Catapult the Conversation

Catapult the conversation. This is the Elevate Polk Podcast, and I'm your host, Chrissanne Long. And with me, as always, is Rob Arturi.

Hello, welcome.

And on today's show, we have a very special guest, Steve Scruggs, the president of the Lakeland Economic Development Council. I'm very excited to have you here, Steve.

It's wonderful to be with both of you today.

Well, thank you. I'm just going to get to kick off the show with anyone who's listening who might not know what the LEDC is with some of your words that you recently shared, and just kind of, we can start from there. So the primary role of the Lakeland Economic Development Council is to create jobs with an emphasis on high-skill, high-wage jobs and increase Lakeland's tax base. But if you asked me what I really wanted to accomplish over my last 33 years with the LEDC, it would be to create a city where our children would want to stay or come back to live and thrive. So with that, I think maybe you can give a little bit of a history of your time with the LEDC. And also, I would like, I always like to get our guests to talk about how they got to Lakeland or how long they've been in Lakeland and kind of their, their Lakeland story or their Polk County story.

I'd love to do that. I was born in St. Petersburg. I was adopted by my parents who lived in Winter Haven. After a month, they brought me to Winter Haven and I lived there for 2 years. Then I lived in New Jersey for 2 years and I lived in Connecticut for 2 years and I lived in Illinois for 2 years and then New Jersey for 2 years and then Florida 2 years and then India for 2 years and then Florida for 2 years and then Brazil for 2 years and then Florida for 3 years. Graduated from Winter Haven High School, Blue Devil.

Wow.

And then I went to Troy State University in Alabama for 4 years. Then I went to Mississippi for 2 years to get my master's degree in economic development. I moved back to Winter Haven for 1 year and worked as the economic development person there. A guy named Rick Thrasher was running the EDC in Lakeland. He offered me a position. It paid about $10,000 more than what I was making in Winter Haven, and there was a lot more economic development going on in Lakeland than Winter Haven at the time.

What year was that?

That was 1987, June 1st. So I'll be celebrating my 33rd year at the LADC on June 1st.

Congratulations.

And 9 months after I took the job, the gentleman that was running it was fired. And so Mark Hollis, the president of Public Supermarkets at the time, brought me into his office and he said, Steve, we're gonna make you the interim director. I was like 23 years old at the time. And he said, we're gonna do a national search and we're gonna find somebody to, you know, be your boss. And, but we're gonna keep you. We think we like you. And then about 3 months later, he called me back in the office and said, "Eh, we think you're our guy." Wow. And so I've been here ever since.

That— so way, way going back to the beginning of when you started, I had no idea of that story. So it's interesting how many times we've had conversations and we've just never really have the time to talk about the personal stuff. So we're always focused on the business stuff. So cool to learn your story, how many different visits back to Florida and different places. Now, the furthest away you lived was where? India?

Yes, I lived, uh, 8,000 feet up in the mountains, went to an International Baccalaureate school called Kodi Kanal, and, um, it was about a 2-day drive from where my parents lived, and I was in 4th, 5th, and 6th grade.

Wow, what a cool, like, story that you have. I, I want to explore that someday. I really want to talk a little bit more about another podcast. Yeah, maybe we have another show.

One question, were they Was it military, missionaries, or circus? I can't—

Yeah, correct. All that traveling.

Rob, it doesn't have to be any of those, but actually my dad was an engineer and built fertilizer plants around the world. So he's a project manager and that's what got us here. He worked for IMC, International Metal and Chemicals.

So always choose none of the above in those multiple choice questions.

Well, yeah, we can get back to the circus later though.

Yeah, well, see, sometimes I always go by the principle when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras, but every now and then it's a zebra or a fertilizer engineer, not a circus performer.

There you go. There you go.

But yeah, thank you.

So, all right, let's tee this up a little bit. We brought you on the show basically in a reaction to some things that have been shared locally, and we really felt that it would be great to let you have the opportunity to share more about the actual goal of the LEDC, which is not to be, I guess, the enemy of the community, as it seems.

It's quite the opposite. Well, I would fight, you know, personal opinions notwithstanding on the internet. But sure.

Yeah. So I think I do want to talk a little bit, Steve, about how you think that has happened, because I read a lot of things where there were discussions about backroom deals and some of these things that, of course, as we talked on a previous show, some things have to be happening in private. No, private sector business has deals have to be made and conversations can't be shared publicly. In this case, this is a public conversation, so that changes things a little bit. But where is, where is the, where in your opinion, where is the nefariousness of the LADC coming from?

