MANATEE COUNTY – The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) is levying an $8,500 penalty for the improper mangrove trimming and debris re- moval activities that occurred along the Aqua development shoreline in 2022.
Located between Sarasota Bay and the El Conquistador Parkway in unincorporated Manatee County, the Aqua property (formerly known as Long Bar Pointe) being developed by Medallion Home includes hundreds of single-family and multi-family residential units currently being built during the initial construction phase.
On Dec. 22, FDEP Southwest District Director Kelley Boatwright sent an electronic letter and proposed consent order to Long Bar Pointe LLLP and Medallion Home representative Rob Bosarge. The letter was also sent to Medallion Home President and CEO Carlos Beruff, Medallion Home Manager of Land Development Chris Chavez, FDEP Environmental Specialist Derrick Hudson, FDEP Secretary Shawn Hamilton and Gov. Ron DeSantis.
The letter requested that Long Bar Pointe review, sign and return the proposed consent order by Jan. 3 if in agreement with the proposed terms, or to contact FDEP immediately if not in agreement.
The consent order proposes a settlement between FDEP and Long Bar Pointe LLP. The order notes FDEP personnel inspected the Aqua mangroves on June 17 and Aug. 25 and improper trimming and removal activities were conducted in violation of the mitigation bank permit and general mangrove permit Long Bar Pointe was previously issued in accordance with Florida’s Mangrove Trimming and Preservation Act. Coastline Tree Service performed the mangrove trimming and debris removal activities in question.
According to the consent order, FDEP found the following violations occurred:
• Respondent did not properly remove and dispose of all mangrove trimmings over 3 feet long or over 3 inches in diameter.
• Respondent did not evenly distribute the remaining trimmings.
• Respondent reduced a portion of mangrove foliage more than the authorized amount of 25% annually on the waterward extent of the mangrove fringe.
• Respondent did not provide adequate pre- and post-photo documentation of the trimming event.
Taken in August, this photo shows the diameters of some of the mangrove trees and branches cut. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
The consent order seeks an $8,500 penalty settlement that includes $1,000 for costs and expenses incurred during the investigation and the preparation of the consent order, $3,000 for reducing the mangrove heights by more than 25%, $3,000 for debris removal violations and $1,500 for improper documentation of the trimming activities. The check payment is to include a notation referencing the Water Quality Assurance Trust Fund.
The consent order includes an additional daily fine of $1,000 for each day Long Bar Pointe fails to comply with the consent order requirements. If FDEP is forced to file a lawsuit to recover the stipulated penalties, the agency can seek civil penalties greater than the $8,500 stipulated in the order.
Aqua response
On behalf of Long Bar Pointe, Chavez sent Hudson a Jan. 4 email that said, “Carlos Beruff is currently in Asia and is 12 hours ahead. We have emailed him so that he is aware of
the consent order. We cannot sign, or communicate that we are not in agreement, until he reviews.”
Chavez informed Hudson that Bosarge no longer works for Medallion Home and all future correspondence should be sent to Andy Kern.
When contacted on Jan. 6, FDEP Public Information Specialist Brian Humphreys said, “DEP has been in contact with staff at Aqua by the Bay. It is our understanding they are reviewing our consent order and we anticipate having their response soon.”
Suncoast Waterkeeper response
FDEP’s investigations were initially prompted by citizen complaints the agency received in early 2022 – with additional correspondence and photographs later received from the Suncoast Waterkeeper organization.
In August, the Suncoast Waterkeeper board sent a letter to FDEP officials that was critical of the agency’s initial inspection efforts and the lack of penalties imposed. That letter also expressed concerns about the significant amount of mangrove debris that had not been properly removed.
Taken in August, the photo reveals some of the trimming debris left behind. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
Regarding the consent order, Suncoast Waterkeeper board member Rusty Chinnis said, “This would not have happened if we had not pounded it. They cut more of the mangroves than they were allowed to cut. FDEP initially reviewed the mangrove cuttings, said everything was fine and gave them a pass.”
Despite past criticisms, Chinnis, The Sun’s outdoors columnist, praised the FDEP staff members’ recent efforts.
“I think the people at FDEP care and they do a good job. They’re underfunded and I don’t think the powers that be are giving them the authority to do what they need to do. When Rick Scott was governor, he basically eviscerated it and allowed the developers to police themselves. We see where that got us,” Chinnis said.
“If done properly, mangrove trimming can create views while still protecting the mangroves, but that’s not being done. The enforcement is weak and $8,500 is the cost of doing business,” he said.
The FDEP graphic highlights some of Florida’s mangrove trimming regulations. – FDEP | Submitted
Regarding mangrove trimming in general, Chinnis said, “We have documented to FDEP the fact that people have been cited for mangrove violations and were not given any penalties; and a couple years later, the same people are caught again because there were no repercussions.”
MANATEE COUNTY – The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has issued a warning letter regarding the mangrove trimming conducted earlier this year along the Aqua development shoreline.
FDEP Southwest District Director Kelley Boatwright issued the warning letter to Medallion Home representative Rob Bosarge on Aug. 31. Aqua developer and Medallion Home CEO and president Carlos Beruff was among those who also received a copy of Boatwright’s letter.
Featuring numerous single-family and multi-family structures, the Aqua development, formerly known as Long Bar Pointe, is currently under construction in unincorporated Manatee County, between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay. According to the May 3 FDEP inspection report, Coastline Tree Services conducted the mangrove trimming and debris removal activities.
The mangrove trimming that took place earlier this year creates a better view of Sarasota Bay for those who will occupy Aqua’s multi-family structures. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Boatwright’s letter references the inspection that took place on June 17 as part of an investigation prompted by three complaints FDEP received from concerned citizens.
“The Florida Department of Environmental Protection conducted a compliance inspection at your site on June 17. During this inspection, possible violations of chapters 403 and 373, Florida Statutes, and chapters 62-330, Florida Administrative Code, were observed. During the inspection, department personnel noted the following:
All trimmings over 3 feet long or over 3 inches in diameter were not properly removed and disposed of offsite.
Remaining trimmings were not evenly distributed.
A portion of mangroves appeared to be reduced more than 25% of foliage annually.
Adequate pre and post photo documentation of the trimming event was not provided.
A visit to the Aqua shoreline in mid-August revealed these large mangrove remains were left behind. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
“On July 12, department personnel notified you that potential violations existed at the site and you were requested to take corrective actions within 30 days. On Aug. 25, a follow-up site visit was conducted and violations did not appear to be adequately addressed. To date, the potential violations have not been resolved,” Boatwright stated in his letter.
The violations could result in liability for damages and restoration and incur civil penalties, according to the letter.
“Please respond in writing within 10 days of receipt of this warning letter. The department is interested in receiving any facts you may have that will assist in determining whether any violations have occurred. Please be advised that this warning letter is part of an agency investigation, preliminary to agency action in accordance with section 120.57(5) Florida Statutes. We look forward to your cooperation in completing the investigation and resolving this matter,” Boatwright stated in closing.
Waterkeepers watching
On Aug. 19, the Suncoast Waterkeeper organization emailed a letter to FDEP compliance coordinator Derrick Hudson, Boatwright, several other FDEP staff members and state legislators Jim Boyd and Will Robinson Jr.
This mangrove trimming debris remained in place as of mid-August. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
The Waterkeeper letter thanked FDEP for following up on the complaints, but added, “It appears the investigation has resulted in some remedial action for which we are pleased, however current conditions at the site reveal significant debris remaining and further evidence of permit violations.
“A recent visual observation from the water revealed that only the small portion of the mangrove forest contained within the inspection report was cleaned up. However, the extent of the trimming damage was much more extensive suggesting that the investigatory measures taken by DEP have not been adequate to achieve compliance,” the Suncoast Waterkeeper letter said.
MANATEE COUNTY – The mangroves on the Aqua property along Sarasota Bay were recently trimmed in compliance with state-issued permits, but the trimming notification process was not fully compliant, according to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP).
“As you will read in this report, the mangroves appeared to be healthy and trimmed within the permit limits – i.e. mangrove height is greater than 12 feet, trimming did not result in more than 25% of the foliage being removed and trimming did not induce tree mortality,” FDEP Press Secretary Alexandra Kuchta said in a May 17 email to The Sun regarding the department’s investigation of mangrove trimming at the property. “However, no pre- or post-photographs or pre- or post-trimming notifications were provided to the department, which are required by the mangrove trimming plan. DEP has requested this information from the company so we can complete our regulatory review,” Kuchta’s email stated.
Medallion Home is currently developing the Aqua property owned by Long Bar Pointe LLLP. The property is located in unincorporated Manatee County between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay. Formerly known as Long Bar Pointe and Aqua by the Bay, the development currently taking place includes numerous single-family homes and multi-unit residential buildings.
The recent inspections of the mangrove trimming on the Aqua property were prompted by two complaints FDEP received in February and another complaint received in April.
FDEP report
On May 16 Hanna Westervelt, Southwest District Environmental Manager for FDEP’s Compliance Assurance Program, sent a cover letter and a copy of the FDEP inspection report to Medallion Home representative Rob Bosarge.
“Dear Mr. Bosarge, The Florida Department of Environmental Protection received complaints regarding possible activities on your property located on El Conquistador Parkway,” the letter stated. “On April 26 and May 3, department personnel conducted inspections of the above-referenced facility. Within 30 days of receipt of this letter, please provide the requested information regarding notification of trimming activity further described in the Recommendations for Corrective Actions section of the attached inspection report. Please be advised that any future noncompliance of the permit requirements may be subject to penalties under Chapter 403.9332, F.S. (Florida Statutes).”
According to the FDEP inspection report, the Aqua mangroves were approximately 20 feet tall before they were recently trimmed and are now 15-16 feet tall after being trimmed.
