to 1,400 tourist units on the island.  Residents are more affluent than tourists and they purchase a much broader range of products and services.  In addition, residents will become repeat customers. It is hard to comprehend why some people want to focus on increasing tourism.  Rezoning would do little for businesses on the Key.  Those businesses which satisfy customers will survive while those that don’t will expire.  Rezoning should occur only on an individual need.

Younger: Local amenities enjoyed by residents also depend on visitors to our community, and restoration of lost tourist units would definitely help support these amenities.  Commercial zoning was established in the 80’s when population build-out was thought to be about 70,000, instead of the current 7,000 with 20,000 during high season.  Rezoning of business plots that have been vacant for several years may warrant consideration.

O’Connor: Number of bodies, as you say, will be what it is independent of government. The existing businesses should be those that can and will serve well our population.

Brenner: We need more visitors on the Key.

Rothenberg: No additional density is needed: we already have too many vacant condos and houses.  We should support the Colony, Hilton Hotel and motels.  Key Club tourism units, if ever built, are years away.

Larson: We need visitors to help pay sales and occupancy taxes and to shop, eat, and use services which help to make them available for us all year.  The town residents, who responded in the “Vision Project”, indicated they would like a balanced mix of residents and visitors.

I agree that owners of struggling commercial properties should be allowed to rezone if voters  and other close neighbors agree to the rezoning.  This could possibly be accomplished by petitions signed and submitted to the Commission for approval.

There have been many recent complaints of traffic congestion by residents on Longboat Key. What solution do you see looking forward, to the traffic congestion on the Key?

Lenobel: I have maintained and worked for several years in an attempt to get the local legislators in Sarasota to cooperate with Longboat on improving the flow of traffic on St. Armands.  I have suggested pedestrian traffic lights at the three main crossings in St. Armands which would permit pedestrians to cross in groups rather than have one or two amble across in front of waiting autos.  If this fails, then traffic police should be posted at these crossings between the hours of 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. during the busy season to control pedestrian crossings. 

Younger: Island traffic is cyclical; light in the off-season, greater during the high season.  Longboat depends on a single state highway for movement. The Ken Thompson light has exacerbated the flow to and from Lido.  The popular Coquina Beach and the world’s “smallest traffic circle” at Bridge Street compound the north-end problem. There may be opportunity to pursue a few more turn lanes in select areas, without completely expanding the width of GMD.

O’Connor: Traffic here is mostly a seasonal phenomenon.  We do not design infrastructure for peak peak needs.  Regional cooperation with our neighbors can alleviate our problem somewhat.   (Eliminate the “traffic circle” in Bradenton Beach as a start!

Brenner: This is solved on a regional level with regional solutions.

Rothenberg: We should not do anything to make it worse!  It is always bad in tourist season.

Larson: We need to work with the Florida Dept. of Transportation and Sarasota County as Gulf of Mexico Drive is an emergency evacuation route and state highway.  Crosswalk lights on St. Armands have been considered in the past and should be reevaluated now.

What about the Key Club redevelopment plan before the Town? Should it be approved? What about the hotel and driving range?

Lenobel: I am sorry, but I am prohibited from commenting on this situation.

Younger: As we all know, the vote on the Club’s plan has been delayed until after the March 16 election.  Current Commissioners and candidates for the Commission have been advised by the Town’s legal counsel to not specifically state a position.  Many Longboaters are aware that without advocating approval or denial of the plan, I proposed a comprehensive rendering during the Commission Club hearings that benefited all, including the Town and addressed mitigating traffic and maintaining a driving range.

O’Connor: Too soon to answer this question! Soon, I promise.

Brenner: I’m constrained by the town’s attorney on what I can say.  As a Commissioner my sole criterion will be “Is it good for Longboat Key?”

Rothenberg: I am unable to comment on this situation because it is a quasi-judicial matter.

Larson: The Key Club Plan is in transition.  My only comment is that I would like to see a mediated agreement between the IPOC and Key Club groups sent to the Commissioners for approval.

Police coverage on this island has been reduced. Would you push to restore it to historic levels? Why or why not?

Lenobel: Safety is a prime concern on Longboat.  I would want to see it maintained at the same level as in past years.  It is a main concern of the residents of the Key.

Younger: It is my understanding that the Chief of Police has noted that the island is adequately covered and protected with the current staff.

O’Connor: You are assuming that historic levels are the best levels.  We have a respected professional police chief who sets the level of police coverage.  He offered the positions deleted this past year.  I am confident that we are amply covered.