Yeah. So Having been there for 33 years, things have changed a lot over 33 years. When I first came to Lakeland in 1987, every business person in Lakeland had lunch at the Lakeland Yacht and Country Club. And you had, you know, you wore a suit every day, right? Those days are gone. When a company came to look at Lakeland, they'd spend 3 or 4 days here and they would bring the head of real estate, they'd bring the head of HR, they would maybe even bring their president in town and they'd want to go to dinner with the mayor and they'd want to, they'd want to meet with 4 or 5 companies and talk to their HR director. To see what our labor market was like, and they'd want to get in a helicopter and look at 4 or 5 sites. Those days are long gone. Today they get on the internet and look and see, you know, everything's there right at their fingertips. And of course we make it easy for them also on our website and stuff. So for us, when it relates to how we relate to people, how we relate to the city, we would always just go meet with the city and say, hey, look, Amazon's looking at coming to Lakeland. They're gonna build a million square feet. They need these types of incentives. And, you know, we're going to bring that to the city commission. We'll talk about it on Friday at the agenda study, and then we'll vote on Monday. Mm-hmm. That's how we did business for 30 years. The first time that I realized that business was going to be done differently or could be done differently than that was— and I wasn't big on social media at the time, but 5 years ago in 2015, when we bought the Cash Feed building and we bought the vacuum cleaner building on Lake Mirror to build Catapult.

Right.

And At that time, there was a pretty big little social media storm about tearing the vacuum cleaner building down because there was a tenant in the building, Crap Art, Kimberly Wyatt. And so people were really angry about that. They thought that we had come in and kicked this lady out of her space. And we couldn't explain it. We didn't know how to explain ourselves. We didn't think we had to. We didn't even own the building. It wasn't our problem. She was a tenant, you know, but we were the bad guys. And all of a sudden, that was the very first time that I realized, oh my gosh, We're not communicating well. We don't know how to handle this. We're not getting our story across. And yes, we had had a little bit of that with Lakeland Electric a few years before that in 2012, but that was more of the ledger. It wasn't, you know, it was in the newspaper and we couldn't control it or whatever.

I think we used the term, you started a blog around that same time and it's kind of managing the narrative, controlling the narrative and having that conversation and being on the front end instead of reactionary to the media.

Correct. From a social media standpoint though, I would say it was the vacuum cleaners, and that's where we started learning. So at that point, we went back to our board and we went back to the city commission and we said, look, we're not going to do the one-on-ones with city commission anymore and do it behind the scenes. This doesn't work anymore. I think the community wants to be out in front of it and wants to hear it. And so we started being way more visible about our agenda publicly. And that's probably about the time people started thinking we were nefarious and doing backroom deals. Because when you're doing backroom deals, you know, which, you know, that sounds horrible, but just when you're doing business like you've always done business, people automatically think that you're doing something wrong. But on the other hand, since we were doing it behind the scenes, nobody knew we were doing it.

Right.

So it's kind of like that catch-22 that once you come out of the closet and you say, okay, look, this is our agenda. People don't like that agenda, right? You know, and then, and then you don't know how to explain it to them. You don't, you don't, you can't give enough information to make people feel comfortable. So it's, it's something that we're learning to deal with and, and we're not doing such a great job at it all the time.

Well, and I think it's also a fire hydrant. You're drinking water or fire hose. You're, you're, there's so much information and now you're adding another level of information delivery to the dialog and everybody's trying to absorb it from every angle and they don't even know how to absorb it. So they can't really draw an actual logical conclusion because everything just seems to either contradict or it just doesn't fit. And so there's just so much, so much information out there. It's hard to find the source to get to the actual bottom line.

Sure.

I think, I think the situation is probably a little different than Lake and Electric. The core premise might be the same in that you can propose an idea and some people will put their own spin on it or make their— take their own interpretation. We were talking earlier about there's become a trend in America, if not globally, where people want their ideas, they want their news curated for them, but not just curated. They want somebody to kind of pre-digest it, right?

Right.

Like a mother bird feeding a baby bird, but they want it digested for them, chopped up into bullet points, dipped in chocolate, and then fed to them while they relax in a chaise lounge. And unfortunately, that's not how the world works. That's what we saw, I think, online with respect to the issue of the day, which is the Cleveland Heights golf course.

Right. Let's unpack that a little bit. And again, I always want to assume this is your first show listening. So we've talked a little bit. We've had a recent show.

Shame on you if this is your first show.