According to FDEP, the trimmed mangroves are now approximately 16 feet tall. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The report states the annual trimming activity conducted at the Aqua property this year was the third of four anticipated trimming events. The report notes the expected trimmed height was 20 feet in 2021 and 16 feet in 2022.
The report notes mangroves can be reduced in height by no more than 25% of the foliage each year, the trimming cannot result in the mortality of any mangroves and subsequent annual trimming height reductions depend on the remaining foliage. This could lead to a greater time span between trimmings. The report states the mangroves were measured with a telescoping pole and the report includes photos of a pole being used to measure the trimmed mangroves.
A telescoping pole was used to measure the recently-trimmed mangroves on the Aqua property. – FDEP | Submitted
The report states all trimmings over 3 feet long or over 3 inches in diameter were to be removed by hand, properly disposed of and all reasonable efforts should have been made to remove as much trimmed material as possible.
“Photographs will be taken and submitted to the department 14 days prior to each trimming and again within 14 days following the trimming activity, and a joint site visit with (FDEP) department staff within 30 days following each trimming event,” the report said.
The report notes those notification processes were not fully complied with.
“Unauthorized trimming activity was not evident at time of the inspections,” it said. “However, no pre- or post- photographs, pre-trimming notification or post-trimming notification was provided to the department.”
Recommendations in the report to bring the mangrove trimming into compliance include the property owner providing pre- and post-trim photos within 30 days and, at the next trimming event, photographs are provided to FDEP 14 days before and after trimming takes place. A site visit with FDEP staff also is required to be scheduled within 30 days of any mangrove trimming maintenance.
Attorney Edward Vogler II represented Aqua developer Carlos Beruff during the Aqua/Long Bar Pointe permitting process and continues to represent Beruff and the Aqua development team.
When contacted by The Sun on April 22, before the FDEP inspections occurred, Vogler said, “All the work done in connection with mangrove trimming is done by certified mangrove trimming experts under the supervision of environmental consultants. All work is done pursuant to proper permits. We welcome the investigation and I think it will be confirmed that everything was done properly.”
MANATEE COUNTY – State environmental authorities have conducted their initial inspection of the mangrove trimming that recently occurred along the shoreline of the Aqua property being developed adjacent to Sarasota Bay.
“DEP did do an initial inspection on Tuesday (April 26) and in the coming weeks we will be conducting an additional inspection,” said Alexandra Kuchta, press secretary for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
“I’d be happy to share a copy of the report once our inspections are completed,” Kuchta said in her email to The Sun.
Kuchta and FDEP provided no additional details on any findings or determinations made during the April 26 inspection.
The mangroves in front of this multi-unit residential building being constructed on the Aqua property were recently trimmed. The mangroves to the left were not trimmed. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The Sun recently reported FDEP received three complaints about potentially illegal or improper mangrove trimming that occurred along the Aqua shoreline in February. FDEP email exchanges indicate procedural errors may have occurred regarding FDEP’s pre-trimming notification requirements and FDEP’s before and after trimming photographic documentation requirements.
The mangroves in front of the single-family homes being built on the Aqua property were recently trimmed. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Aqua attorney Edward Vogler II recently told The Sun he believes all mangrove trimming that’s occurred on the Aqua property has been done in accordance with one or more permits previously obtained on behalf of developer Carlos Beruff and the Medallion Home development company.
Formerly known as Long Bar Pointe and Aqua by the Bay, the Aqua property is located in unincorporated Manatee County, between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay.
MANATEE COUNTY – The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) is investigating complaints about mangrove trimming along the Aqua development’s shoreline.
Formerly known as Long Bar Pointe and Aqua by the Bay, the Aqua property is located in unincorporated Manatee County between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay.
The Aqua property is owned by Carlos Beruff’s Cargor Partners VIII/Long Bar Pointe LLLP and is being developed by Beruff’s Medallion Home development company.
The Aqua community is being developed along El Conquistador Parkway. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
On April 19, FDEP Press Secretary Alexandra Kuchta provided The Sun with the following email response regarding the mangrove trimming complaints the agency received.
“The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is investigating reports of mangrove trimming waterward of Aqua by The Bay. For context, these mangroves are managed by Long Bar Pointe, LLLP. Long Bar Pointe is a permitted mitigation bank and has an approved mangrove trimming plan. Since the property is privately owned, permission for site access is required prior to inspecting the property and DEP has been working to obtain this. At this time, our investigation is active and ongoing.”
Suncoast Waterkeeper founder and board member Justin Bloom is among those monitoring the investigation.
“I’ve reviewed the file on the state’s Oculus site. There have been several complaints of unpermitted mangrove trimming,” Bloom said.
Bloom has also been in contact with FDEP attorney Kirk White.
When contacted Sunday afternoon, Bloom said, “I learned late Friday afternoon from Kirk that they finally have an agreement to obtain access to the property and they’re going to be doing an onsite investigation on Tuesday. I’m glad to see DEP is finally getting onsite. I hope they do a thorough investigation; and if there are violations, I hope they adequately enforce them.”
FDEP letter
Kuchta’s email response included a copy of a letter FDEP Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Coordination Program Administrator Timothy Rach sent to a Mr. Hoffman (first name not provided) on Oct. 2, 2019.
“The FMTP shall not allow any mangrove trimming below a height of 12 feet, as measured from the substrate, shall not allow for more than 30% of the total onsite mangrove acreage to be trimmed and shall not result in fragmentation of the remaining intact mangrove swamp into more than four individual fragments,” the letter states.
FDEP correspondence
Kuchta also shared a link to the online Oculus portal that provides access to additional documents and email exchanges pertaining to Aqua’s mangrove trimming authorizations and activities.
On Feb. 22, FDEP Southwest District Compliance Coordinator Derrick Hudson emailed Medallion Home Vice President of Land Operations Robb Bosarge and notified him that FDEP received an email from a citizen concerned about the mangrove trimming at the Aqua property.
Hudson’s email noted the Long Bar Pointe mitigation bank permit requires the property owner or his representatives to provide FDEP with 48 hours advance notice before any mangrove trimming occurs. The permit also requires photographs to be taken and submitted to FDEP 14 days before the trimming activity begins and subsequent photographs taken and submitted within 14 days after the trimming activity occurs. The permit also requires a site visit by FDEP staff within 30 days of the trimming.
“Please provide the status and any additional information associated with this season’s trimming activity. In addition, we would like to schedule a site visit to assess the area,” Hudson said in his email to Bosarge.
The FDEP records posted online do not include an email response from Bosarge.
On March 8, Hudson emailed FDEP attorney Kirk White.
“We received a complaint regarding possible unauthorized mangrove trimming in the Long Bar Pointe mitigation bank. Is there any way you could reach out to their attorney and open communication and/or see if they have appropriate contact information for a representative?” Hudson’s email said.
On March 9, Hudson emailed White again.
“I would like to conduct a site visit. Typically during this time of year, the mitigation bank conducts authorized mangrove trimming. However, I did not receive commencement notification as required by the permit,” Hudson wrote.
On March 11, White emailed attorney Doug Manson.
“Southwest District got a complaint about unauthorized mangrove trimming at the Long Bar Pointe mitigation bank. Derrick has tried to contact Mike Campbell and Rob Borsarge to arrange a visit but has not heard back. Any chance you could provide the OK for Derrick to get out at some point in the near future and check things out?” White’s email said.
In his March 11 response, Manson said, “I am glad to help facilitate a site visit with Derrick.”
That site visit was not arranged until late last week.
On April 18, Hudson emailed a complaint timeline to FDEP Environmental Resources Program staff member Hannah Westervelt. According to the timeline, FDEP received an email from a concerned citizen on Feb. 15, an online complaint from Manatee County resident Karen Willey on Feb. 22 and an anonymous complaint on April 4.
“The emails reveal a couple things,” Bloom said. “Most significantly, it appears that there’s a violation of their mangrove mitigation bank permit. That permit requires that they notify DEP prior to commencement of any trimming. Not only are they supposed to notify DEP, but they’re supposed to provide photos indicating existing conditions prior to trimming so they can compare what was there before trimming and what’s there after. It looks like they didn’t do that; and it looks like there’s been some very dramatic trimming, beyond what would be permitted in a mangrove mitigation bank permit or the general permit which would cover the mangroves at Long Bar Pointe (Aqua). I think there are likely to be violations of how and where they trimmed and then there’s the procedural violation which it seems like DEP has acknowledged in their email chain.”
Aqua attorney’s response
Edward Vogler II has long served as an attorney for Beruff and he represented Beruff and the development team during the lengthy Long Bar Pointe/Aqua by the Bay permitting process that dates back more than a decade.
Several multi-unit residential structures are being built on the Aqua property. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Vogler was contacted by The Sun on Friday.
“The landowner/developer is aware of the complaints and has been in contact with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and welcomes any type of investigation or inspection. All the work done in connection with mangrove trimming is done by certified mangrove trimming experts under the supervision of environmental consultants. They have the tools and the technology and they understand and follow the trimming rules and criteria. All work is done pursuant to proper permits. We welcome the investigation and I think it will be confirmed that everything was done properly,” Vogler said.
“There are general permits that allow mangrove trimming under certain conditions and circumstances and there are specific permits required for given circumstances. That property also has a permitted mitigation bank in which various other types of permits and authorizations were afforded to the property. I’m very confident that any trimming was done under one or more permits,” Vogler said.
He also referenced the previously trimmed mangroves along a portion of the adjacent shoreline of Legends Bay by Medallion Home.
The mangroves at the adjacent Legends Bay by Medallion Home community are maintained at a height similar to the recently-trimmed Aqua mangroves. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“Those mangroves are trimmed every year and multiple complaints have been made about that. People get upset when they see mangroves trimmed but that’s an authorized practice in the state of Florida and it’s routinely done. Those mangroves over there have been cut for 15 years,” Vogler said.
