St. Pete mayoral candidates trade policy, not punches, in second forum

The second St. Petersburg mayoral debate, hosted by the League of Women Voters at St. Pete College’s Music Center Thursday night, differed sharply from the first.

The NAACP’s June debate often devolved into attacks on Mayor Kenneth Welch’s record, particularly regarding hurricane response and transparency. This time, the format prohibited rebuttals and direct exchanges, forcing candidates to spend nearly all of their time discussing policy.

All six candidates participated, including former St. Petersburg Fire Chief Jim Large, who skipped the first debate. Without the opportunity for candidates to challenge one another, voters received a more focused look at where the field stands on issues ranging from electric rates and affordable housing to redevelopment and growth.

Here’s how the candidates stacked up when questions were posed:

Cheaper electricity

“Dump Duke” has become the battle cry of residents frustrated by rising electric bills, and candidates largely split between those willing to explore alternatives and those skeptical that the city should take on an electric utility.

Maria Scruggs argued the city should have been evaluating its relationship with Duke Energy years ago.

“We are now in a situation where we are reacting and not giving us the appropriate timeline to plan,” Scruggs said.

Welch attempted to demystify how electric rates are set.

“Rates are designated by the PSC, so the city’s impact is small, but having said that we can press for new renewable options,” Welch said, adding that his administration is already working with Duke Energy as the franchise agreement comes up for renewal.

Large mostly agreed with Welch: “We’re really limited on what we can do,” he stated. “If you look at Dump Duke versus keeping Duke, it’s just not the right time. We need to be reducing the size of government, not increasing.” Instead of electricty, Large shifted focus toward water bills, arguing that municipal water rates have become a larger problem than electricity costs.

Kevin Batdorf was even less convinced by the municipal utility discussion: “Let’s look at it. The city can’t run a water utility, but it’s going to run an electric utility. It’s not going to happen. It’s never going to happen,” he said, criticizing the city’s $590,000 feasibility study as a waste of money.

Brandi Gabbard, one of the council members who supported the study, defended the decision.

“I make no promises that we will actually move forward with that municipal study,” Gabbard said. “But mostly I believe in due diligence.” Gabbard argued the study gives the city leverage in future negotiations with Duke.

Charlie Crist fell back on his record as Florida Attorney General: “I sued power companies, for you, for the consumers,” Crist said. “One way you can find justice is going to court.” He added that he would be willing to pursue legal action if necessary to protect consumers.

Affordable housing

Housing affordability remains one of the race’s central issues, though candidates differed on whether the solution is building more housing, increasing wages or streamlining government.

Welch pointed to his administration’s record, including more than 1,000 affordable units built or preserved and another 1,000 in the pipeline.

The morning of the debate, Welch spoke at The Grove, an affordable housing development completed in partnership with Habitat for Humanity.

“It remains a priority all across this city,” Welch said. “We are putting affordable housing on the ground.”

Large divided the issue between those concerned about affordability and those concerned about subsidizing affordability.

“The cost of housing has risen, and the mayor cannot control construction costs, cannot control interest rates,” Large said. “So as a city we have to make it convenient to build here, no obstacles with the permit department.”

Accelerating permitting has become a central plank of Large’s campaign.

Batdorf, who has worked in real estate since 1999, said the issue ultimately comes down to supply and demand.

“Honestly, it’s supply and demand, using smart development when we are building,” Batdorf said. “If there was a solution, it would have been done already.” He encouraged residents to take advantage of existing down-payment assistance programs.

Gabbard highlighted a city program she championed that helps lower-level city employees afford housing within St. Petersburg: “We can scale those programs,” she said, adding that the goal is ensuring “all of us can call this city home.”

Crist promised three things: to speed up permitting, use city-owned land to incentivize affordability and protect longtime residents from being priced out.

“I will be an honest broker,” he promised.

Scruggs challenged the premise of the question itself. “Affordable for whom?” she asked.

Pointing to affordable housing developments such as The Grove, Scruggs noted that many recipients are working professionals, and therefore “the issue is people need to make more money, a livable wage,” not build more affordable housing.

Rather than focusing solely on subsidized housing, she argued the city should focus on helping residents earn enough to afford existing housing stock.

Historic Gas Plant District

The Historic Gas Plant District once again emerged as one of the clearest points of division among the candidates.

Large said redevelopment must balance honoring the neighborhood’s history with maximizing the value of the land.

“We need to recognize the history,” Large said. “But we need to make sure this tract of land works in the best interest for the whole city.”

Batdorf argued the site should be leveraged to help address needs throughout the city, not just at the Gas Plant. “The fair market should be developing that property,” he said. “It’s the fair market that will generate the income to solve the other issues this city has.” While not explicitly stated, his response implies minimal government inclusion in the Gas Plant redevelopment.

Gabbard reiterated her call to pause the current redevelopment process until a comprehensive study is completed.“We have not even begun to answer those questions,” she said, referring to whether the city should sell the property at all or retain portions of it as public assets.

Crist said the project should produce jobs, affordable housing and long-term economic opportunity.

“We need to examine them carefully,” he said of the four remaining development teams.

Scruggs argued that discussions about the site often lose sight of the people displaced when the neighborhood was demolished.

“We need to start telling the truth,” she said.

She also called for a broader master plan for South St. Petersburg, noting that many other parts of the city already benefit from long-term planning efforts.

Welch pushed back against further delays: “We’ve planned and planned and planned to death.”

With a developer selection expected later this month, Welch maintained that moving forward is the best way to honor promises made to the families displaced from the neighborhood.

Balancing new high-rises with St. Pete’s character

Questions about development and growth produced some of the evening’s most substantive responses.

Batdorf suggested that every major development should be accompanied by an impact report detailing how it will affect surrounding neighborhoods and infrastructure.

Scruggs said City Hall has spent too much time focusing on developers and not enough time considering residents.

“The focus has been downtown, downtown, downtown, and how can the buildings be higher, higher, higher,” Scruggs said. “Missing from that conversation is what about the people?”

Welch defended the city’s growth strategy: “High rises are not the problem,” he said. “If you look at the state of our economy, you’ll see how much high-rise developments contribute to our tax base.”

Crist took a middle-ground position.

“St. Pete is a charming place to live, and is a special place to live, and so our development has to be smart,” Crist said. “I’m for it, but I’m not for ruining the charm that makes St. Petersburg such a special place.”

“The development has far outpaced the maintenance of our infrastructure,” Large said. “We can’t keep putting tomorrow’s development on yesterday’s infrastructure.”

Gabbard tied future growth to resiliency and infrastructure planning, arguing that development decisions must account for impacts on water, wastewater and stormwater systems.

While the first debate largely revolved around criticism of Welch’s administration, Thursday’s forum gave voters something different: a side-by-side comparison of how each candidate would govern.

The sharpest divide of the evening remained the Historic Gas Plant District. Welch argued the city has spent years studying the site and must move forward. Gabbard maintained that St. Petersburg still has fundamental questions to answer before handing over one of its most valuable public assets.