We've had an interview with Bob Donahue that now we're talking to Steve. We want to kind of understand the reality behind how the city operates. And so we had Bob Donahue who represents the Parks and Rec and And now we have Steve who represents the private sector. And what has happened, and because I follow the local political scene a little bit more closely, this is my interpretation. And then of course, Steve, please correct anything that is not accurate because I don't even have a second of belief that I think I have it all right. Every year the LEDC makes a presentation to the city commission in a public meeting. And each year that I have experienced listening to that presentation or just following along with the conversation, that is a wrap-up of this is what we've done this year. This is how many square feet, this is how many jobs, this is how many high school, high skill, high wage jobs. These are all of the things that have happened that are projects that the LEDC has put together and has, has closed or are closing that they can share. And then at the end of that presentation, there's usually a part of that that says these are some ideas and some suggestions of what the LEDC thinks you might do to address this particular situation or this particular situation. And I recall last year specifically because because it's so near and dear to my heart. There was a couple of slides about how we can make some decisions about incentives for smaller businesses. And so these are the kinds of things that you just put together in your report and you share them. There is, to my knowledge, has not been any preconceived, pre-dialogues, discussions or anything like that. This is just, hey, here's some ideas. This is what we think. You may or may not like them, but this is just for what it's worth kind of stuff. Am I on target with that?

Absolutely.

Okay. So this year you shared some ideas that involved some of the public, and you're going to have to give more of the story about why we need to kind of find some revenue because I don't think we have a really solid background backstory on that yet. But you shared that maybe we could do something different with the golf course, the Cleveland Heights Golf Course. You also shared maybe we could do something different with the building that is the home for the Lakeland Community Theater. You talked about the fire department, which lives on Lake Mirror, and I believe there was something else. What am I missing?

Lakeland Ellie, Lakeland Electric.

So with that, there were some personal feelings about the Heights, there were some personal feelings about the Lakeland Community Theater, and a group was created on Facebook to save the Heights. And out of that, there was a lot of misunderstanding and a lot of misinformation shared. That's to catch up the listener who might not be following along with any of the stuff that we've talked about so far. Now, Steve, on your end, that presentation that you made to the commission in January, were you expecting any of this reaction from the community?

No. Would you like me to elaborate?

Please elaborate.

So, yeah, I'd like to backtrack a little bit on the presentation. And I think we did do it differently than we've done it in the past because we generally do like those big ideas to throw out, like, like last year also, the Catalyst Plan. The last couple of years we've been working with Nicole Travis and So that was one of those things. What was different this year and why it became controversial is because we actually tried to suggest solutions instead of just putting our hand out and saying, "This is what we want," which really makes you feel even more like, "Holy smokes, really? Like we're actually trying to help and we're being crucified for that." So I think the things that we really— the presentation was really about and was originally going to be about the High Line and the police station garage and commercial air service and more bike trails and these kinds of things. And, and, and I'll even throw another one out, you know, maybe even closing the parking on Kentucky Avenue now that we have a new garage and having more outdoor cafe space for the Palace Pizza and Taco Bus and Frescos and all those people. What I just said now, most people have not heard, and that— and there will be a save Kentucky Avenue parking right off of this. Trust me.

Right.

And so, you know, if we don't spend 30 minutes talking about why that might be a good idea, people aren't going to understand it. But the bottom line is that was what the presentation was about. What was different this time than any of the 34 years in the past is we said, here's 20 people from LEDC's high skill, high wage group, and we can talk about that. But leaders in the community that want to help you accomplish those 5 or 6 goals— commercial air service, you know, High Line parking garage, Then we even went a step further that we've never done before. And the step further was, and here's some ways you might be able to fund those things because we know you have some challenges with the hospital lease. You were asking me earlier, which I think most people are familiar with, but, but in 2040 that sunsets and it brings about $15 million a year into the city. It could be less than that time period. The certificate of need that the state of Florida passed recently will mean now Lakeland Regional will have competition. Maybe you saw recently that Orlando Health's coming over with a 350-bed hospital. So we may not be till 2040. We don't know. Lakeland Electric has decided to discontinue running their coal plant. So they're having to make some decisions on that. That's going to cost something. And it may not be physical. It's just that we we may have to buy power from somebody else, which might cost more, which means our rates might go up.

Right.

But anyway, those are just, those are things that we're facing as a community. People don't usually like to talk about those things. That's why city commissioners don't like to raise taxes. People don't want to hear about what's, you know, things that are going to cost more money. And they don't really like the messenger that's telling them that things are going to cost more money. So we wound up jumping in that space. We were trying to be helpful in that space and it didn't work. And then even beyond that, we talked about some sacred, whatever you want to call them, sacred cows or sacred things.

Or special interests, I think it is.