Regarding FDEP’s requests to inspect the Aqua mangroves, Vogler said, “I’m not aware of any request being denied or delayed.”
Citizens’ concerns
Suncoast Waterkeeper Chairman and The Sun’s Outdoors Editor Rusty Chinnis is concerned about Aqua’s mangrove trimming.
On April 15, Chinnis said, “I was out fishing one day and noticed it so I called FDEP. The lady I talked to, Abigail McAleer, said someone reported it back in February but FDEP couldn’t go on the property without getting permission from the owners. I’m not accusing anybody of anything but it looks suspicious and it needs to be investigated.”
The FDEP graphic highlights some of Florida’s mangrove trimming regulations. – FDEP | Submitted
Chinnis referenced FDEP’s mangrove trimming guidelines and best management practices. According to that 2016 document, trimming mangroves that are over 24 feet tall requires a FDEP permit; and when trimming a mangrove tree that’s over 16 feet tall, no more than 25% of the tree can be removed per year.
“That first cutting they did looks like it’s about 50%,” Chinnis said.
The taller mangroves on the left were not trimmed. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
According to the FDEP trimming guidelines, a first trimming violation may result in the property owner being required to restore the area. For subsequent violations, property owners and the person performing the illegal trimming can be fined up to $100 for each mangrove illegally trimmed and up to $250 for each mangrove illegally altered.
“I’m not against development. I was a building contractor for 35 years, but I’m also a fisherman and I appreciate the importance of the natural environment to the ecology and the economy,” Chinnis said.
The FDEP guidelines note mangroves stabilize the coastline, protect water quality, reduce coastal flooding, provide habitat for fish, protect young fish from predators, protect wildlife species, serve as bird nesting areas and contribute $7.6 billion annually to the economy while creating 109,000 jobs in Florida.
Karen Willey is the conservation chair for the Florida Native Plant Society’s Serenoa Chapter. In February she filed a complaint with FDEP after seeing an Aqua advertisement that Medallion Home ran in the Washington Post.
“From the photographs in the ad, it appeared the mangroves had been trimmed and it looked questionable. I went to the FDEP website, filled out a complaint form and included a link to the ad. They called within a few days saying the mangroves appeared to be trimmed but they really couldn’t tell. They said they would be following up,” Willey said.
“This came up in February. Why is it the middle of April and they’ve done nothing? This is a serious issue. Mangroves are so important and we need to do everything we can to protect them. They should not be giving trimming permits on pristine mangrove forests like this. I think the time has come where we need to say no more mangrove trimming. Since the 1940s we have lost more than 50% of our mangroves on Sarasota Bay and we cannot afford to lose more,” Willey said.
On April 20, The Sun took a boat tour of the Aqua shoreline. A large swath of shoreline mangroves had been trimmed in front of the four-story, multi-unit residential buildings being built toward the northwest end of the Aqua property. The trimmed mangroves now provide a clear view of the bay for many of those residential units. The trimmed mangroves appear to be between 8 and 10 feet tall and the remaining untrimmed mangroves on the Aqua property appear to be between 20 and 30 feet tall.
These mangroves were trimmed along the southeastern end of the Aqua property where numerous single-family homes are being built. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Another large swath of mangroves was trimmed to the same height in front of the single-family homes being built at the southeast end of the Aqua property. The trimmed mangroves along the Aqua shoreline are about the same height as the trimmed mangroves along the Legends Bay shoreline.
FDEP’s slow response
Bloom is also concerned about FDEP’s slow response time.
“It’s been several weeks. The first complaint was nearly a week before Karen Willey’s complaint. Someone made it to FDEP’s Southern District out of Fort Myers and it was relayed to the Southwest District in Temple Terrace that governs mangrove trimming in this area,” Bloom said.
“DEP took a very long time to respond to the situation and the email chains show what appears to be excessive caution and delay in responding to citizens’ complaints. Now we’re in a situation where it looks like the deed is done. With their failure to notify DEP and provide photographs of preexisting conditions, I think it’s going to really complicate any investigation because there’s going to be a lack of evidence of how they trimmed,” Bloom said.
“DEP seemed to be absent and it begs the question as to whether DEP is up to the task of adequately regulating and enforcing mangrove trimming in Manatee County; and whether Manatee County should pick up the slack. Every coastal county surrounding Manatee County has their own mangrove program. Sarasota County has been running a mangrove program for the last three years, I think, and Hillsborough and Pinellas counties have longstanding mangrove programs.
“Manatee County’s been the holdout and I think they need to take a hard look at paying attention to and protecting the existing natural environmental infrastructure which includes the mangroves, dunes and seagrasses that are rapidly disappearing. Sarasota County has lost almost all of their natural shoreline. Manatee County still has a lot, but we’ve just lost a significant amount at Long Bar Pointe (Aqua). What’s happening at Long Bar Pointe should focus the attention of the Manatee County Commission to recognize the need to pay more attention to our dwindling mangrove populations,” Bloom said.
“I will be bird-dogging DEP and try to be as up to date as possible on the investigation by reviewing their records and watching to ensure there’s a thorough investigation and appropriate enforcement. We don’t know what the violations have been, but the maximum fines for violations seem wholly inadequate considering the value that mangroves have to our estuary and our community,” Bloom said.
BRADENTON – Cheri Coryea’s two-year tenure as county administrator ended Tuesday evening after the Manatee County Commission approved a $204,000 separation agreement earlier that day.
Deputy County Administrator Karen Stewart will serve as acting county administrator until no later than March 23. By then, or before then, the commission expects to appoint someone else to serve as acting county administrator while the search for a permanent county administrator is conducted.
During Tuesday’s meeting, county commissioners voted 6-1 to accept the separation agreement negotiated by Coryea’s attorney and County Attorney Bill Clague. Clague noted the separation agreement is not a termination and is not a resignation. The agreement also ended Coryea’s 30-year tenure as a county employee.
The separation agreement calls for the county to pay Coryea a lump sum payment of approximately $204,000, minus taxes. Per the agreement, Coryea will receive 20 weeks of regular pay as established by her $192,000 annual salary. She will also receive 400 hours of paid leave (vacation time), 500 hours of sick leave pay and 197 hours of compensatory time pay.
Commissioner Carol Whitmore supported the separation agreement after she unsuccessfully proposed Coryea’s vacation pay be increased to 1,000 hours. Bellamy voted against the separation agreement as originally proposed. He said he could not support any motion that resulted in Coryea vacating her administrator’s position.
Before the 6-1 vote occurred, the commission rejected by a 4-3 vote Bellamy’s motion to discontinue the separation discussion and give Coryea one year to prove that she can move the county forward in a manner that satisfied the current commission.
Commissioners Vanessa Baugh, Kevin Van Ostenbridge, George Kruse and James Satcher opposed Bellamy’s motion. Bellamy and commissioners Misty Servia and Carol Whitmore supported Bellamy’s motion. Van Ostenbridge then made the motion to accept the separation agreement that now ends the commission majority’s previous efforts to terminate Coryea.
Previous termination efforts
In November, Van Ostenbridge proposed terminating Coryea for carrying out the previous commission’s directive to purchase a 161-acre property referred to as the Lena Road property for slightly more than $30 million. Van Ostenbridge, Kruse and Satcher – who were not in office when the property was purchased last fall – believe the county overpaid for that property. Coryea was then put on notice that her termination would be discussed and voted on in December.
Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge proposed Coryea’s termination two days after he took office in November. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Before that December discussion occurred, Kruse had a change of heart and asked the commission to rescind the termination notice and give Coryea a chance to prove herself to the newly-reconfigured commission.
On Jan. 26, Kruse had another change of heart and he made a motion to again put Coryea on termination notice. Kruse made said he was making that motion in part because Coryea, at Commissioner Carol Whitmore’s request, arranged a one-on-one meeting between he and Whitmore to discuss affordable housing. That one-on-one meeting took place in a conference room on Jan. 22 and was also attended by Coryea and two other staff members and was recorded. During the Jan. 26 meeting, Clague said the Kruse-Whitmore meeting was conducted in compliance with the Florida Government in the Sunshine Law.
Although he willingly participated in the Jan. 22 meeting with Whitmore, Kruse then expressed remorse for doing so in response to the public backlash that followed in regard to how that meeting was publicly noticed and conducted.
Before making his motion to again put Coryea on termination notice, Kruse also acknowledged his own extramarital affair and suggested Whitmore might “blackmail” him due to her knowledge of his affair and her reported receipt of a photograph of Kruse and the other woman. Whitmore and her attorney, Brett McIntosh, vehemently denied Kruse’s unproven accusation of blackmail.
Baugh, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge supported Kruse’s motion to put Coryea on termination notice, which then resulted in the mutually-agreed-upon separation agreement instead.
Hines rejected
After approving the separation agreement, the commission engaged in another lengthy discussion regarding the appointment of an acting county administrator.
The commission ultimately voted 4-3 in opposition to hiring Venice-based attorney and former Sarasota County Commissioner Charles Hines to serve as acting county administrator.
Baugh, Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge expressed their respect for Hines, but voted not to appoint him as acting county administrator.
The commission rejected Charles Hines’ offer to serve as acting county administrator. Joe Hendricks | Sun
To varying degrees, Baugh, Kruse, Satcher and Van Ostenbridge expressed concerns about the contract terms Clague negotiated with Hines. The proposed contract offered the same $192,000 salary Coryea received, called for a minimum contract length of eight months and included a housing allowance that Clague said was necessary because state statute requires county administrators to live in the county they serve.
Bellamy, Servia and Whitmore voted in favor of Hines serving as the acting county administrator.
Before the commission voted on hiring Hines, school board member Dr. Scott Hopes made his own pitch for the acting county administrator’s position, which at one point he said he would do for free and without a contract.