Brenner: I defer to the Police Chief who is our professional resident expert on police matters.

Rothenberg: I would love to see it restored to historic levels because I feel police protection is vital  in a retirement community, such as Longboat.  However, current tight budgets precludes this.

Larson: Yes, I believe safety services are part of what makes this such a safe and wonderful community in which to live.  A visible police presence is a great deterrent to those who may wish to take advantage of our residents’ quality of life.

Do you believe the town should spend money fighting roundabouts in the city of Sarasota? If they are shown to increase traffic flow, would you then support the roundabout plan?

Lenobel: We have spent all the money we should.  Now, it is up to Sarasota, the MPO and the DOT to determine the efficacy of roundabouts.  If traffic flow is improved by adding roundabouts, I am in favor.

Younger: I believe that Longboat Key taxpayer dollars should be put to better and more effective use.

O’Connor: Roundabouts are an accepted traffic engineering feature.  They are recognized as useful in selected cases by the profession.  We needed and still need professional advice in talking intelligently to our neighbors and friends in Sarasota.  We obtained that help.

We are not fighting anyone on this.  There are folks on LBK who felt and feel that these changes might threaten our positions.  We responded to those citizens.

Your second question is a hypothetical, of course we would support improvement (doubtful).

Brenner: No single solution fits all situations.

Rothenberg: No additional Town money needs to be spent, but citizens should write to the Department of Transportation to express their views.  My concern is that Sarasota wants to build a roundabout at the intersection of Gulf Stream and U.S. 41 which would severely impact our residents on their way to hospitals, medical offices, restaurants, businesses and malls on the mainland.

Larson: The Town should not waste our money fighting roundabouts in the City of Sarasota.  Instead, we should work with the County and State Dept of Transportation to seek their input on this matter.  We pay substantial taxes to the County and State and deserve to have input and an opportunity to be heard on this subject without hiring outside consultants.  If roundabouts are the best solution to increase traffic flow, then yes, I would support them.

Should final site plan approval remain with the Town Commission or be the responsibility of the planning and zoning board?

Lenobel: The ultimate approval of a site plan should remain with the elected officials since they are the representatives of the people, not appointed by legislators

Younger: Under the current arrangement, it would appear that this would be the responsibility of the Town Commission.  I suspect that the P & Z should have a very substantial role regarding this, with final review by the Commission, who should overrule the P & Z only given extraordinary circumstances.  Such a scenario would eliminate redundancy as had been experienced with the recent Club hearings and move decisions to closure in a more timely manner.

O’Connor: I did not vote to move site plan approval from our Planning and Zoning Board to the Town Commission.  I have not changed my view.

Brenner: The site plan approval should be with the P&Z, which has the expertise.

Rothenberg: I believe these approvals should remain in the hands of the elected officials on the Town Commission.

Larson: Since the Commissioners are elected by voters of the Town but the Planning and Zoning Board members are appointed, I think the Commission should have final site plan approval.  If citizens do not like the decisions of the Commission, they have the opportunity to change the Commission on election day.

Some candidates have given examples of unnecessary expenditures. Are there any you have concern about? What action would you take to control those expenditures? What other expenditures do you feel need to be reduced?

Lenobel: Control of expenditures has to be, and is, in the hands of the men and women who are elected by the residents.  It is the commissioner’s responsibility to determine what spending is essential and what is frivolous.  If the voters think the commissioners are not doing their job, they should simply vote them out of office.

Younger: I was extensively involved in last year’s budgeting process and firmly believe that there remains room to better utilize taxpayer dollars without reducing services.  The Town ultimately earmarked only about $60,000 of $930,000 identified in last year’s budget.  Finance Director, Tom Kelley thought outside the box and was able to defray town expenses by over $400,000 by tapping into non-town resources. Consultant fees and legal fees may be easy targets for some candidates, but may prove more complicated than realized.

O’Connor: I have supported the Town Manager’s recommended budget, this year and past years. Clearly I would not have supported “unnecessary” expenditures.Almost all expenditures can be reduced, in almost any organization. We should understand that “level of service” does not equate to “level of effort”. What we pay for is level of effort.  Productivity, management and discipline are What bring about the needed level of service from that effort.  We are not knowingly wasting anything here.

Brenner: Expenditures should be based on broad guidelines laid down by the Commission.  The real need is to have an organization that supports those guidelines. For example, should the management of the beach continue as is, be brought in house or dealt with on a regional basis?