Special interests of the things that really, I mean, the city commission, the last 5 retreats has been talking about Cleveland Heights and the losses out there and they've been concerned about it. So that really wasn't new information, but I think us saying it, as an authority figure or an outside figure probably scared people more or made it, elevated it more.

Right.

Elevated.

Elevating pole.

Elevating pole. Elevating pole.

Let me ask you, Steve.

Yeah, sure.

Do you think maybe that people understand that commissioners from time to time are going to posit ideas and there'll be discussions about things they may or may not like?

Sure.

But I think maybe the difference is people view the commissioners as having some degree of control over them because they're elected.

Right.

Now, the LADC, they don't elect those people.

Right.

And I think there's probably some degree of concern or apprehension by some as to how this all works. What degree of control does the LADC have over the commission? And we live in a time where people think that everything around them is just run by a small group of people who meet in a cigar smoke-filled room and everything just gets done and nobody listens and et cetera. And I'm sure there, you can find examples where that might be true, but I don't know that that's everything. But I think that's where some of this angst came from. You talk about challenges, right? That's, that's putting it nicely. The fact is people don't like to talk about how the sausage is made. They want all of the things, but there really isn't a concern or an understanding of how those things happen. They just think that the money just comes from somewhere, right? I don't know that many people have an idea that, or have a grasp of the alternative sources of funding for the city. They think that everything just comes from the property taxes. Well, that's not exactly true. And a lot of the peripheral things like having a golf course that's owned and operated by the city are the result of having peripheral sources of revenue. When those are threatened or issues, you have to look at options. Now, I think it's safe to say that the Cleveland Heights golf course is very near and dear to a lot of people. I think it's a beautiful course. I think maybe we— I think you have to look, Steve, at different options and present those options. But this is how any kind of government works. Maybe that's the reason why, because there's a lack of understanding. And that's why I'm glad you're here as to the relationship between the LADC and the commission. And do they just merely do the bidding of the LADC? Because there's, you know, there's also talk about how these— there's all these commissioners that were endorsed by the LADC, and it gives this sense that there's something nefarious going on. And I think that's where a lot of the root comes from.

Yeah.

And I know you really enjoy communications and talking about politics, and that's probably neither one of those are my expertise. But one of the things that I've recognized in my career over time, and again, I'd go back to Lakeland Electric, is we could never get our message out on what we were really trying to do there. We still haven't. People still think that we were trying to sell Lakeland Electric to the benefit of private industry. And I don't want to go back over that, but all I'm telling you, that was never the intent, but we could never get our message out. It's the same thing with this 5 commissioners that have been elected by the PAC, and people are scared of that and people are saying that. And when people say that, I go, okay, What vote did they vote on that you're— and nobody ever—

there isn't one.

There isn't one. And but, but if it's said enough times online, on social media, people believe it. And, and I've noticed a lot of times now that I'm engaging on, on social media, when you ask that specific question, they never have an answer. They shut down every single time when you ask for a specific. But it doesn't matter if the Ledger prints 16 articles on the front page that says we're trying to sell Lake Electric. We're trying to sell Lakeland Electric. If somebody says it 1,000 times on social media that the LADC got 5 people elected and now they have a supermajority and they're going to control everything that happens in the city. But the truth is there's not one vote that I'm aware of that those 5 people have voted on, and they're not LADC anyway. The PAC is— yes, there are people from LADC that are involved in it. It's not an LADC thing. But whether it is or not, who cares? The bottom line is they're not voting as a group, right, to do these things. But people think they are.

It assumes, or it presumes, that all of the commissioners who have been voted in by the public, who were supported by the PAC, the Lakeland First PAC, are not free-thinking individuals. And they are all free-thinking individuals who wanted to serve. So then now we're starting to create some negativity, negative vibes around, hey, I put my name in the hat, I decided I'm going to step up and I'm going to serve. And a community of business-focused people and other leaders in the community say, we would like to get behind you. You are going to lead the community. And it might not happen exactly this way. I'm sure it always— it's, you know, dialogues are different for every single individual. But at the same time, now we're detracting from the value that that commissioner can bring into the dais. Because wait a minute, who's supporting them? No, if they're a good leader, they're going to earn the right to lead. And then we are going to decide based on how they vote, whether we wanna keep them in office or not, how they, you know, and that's the thing that I think is, is so frustrating to me is because every single one of them make their own decisions once they're there. And I think there's this perception that someone's in someone's pocket and I don't, I don't see anything anything that proves that or disproves that. It's just, it isn't that. That's not what's happening.