School board member Dr. Scott Hopes offered to serve as acting county administrator. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Van Ostenbridge and Satcher mentioned Lakewood Ranch Business Alliance President and CEO Dom DiMaio as another potential candidate. Satcher also mentioned Rick Mills as a possible candidate. Mills is the former superintendent of the School District of Manatee County.
Van Ostenbridge said he prefers Hopes, but then said, “Dom DiMaio’s beating down my door. I’ve talked to Dom a couple times as well. DiMaio’s not here, but he seems pretty interested the way he blows my phone up.”
During public comment, Carol Felts expressed concerns about DiMaio’s connections with developer Carlos Beruff. She also opposed Hopes serving as acting county administrator.
As the commission struggled to appoint Coryea’s temporary successor, Clague stressed the need to have someone in that position that day because there are certain duties only the county administrator or acting county administrator can perform. Those duties include presenting the annual county budget and presenting for commission approval a candidate to replace Deputy County Administrator John Osborne.
Osborne left his county position on Feb. 16 – one day before Coryea’s termination was originally scheduled to be discussed and voted on. At the request of Clague and Coryea’s attorney, that meeting was then delayed until Feb. 23 to allow for time for the attorneys to negotiate the separation agreement.
Stewart appointed
After another short recess, the commission voted 6-1 in favor of appointing Stewart to serve as acting county administrator until no later than March 23. Whitmore cast the lone opposition vote to that motion.
Whitmore and Servia expressed concerns about Stewart being too busy with her current responsibilities to take on the additional duties of acting county administrator, even on a short-term basis.
One of Stewart’s current responsibilities as deputy county administrator is to oversee the distribution of the federal CARES Act funds that provide financial assistance to individuals and businesses who have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Deputy County Administrator Karen Stewart will serve as acting county administrator until no later than March 23. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
It was noted that Stewart is not interested in serving as acting county administrator for an extended period of time or in serving as the next county administrator. Clague noted that Stewart would not be vacating her deputy county administrator’s position and will continue in that role once a new acting county administrator is appointed.
As a final action, the commission voted 7-0 to direct Clague to draft a proposed contract and an accompanying resolution for the appointment and hiring of an acting county administrator. Clague will present the proposed contract no later than the commission’s March 4 land use meeting, at which the commission expects to vote on whether to approve the proposed contract terms.
Van Ostenbridge said if the contract terms are approved on March 4, he anticipates a new acting county administrator to be appointed and hired according to those non-negotiable contract terms as early as the commission’s regular meeting on March 9.
The meeting ended a short time later with Coryea performing her final public act as county administrator. Surrounded by several department directors, and choked with emotion at times, Coryea presented the annual county administrator’s report for 2020. While doing so, she praised and thanked those staff members for all the assistance and support they provided her.
Coryea then returned to her office and worked until 9:30 p.m. before leaving the county administration building for the final time.
MANATEE COUNTY – Private meeting notes and text messages disclosed in a public records request reveal more about County Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge’s failed efforts to terminate County Administrator Cheri Coryea.
As the newly-elected District 3 commissioner, Van Ostenbridge represents Anna Maria Island, Cortez, west Bradenton and Longboat Key.
During the Manatee County Commission’s Tuesday, Nov. 17 work session, Van Ostenbridge requested a special commission meeting on Thursday, Nov. 19. He said the purpose of that meeting was to discuss the county’s response to a potential COVID-related federal shutdown. When requesting the special meeting, Van Ostenbridge gave no indication that he also intended to propose Coryea’s termination.
With no advance notice given to the public, Van Ostenbridge then made a motion during the Nov. 19 meeting to put Coryea on notice that her termination would be discussed and voted upon on Jan. 6. Commissioners Vanessa Baugh, George Kruse and James Satcher supported the motion.
Text message records obtained as part of a public records request made by paralegal Michael Barfield reveal that Van Ostenbridge discussed the Coryea termination efforts with developer Carlos Beruff and others in advance of the special meeting at which he intended to call for Coryea’s termination.
Van Ostenbridge’s efforts to terminate Coryea came to an unexpected end on Thursday, Dec. 10, when Kruse made a motion to reconsider the Nov. 19 motion and end the Coryea termination efforts. The commission supported Kruse’s motion with a 7-0 vote.
Private meeting notes
Before the Nov. 19 special meeting took place, Van Ostenbridge requested and received a private meeting with Coryea at 7:30 a.m. that morning in Coryea’s office.
Coryea’s notes include a transcript of a voicemail message Van Ostenbridge left her and a printout of the text message exchange they had regarding the requested private meeting.
“I just wanna talk about how things are going so far and a little bit about the (special) meeting before we get there,” Van Ostenbridge said when requesting the private meeting.
According to Coryea’s handwritten notes, Van Ostenbridge began their meeting by saying, “I liked you before, when I met with you during the campaign, but when you closed on that property (Lena Road) I changed my mind. You should have waited for this new board because I had already spoke out against it and you should have stopped it.”
On Oct. 13, the previous county commission approved the $32.5 million purchase of a 161-acre property in east Manatee County at S.R. 64 and Lena Road. The closing for that sale took place on Friday, Nov. 13, four days before Van Ostenbridge, Kruse and Satcher took office.
The Lena Road property was purchased with the intent of creating a Central County Complex that provides a district office for the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office and additional facilities for the county’s Public Works Department and Utilities Department.
According to her notes, Coryea responded to Van Ostenbridge’s comment by saying, “The board (of county commissioners) took two votes on this property, both passing. I’m responsible for carrying out the directives of the board.”
Van Ostenbridge then asked about the closing date.
“Based on the decision of the board, the closing was to occur anytime between 10/4/20 and 12/16/20 – when the due diligence had been successfully completed. It was completed around Nov. 2 or 3. Property Management Department proceeded with scheduling closing,” Coryea said, according to her notes.
Van Ostenbridge asked who approved the Nov. 13 closing date.
“I did. The previous board approved this action two times and the closing occurred during their terms,” Coryea said, according to her notes.
According to Coryea’s notes, Van Ostenbridge then said, “I am here to ask you for your resignation.”
County Administrator Cheri Coryea took this note during her private meeting with Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge. – Manatee County | Submitted
In response, Coryea said, “You will be disappointed to hear I will not be submitting my resignation. I won’t be resigning.”
According to Coryea’s notes, Van Ostenbridge then shared his intentions for the Lena Road property.
“I intend to parcel out the property into small parcels and will sell them off at a loss and that will embarrass the previous board and you. I might keep a sliver for something. I have the votes,” he said, according to Coryea’s notes.
County Administrator Cheri Coryea took this note during her Nov. 19 meeting with Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge. – Manatee County | Submitted
The Florida Sunshine Law prevents city and county commissioners from privately discussing any matter that could foreseeably come before them for official action or vote.
At that time of his meeting with Coryea, Van Ostenbridge, a Realtor with Boyd Realty, had been in office for less than 48 hours and had participated in one county meeting.
According to her notes, Coryea responded to Van Ostenbridge’s Lena Road comments by saying, “I had offered to provide a full briefing to the new commission on this project and many others that the board wanted. We were instructed in Jan. 2018 by the previous board to begin looking for a large parcel to co-locate needed services closer to population growth. We briefed each board member five times since then.”
In June, the commission received a third-party appraisal that valued the Lena Road property at $18.4 million.
“The board was aware of the appraisal price that was a market appraisal targeted at housing, not public use, ” Coryea wrote in her notes.
After further discussion about the Lena Road purchase, Van Ostenbridge said, “I intend to make a motion at the meeting today to ask for you to be terminated,” according to Coryea’s notes.
County Administrator Cheri Coryea rejected Kevin Van Ostenbridge’s request for her resignation. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
According to her notes, Coryea then questioned the true intent of the private meeting.
“When you asked me for this meeting this morning you said it was about the special meeting agenda item (a federal shutdown). I prepared a motion for it. Did you need it?” Coryea said, according to her notes.
“No, I don’t believe I need anything,” Van Ostenbridge said, according to Coryea’s notes.
“So, this meeting this morning was not to talk about that?” Coryea said, according to her notes.
“I’m all set for the meeting,” Van Ostenbridge said, according to Coryea’s notes, which indicate the meeting ended at 7:48 a.m.
Van Ostenbridge responds
When contacted Friday afternoon, Van Ostenbridge was asked about his meeting with Coryea.
Regarding Coryea’s notes that state he asked her to resign, Van Ostenbridge said, “That captures the spirit of what I was saying. I told her that she knew the incoming board was adamantly against the purchase. We felt that it was a drastic waste of taxpayer money and each of us made that clear during the campaign, including in public comments during meetings.
“I told her I had lost trust and confidence in her and I asked her for her resignation. I then said I scheduled the meeting with her as a courtesy, to alert her of my intention to make the motion to terminate. I was attempting to give her an opportunity to resign and spare her and the county the indignity of the debate which was sure to follow my motion,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Van Ostenbridge was asked if he felt a new commissioner, who had been in office less than 48 hours, had the authority to ask the county administrator to resign without first discussing it with the commission as a whole during a public meeting.
“When I put my hand on the Bible, I became a full commissioner. There’s no orientation period. I was doing it as a courtesy because I had made up my mind I was going to make the motion to terminate. I officially made up my mind on Friday (Nov. 13), when the deal was closed. I had sought the counsel of many business leaders in town, as well as friends of mine, even my parents, leading up to that time. When she closed the deal on Friday, I started letting some people know that I had made up my mind,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Van Ostenbridge was asked if any of those he sought counsel from were sitting county commissioners or future county commissioners who had not yet been sworn in.
“Absolutely not. I have not committed a Sunshine violation,” he said.
