Link answers Fort Myers Beach Observer questions on London Bay, public benefit
Town of Fort Myers Beach Councilmember Rebecca Link is running to defend her seat on the Town of Fort Myers Beach Council. Link answered questions from the Fort Myers Beach Observer as part of a series of questions given to all four of the candidates seeking three seats on the Town of Fort Myers Beach Council in the Nov. 3 election.
Age:66
Birthplace/raised: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Moved to Fort Myers Beach: Became full-time resident in 2012
Education: B.A. in Communications, M.S. in Professional Leadership & Organizational Development from Carlow University.
Professional experience: I began my career at Westinghouse in nuclear power and large power transformers. I later transitioned to high-tech and became a global director, traveling the world helping organizations identify challenges, establish goals and improve productivity and efficiency. For the past 20 years, as co-founder/owner of a consulting firm, I have helped school districts navigate state and federal technology funding programs and compliance requirements.
Question of the week:
Can you comment on your opinion of the original London Bay project and what you think of their latest proposal and use of the Live Local Act? How do you think the town staff should be responding to this Live Local Act proposal? Do you think it fits the town’s comprehensive plan, and if not, what should the town do?
Answer:
With two London Bay proposals currently open with the Town, I believe the responsible approach is to refrain from commenting in a campaign response.
As a sitting council member, I have a responsibility to keep an open mind about matters that may come before me for a decision. Any decision I am called upon to make should follow a review of the evidence and applicable law. I do not want a campaign statement to suggest that I have already reached a conclusion about either proposal.
Both residents and the applicant deserve a fair, thorough and transparent review. I’ll continue fulfilling my Council responsibilities as these proposals move through the appropriate process.
Question:
What do you think a public benefit should be for a developer, whether town council needs to define public benefit more clearly in the town’s code, and whether you believe any project is entitled to deviations from town code if they can provide a public benefit, or if there should be limits to the amount and size of deviations for a project that proposes public benefit? What do you think the limits on deviations should be?
Answer:
I’ve been consistent about what I believe constitutes a true public benefit. It should be proportional to what is being requested, guaranteed, long-lasting, and benefit the majority of the island or support an overall island desire. It should also be consistent with our Comprehensive Plan.
I believe we should define those standards more clearly in our code. What I don’t support is a menu of public benefits. I don’t want this to become, “Give us this and we’ll give you that.” Every project and its impacts are different.
Offering a public benefit does not entitle anyone to deviations. The burden remains on the applicant to demonstrate that the deviations are justified. Nor do I believe there is a formula where a certain benefit buys a certain amount of height, density, intensity or other deviation. Some requests may simply go too far, regardless of what is offered.
My test remains simple: Is the benefit proportional to what the community is being asked to give up? Is it guaranteed and long-lasting? Does it benefit the majority of the island or support an overall island desire? If that benefit disappeared, would our community truly miss it?