Commissioners also agree on expanding radius within which meetings have to take place
Although the majority of the Sarasota County commissioners this week expressed support for once again requiring that Neighborhood Workshops on land-use petitions be conducted in person, the board members ultimately agreed to put on pause any formal changes to the county resolution that governs those proceedings.
Commissioner Mark Smith — who, in late March, revived the suggestion for the return to the in-person sessions — said on May 20 that he had been working with a Sarasota church leader who has offered to compile a list of churches where the workshops could be conducted. Smith wanted that list “in hand,” he said, before the board formally voted on any changes.
Additionally, Smith, Commissioner Teresa Mast and Chair Joe Neunder expressed interest in amending the county guidelines to enable project teams to hold the workshops within a wider radius of the sites proposed for land-use changes.
As Matt Osterhoudt, director of the county’s Planning and Development Services Department, pointed out during his May 20 presentation to the board, county regulations call for the workshop venue to be within a 2-mile radius of the project site if that location is within the Urban Service Boundary, where county infrastructure — such as water and sewer lines — exists. Outside that boundary, the radius is 5 miles.
Then, providing background on the Neighborhood Workshop issues, Osterhoudt explained that, throughout 2019, he and his staff received comments “from the development community [regarding] difficulties in finding venues for [the workshops], and that wasn’t just for one reason …”
Among the problems cited, Osterhoudt said, were the radius requirement, “room size, technology needs, as well as the venues themselves becoming reluctant to [host] crowds [and contend with] the risks associated with [discussions of] more complex and controversial petitions.”
“On the heels of that,” he continued, “we unfortunately, of course, had the onset of COVID,” so venues where workshops had been held no longer “were available for those larger public gatherings.”
“At that point,” Osterhoudt noted, the commissioners agreed to make the transition to virtual Neighborhood Workshops. They voted in April 2020 to approve a temporary resolution to that effect, he said.
“Based on the successful implementation [of the virtual workshops],” Osterhoudt pointed out, the board members later formally approved a new resolution that allowed the virtual option to remain on a routine basis, after the height of the pandemic.
Then he provided slides with data for the commissioners’ review, which showed the number of Neighborhood Workshops held each year from 2015 through the first part of 2025, plus the corresponding attendee counts.
For example, the first slide showed, in 2019 — the last year that in-person workshops were required — 61 of those sessions were held. The annual total declined in 2020 before beginning a rebound in 2021 with the virtual format, as noted in that slide.
So far this year, Osterhoudt said, 24 Neighborhood Workshop have been scheduled; only two were conducted in person.
Further, he reminded the commissioners that the last time the board considered switching back to the in-person workshop requirement, no action resulted after staff made a presentation on the issues. That was on June 13, 2023.
During his presentation, Osterhoudt also stressed that a Neighborhood Workshop is not a county function. “It is formally a petitioner workshop.”
Finally, Osterhoudt referenced earlier board discussions about the potential of a revised resolution’s allowing for the option of a hybrid workshop, so people could attend sessions in person or virtually. Staff has concerns about logistical challenges with that model, he said, especially in regard to whether a petitioner’s team would be able to ensure that the virtual participants could hear the presentation and comments.
‘A strong proponent’
Following Osterhoudt’s presentation, Commissioner Smith told his colleagues, “I am a strong proponent of in-person Neighborhood Workshops.” Nonetheless, he acknowledged the concerns that had been raised about petitioners being able to find adequate venues for them.
After learning of church leaders’ reluctance, Smith continued, he contacted several church groups. He has discussed the issue with Pastor Eric Olsen of Faith Lutheran Church, who is a leader of the nonprofit SURE (Sarasota United for Responsibility and Equity) and the chaplain for the Sarasota County Fire Department, Smith added.
Olsen’s view, Smith continued, is that churches would be very open to hosting in-person Neighborhood Workshops. He believes strongly in them himself, Smith noted.
Olsen has agreed to compile a list of churches that would host the workshops, Smith told his colleagues. “He’s actually working on that for me.”