When asked about his alleged intentions to sell the Lena Road property at a loss, Van Ostenbridge said, “I said that I felt there was value in the property that abutted the landfill. I told her that was the most valuable to the county and the least valuable to the open market. I wanted to keep that, but I wanted to sell off the rest because I didn’t want to be saddled with the unnecessary improvements that would be needed on the rest of the property. The county overpaid for the property, so obviously when I go to sell it I’m not going to get market value. I told her that if we sold that off it would be at a loss, and the responsibility of that loss would fall on the previous board,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Van Ostenbridge denied telling Coryea he had the votes to sell the Lena Road property, which Coryea wrote in her notes.
“I never said that. At the end of the conversation, I said maybe you have the votes, maybe I have the votes and we’ll see in a couple hours,” Van Ostenbridge said, referring to his intent to pursue Coryea’s termination.
Van Ostenbridge’s statement contrasts with Coryea’s notes, in which the alleged comment about having the votes appears in conjunction with the discussion about selling the Lena Road property.
Van Ostenbridge confirmed that he told Coryea he would seek her termination.
“I said I’d be giving her notice of a hearing for termination at the special meeting,” he said.
Van Ostenbridge texts
Late Friday afternoon, in response to his public records request, Barfield received copies of Van Ostenbridge’s text message exchanges from Nov. 3 to Nov. 20.
Barfield confirmed that developer Carlos Beruff is the “Carlos” and “CB” that appears in some of the text message exchanges Van Ostenbridge produced.
Paralegal Michael Barfield, who serves as the president of the Florida chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, is independently investigating the actions of county commissioners Kevin Van Ostenbridge, Vanessa Baugh, George Kruse and James Satcher. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
According to those records, Beruff sent Van Ostenbridge a text message at 6:51 a.m., less than an hour before his Nov. 19 private meeting with Coryea.
“Good morning you all set,” Beruff wrote.
“All set. Meeting with Cheri at 7:30,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
This is one of several text message exchanges Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge had with developer Carlos Beruff. – Michael Barfield | Submitted
On Sunday, Nov. 15, Beruff sent Van Ostenbridge a link to a Bradenton Times story that included the headline: “Are special interests gunning for County Administrator?”
That story notes Beruff and other members of the development community pushed for Lakewood Ranch Business Alliance President Dom Dimaio to succeed retiring County Administrator Ed Hunzeker in 2019, rather than Coryea.
“We have a leaker,” Van Ostenbridge wrote in response to Beruff’s text about that story.
On Tuesday, Nov. 17, as part of the same text message exchange with Beruff, Van Ostenbridge wrote, “We have a special meeting on Thursday, after the port meeting. Carol took the bait.”
That message appears to refer to acting Commission Chair Carol Whitmore supporting Van Ostenbridge’s request for a special meeting discussion about a potential federal shutdown.
On Saturday, Nov. 14, Beruff initiated a text message exchange with Van Ostenbridge that began with a link to an East County Observer story about the county’s plans to build a solid waste transfer station on the Lena Road property.
“You may have missed this last week, but it basically says that they bought something they don’t need for 17-20 years,” Beruff wrote.
“They did all they could to saddle us with this (expletive) we don’t want. At least they’re done. Nothing left for them to do,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
On Thursday, Nov. 5, Beruff sent Van Ostenbridge a text message that said, “Good morning, take a look at this and see what you think. Call me when you get a chance.”
Attached to Beruff’s message was a Microsoft Word document titled “ManCo BOCC (Board of County Commissioners).docx.” The contents of that document are not known and Barfield said he has not received it.
“That looks good. I only want to drop the mention of masks. That is too much of a 50/50 issue. Call you in a few,” Van Ostenbridge wrote in his response to Beruff.
Van Ostenbridge’s text records also include an exchange he had with someone named Bob, whose initials are BS.
“We have a special meeting on Thursday after the port meeting. Carol took the bait,” Van Ostenbridge wrote.
“I watched you. Smooth baby,” Bob replied.
“Acted like I was stumbling through it, ha-ha,” Van Ostenbridge wrote.
Barfield said he did not yet know Bob’s identity.
On the evening of Nov. 19, Van Ostenbridge received a group text message from Chad Choate, a financial advisor at the Edward Jones office in Bradenton. Choate is Facebook friends with Van Ostenbridge and has posted county commission-related comments at Van Ostenbridge’s Facebook page.
“How long has she been county admin,” Choate wrote in his text message to Van Ostenbridge.
“2 years. She’s been a county employee for over 30 years. A 30-year bureaucrat. It’s time to put a private sector person in charge,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
“Yeah, who replaces her,” Choate wrote.
“Put your name in when the spot opens up,” Van Ostenbridge replied.
Updated Nov. 23, 2020 – BRADENTON – Newly-elected District 3 Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge initiated an effort on Thursday to terminate County Administrator Cheri Coryea.
The Manatee County Commission is scheduled on Wednesday, Jan. 6 to debate and vote on the potential termination of Coryea, who has been on the county’s staff for more than 30 years.
As newly-elected commissioners, Van Ostenbridge, James Satcher and George Kruse were sworn in on Tuesday. They participated in a work session that day which resulted in Van Ostenbridge requesting a special commission meeting on Thursday to discuss the county’s legal rights in the event of a federally-ordered economic shutdown.
Terminating the county administrator was not an item on Thursday’s special meeting agenda, so no public notice was issued to the public, the commissioner, Coryea or county staff.
Commissioners Vanessa Baugh, Satcher and Kruse ultimately supported Van Ostenbridge’s motion to put Coryea on at least 15 days’ notice that a discussion pertaining to her potential termination is now pending. Commissioners Reggie Bellamy, Misty Servia and Carol Whitmore opposed that action. The 15-day time frame was later extended until after the holidays.
With about 1,900 employees under her supervision, Coryea carries out the directives of the county commission and oversees the operations of the county. She was named acting county administrator on Feb. 26, 2019. On May 21, 2019, the county commission approved removed “acting” from her job title and made her Manatee County’s first female county administrator.
Surprise discussion
As Thursday’s special commission meeting neared what was thought to be its conclusion, Van Ostenbridge said, “There is something else I’d like to bring forward. It’s a serious matter. I want to bring up the matter of our county administrator. I like Cheri very much as a person. I think she’s a great individual. However, I have a different vision for the administrator position. I admire her dedication to the county and her many years of service, but I’m a private sector person and she’s more of a public sector person.
“My vision is that government should, whenever possible, mirror the private sector. I think we need a shift of culture within the county. I saw the direction that she was leading the county and the direction she was steering the committee at times and I disagree with it fundamentally,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge seeks to terminate the county administrator. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Van Ostenbridge then referenced the county’s recent purchase of a 161-acre property in east Manatee County at 8520 State Road 64. The newly acquired property is across the street and slightly north of the county’s Lena Road Landfill.
“Cheri did not make that decision. The board made that decision.” – Commissioner Reggie Bellamy
The decision to purchase that property was finalized by a 5-2 commission vote in October, with Baugh and then-Commissioner Steve Jonsson voting in opposition. According to the sale and purchase contract dated Oct. 13, and signed by then-Commission Chair Betsy Benac, the county purchased the mostly vacant property from Musgrave Real Estate Holdings for $30,185,625.
The warranty deed that transferred ownership of the property from Musgrave Real Estate Holdings to Manatee County was signed by Kimberly Musgrave Schmidt and notarized by Karen Calyer on Friday, Nov. 13, with attorney Caleb Grimes signing as the second witness.
The property was purchased with the intent of creating the Central County Complex that would provide a district office for the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office and additional facilities for the county’s Public Works Department and Utilities Department.
“I, and some colleagues of mine, value that property at $6 million. The previous commission voted twice to go through with that purchase. I was pretty vocal against it. Commissioner Kruse was incoming at the time – he was pretty vocal against it. Mr. Satcher made public comments that he didn’t agree with it as well. It was pretty obvious that the incoming commission did not want this,” said Van Ostenbridge, a Realtor with Boyd Realty.
“The closing date of that property was hurried to last Friday. Funds have changed hands and it’s a done deal. I feel very saddled now with that cost and that property, as well as the burdens of the improvements that have to be made,” he said.
Van Ostenbridge also mentioned the purchase negotiations led by Utilities Department Director Mike Gore.
“I didn’t agree with the process, having Mr. Gore lead the negotiations. I didn’t feel he was qualified. Day-to-day operations are run by the administrator, so ultimately that falls on the administrator. I think tens of millions of tax dollars were wasted on that purchase. It’s the position of this commissioner that the $25 million in wasted tax money is a fireable offense,” Van Ostenbridge said.
The property is appraised at about $18.5 million, according to a June report obtained by The Sun and written by Hettema Saba Commercial Real Estate Valuation Advisory Services.
“Based on the known factors creating and affecting value, it is my opinion that the market value for the subject property in its ‘as is’ condition, as of June 18, was $18,448,000,” according to a letter signed by state-certified general real estate appraiser Ronald Saba and addressed to Brandie Adams, the real property specialist for Manatee County’s Property Acquisition Division.
”The purpose of the appraisal is to provide an opinion of the market value. The report is intended to be used by the client to make a purchase price decision,” Saba wrote.
The $30,185,625 purchase price equates to $187,488 per acre, with the most recent comparable property in that vicinity at that time selling for $310,218 per acre, according to a staff presentation to county commissioners on Oct. 13. The price per acre in that vicinity over the past 10 years was $496,923.
After a recess during last Thursday’s meeting, Commissioner Carol Whitmore sought insight from Chief Assistant County Attorney Bill Clague.
“Miss Coryea’s service as county administrator is by agreement between her and the county. That agreement has provisions in it that govern the circumstances under which the board can dismiss her. They require that the board provide her with at least 15 days’ notice prior to conducting a meeting to make that decision. The most the board could do today would be to direct our office to provide her with that notice and schedule a meeting to consider that. I would advise the board to be careful in this meeting about going into the legalities or the details of those things,” Clague said.