Rothenberg: I am very doubtful that unnecessary expenditures remain after the severe budget cuts of the last three years and the continuing public and commission scrutiny.  But I will always look critically at any specific expenses that are questioned

Larson: My greatest concern is the current budget process which projects the next budget year with comparison to the current and past budget year.  The budget should be established on actual expenses in the past year and comparisons with other prior years of actual expenses.  Reasons for differences in actual expenses over several years should be explained along with rationale for increasing budgeted over actual in the coming year.  The Commission does not establish the budget, but I feel the Commission should work closely with the Town Manager to establish priorities for the budget.

Some residents say we have cut taxes to the point of eroding essential services, others say the economy justifies more tax cuts. Where would you increase spending and where would you make cuts, if elected?

Lenobel: I would seek to maintain the police and fire departments at a level that is essential to the health and safety of our residents.  Taxes should cover those needs because nothing is more vital to our citizens then the responses provided to them for health and welfare.  Our community depends so much on the emergency responses by our EMS that we must keep them at a very high level and standard.

Younger: I do not seek to increase spending; burgeoning pension debt may leave no choice in this area. Spending cuts were addressed in the previous question.  The Town Manager noted in a memo several months ago that the job was getting done with no visible impact to the residents. Strained in some areas, perhaps, but diminished where it counts, no.  This is a tough economy. There is not a household, business or government entity that has not been impacted by financial challenges. Longboat Key is certainly a special place, but no different when it comes to this.

O’Connor: See above regarding level of effort. Connection is nebulous! I think we need an Assistant Town Manager and would support increased spending for that.

Brenner: This question misses the point.  How can you cut taxes and increase expenses at the same time.  Clear definition of acceptable level of essential services needs  to come first.

Rothenberg: I believe essential Town services have been cut to the minimum required, and all departments are now understaffed.  Bear in mind that all Town services are funded by taxes, and of the taxes you pay less than 12% of your tax bill goes to Longboat.  (The vast majority goes to the School district-over 50%-and the county, over 20%).  I don’t like taxes any more than you do.

Larson: Spending $25,000 on a consultant for Roundabouts is a great example of wasteful spending; this type of spending should be eliminated.

Safety and Emergency Services for actual patrol and service workers are not areas which should be cut and possibly should be increased.

Are the town’s employees overpaid, underpaid or paid sufficiently?

Lenobel: I believe our town’s employees are fairly paid.  We cannot suffer failure in the area of health and welfare, hence our employees should be fairly paid and I think they are.

Younger: I cannot say with specificity regarding any particular employee; however I believe that overall pay is competitive.

O’Connor: We try to pay at the 75th percentile for the area.  I think we do rather well.  Employees are fairly compensated.

Brenner: Without sufficient comparative data, I can’t answer.

Rothenberg: Our employees have not had increases nor cost-of-living adjustments for three years. Their pay scales are competitive with surrounding areas, I believe.

Larson: This is a question which is the responsibility of the Town Manager.  Our personnel staff should analyze comparisons with private, county, and local city departments to make sure our Town staff are paid sufficiently but not overpaid in terms of salary and benefits.

What is your greatest frustration when it comes to Town Hall?

Lenobel: I am not frustrated at all.  I think we have a wonderfully working community which is operated by fine employees and a properly functioned legislative body.  We are fortunate to live here on Longboat Key.

Younger: Long, drawn-out Commission meetings and decision-making.  A change in process, levels of engagement, and people should be able to remedy that.

O’Connor: I have no frustrations with Town Hall.I am an experienced public sector professional who recognizes the hard working serious folks that serve us here every day.  Many of these are not even in Town Hall, see Public Works, Fire Station, Police Station, Tennis & Rec Centers, etc.

Brenner: I would like everybody in Town Hall to treat a visitor as a customer. How can I help you?

Rothenberg: I do not have any frustrations with Town Hall.  I have always found them to be extremely co-operative and they have always supplied any information or answers to questions that I have requested.

Larson: We have workers who are great at their jobs and are helpful to us.  However, it is always easy to remember the time we received conflicting information from Town staff.

That said, the amount of time, money and talent we have spent on the Longboat Key proposal is unbelievable.  We must establish a way to prevent the double hearing process before the Planning and Zoning Board and then the same process over again, in entirety, before the Commission.

Should the Mayor be a position that is rotated among commissioners or should it be decided by a strict vote of whomever the sitting commission believes has the greatest ability to assume that role?

