Could Big Changes be in Store for Manatee County Port Authority?

by Dawn Kitterman

PALMETTO — There could be a big change in SeaPort Manatee’s future, as the port’s lobbyist says local state representatives have plans to put forward a measure that would restructure the port’s governance, removing it from the county commission’s management and oversight.
Earlier this month, a resolution was brought before Port Authority members that would have declared the board’s support for a state bill that would convert the port from a dependent to an independent district; the item failed in a tie vote.
The possible future bill would establish the Port Authority as an independent five-member governing board with four members appointed by the governor, and one member—who would act as a liaison between the county government and the port—would be appointed by the county commission.
The primary difference between a dependent and an independent port district lies in who controls its operations, including finances. A dependent district is subject to the authority of a single local government, while an independent district operates with more autonomy.
SeaPort Manatee was structured as a dependent special district by the Florida Legislature in 1967. The intent was to ensure coordination with the county as the port was developed, providing a governance structure that allowed the port to operate as a separate entity in day-to-day business while also being accountable to county commission oversight.
Due to its structure, the Manatee County Port Authority, which governs the port, is composed of the same seven elected individuals who serve as Manatee County Commissioners.
Despite this governance structure, SeaPort Manatee is not considered a unit of the Manatee County Government and does not receive ad valorem tax support.
A draft of the proposed bill’s language was attached to the meeting agenda. The measure would, in part, repeal all prior special acts relating to the Manatee County Port Authority and provide for its reformation. The draft bill was dated for submission to the state’s 2026 legislative session. 

Port Authority Chairman Mike Rahn introduced the item, noting that a change to an independent district would be beneficial not only to the port but also to the county and the clerk’s office, which would no longer be responsible for management and oversight. Rahn added that the change “was a long time coming.”
SeaPort Manatee state lobbyist, David Ramba, provided authority members with a summary of the proposed measure and explained that the port’s existing bondholder rights and obligations would be conveyed in the transfer from dependent to independent district.
Ramba serves as the Executive Director of the Florida Association of Special Districts and is the founder of Tallahassee-based lobbying firm Ramba Consulting Group.  

Ramba told commissioners that the bill’s drafted language, as attached to the meeting agenda, was worked on by port staff and “some other folks” based upon input from “some members of the Florida House and Senate.”  

“We’re not attempting to change the operations of the port,” Ramba explained. “But we would like to see some of the successes similar to the Sarasota-Manatee Airport Authority.”

Commissioner George Kruse, the longest-serving member of the Port Authority, said he has been in favor of such a change since he was first elected to the commission.
Kruse said he believes it is a disservice to the port to have it governed by sitting county commissioners—and, likewise, serving on the Port Authority, he said, is a disservice to members’ roles as county commissioners. 

As an economic driver of the county, said Kruse, the Port Authority Board should be composed of individuals capable of providing oversight expertise. Kruse pointed to the Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority as such an example. 

“SRQ has been able to bring in a lot of money, with a lot of connections and a lot of influence, to grow substantially,” Kruse said. “This port is certainly growing and doing an amazing job, but it could be even more.”      

To better explain the measure before the board, Kruse told his fellow board members that the proposed resolution was merely a way to show support for a bill that would be presented at the local state delegation meeting.  

“We don’t need to give support for it; it just helps them to give support for it,” he explained. “We’re being asked to give a blessing for our local delegation to move this bill forward.”    

The measure was expected to be sponsored by Senator Jim Boyd and Representative Bill Conerly, according to Kruse. Ramba suggested that Representative Michael Owen also intended to co-sponsor the legislation.
Commissioner Amanda Ballard agreed with Kruse, “I think to move the port forward, in the best way possible for the business operations of the port, we need people who are dedicated to the port and who are experts in this area—none of us on this commission was elected because we wanted to be a Port Authority member.”
Ballard added that because the authority role can be seen as secondary to that of a county commissioner, she feels the Port Authority hasn’t received the attention and dedication it warrants. 

Commissioner Carol Felts saw things differently from Ballard, Rahn, and Kruse.
Felts said that she “had a lot of questions” about the proposal, given that the meeting was her first opportunity to receive any information on the matter. Feeling caught off guard, Felts said she felt obligated to decline to support a “measure of this magnitude” without being more informed.
Rahn pushed back on Felts’ concerns, telling her it was little more than a formality—only a vote in support of the resolution, not approval of a change—and that the state delegation would introduce the bill later next year.
But it quickly became clear that Felts was not alone in having concerns. 

