close

Manipulated by misinformation

4 min read

To the Editor:

“Lee County seeks to push future commercial establishments on Pine Island into rural areas,” according to Phil Buchanan’s commentary in last week’s Eagle.

“Misinformation” in the hands of government-trained CIA officials has helped topple or destabilize foreign governments, some of them democratically elected. It has helped to generate resentment and mistrust of the U.S. around the globe. Now we have the well-trained Mr. Buchanan to thank for bringing it home to America.

In Third World countries, it’s designed to stir up fears of tyranny, oppression and subjugation to enemies both real and imaginary. It’s intended audience — the less educated, volatile masses that have no skills for forming their own interpretations of the politics affecting their lives.

In Florida it’s used to stoke fear of developers and sometimes government officials who are accused of complicity with those developers. Yes, citizens of Pine Island, be prepared to ask only of Phil, “Where and how high shall we jump?” as he sings his siren song, “Stop the Developers.”

On July 27, six people spoke in support of county ataff’s language for delineating allowed uses for 27 existing commercially zoned properties within the Coastal Rural designated areas of Pine Island. Although the language was somewhat more restrictive than for other rural areas of the county, those six, including four palm growers, their attorney and the president of the Bokeelia Civic Association, decided it was more desirable than the highly restrictive language proposed by Mr. Buchanan. Although none of the six supporters own any of the affected properties, we felt it necessary to oppose Mr. Buchanan’s attempt to limit those properties solely to fruit stands, nurseries, feed stores, garden supplies and equestrian facilities.

If adopted, Mr. Buchanan’s language would not allow a convenience store such as the Grab Bag, or a small restaurant like the Cracker Café to exist. Fortunately the county ataff saw such language as shortsighted and encouraging greater “on Island” travel (it’s seven miles to the Circle-K, making it nearly a 15 mile round trip for some of us).

The existing Pine Island Plan as crafted by Mr. Buchanan and his cohorts completely ignored placing limits or directions on those 27 properties that were included in their newly created category “Coastal Rural.” When a property owner of one of these parcels brought a request before the County Commissioners, this oversight became readily apparent. The County Commissioners then directed county staff to develop language to address this void and have it ready for the September “transmittal” meeting. Staff visited the Island and discovered that locals valued such establishments as the Grab Bag that are outside the “villages.” After then crafting language limiting such things as size, nature of the business and impervious surface areas to an extent somewhat greater than in other rural parts of the county, the staff are then accused by Mr. Buchanan of “pushing” commercial businesses into rural areas.

The reverse could be argued more reasonably, that Mr. Buchanan and his Pine Island Plan creators have attempted to push commercial business into the rural areas by having given no direction or limits for such commercial properties in the Coastal Rural areas. Since its adoption, the Pine Island Plan, by default, allows practically any imaginable business. As one county official has stated, “Commercial uses from an airport to an auto repair have already been found to be consistent with the category.”

Taking such an embarrassing oversight and turning it into a conspiracy by the county staff to turn Stringfellow into another U.S. 41, is remarkable. Fear-mongering at its finest, a tribute to his manipulative powers that might make his former colleagues in Washington smile in admiration.

In reality, the fact that property owners could have applied for practically any kind of business since the plan’s adoption did not cause any such actions. In the free market, business responds to needs or it fails. One member of the LPA, after hearing these discussions about commercial development in the Coastal Rural areas, asked, “Isn’t it more or less self-limiting given the restrictions on residential development under the Pine Island Plan?”

One thing is for certain, whenever Pine Island’s future is debated, we can look forward to some creative “spin” from Mr. Buchanan and his foreign intelligence training.

Bill Wright

Pineland