Lenobel: The mayor should be that legislator who will serve well as presiding officer.  I have a suggestion: the voters should select and determine who should be mayor.  That would require a referendum to change our charter and it would result with a “strong mayor” form of government.  That would solve many of our problems and avoid a lot of others.

Younger: Over the last several years, this issue has been contentious and divisive, and it has seemingly not resulted in a copasetic situation or even results.  Seniority is certainly worthy of recognition, tempered to some degree with given circumstances.

O’Connor: My position on this subject is well known. I think it fair that all get at least the opportunity to serve as Mayor.

Brenner: This should be decided on the basis of their ability to assume the role.

Rothenberg: I believe our current system of having the mayor elected by their peers on the Commission is the best method.

Larson: The mayor position should be filled by the sitting Commission voting for the person who has the best ability to serve in that role.

Do you think commission term limits are good for Longboat Key or do they politicize the process?

Lenobel: I have come full swing on thinking about term limits.  I disapprove of term limits.  Why eliminate a good person simply because he has served six years.  It should be the function of the voters to determine who is a good commissioner.  If the voters think a commissioner is not serving the community properly, they should vote him out of office.  It is the voters who should make that decision, not an inflexible rule.

Younger: Longboat Key voters voiced their preference for a three-term limit, and I highly respect and believe that it is in the best interest of the Town to abide by this limit.  Entrenchment, which is all too common in many political arenas, tends to stagnate the ability of a governing body and community to deal with a changing world.

O’Connor: Term Limits are good, especially for Longboat Key.

Brenner: The citizens prefer term limits and I agree.

Rothenberg: I am in favor of term limits.

Larson: Term limits are good because they ensure new ideas to aid in solutions not just more of the same.  It also offers individuals the opportunity to serve and give their best within the time allowed.

With regard to the Town’s unfunded pension liability and our policy of paying our employees, there is a total of $25 million in unfunded pension liability. In your view, how did we get to owe $25 million? Is there anyone to blame? If elected, would you be inclined to keep our defined benefit plan or move to a defined contribution model or do you have another type of solution?

Lenobel:

Younger: The pension debt grew from about $600,000 in 2003 to the current staggering $25,000,000 plus, and it will continue to grow absent attention.  We are one of the 10 worst funded programs in the state.  Why prior Commissions did not begin to address this dire situation earlier is beyond comprehension.  The solution is multi-faceted and too lengthy to address in a limited Q & A.  Suffice to say that migration to a defined contribution plan such as a 401k, most definitely for new hires, is a must.

O’Connor: I really don’t know how we got here.  There is no one to blame – fixing blame is almost always counterproductive. I suspect that for public sector employees a defined benefit plan is superior. This is not a simple solution.

Brenner: The contributions in the past were underfunded.  Blaming someone now would be pointless.  My guess is that some hybrid will emerge.  The real question is when are we going to start funding the current shortfall.? It’s going to require a substantial tax increase which nobody wants to discuss.

Rothenberg: Causes are complex.  The four major causes are 1) change in cost method, 2) investment losses, 3) benefit changes, and 4) salary increases.  The change in cost method reflects change in amortization time from 30 years to much less as a result of state pressure.  The investment losses were 26% during 2001/2002.  Benefits were increased in 2007, and salaries were increased more than 10% over a five-year span starting in 2003.  There are other causes also, but the result is a reasonably stable and predictable yearly town cost, at least for the next few years.  Therefore it is not necessary to do anything significant at this time, but the cost to the Town will remain substantial.

Larson: We got to this unfunded liability with a combination of the bad economy, a drop in the stock market, drop in interest rates, generous benefits, optimistic views of income on investments, and an increase in the average life expectancy.  There are so many people to blame, but no one person.  We should explore other avenues of pension benefits and keep an open mind on them all, but we must keep promises we have already made to our employees and former employees and beneficiaries.

There is much discussion about decaying and vacant commercial property. What is your solution to the vacant property?

Lenobel: When the economy improves, vacant property will cease to be a problem.  Until then, the financial crisis is too  severe to try to improve things on a local level.

Younger: Absent a code violation or a failure to pay taxes, little can be specifically done with regard to decaying and vacant property; however, part of the answer was already addressed with regard to the initial question of this Q & A.

O’Connor: I’m not so sure there is much decay here.  Avenue of the Flowers is now in the hands of a top retail firm.   I expect to see new vitality there.

Brenner: Bring together the members of the real estate community to be sure the  problem is understood and solicit their opinions on how to deal with the problem.