Commissioner Tal Siddique said he was concerned by what he called “inconsistencies” in the proposed language of the measure, including provisions for borrowing money and the issuance of bonds. 

Siddique remarked, “Unless I see something that is 100% guaranteeing revenue bonds are going to be the only issuance of bonds for port revenues, and frankly, I would never trust that that’s what’s going to happen because Tallahassee can have a bill show up about emergencies, and then it becomes a preemption about wetland buffers.” 

He called the entire proposal “not well thought out.” 

“No. I’m not supporting this,” Siddique said. “I think that this is just not good, and the fact that I wasn’t given a briefing is a major problem.” 

Commissioner Jason Bearden could be heard agreeing with Siddique off-mic, “It’s a major problem,” said Bearden of the lack of briefing ahead of the vote. 

Once recognized by Chairman Rahn, Bearden’s frustration was evident as he spoke about the lack of advanced information and suggested the ‘real’ motivation for the proposal.
“I can tell you right now the reason this is happening,” Bearden began. “The reason why, because a few months ago, guess what we denied? We denied a land purchase across the street from here.” 

Bearden was presumably referring to the $21 million SeaPort land acquisition deal with Fortress 2020 Landco for acreage adjacent to Piney Point, a deal that Port Authority members squashed in February. 

Bearden surmised that if the Port Authority had been “state-run” by governor appointees when the land acquisition deal had come forward, “It would have been a done deal.” 

“It doesn’t sound good to me that we’re going to give a county asset over to the state,” Bearden said, adding that he would be joining Siddique in voting against the approval of the resolution. 

At one point, Siddique asked SeaPort Manatee Executive Director Carlos Buqueras how the port’s revenues had changed over the last 14 years. Buqueras confirmed revenues had increased “dramatically.” Siddique suggested that this fact was evidence that the port has been successful under its current governance structure, with oversight by the county commission.

Following more than an hour of discussion that occasionally grew tense, the motion ended with a split 3-3 vote, with Commissioners Kruse, Ballard, and Rahn voting in favor and Commissioners Siddique, Bearden, and Felts in opposition. Commissioner Bob McCann was absent. 

With the resolution declaring the Port Authority’s support for transitioning from a dependent to an independent district failing, it is still unknown whether state delegates will try to advance the measure in the upcoming legislative session without the Authority’s backing.
So, is there a superior port governance structure?
Both dependent and independent governance structures are commonly found in seaports nationwide, including in Florida. Semi-independent or independent structures are also not uncommon.
Of the state’s five largest ports (ranked by tonnage), only two are true independent special districts. ‘Tonnage’ is a unit of measure of the total volume of cargo moved through a port.
According to the South Florida Business Journal, SeaPort Manatee is the fourth-largest port in Florida based on 2024 figures. The Port of Tampa Bay was the largest, says the Business Journal, with a total tonnage of 33.63 million tons. Port Everglades was second with 26.89 million tons, Port of Jacksonville (JAXPORT) third, reporting 19.23 million tons, SeaPort Manatee with 11.51 million tons, and PortMiami fifth with 10.13 million tons. 
Of these five ports, only Port Tampa Bay and JAXPORT are governed under independent special districts.
Port of Tampa has a seven-member board, five members appointed by the governor, one county commissioner, and the Mayor of Tampa. Similarly, the JAXPORT Authority has seven members: four appointed by the city mayor and three by the governor.
Port Everglades and PortMiami, however, are neither dependent nor independent special districts; instead, these ports are structured as government departments within the county government, governed by the county commissions.
A 2014 joint report of the Florida TaxWatch and the Florida Ports Council followed an independent review of the regional governance structures of Florida seaports. The report was titled Seaport Governance Models: How Florida’s Seaports Compare to U.S. and International Models.

According to its authors, the independent review sought to analyze existing governance structures and comparable models to identify the characteristics of successful port governance. 
In its conclusion, the report included in part, “While the available literature shows mixed results regarding the most favorable structure, several researchers point out that the regional/municipal structure has several advantages over more centralized ones… After reviewing the literature, we also found that regardless of the structure, successful seaport structures should have two main characteristics: stable and predictable governance structures, and local community integration, support, and trust.”
To view the October 16, 2025, Manatee County Port Authority meeting agenda, click here, and scroll to Agenda Item 8: Resolution for Independent Special District. Item attachments are located after the item cover sheet in the agenda PDF.
Click the video below to replay the item’s discussion during the October 16, 2025, Port Authority meeting.