County Acknowledges Poor Pitch to Cities for Beach Aid Even as Cryptic Talk of ‘Plan’ Continues

Reflecting on last week’s joint government meeting, County Commissioner Kim Carney was critical of the vagueness and contradictory request by the county for help from local cities in financing a beach-protection plan. The county’s “ask,” Carney said, left the cities with no reason to contribute since County Commissioner Greg Hansen told them the county had a plan and would go forward with or without the cities.

Commission Chair Andy Dance agreed with Carney, as did County Manager Heidi Petito: the “ask” was poorly conveyed, and it will have to be reworked through clearer presentations to each of the local municipal governments to convince them to join the countywide plan. (See: “Eroding Management Plan, Cities Bluntly Tell Flagler County: Not One Extra Dime for Beach Protection.”)




But even as they conceded a lack of clarity on their own part, Petito repeatedly and cryptically referred to a plan that has not been made public, that has apparently not been discussed with county commissioners, except perhaps Hansen (who kept referring to just such a plan), and that still wasn’t revealed at today’s commission discussion on the matter.

The joint government meeting took place last Wednesday. Palm Coast, Beverly Beach and Bunnell officials, and to some extent Flagler Beach officials, all rebuffed the county’s request to join a countywide plan that would entail some form of financial contribution, through taxes or fees, to help finance an expensive beach-management plan. The plan would keep renourishing (or rebuilding) the county’s 18 miles of beaches, and maintain them. The county is looking for $6 to $8 million a year. Its current tentative plan covers only the unincorporated portions of the beach–not Flagler Beach, not Beverly Beach, not Marineland.

Carney brought up the Wednesday meeting, which she attended, because she was puzzled by fellow-Commissioner Hansen’s assurance to other governments that the county has a plan, with or without the cities. If he meant to refer to the limited plan to manage the unincorporated portions of beaches, “I don’t think that came across really well or strong,” Carney said. “If I was one of the participants from Palm Coast or Bunnell or Flagler Beach, I left there thinking that we got this, so then why would we even bring it forward to them?”




Carney favors presenting a clear funding plan to the cities. “If we do have a funding path, spell it out, tell them what we need.” That didn’t happen. Carney credited Commission Chair Andy Dance for spelling out the issue, but not the Hansen suggestion that a plan is in place.

“There was a bit of miscommunication or just vagueness in the in the ask,” Dance said. The county worked for the past six months to put a plan in place, he said, after getting push-back on a countywide plan that included some level of additional taxation. The current plan could be done unilaterally just for the unincorporated section, “if we had to,” Dance said. “That’s not the preferred method. My point was, this should be a community effort.”

Petito said the county cannot manage an area of the coastline within a city’s boundaries without its approval. The county has such joint agreements (called inter-local agreements) with Fagler Beach and Beverly Beach, both for the federal beach-renourishment project that was completed last year and for future renourishment and maintenance efforts.

So it was “a little disheartening for me,” Petito said, that both those cities “don’t seem to want to support the ongoing maintenance and renourishment, which is outlined in the inter-local agreements where they agree to take on that responsibility for the future. I didn’t walk away from that meeting getting a good sense of that. Primarily, I think it was Mayor Emmett comments that they didn’t think they had a problem. But we have an inter-local [agreement] that says that they will maintain the beach. But it doesn’t sound like they’re willing.”




At the same time, Petito picked up on Hansen’s references to a “plan,” and got cryptic: “We’ve shared some information with staff, but I don’t know if they have everything,” she said. “We’ve had some kind of high level discussions with staff.” She appeared to be referring to a broader, countywide plan. But she didn’t elaborate, and commissioners didn’t ask her to.

Petito wants to go to each city and present at public meetings in coming weeks “something specific.” Each presentation would be tailored to the specific city. But it would make clear that “it is a county-wide challenge.” Any harm to the barrier island would have economic and tax consequences for the rest of the county. “It would negatively impact the quality of life for anybody in Flagler County, regardless of where you live. She said a Category 1, 2 or 3 hurricane striking Flagler County would leave large portions of Palm Coast–the C Section, the F Section, the Woodlands, the Sanctuary–all impacted.

What she did not say, however, is that beach renourishment or maintenance would make no difference in those cases: those low-lying neighborhoods, like areas along the Intracoastal, would be affected either because of storm-surge flooding, which dunes cannot halt, or from catastrophic rain events.

“And yes, there is maybe a little bit more benefit to the folks that live on the barrier island,” Petito said.




She then referred in vague terms to the plan that hasn’t been presented yet, which would have barrier island residents paying a “nominal fee” higher than in the rest of the county. “I think our new plan, if everybody can come together, has that amount being significantly less than anything we’ve looked at previously,” Petito said. “I don’t know to what level of detail this board would like me to share with them, as far as you know, potential options and what that looks like. I mean, we could certainly bring a spreadsheet and kind of play with the numbers live while we’re there in presentation.”

That’s as precise as the administrator got before returning to the city officials’ rejection of any financial contribution to a beach management plan. “I don’t know, I don’t understand maybe why they don’t see that value or that benefit,” Petito said. “In general, I think that people don’t have an understanding of what the county provides.”

Carney, too, was critical: “If there’s anybody in Palm Coast that that can tell you that they do not live in a coastal community, then they basically don’t know where they live,” she said. “Palm Coast residents really need to understand the impact of what our future could look like if we have a do nothing approach, and if we don’t have the funding we do nothing.”

Commissioners agreed that Petito should make presentations before each local municipal government, with more detail and precision. But they did not touch on that mysterious plan she kept referring to, so it’s not clear whether the cities will hear about it. The goal, Dance said, is to have county-wide participation.

“Beach renourishment is never going to work in pieces and drabs,” Carney said. “We as a county have to come together on a plan. So if the plan is: no funding equals no project, I am perfectly fine with that. It’s not ideal for our county. It’s incumbent upon us–because we are the sponsor in Flagler Beach, we are going to be sponsoring our own sections–that we bring, or try to bring everybody on board.”