Well, a good example would be when people think the LEDC is running the City Commission or whatever. Do you know that the last time that I asked, I went to the City Commission and asked for anything LEDC, was in 2015 when we asked for that less than a half-acre piece of property for parking for Catapult. That was 5 years ago. That's the last time the LEDC has been before the City Commission and asked for anything. So I don't know that it really matters. People still think that. They think every day we're asking for stuff and we're lining our pockets, and it's just not true. But at the end of the day, we have to— LEDC has to figure out a way to communicate better, to learn how to bring people along. And have a community conversation where it's safe and healthy and people are felt like they're heard. And so we're trying to do that and we're learning how to do that and I'm committed to it. But it is hard after a week like this when people start calling you names and I mean, it's, that makes you want to go back and Rob and I have talked about this before. This makes you want to go back and go, you know what? It's probably a little easier just to go talk to the commissioners one-on-one and be done with it because why do I have— why would I want to subject myself to this kind of abuse?

Right.

That's this kind of thing that people don't always think about at what cost, right?

Right.

They want the information, they want to be involved, they want these transparent things to occur, but at the same time, if they're not happy with the results or they have the maybe a disproportionate response, the cost of that, those actions might be losing that entire platform, that transparency altogether. I want to find some common ground with this because I do believe that there are some communications challenges. I think if you're out there listening, whether or not you are a fan of Steve, the LEDC, whether or not you think these current commissioners are going to do right or do wrong, I think what we need to do is to take a deep breath and look at actions. I think in any level of politics, judging people based upon what you think they might do is even worse than judging them by their words. But ultimately, the only sound foundational judgment that you can make are based upon actions. What actually happens? Did this actually come to fruition?

Right. And I think there's a flaw in how social media, the example of social media has nationally kind of set us on edge. You know, there's this feeling that there's something happening that we're not familiar with. We want transparency. At what cost? That's the question. But that's not for this discussion. But at the same time, I continue to say we have to trust the institutional knowledge of the people who have been leading for so many years, that there's actually something that they've learned along the way, that we can't take that out of their heads and make them forget that they know what they're doing. And if we as a community start to see somebody failing or someone not doing their job, we then can start to work on how we're going to solve that problem. But right now, we have examples of leadership in the community that we need to support and find a way to understand it better, like better approaches to ask questions instead of knee-jerk reactions and trying to perpetuate the fear of this is going to happen and we got to do something about it. And everyone wants to take action. As you saw, we deployed change.org, sites to everybody's going to sign a petition and we're going to— we can mobilize. But the problem is eventually if we mobilize on, on, you know, the boy who cried wolf enough times, then we mobilize for nothing. When we actually have something to mobilize on, we can't move forward. And that's my fear as we, as we see this thing happening. There may be some conversations that have happened where someone, a developer may have pitched something to someone about the 9 holes. I don't know, but I'm really not here to discuss the reality of the deal. As much as I am of the communication and how we're going to change the narrative and build the trust. Because I think what we've seen is that there's been an erosion of trust in the last 10 years, that how do we build that back up? And what I'm really encouraged to hear is you're committed to changing the communication plan and you want to be somebody who's going to, as frustrating as it is right now, to adapt to the way that the community wants things to be shared with them.

And I think the thing that we can all work on is how do we go from idea, I feel threatened, I'm going to attack the person that's threatening me, to idea, community conversation, community solution. That's where we need to learn how to do that. And I think the whole country is trying to learn how to do that. It's true. And depending on how you feel from the top down, it hasn't been that way. We as leaders have to lead and we're going to get shot a few times and that's going to be okay. We're not going to cry wolf and we're not going to freak out. We're going to love people through it. And you're always going to have people that are unreasonable or demanding and at some point you don't have to answer them anymore. But for the general rule of thumb and the general public, I really think when you sit down with people, we all want the same thing. And I said that in my post. I really believe that it's been a blessing for me, and I mentioned it in the post, but I've met with a lot of people that I've never met with before. You remember when I, uh, IDEO came and we talked about under-the-radar people, and you're, you are my under-the-radar, you know, example.

Story when you start talking.

You are, right. So I've got 7 or 8 more of those that I've gotten through this process, and it's a real blessing, you know, even to get to meet Rob, who I've never met but admired from afar. So I—

and there's another one too. I think there was some negative exchange going. I don't remember what it was. 3 years. Oh, it was the parking lot. It was the vacuum cleaner store.

Sure.

And the conversation that I said, my suggestion was you guys need to talk.

Yeah, absolutely.