Whitmore noted the land purchase was actually initiated by previous County Administrator Ed Hunzeker.
Whitmore referenced a Nov. 15 story published at the Bradenton Times website that included the headline, “Are Special Interests Gunning for County Administrator?” The story states developer Carlos Beruff and other members of the development community pushed for Lakewood Ranch Business Alliance President Dom Dimaio to succeed Hunzeker, rather than Coryea.
“I was called, you all were called, by a developer who didn’t want Cheri in the job,” Whitmore said.
She also said that the developer supported Van Ostenbridge, Satcher and Kruse’s campaigns.
Commissioner Carol Whitmore believes an orchestrated effort is afoot to replace the county administrator. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“I was hoping you guys would at least give her a chance. You haven’t even been in office for three days. Shame on you for doing that. This is very upsetting,” Whitmore said.
Regarding Van Ostenbridge’s desire for the county government to operate more like a business, Whitmore said, “This is not a business.”
Commissioner Reggie Bellamy began his remarks by referencing something he learned in business school: “When you take over leadership, you don’t come in and make hasty decisions. This sounds like a hasty decision and it’s very unfortunate,” he said.
Bellamy said it’s one thing to be disappointed with someone for carrying out a commission decision, but to say it’s a fireable offense is something totally different.
He also disagreed with Van Ostenbridge’s claim that the land purchase was rushed.
Commissioner Reggie Bellamy believes the efforts to oust Coryea are premeditated. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Bellamy said he asked Van Ostenbridge and Kruse during their campaigns if they planned to fire Coryea once they took office.
“And the comment was, ‘No, I don’t know what you’re talking about,’ ” Bellamy said.
“It’s quite clear there’s been some premeditated comments and thoughts about this particular step with her. If the cause is for Lena Road, don’t fire her. Fire the commissioners that voted on it, twice. And that’s not your job, that’s the job of the constituents. Cheri did not make that decision. The board made that decision,” Bellamy said.
“I don’t think you, as a county commissioner, can learn in 72 hours enough to draw a conclusion that you’re going to fire anybody. There is no way in the world that we should be holding a conversation like this three days into it,” Bellamy said.
“It’s kind of piling up now. When you see the information that’s brought to you it almost seems like an attempt to build momentum. This is why I’m saying some of this is premeditated,” Bellamy said.
Speaking next, Commissioner Misty Servia said, “Kevin, this is a reckless move. You have been here actually 50 hours, it’s not even close to 72 hours. Here’s what this move does: The morale of our staff just dropped. Our ability to hire people that we so desperately need has dropped.”
Servia said Van Ostenbridge made a “poor move” when initiating that discussion without giving the public advance notice.
“You’ve just shut them out of this,” she said. “The art of the deal requires finesse. This is not finesse.”
Commissioner Misty Servia described the efforts to terminate Coryea as “reckless.” – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Servia mentioned Coryea’s performance evaluations submitted by six of the seven members of the previous commission, which were discussed at that commission’s final meeting on Nov. 10 – an evaluation process Baugh chose not to participate in.
“Our county administrator just received a glowing review because she has done everything this elected board has asked her to do in a timely and efficient manner,” Servia said.
Bellamy noted Coryea received a 6-month evaluation and a 12-month evaluation.
“Not a 3-day evaluation or a 50-hour evaluation,” he said. “It seems as though there’s ulterior motives. It seems as though there’s something else out there.”
Bellamy told the new commissioners to consider how they would feel about being evaluated after just 50 hours on the job.
Along those same lines Servia said, “Fifty hours on the job? We need to be in a learning mode, not in a firing mode.”
When it was his turn to speak, Kruse said, “I think ‘premediated’ is probably a strong word. I think we all came into this with a common view of government. Any level of premeditation was just a group of us saying let’s look at something a little more from a business standpoint. I’m not saying which direction I’m going. I’m OK with starting a clock, but if this is a vote to flat-out do it today, then that would be a different story.”
Baugh disputed any premeditation.
“I don’t know anything about premediated. I don’t know anything about developers coming to anybody. None have come to me, but I can tell you this – the citizens do come to me and they’re the ones that are important. And by the way, I guess developers are citizens too,” Baugh said.
Commissioner Vanessa Baugh seconded the motion to put Coryea on notice. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“I realize this isn’t a topic most people want to talk about. I don’t believe it is fair to make accusations to the new commissioners that have been out there for over a year working to get elected – who might know a little bit more than you think. Everybody take a breath, we’re not making the decision today,” Baugh said.
Clerk of Court weighs in
Aware of the discussion taking place, Manatee County Clerk of the Circuit Court Angelina Colonneso felt compelled to make the short drive from her downtown Bradenton office to the Bradenton Area Convention Center in Palmetto to address the commission.
When addressing Van Ostenbridge, Satcher and Kruse, she said, “To the three of you, please take my advice: a little humility doesn’t hurt. Take it from my experience, you’ve got a lot to learn. I am for the people’s records, the people’s business. There are no citizens here. Those people have not been afforded the opportunity to even weigh in on this.
“I think you should take a little time and see how things work. You haven’t even been to a (regular) meeting yet and you’re bringing this up. You haven’t had a chance to work with anybody in this county or see the interactions,” Colonneso said.
“In a way, I feel like I’m up here as that watchdog for the citizens – to tell you that whatever you decide, take a step back. You took an oath. You need to be humble and understand there’s so much to learn. Please, take your time here,” Colonneso said.
“I didn’t expect to make a trip here today. I gave up another meeting when I saw this, it was so outlandish,” she said in conclusion.
Final comments
“This is not terminating Cheri today. I am not eliminating the public process. I’m going to make a motion to give 15 days’ notice of a vote. The public, community leaders, citizens of all types can reach out to us. I just want us to make some fundamental cultural changes,” Van Ostenbridge said.
Baugh seconded Van Ostenbridge’s motion.
Before voting on the motion, Whitmore said, “I knew this was orchestrated. Kevin, I supported you. I am ashamed that I did. You’ve been in office 50 hours. This was premediated. I’ve had the calls; every one of you have. I know what’s going on. There are employees crying right now because of what you’ve just done. Maybe you don’t care, but you should.”
In response, Van Ostenbridge said, “I agree with you, it’s a very difficult decision. It can be very emotional for people, but you cannot run a $1.5 billion business based on feelings and emotion. Unfortunately, it has to be run pragmatically, as a business.”
Servia said, “With all due respect, this is not a good way to do business because there are so many unintended consequences that amount to millions and millions of dollars; and things are shifting right now today because of this action. This is a very dangerous approach.”
Satcher said no one should be surprised about Van Ostenbridge’s positions.
“Everyone that was running for election had very public comments about what was going on at Lena Road. Of course it’s expected. It was a major decision. I was tempted to read my Facebook post: ‘Five reasons why the Lena Road land deal is wrong for Manatee County.’ I should have said 32 million and 5 reasons why it was bad for Manatee County,” Satcher said, citing a figure that was higher than the $30,185,625 sale price listed on the signed contract.
Commissioner James Satcher disagrees with a recent county land acquisition. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Kruse said the Coryea decision is one of the most serious decisions this commission will make, and he noted it will have implications throughout the entire county and county government.
“If you’re a director and you work directly under Ms. Coryea, please reach out to me – Ms. Coryea included,” Kruse said of his willingness to speak with as many people as possible before making his decision.
“This isn’t premeditated or a done deal. I am going to do my due diligence and my homework. Lena Road, while I disagree with it, that wouldn’t be my decision in and of itself, but there’s bigger philosophical things,” Kruse said.
Commissioner George Kruse says he has not made his decision yet. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
After the 4-3 vote to put Coryea on notice took place, the commission discussed scheduling that meeting on Dec. 15. Bellamy requested the discussion be delayed until after the holidays and the other members unanimously supported his request.
BRADENTON – Manatee County commissioners have deleted a 2017 development stipulation that gave the commission and the public the ability to review the Aqua by the Bay development plans after the first 750 residential units are built.
During the county commission’s Thursday, Feb. 6 land use meeting, commissioners voted 6-1 in favor of granting a request from developer Carlos Beruff and county staff to delete Stipulation A.17 from the stipulations included in the General Development Plan unanimously approved by county commissioners on Oct. 3, 2017.
No longer in effect, the stipulation said, “Subsequent residential dwelling units, upon completion of the first 750 residential dwelling units, shall require further approval by the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing prior to, or as part of, preliminary site plan approval, in increments of 750 units or more.”
Commissioner Steve Jonsson made the motion to delete the stipulation and commissioners Vanessa Baugh, Reggie Bellamy, Betsy Benac, Misty Servia and Priscilla Trace supported his motion.
County Commissioner Steve Jonsson made the motion to delete Stipulation A.17. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Commissioner Carol Whitmore cast the only opposition vote after asking the commission to continue the public hearing to a later date to amend and clarify the stipulation rather than delete it.
Formerly known as Long Bar Pointe, Aqua by the Bay is now being developed on a 529-acre property between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay in unincorporated Manatee County.
Developer’s request
Attorney Ed Vogler represented Beruff and Aqua by the Bay at Thursday’s hearing. He noted the general development plan was unanimously approved by county commissioners in 2017 and later withstood a legal challenge from project opponents.
The 2017 approvals allow 2,894 residential units, including up to 16 high-rise condominium buildings between 76 and 95 feet tall. The approvals also allow 78,000 square feet of commercial space.
Vogler said deleting the stipulation would not change the approved land uses, the density or intensity of the project, the building heights or the building locations.
Vogler said the stipulation was confusing for the developers and for county staff because of the words “upon completion” that could be interpreted to mean the developers need 750 county-issued certificates of occupancy before additional preliminary site plans could be approved.
