Open deals for Martin

It’s a simple suggestion: Make owners who want to develop property identify themselves by name.
The idea is so simple that it should have been made law years ago. But two Martin County lawyers who have asked county commissioners to make all investors in a piece of property identify themselves and disclose their interests got no support from the commission majority of Michael DiTerlizzi, Doug Smith, Lee Weberman, and often Susan Valliere. Only Sarah Heard supports ownership disclosure.

County rules now require property owners to provide a deed and identify themselves only by a company name, allowing the developers to hide behind names of attorneys or land planning firms. Virginia Sherlock and Howard Heims, who often represent clients opposing development, say the companies identified as owners often are “shell” companies owned by other firms. Tracking who stands to benefit financially from a development becomes difficult or impossible.
Commissioner Heard points out Palm Beach County, where ex-commission Chairman Tony Masilotti resigned because of a secret land deal that will send him to prison, now requires disclosure of ownership interest for each applicant and property owner seeking county approval. Without required disclosure, she said, “we could approve a development or make a (growth plan) amendment for an owner laundering money from illegal drug sales or terrorism support. … ”
Commissioner Weberman called suggestions to make owners identify themselves “a fishing expedition,” and said county forms requiring disclosure would make no difference to people determined to conceal information. Commissioner Smith said commissioners already disclose all their interests and Commissioner DiTerlizzi complained that the two lawyers were trying, unfairly, to tie Martin commissioners to the Palm Beach County scandal.
All those protests, however, miss the essential point: If a developer has a credible proposal, why would he or she be afraid to disclose the names of the investors? A land planner whose name is on many Martin development applications contends that it’s not commissioners’ business to know who owns the land. He is wrong. Whether a project gets approved can depend on who is involved, not just what is proposed. Since the decision affects the public, the public should know.