And this was for Chuck Flagler and you to sit down and talk. And I know I ran into him the other day and he's like, you know, I was talking to Steve. I've been messaging Steve about all this stuff.

You're not supposed to say that, Chrissanne. You've just ruined our relationship.

Oh, well, we can edit that out. Yeah, he's not allowed.

I'm not allowed to tell people people, we actually talk to each other.

So Rob, you just outed Chuck Flagler.

Rob, you need to delete that out.

This is going to start a— no, no, it's fine. He's gonna be fine with it. I know, but yeah, I mean, that's a good example. But what I've found, and I'm sure Rob has and you have too, Chrissanne, is that, you know, people say things on social media, but when you sit down, if you can actually get somebody to sit down and meet with you— so true— I mean, 99 out of 100 times you're going to find things in common and you're going to start working together.

Yeah.

So I always encourage that on social media, you may see, you know, even through the Heights thing, you may have seen some interactions in there that looked pretty rough, you know, people being pretty hard. I tend to private message those people and see if we can meet with each other and talk, and it always works out if they're willing to do that.

What a great suggestion. I love that.

So that's what I do. And I've met with, well, you saw I've met with a lot of people. I'm actually got a meeting next Thursday with the community theater, all their 3 key people. We might wind up being an advocate for helping them, you know, just with their organization in the future. So good things can come out of these things if you can keep a level head, if you can keep your emotions out of it, if you can keep your blood pressure down, and if you're willing to reach out and be humble and apologize and say you're sorry. I've had a few people, it's even today, I had a person that was just, you know, I apologized and they said, you're being condescending. And I'm like, no, really?

I had a nickel for every time I heard that.

I'm really apologizing. So, I mean, you know, at some point I'm not sure what else you can do, right?

But I— well, part of my response to that is I think what I heard you say, and I'm going to say it again, you are committed to changing the way the LADC is communicating.

Yes.

And that to me, I need to— can't— we can't underscore that enough because I think what has happened over the last few years is that the LADC is starting to realize that the community is part of, could be a part of the conversation. That it, and you said it so well earlier, we've never done it that way, so how do we know how to do it any other way? So we've got to also understand that as partners in the community, they're also looking at ways to improve, and they're not, they don't have it all figured out. Social media wasn't part of their plan, you know, 10 years ago, and they've got to adapt to how that's working. So I, you know, I, and I'm kind of hard on you in some situations when I'm like, we need to think about small business more often, we need to at least there needs to be one slide. That's what I always say. Can we just have one slide for small business when we're talking about economic development? But I know that over time you and I have created a relationship of trust, and I want that to be the message, is that if I don't trust you, I can't build a relationship with you. And if I have built a relationship with you that is on mutual trust and something goes sideways, I should be able to come to you and ask, is that what you really meant? Or what else? What's going on here? Because if we can't have the dialogue that we need to have as adults and professionals, we're going to continue to see ourselves feeling stressed out. The angst of, whoa, wait a minute, you know, here's this bad guy coming in to try and buy up all of this stuff and the developers and all of that, which isn't necessarily a reality unless you tell me that it's a reality.

I can probably make a list of things that I think would have— would benefit the LADC in this new age of communication.

They need a podcast.

But sure, let's do it.

Some of those decisions or some of those proposals that you make are bold because some of the problems that we are potentially facing are big. And, you know, I think that the community needs to understand too that it's not just evaluating half the equation is foolish, right? You know, Chrissanne, you mentioned about the angst and getting upset about these things. A lot of that is also traced. Yes, we can, we can critique the LADC's comms, but we also have to look at, as citizens, as a community, we have to be willing to look at both sides of the equation. So there's a reason that Steve brings up the idea of one avenue was potentially the sale of the property that is the Heights for, for development into houses. He also mentioned potentially leasing the property to somebody that would up manage the golf course itself and take that over. If they could do it more efficiently. People tend to overlook those things. See, I picked it apart. Okay? That tells me that this is somebody that's putting out multiple options. There's not some development out there that's lining Steve's pockets to, to get him to bend the city commission to sell the property so they can build some houses. Okay? To me, that, that just seems like a, a real, real overreach. And it's unproductive to even have that in a, in a discussion.

Right?

Right. But here, let's, let's stop for a second and say, if that is happening, eventually it's going to come out in the wash. Right. And we're going to understand that there was something nefarious. Right. So if, if, if there is a nefarious thing, it's not like they're going to pull the wool over our eyes and we're never going to see that suddenly the golf course is getting sold. So there are checks and balances in the system and we don't necessarily need to get in the way of the checks and balances, but we do need to make sure that we're doing the checks. That we're following the process and understanding how the process works.