Vogler noted the county staff report submitted prior to the meeting expressed similar concerns and stated staff supported removing the stipulation.
Vogler said 1,112 residential are already in various stages of permitting and permitting review with county staff.
“The Aqua by the Bay project is going forward. It’s under development,” he said.
Commissioners’ questions
Whitmore asked Vogler who wrote the stipulation.
“I think it was a collaborative effort,” Vogler said.
It was later noted during public comment that Servia proposed similar but more detailed stipulation language in the Sept. 15, 2017 letter she submitted to county staff. At that time, before she was a commissioner. Servia represented Beruff and Aqua by the Bay while employed by King Engineering Associates.
Whitmore noted the developers have the right to build 2,894 residential units with or without the stipulation.
County Commissioner Carol Whitmore cast the only vote opposing the deletion of Stipulation A.17. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“My intent when I approved this was that you would come back and submit another preliminary site plan to us,” Whitmore said of the vote for approval she cast in 2017.
“It wasn’t that you weren’t going to be able to get it approved, because you were, but to appease us as a board, to make sure everything was on the up and up – to oversee this a little tighter because of the environmental concerns that a lot of people have along Sarasota Bay,” Whitmore said.
Whitmore said the commission approval would not have been unanimous without the stipulation.
“Would you agree that all the stipulations, including number 17, got you the 7-0 vote?” Whitmore asked Vogler.
“Ultimately, yes. There were two commissioners that talked about A.17,” Vogler responded.
In 2017, then-commissioners Robin DiSabatino and Charles Smith shared Whitmore’s concerns about the lack of specific details contained in the general development plan.
Servia and Bellamy were not commissioners when the general development plan was approved.
Benac asked Vogler if the stipulation was added to comply with county code.
“There is no code requirement. To be brutally frank and honest, we were listening to comments made by commissioners and we were trying to fashion something that provided comfort and support at the time,” Vogler said.
“Your counsel warned you at the time,” Vogler said of the limited authority the stipulation provided the commission to review plans submitted for additional development phases beyond the first 750 residential units.
Benac said the stipulation seemed like a good idea at the time but it gives people false hope that there’s still an opportunity to stop the project after the first 750 residential units are built.
Commissioner Vanessa Baugh said she didn’t understand why the stipulation was included in the first place and Jonsson expressed similar sentiments.
Staff comments
Manatee County Principal Planner Stephanie Moreland said staff and the applicant were both requesting commission approval to delete the stipulation.
Manatee County Principal Planner Stephanie Moreland agreed the stipulation should be removed. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The stipulation is unclear and it’s not working under the procedures that we are familiar with. I’ve never seen one that says upon completion a project must return to the board. Currently, there are 446 units issued, 316 units are under review and staff has had a pre-application meeting for 350 to 353 units. If we’re waiting for the structures to be completed and then come back with a preliminary site plan we’re too late in the process,” Moreland said.
Public input
Public input given during Thursday’s meeting did not sway the commission majority’s final decision.
Speaking on behalf of several Cortez residents, former County Commissioner Jane von Hahmann mentioned the lack of specific details contained in the general development plan that allows for up to 16 high-rise condominium buildings.
“We didn’t have a visual. We had a general development plan and that bothered commissioners. It certainly bothered the public because we had no way of knowing where, other than in the yellow area or in the orange area, these buildings were going to be allowed to be placed,” von Hahmann said regarding the 2017 approvals.
Von Hahmann referenced the concerns Commissioner Charles Smith expressed in 2017 about approving a multi-phase development project that developers said could take decades to complete.
“He couldn’t see himself approving something that was 20 to 30 years out. He expressed concern that the board is responsible for approving buildings over 35 feet, but the number of buildings is uncertain,” von Hahmann said.
“We’ve never seen any of the preliminary site plans that have been approved. If staff has anything that can show what’s already being laid out, maybe there’s a comfort level from us that we walk away from the stipulation,” von Hahmann said.
No preliminary site plans were presented at Thursday’s meeting.
“If the stipulation is providing grief because it’s not specific enough, we would ask that you go back to the drawing board and make it more specific,” von Hahmann concluded.
“The bay is very vulnerable. I think it’s very important that we maintain any kind of examination process on a big project like this,” Sarasota Bay Estuary Program member Jim Eliason said.
“Go back to the drawing board. The public does want to keep an eye on this,” county resident Dan Young said when urging the commission to revise the stipulation instead of eliminating it.
Former Manatee County resident Barbara Angelucci read aloud comments prepared by her friend Shannon Larsen, who could not attend Thursday’s meeting, and she shared her own thoughts too.
Former Manatee County resident Barbara Angelucci expressed the views she shares with her friend, Shannon Larsen. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“A stipulation is something specified to or agreed upon in common – an agreement between opposing parties during the course of legal proceedings, legally binding and part of the record. Manatee County Zoning Ordinance PDR/PDMU 15-10 was duly adopted by the board of county commissioners on Oct. 3, 2017. This ordinance contained a number of stipulations that were promised, agreed upon and signed by Manatee County officials. Now, some 29 months later, the applicant would break their agreement, break their promise and break their binding contract with the commissioners and the citizens of Manatee County through their concentrated efforts to delete this stipulation,” Angelucci said.
“If Stipulation 17.A is allowed to be deleted, this breach of promise will set a course of action that provides this applicant and any other applicant the freedom of determination to delete additional stipulations that they themselves agreed to and promised,” Angelucci said.
“A promise is a promise, especially when it was made after hours and hours of deliberate and difficult decisions with input from the applicant, the applicant’s attorneys, the Manatee Board of County Commissioners and the citizens of Manatee County who should be able to trust their commissioners to uphold their promises and agreements and not fold to the demands of wealthy developers,” Angelucci said.
Former County Commissioner Joe McClash said, “Just for the record, we’re not getting notices as a public when things are coming through like site plans. I know the county has abilities to do that and this is one of those commitments I thought was made at the hearings – that we would be notified as height plans come in. Either that or we have to check every single week to see if the county’s received a site plan, which isn’t right.”
In response to McClash, Public Hearing Section Manager Margaret Tusing said Aqua by the Bay site plans are not available at the county website but can be obtained by making a public records request.
This new building is the first to be built on the Aqua by the Bay property. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
BRADENTON – On Thursday, Feb. 6, Manatee County Commissioners will discuss Aqua by the Bay developer Carlos Beruff’s request to delete a development stipulation included in the initial development approvals he received from the county commission in 2017.
Thursday’s land use meeting will begin at 9 a.m. and take place in the Honorable Patricia M. Glass chambers on the first floor of the county administration building at 1112 Manatee Ave. W. in downtown Bradenton.
The Aqua by the Bay zoning ordinance amendment request discussion is expected to take place soon after the meeting begins. Public input will be allowed, and Cortez resident and former County Commissioner Jane von Hahmann is among those planning to voice opposition to the developer’s request.
“I believe it is in our best interest to be present at that meeting and make it known that this stipulation was our insurance policy, if you will, that we would know what we were getting in these buildings, especially the visual impact, water shoreline vista impact and overall compatibility with surrounding area,” von Hahmann wrote in an recent email she distributed encouraging others to express their views at the upcoming meeting.
“This is a stipulation which allowed us to see, after development begins, the physical building size and the number of units each building will have, and they want it removed,” von Hahmann wrote.
A large, centralized, clubhouse-like building now stands near the southeast end of the Aqua by the Bay property, between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay. Large concrete pipes are scattered about that end of the property that will contain the first phase of residential units to be built.
Excavation work is also taking place at the northwest end of the property, near the pasture where several cows currently live.
These cows now share space with dump trucks and other construction vehicles. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Stipulation language
Approved by county commissioners on Oct. 3, 2017, the zoning ordinance Beruff seeks to amend includes stipulation A.17, which reads as follows: “Subsequent residential dwelling units, upon completion of the first 750 residential dwelling units, shall require further approval by the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing prior to, or as part of, Preliminary Site Plan approval, in increments of 750 units or more. Any approval shall be in conformance with Stipulation A.16.”
Commissioners were provided with a county staff report prior to Thursday’s meeting.
“Staff finds the language in Stipulation A.17 to be unclear and problematic relative to timing as to when the project is required to return to the Board of County Commissioners. Staff believes the timing of ‘completion’ is too late in the development process for the Board of County Commissioner’s review of a site plan,” the staff report says.
“Currently, a preliminary/final site plan has been issued for 446 residential units. 316 residential units are pending Preliminary/Final Site Plan approval. A pre-application meeting was held for another 350-353 residential units,” the staff report says.
“In addition to the complexity of the timeline, the applicant has identified an additional concern with the last sentence of stipulation A.17 which reads; “… Any approval shall be in conformance with Stipulation A.16,” the staff report says.
Workers are onsite installing the infrastructure components for the phase one residential units. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Regarding stipulation A.16, the accompanying project narrative says, “Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant shall submit a hurricane evacuation and disaster plan to the Public Safety Department’s Emergency Management Division.
“Approval of hurricane evacuation/disaster plans and review of site plans for compliance with those plans has historically been administrative. Requiring public hearings for this purpose is an undue burden for both the applicant and staff. This is contrary to the streamlining direction of the board with the 2019 code amendments,” the project narrative says.
The staff report says, “Staff concurs that the deletion of stipulation A.17 would remove the apparent ambiguities existing during the review and processing of the preliminary and final site plans for the already approved 2,894 residential units. The requirement for a Hurricane Evacuation and Disaster Plan previously referenced in stipulation A.17 would remain applicable to the residential units as stated in the existing Stipulation A.16,” the staff report says.
“In accordance with Manatee County Comprehensive Plan, policy 2.1.2.7, deletion of stipulation A.17 does not affect development patterns, types of land uses, transition between land uses, natural features, or approved development in the area. There is no proposal to increase or decrease the gross or net residential density of the project. Staff finds the request to be consistent with applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the Manatee County Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval,” the staff report concludes.