Smith added, “We’re very fortunate in this county to have a tremendous amount of churches of all denominations.”
Commissioner Tom Knight said he had contact information for the Rev. Dr. Tom Pfaff, president of the Sarasota Ministerial Association, if Smith wanted Pfaff’s assistance, as well. However, Smith indicated that he already had that information.
Additionally, Smith said, someone had mentioned to him the potential of using meeting rooms in county libraries for the workshops. County Attorney Joshua Moye had agreed to have his staff research that option, Smith continued, though the workshops would be held after the libraries’ traditional closing hours.
“I do believe strongly that getting public input in person for [proposed] developments that are affecting our neighborhoods is important,” Smith said. “The more we listen to people, the better they feel heard.”
However, he did express support for the hybrid option for petitioners.
Commissioner Ron Cutsinger argued for continuing the workshops under the current guidelines. “I think we get a lot more participation, and the possibility of participation,” through the virtual option, he stressed. “We live in a digital age.”
Some people do not like to drive at night, Cutsinger noted.
Moreover, he said that he, too, had heard concerns expressed by church leaders. “Folks are passionate and they get emotional” at many of the workshops, he indicated. Sometimes, Cutsinger said, they need to be calmed down.
Churches are concerned about liability, he added.
Then Cutsinger referenced a comment made that morning during the Open to the Public session. Robert “Bo” Medred, of Genesis Planning and Development in Bradenton — who has been on numerous land-use project teams through the years — pointed out that a Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office deputy is present at each County Commission meeting. Medred talked about safety concerns during some Neighborhood Workshops.
(A second speaker during the Open to the Public period that morning — Becky Ayech, long-time president of the Miakka Community Club in the southeastern part of the county — supported a return to the in-person workshops. “I have not heard a single person stay that they would like to do a virtual workshop,” she stressed.)
“For a lot of reasons,” Cutsinger told his colleagues, he believes that the virtual option should be allowed, in lieu of an in-person workshop.
(Medred also told the commissioners that morning, “I’ve heard more favorable comments from residents about virtual [workshops]. They can sit in the convenience of their homes and listen to the presentation.” They also are able to attend the sessions, Medred noted, even if they are out of town.)
Commissioner Knight agreed with Smith. “I believe in citizens’ ability to have that front-and-center conversation with the persons who are going to be impacting their area,” Knight said.
Moreover, he pointed out, churches are not the only potential venues.
He agreed with Smith, as well, about the board’s allowing the hybrid option.
“I happen to agree with Commissioner Smith and Commissioner Knight,” Chair Neunder said.
Just the previous day, Neunder told his colleagues, when he was attending the regular meeting of the Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), one commissioner on the MPO board was unable to participate by virtual means. That meant that that commissioner was unable to offer any comments on any discussion, Neunder stressed.
Since the end of the COVID pandemic, Neunder continued, many boards — including a number of them on which he serves — have returned to the practice of in-person meetings. “I think there’s tremendous value in being face-to-face on this,” he added.
Following his remarks, Commissioner Mast joined Cutsinger in opposing a renewed requirement for in-person Neighborhood Workshops. She had reached out to many churches that had allowed those sessions, she said, and she had learned that the leaders no longer would agree to hosting the workshops.
Like Cutsinger, she noted the “level of passion that is expressed at these meetings.”
Mast did suggest that the commissioners make the effort to learn their constituents’ feelings on the proposal to require in-person meetings once again.
After she concluded her comments, Commissioner Smith noted that the issue was not time-sensitive. That was when he proposed that a decision be made in the future, after the board members have determined a network of facilities that could be used for the workshops.
Smith also suggested that the 2-mile radius that Osterhoudt had discussed be extended to 5 miles. “Two miles is pretty tight,” Smith pointed out.
Finally, Smith concurred with Mast in wanting to hear from the public.
Neunder agreed on pausing the discussion “for all of us to do some individual homework.”