King's Landing, Fisherman's Wharf, Brightline station, Sunrise Theatre have common problem

When Dale Matteson sent out an email last month outlining the ways Fort Pierce officials had contributed to delays on the King's Landing development project, it appeared at first glance like a nice piece of keister-covering.

After all, it was Matteson's company, Audubon Development, that had fallen behind on plans to build the multi-use housing and commercial development in the city's downtown ― so much so the city's leaders were preparing to find the company in default of its contract.

Ultimately, the Fort Pierce City Commission granted Audubon and Matteson an extension to come up with a revised timeline for finishing the project.

It remains to be seen if Matteson can get the project back on track, and whether his company has sufficient financial backing to see the work through to completion. But if the project fails, the city must share in the responsibility for that failure, just as it must for other recent high-profile initiatives that have gone off the rails.

City can't develop property it doesn't own

Artistic renderings show the planned King's Landing multi-use development, which has hit a number of snags since Audubon Development was picked by the Fort Pierce City Commission in 2019.
Artistic renderings show the planned King's Landing multi-use development, which has hit a number of snags since Audubon Development was picked by the Fort Pierce City Commission in 2019.

In an April 5 email to myself and my colleague, Wicker Perlis, Matteson complained city officials had misled him about the King's Landing site at 311 Indian River Drive, across from the Fort Pierce City Marina. Instead of being "development ready," the site had concrete foundations left over from the old power plant that had to be removed.

Because the concrete removal had to be done, Matteson said he couldn't obtain proper permitting from the state. Also, Matteson said in his email the city didn't have clear title to the property at the time his company signed the contract to build a high-rise hotel, condominiums, townhouses and commercial space.

I've never heard city officials discuss title issues as one of the reasons for the delays.

If what Matteson wrote is true, it's fair to ask why the city would request redevelopment proposals for property it didn't already own, especially since the same issue has come up before with the Fisherman's Wharf project.

In March 2021, the city commission agreed to negotiate a contract with Shelli Associates, a local development firm, to build a multi-use complex at the eastern end of Avenue H. Fisherman's Wharf was supposed to include restaurants, a tiki bar, residential units and a boat storage facility, among other amenities.

Wondering what happened?

Kaitlyn Ballard, the city's marketing and communications manager, confirmed in an email last week the terms of the Fisherman's Wharf contract have been extended "to cure the title and survey objections."

Why won't someone at City Hall put a stop to this?

Fort Pierce is in the early stages of developing Fisherman's Wharf. Office America Group's proposal includes 92,179-sqaure-feet of mixed-use development for office space, apartments, restaurants and more.
Fort Pierce is in the early stages of developing Fisherman's Wharf. Office America Group's proposal includes 92,179-sqaure-feet of mixed-use development for office space, apartments, restaurants and more.

That's right. Fort Pierce doesn't have a clear title to the Fisherman's Wharf property, either.

That could be just an unfortunate coincidence. But remember the city's recent unsuccessful bid to get a Brightline passenger train station downtown? The city didn't own all of the property it wanted to use for that site, either.

Which may or may not have had anything to do with why Brightline chose to put the station in Stuart instead, but a pattern certainly seems clear here.

And here's one more example to consider: A few days ago, Perlis wrote a story about how, under the city's management, the Sunrise Theatre has continued to hemorrhage money.

Even with COVID-era relief funding from the federal government, which is ending, the century-old theater hasn't been able to operate in the black.

If the Sunrise goes dark (again), it would be a huge blow to downtown and undo much of the progress made there during recent decades.

Why the mystery surrounding Sunrise management?

This rendering shows the location of a Brightline train station proposed by the city of Fort Pierce in the 200 block of South Depot Drive.
This rendering shows the location of a Brightline train station proposed by the city of Fort Pierce in the 200 block of South Depot Drive.

It should be clear to even the most casual observers that the city isn't well equipped to operate this type of entertainment facility.

In September 2021, Perlis' story noted, city officials came close to turning the theater over to a private company by hiring Professional Facilities Management of Rhode Island for one year at a cost of $120,000.

When I asked why that didn't happen, or why the city didn't hire another company instead of Professional Facilities Management, this was Ballard's emailed response:

"The City of Fort Pierce did previously explore the option of hiring a management company for the Sunrise Theatre. However, after deliberation, it was decided not to proceed with such arrangements. Thus, the theater has remained under the direct management of City of Fort Pierce staff."

In response to a request to elaborate, Ballard wrote that she had no additional information to offer.

Not very much transparency about the city's decision-making process there.

Pick any two of those four projects being successful ― King's Landing, Fisherman's Wharf, the Brightline station or the Sunrise Theatre ― and we are having a completely different conversation about downtown Fort Pierce and its future prospects.

Instead, these all seem like high-profile examples of a lack of follow through and attention to detail on the city's part.

Which is extremely frustrating because it seems like a series of preventable errors is holding back Fort Pierce's progress.

If no one else will fix this, voters can

BLAKE FONTENAY
BLAKE FONTENAY

I am not one of the naysayers who contend Fort Pierce is and always be the municipal equivalent of a train wreck. In reality, I see the potential for the city to be just the opposite.

Fort Pierce has made great strides in cleaning up its downtown and beachside areas, but there's more work that can and should be done. The Sunrise City has the potential to be one of Florida's greatest coastal communities, but it is going to take some further hard work to get there.

Amid all these project delays and disappointments, I have yet to hear City Manager Nick Mimms or anyone on his management team take responsibility for any of this. Nor, to my knowledge, have any of the commissioners.

Mimms is directly accountable to the mayor and city commissioners, who are directly accountable to the voters.

This is an election year.

Fort Pierce residents, please take note.

This column reflects the opinion of Blake Fontenay. Contact him via email at bfontenay@gannett.com or at 772-232-5424.

This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: Fort Pierce leaders lack follow through on high-profile civic projects