Rothenberg: This is a problem in all Florida towns.  We must make Longboat a more attractive community for people to live in all year ‘round because they are the steady patrons of our businesses.

Larson: I have said the owners of vacant property should best determine how they wish to solve this problem and then work with Town staff and the Commission.

The Village Association has suggested the town should directly control the peacock population and not just fund the removal. Do you believe there is a peacock problem, and if so, what should the town’s role be in controlling the birds?

Lenobel: The town is handling the problem quite well now.  It is helping to keep the peacock population to a reasonable number.  There isn’t much else we could do.

Younger: I do not live in the Village and cannot say whether or not there is a problem from my perspective.  Some obviously feel there is a problem, and some do not.  Perhaps the town should survey all of the Village residents and abide by a majority decision to either keep them or not, with the Villagers being informed that if should they elect to keep them, the expense of periodically culling the population will henceforth be theirs, or at least borne by those that choose to keep them.

O’Connor: There are too many peacocks.  Removing these birds is an acceptable function of government, in my view.  We can either reimburse the Village or have Town contract for removal. I favor Town direct action, at this point.

Brenner: I don’t know if there’s a peacock problem, but the citizens who live in the Village do.  If there were a localized  rodent problem the Town would jump in to eradicate it.  This situation fits the same criteria.

Rothenberg: From the complaints I hear, the peacocks are a problem.  However, I feel that the Town should not do more than finance their partial removal.

Larson: The residents of the Village can best determine if there is a peacock problem and offer suggestions as how it should be handled.

The town is looking at revising the tree codes and tree coverage. What is wrong with the tree code and what needs to be changed, if anything?

Lenobel: I do think the tree code is generally acceptable, however if it does prove to require alteration, I am prepared to listen.

Younger: I am not sufficiently up-to-date to on the tree code and tree coverage issue to adequately comment on this issue at this time.

O’Commor: You assume questions not so obviously before us.  All Codes are subject to constant review, and revision when necessary.

Brenner: The P&Z is reviewing it now and I would like to review their recommendations.

Rothenberg: I believe the Planning and Zoning Board should sort out the conflicting opinions and make their recommendation.

Larson: Some of our residents feel that they are not treated fairly on the tree code.  We currently have groups studying this issue; I would work with our residents who have devoted their time to explore this much more than I and listen to their recommendations before taking a position.

What, if anything, is wrong with our sign code? Should businesses be allowed to have temporary folding signs announcing lunch specials and the like?

Lenobel: There are pros and cons to this;  each situation should be determined on its own merits and conditions.

Younger: Some additional, minor tweaking of the sign code may be worthwhile. Businesses should definitely be allowed to have temporary folding signs (a.k.a. sandwich boards) of a designated size for specials and the like, as long as they are removed at close of business daily.

O’Connor: I don’t think there is much wrong with our sign code.  As above regarding review and revision. This sign code serves our island home well.  This is not Siesta Key; no folding signs.

Brenner: Maybe nothing is wrong, but in my final acts as P&Z chairman I instituted a review of the sign code since that had not been done in the 15 years of its existence.

Rothenberg: Although I recognize the presumed value of this particular type of sign we cannot maintain the high standards of Longboat Key if we make exceptions.

Larson: I have addressed the sign issue above. Realtors have temporary signs for open houses.  This is an area I would ask for more input from town staff, businesses, and citizens before I would take a position.

What do you see as the best solution to the sand erosion problem at the north end of Longboat Key?

Lenobel: A total study has to be made to determine the best and most durable method to solve the problem.  A solution has to be made that will provide the residents of the area with proper safety for their homes and a beach to accompany it.  They are deserving of that.

Younger: The long-term solution will require qualified engineering services, and soon since Mother Nature has already decided her adverse course of action.  Continuing to merely dump sand in the area may continue to be necessary in the short run, but will not suffice long-term.

O’Connor: An engineered solution.  Replace the beach template to the design standard; build necessary structural protection as necessary; monitor; maintain.Immediately add materials to protect residential properties and North shore Road from damage.  There is a role for individual owners here; they are responding.  Spring tides approach.

Brenner: Since the solution is not clearly defined, a second opinion from a competent coastal engineer is in order.

Rothenberg: The short term solution is to fill in with trucked-in sand as we are frequently doing, especially during the storm season.  The long term solution—which is in the works— is to build breakwaters offshore which will afford protection as well as gradually build beaches.  Further long-term solutions include beach renourishment, study of sand movement at Longboat Pass and obtaining sand from various sources as it becomes available.