Well, let me, let me ask, let me add one thing to that, because if I'm, I'm going to put, play the devil's advocate for one second. And I would say to that, because I heard this, right? By the time that we find out about it, it's too late. It's already done. And when, because I asked, I asked, because I had a commissioner that I knew pretty well who was essentially being accused of, of being on the take. So I said, where's your evidence of this? Where's your evidence that these people are being paid off? And of course there was none.

There isn't any.

But what I got was, well, if this is going on, you would never know about it.

Mm-hmm.

So you cannot have a debate. And, and I, I challenge, you know, those people out there, you know, like Steve said, 99 out of 100 are great. There's always that one. But if you want to be taken seriously, and Steve interacted in that group, so it's not as if he's not willing to, to discuss and have these conversations. So that's half the battle right there. But if you wanna be taken seriously, you cannot debate this issue from the position of, well, I say bad things are happening. Of course you're gonna deny them. We won't know about it anyway. We, they won't tell us. And by the time the bad things happen, it'll be too late. So you just take my word for it. It's, it's ironic to me because people who always have these doomsday scenarios, they want me to give them all of this implicit trust. But it doesn't work the other way around.

Not from the other side.

And I bet you, yes, we could probably find an example of where trust was bent in the past on one side, but you can always find it on the other. So I think everybody, I want to have a measured approach to this and look at it pragmatically. Otherwise we'll be back here another year or two or what have you.

Next presentation to the commission.

Right. Well, and you know—

Oh my God, I love that pothole.

It'll be interesting to see how the commission reacts to what's happened over the last week. And, you know, as a commissioner, does that scare you that 7,000 people signed a petition in 48 hours? Whether it was, you know, the information was correct or not, does that empower you to think, wow, those are good questions. We might have found a way to get some good feedback from some people. I always look at these things as potential learning opportunities and ways to build relationships with people and to learn how to communicate more effectively in the future. So I think if we can step back and take the emotion out of it, and trust me, I lost a lot of sleep last week, but if we can, and I don't make decisions in those time periods, you have to let time, and that's why I didn't post for a while and send something out. So I do think there'll be positive things that come out of that. I really do. And, but it'll be interesting. It would be interesting to get a commissioner on here and see how, you know, how does that affect you when you see those things? Does that scare you? Does that, or does that empower you?

Well, and I've had this conversation and it's kind of heavy for this part of the show, but to talk about it from the high level, um, the role of the city staff and the role of the commission is completely different. And so when I, I was thinking, all right, the city needs to come out with a statement to at least address that this is happening, you know, because to not address it is to like pretend like we have our head in the sands. The, the slowdown on that is that the commission has to come to consensus about what that message is going to be. So in a situation where where, you know, you have a public relations and a communications department that needs to communicate with the public and the commission hasn't had a chance to meet on it to come to consensus. What happens in that space? And I think that is a good dialogue for us to kind of stop and look because so many of us, me included, was looking to the city to say something. And in conversations with staff, it was like, we need the commission to tell us what they want us to say. And how do you find that balance? And how do you move a conversation to less angst and less, you know, misinformation and more about the facts and more about the information. Or at least a statement that says, we're looking into this and we will have a statement soon, but please stand by as we figure out what we're going to say. Because they need to get to that point where they can have that consensus. But I think social media moves so fast. Like you said, it's interesting now, how are they going to react to— they were able to mobilize 7,000 signatures that quickly. How are we going to prepare ourselves for issues management as opposed to crisis management. We weren't in a crisis, but there was definitely an issue, and I didn't see a plan on how to communicate in between the time that the commission had a chance to meet and a message being shared.

Underneath it all, I think there is a message of a concerned citizenry that wants the best for Lakeland, and I don't see a reason why we can't get there together. I don't think that the LEDC has a negative vision for the future of Lakeland. I think that's quite the antithesis of what the LEDC does. But in order to enjoy the things like a golf course, like our parks, all of these things that are coming up and that we want to enjoy as citizens of the city, of the county overall, they come at a cost. And I think sometimes we have to look at framing it that way. Because you want these things, you have to pay for it. And if you don't, if you're not willing to watch how the sausage is made, then you should not talk about it. But if you want to enter the conversation, then just, you know, look at both sides of it. So we have to do a better job on all sides from the municipal side, LADC side, and the concerned citizen side.

How do you get ideas across and give enough information?

Mm-hmm.