Larson: The Corps of Engineers is a resource to offer us solutions.  We should work with other local governments and state government to aid in funding of this on the long term.

Cell towers: a necessary evil to help in case of an emergency, or unnecessary because technology is rapidly improving services?

Lenobel: I have not heard of any major problems with the cell service on Longboat Key.  However, there are many advances constantly being made which we should be aware of and ready to accept to solve any cell problems that may or do arise.

Younger: For health and safety reasons, I am extremely concerned about the lack of adequate communications, especially on the north end, but also to a lesser extent on the south end.  Although technology is improving, whether or not it is improving at a sufficient rate to negate currently available systems for improving communications is debatable. 

O’Connor: We do not need to permit the building of tall cell towers here.  Technology advances rapidly

Brenner: This is the wrong question.  The issue is the quality of cell service on the key.  A planned approach focusing on the short term as well as the long term is the prudent way to go.

Rothenberg: I am not in favor of cell towers.

Larson: I have spoken to many concerned residents who feel cell phone service is a necessity for safety in their homes as many do not have home wired phones.  It is also important to residents who fear a car problem, flat tire, or emergency on the beach or golf course.  We should explore Manatee County’s plan to install a cell tower on the South end of Anna Maria Island.  This is an area where co-operation with Manatee County could assist us greatly.

Would you support a municipal wide Wi-Fi system?

Lenobel: Yes, because it would benefit everyone.

Younger: It sounds good on the surface, but support would depend on the investment required and the true payback generated, plus a lot of other factors; who would own, who would maintain, etc.  This idea is in the embryonic stages, and there remains much to be answered.

O’Connor: Yes, of course.  It can save us all money, enhance service, and even earn a profit for the Town.  I am familiar with communities with Municipally operated systems.

Brenner: Why?  Communications on the key should be based on thoughtful, comprehensive planning not the “brainstorm” of the day.

Rothenberg: I am in favor of this system providing the expense is reasonable and it is shown to be of value to most Longboat residents.

Larson: I would like to review cost estimates and more information on an island-wide program for Wi-Fi and Cell phone service. Then we need public input before a solution is adopted.

What are your greatest strengths that you can bring to the commission, and what are your weaknesses (please do not use perfectionism as a flaw)?

Lenobel: I bring years of experience and knowledge of our town.  I think I have served Longboat well for ten years.

Younger: Strengths:  I have military and extensive business experience in a multitude of areas (e.g., finance, cost analysis, research, leadership, planning, engineering, legal, personnel issues) that are commensurate with what is required to operate and effectively and efficiently run a government operation. I carefully listen to issues, weigh alternatives, and arrive at creative solutions as to the most feasible approach in a timely manner.  I prefer to work with people to benefit from their assets and strengths.

Weakness:  Low tolerance for dawdling.

O’Connor: Experience, both here and in my professional career.

Brenner: Leadership.  Experience and background accomplishments. I don’t suffer fools gladly.

Rothenberg: As a seasoned CEO of two non-related and very successful companies, I bring the skills to analyze problems, find solutions and maintain strong relations with staff and customers (the public).  My knowledge and experience working with Town employees, the public and the Commission will help co-operatively find solutions to problems.

Larson: I am a Supreme Court Certified Mediator and hope to bring consensus to the Commission when it deals with issues. My greatest weakness is that all the other Commissioners and candidates are taller than me without my high heels.

What is your single greatest personal accomplishment?

Lenobel: Maintaining Longboat through some difficult periods and help our citizens when they needed help and keeping our community on an even keel.

Younger: I have been fortunate to have many high points in my life. Arriving at this stage surrounded by loved ones, friends, healthy, and happy with my life as it has unfolded, is what I value, but then again, attempting to classify this as a personal accomplishment would be inaccurate, since so much depends on so many others.

O’Connor: My career as a Naval Officer in both war and peace.

Brenner: Marrying Maggie Green over 52 years ago to create a team that has withstood the ages.

Rothenberg: I am too modest to answer.

Larson: I married my best friend and have a wonderful family.

Do you support, or are you opposed to offshore drilling?

Lenobel: I am opposed to drilling off our shore.

Younger: I oppose offshore drilling.

O’Connor: Oppossed

Brenner: I do not support it within 10 miles of our shoreline and need to be convinced that it is worthwhile beyond that.

Rothenberg: I oppose offshore drilling anywhere in or near Florida waters.

Larson: I am opposed to offshore drilling in the Gulf.