To make people feel comfortable enough to have a conversation about it instead of jumping to like what Rob was saying, the worst case scenario, we're going to build homes on Cleveland Heights. And it's like, that isn't even what I said. I mean, it's not even close to what I said. And honestly, I mean, this might be controversial here. I think I care about Cleveland Heights more than most of the people that were on that because I'm actually looking for a solution to make sure the thing doesn't get shut down in the next 5 years.

Right.

That was really my intent. If anybody wants to know the truth, My intent was let's make sure that's, you know, a community asset for the next 95 years.

So if we don't pay attention to this, we're going to lose it. It's basically where you were coming from.

And the development thing. Yeah, maybe it was a scare tactic. I didn't mean it to be a scare tactic. But the bottom line is, ladies and gentlemen, please listen in. If we don't do something about this, the commission will be forced to do something about it and you're going to lose this asset. That really was more of where I was going with that. And I think I need— if you ask me, I need to be wiser care in the future about what ideas that I bring out publicly without either having done my homework, gone and talked to those people. But even the people that ask you to do that, I don't think— even if I went and met with the community theater ahead of time, I don't know that it would have stopped the people from being scared or feeling threatened.

Right. How do we turn the tide away from the vitriol and into productive dialogue that we can all benefit from?

If you want to speak specifically about the Heights, I would just say that we need to work together to make sure that it is a community asset for the next 95 years. And how do we do that together? And it needs to be beyond a petition. It really needs to be hard work. And if you say, I don't even want you to talk about it, don't even bring it up for the next 3 years, That's kind of sticking your head in the sand there. I just don't agree with that approach.

It's a foolish request.

Pardon me?

It's a foolish request to even say, "Well, I love it. Don't talk about it. Don't even bring up anything with it. Just keep it as it is." You can't do that. That's not real. That's not governing.

And let's just say this straight up, and I know I said it on my post, but Brock, who runs that place, has been doing a great job. Bob Donahue, there's not a better Parks and Rec person in the country. There's not a better Parks and Rec—

Fantastic mustache too. Yeah.

Oh, he's just great. Green Bay fan, but, you know, I mean, this is not personal. These people love this city. They've given their life to it.

Right.

So we've just got to find a way to talk about it without being personal and making it productive. And maybe that's not my job. You know, maybe that's not the LADC's job. We know that's a community asset. It is something that helps us as a community, and we just don't want to lose it. So let's just find a way to to move forward in a positive way and not make it personal, learn how to trust each other, like Rob said, and find some solutions. And I believe this community can do it. And I believe we're committed to helping make that happen and make the Heights successful, whatever that looks like.

Yeah, well, I think that's true. And I appreciate your commitment for these many years. And I think it's and that's commendable. There are a lot of people who don't like you. You know, I'm just going to— that became evident, you know, so I'm just calling out the obvious.

Yeah, that hasn't changed.

And I don't want to be one of those people because I feel like there's a benefit that you bring to the community. There's a benefit that I bring to the community, and there's a benefit that everyone I have ever met brings to the community. And that is that we can all kind of row in the same direction. And I think that we have gotten off course a little bit, pun intended, to—

Is it time to say bye, Golly, or whatever you do?

I haven't had the right time to say "by golly," but I just did. So there, got it.

Thanks for that obligatory "by golly." Very good. Well, at least you know you have one listener.

Yeah, well, it's exciting to know that you've been listening. So thank you for that support over the years and over the years. Thank you for that support over the weeks.

Chrissanne, I've listened to you a lot over the years. I get that one too.

And just thanks for your commitment to the community. I think that's what I was really trying to say as we wrap keep up.

Yeah, I, I appreciate you listening to the podcast, but moreover, I appreciate you listening to the community. All of these things are important conversations. I appreciate you being on the show and having it with us today, and hopefully people listen and, and take a beat before the online hysteria in the future and, and reach out because you're willing to have those conversations, uh, online and, and here with us and, uh, and in the future, I'm sure, as well.

So thank you for having me. And again, anybody out there in podcast land that would like to meet with me one-on-one and talk about these things, I'm happy to meet with anybody or take any call.

How do they get in contact with you? Let's go ahead and put an email out or website.

Yeah, I mean, put your home phone number in the show notes. I think I've done that actually on, on post. But the best way to get me is at the office, 687-3788. Just call us at the office and come see me or I'll come to you. 687-3788, Steve Scruggs. Lakeland Economic Development Council. Thanks for having me today.

All right. Well, thanks for listening. And remember, we have a new episode each week, so be sure to subscribe on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen. And remember to leave us a review. We promise to read every one. You can always find all of our episodes at elevatepolk.com. And if there's something you want to hear about specifically on an upcoming episode, reach out to us on Facebook at Elevate Polk.