Commissioner’s past involvement
County Commissioner Misty Servia will be asked to support amending a development plan she helped present to the county in 2017, while working at King Engineering Associates and representing Beruff’s development interests. This was before she was elected to the county commission in 2018.
County Commissioner Misty Servia previously represented Carlos Beruff’s Aqua by the Bay development interests. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
On Sept. 15, 2017, Servia sent Manatee County Planning Section Manager Nicole Knapp a letter on King Engineering Associates letterhead on behalf of Beruff’s Long Bar Pointe LLLP and Cargor Partners VIII LLCs.
Servia’s letter pertained to four stipulations to be discussed at the Oct. 3, 2017 meeting – the meeting at which the county commission approved the proposed development plans.
Servia’s letter noted the developers were offering a new stipulation, known then as stipulation A.18, which stated the developer’s willingness to come back to the commission for additional approvals for subsequent development phases.
That proposed stipulation contained language that is similar to the language approved as stipulation A.17 in the adopted zoning ordinance the county commission adopted on Oct. 3, 2017.
“The Aqua by the Bay project is approved in phases, with Phase I consisting of 750 residential units and 78,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses. Phases II and III shall each consist of 750 residential units, and Phase IV shall consist of the remaining approved residential units. Phases II, III, IV shall require further approval of the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing prior to, or as part of, preliminary site plan approval,” Servia’s letter said, regarding proposed stipulation A.18.
TALLAHASSEE – It’s official: Gov. Ron DeSantis has retracted Aqua by the Bay developer Carlos Beruff’s recent appointment to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC).
On Friday, Jan. 18, DeSantis retracted 46 appointments that departing Gov. Rick Scott made on Jan. 4 and Jan. 7, and Beruff’s FWC appointment was among those retracted.
The retracted appointments apply only to those whose appointments require confirmation by the Florida Senate, and it’s still possible that Beruff could be reappointed. DeSantis also retracted Joshua Kellum’s FWC appointment.
FWC commissioners serve five-year terms and enact rules and regulations regarding the state’s fish and wildlife resources.
On Friday, DeSantis sent a letter to Florida Senate President Bill Galvano informing him of his decision.
“I agree many of these individuals are outstanding citizens who are experts in their respected fields. I thank these individuals for their willingness to serve our state. They will be afforded every consideration as my office re-opens the application process to fill these critical appointment vacancies,” DeSantis’ letter said.
DeSantis also retracted Mark Goodson’s appointment to the State College of Florida, Manatee-Sarasota District Board of Trustees.
Additional retractions of Scott appointments include appointees to the Board of Governors to the State University System, the Board of Medicine, the Board of Veterinary Medicine, the Construction Industry Licensing Board, the Florida Citrus Commission, the Florida Real Estate Commission, the Florida Transportation Commission and more.
Beruff opposition
In late 2017, Manatee County Commissioners approved the Aqua by the Bay development plans that call for the construction of up to 16 95-foot-tall condo buildings, an unspecified number of buildings between 36 and 75 feet tall and a total of 2,894 residential units.
The approved development plans also include 78,000 square feet of commercial space and a man-made crystal lagoon, and there are references to private docks. The proposed 20-year construction project is to take place on a large piece of vacant land located between Sarasota Bay and the El Conquistador Parkway in Manatee County.
As of this afternoon, more than 7,700 people had signed a Change.org petition opposing Beruff’s FWC appointment.
“The appointment of a developer with a track record of putting profit over protection of the environment is unconscionable,” according to the petition, created by Naples resident Michelle Eddleman McCormick.
Anna Maria City Commissioner Carol Carter is among those who signed the petition.
Some who opposed Beruff’s appointment cited the Aqua by the Bay development.
“I believe that this is a conflict of interest seeing as he is attempting to destroy our shoreline to build the Aqua by the Bay development,” Shaun Reilly wrote when signing the petition.
“He has and is destroying wildlife nurseries around Florida, i.e. Aqua by the Bay,” Robert Kinney wrote when signing the petition.
“This man is not an environmentalist and conservationist who cares about wildlife. Please replace him with someone who has a track record of protecting Florida’s natural resources, our water, wetlands, rural areas and wildlife,” Pat Lindsey wrote.
“Talk about a fox guarding the hen house,” Tammy Johnson wrote.
BRADENTON – Late Tuesday afternoon, Manatee County Commissioners voted 7-0 in favor of approving the revised Aqua by the Bay general development plans.
The approved preliminary plans no longer include the controversial man-made estuary enhancement area and retaining wall that would have stood between the coastal mangroves and the development.
Stipulations added during Tuesday’s meeting also require the developers to come back to the commission for additional site plan approval after the first 750 residential units are built, and after each additional 750-unit threshold is completed during the anticipated 20-year development process.
The approved plans still allow for 16 95-foot condo buildings and an unspecified number of buildings between 36 and 75 feet tall, depending on the real estate market over the 20-year construction period. The development is approved for 2,894 residential units and 78,000 square feet of commercial space. The plans also include a swimming pool-like Crystal Lagoon that is the size of a small lake and features artificial beaches.
Initial reaction
As he left the Manatee County Administration Building, developer Carlos Beruff said he was pleased with the decision. He said he was glad the initial stage of the planning process that dates back to 2013 was over. In 2013, he reluctantly removed a proposed marina and navigation channel from his previous plans.
After Tuesday’s meeting, Glen Gibellina said he felt like he and the rest of the county residents had been “sold down the river” by the Manatee County Commission.
Former county commissioner and project opponent Joe McClash said he was pleased that the estuary area and wall were removed. He said he appreciated the developers and the county commissioners responding to the citizens’ environmental concerns about those aspects of the plan.
McClash said he was still disappointed with the building heights, but he acknowledged that was probably a forgone conclusion after the neighboring Lake Flores project was approved for similarly tall buildings. McClash also has remaining concerns about the wetland impacts now that the estuary canal mitigation area has been removed.
When asked if he anticipated a legal challenge to the commission’s decision, he said he and others would have to determine if that is a fight worth fighting in court given the concessions the developers have made.
County Commissioner Carol Whitmore said the developers’ concessions made it possible for her to support the project. Joe Hendricks | Sun
Before casting her vote, Commissioner Carol Whitmore said she could support the project because the proposed 145-foot tall buildings were removed at the previous meeting and the estuary and retaining wall also were being removed. She said these concessions alleviated her primary concerns about preserving the integrity of the adjacent fishing habitat in Sarasota Bay known as “The Kitchen.”
Commissioner Charles Smith said he would support the project based on the concessions made and the evidence presented during the multi-meeting public hearing process.
Commission Chair Betsy Benac praised county residents and others for the information and expertise they provided during the several opportunities they were given to provide public input in recent months.
The commission collectively acknowledged their decision was not going to sit well with everybody, but that the developers have the right to develop their property in some fashion and it would be unrealistic for the public to expect the property to remain undeveloped unless the county purchased it.
Procedural debate
Beruff and his attorney, Ed Vogler, offered to remove the estuary enhancement area from the plans soon after the meeting began Tuesday morning. Commissioners and county staff then had to determine if the proposed revisions were significant enough to warrant the meeting being continued to a later date.
Several concerned citizens expressed their continued opposition during Tuesday’s meeting. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The commission expressed a desire to finish the process that day, and a willingness to stay for as long as it took. Before lunch, the meeting was recessed until 3 p.m. to give the developers time to revise their plans and the attorneys from both sides time to work out the details.
During public comment Tuesday afternoon, several residents expressed opposition to a commission vote taking place that day and they requested the meeting be continued to a later date so they could further study the revisions proposed that morning.
One of the protestors at the Aqua by the Bay rally on Saturday voiced a concern that’s being discussed at bars, on beaches and in boats – “How do they get away with changing the rules in the middle of the game?”
The state of Florida and Manatee County have laws regulating development, mangrove trimming and destruction, dredge and fill operations and seawall construction.
Yet, at Aqua by the Bay, it appears that height restrictions don’t matter. Mangroves can be trimmed, and potentially destroyed, without permits. “Excavation” is substituted for “dredging” in project reports, “retaining wall” is substituted for “seawall,” “Enhancement area” is substituted for “borrow pit,” and everyone nods and winks that the two are different.
Aqua’s plan to excavate dry land landward of the mangroves and create an “enhancement area” will leave a two-mile strip of mangroves with water on both sides of them. That’s not how those mangroves are growing – they are attached to land on one side, with roots in the water on the other side.
The county staff report states that the enhancement area’s construction could cause sediment transfer, which could undermine the mangroves at their roots, then inexplicably recommends that the county commission approve the plan.
It’s almost as though a page is missing from the report that would tie the two contradictory statements together. But all the pages are there. Apparently, you have to read between the lines to determine what the report really means.
That flies in the face of the public’s First Amendment right to know.
The Sun’s request for information from the county to explain several apparent inconsistencies in the report was met with a demand for written questions last month, an unusual requirement, but not unreasonable. However, the reply to the written questions was unreasonable – since the project is pending before the commission, no one on the staff is allowed to respond to the questions.
If you can’t get the answers to questions before the decision is made, what good is it to get the answers later?
If everything in the plan is open, legal and above board, why wouldn’t commissioners simply answer the questions of a newspaper, or Saturday’s protestors, or those of the people who are going to pack the county commission chambers in downtown Bradenton on Thursday at 1:30 p.m.?
Certainly a lot is at stake for the private property owners who have a right develop their land. But a lot is at stake for the commercial fishermen, recreational boaters, tourists who love to see the highly-touted “Old Florida,” and the county’s electorate.
We encourage commissioners to do the right thing and address the concerns of the people with honest, complete answers to their questions, including, “How can they change the rules in the middle of the game?”
Because if the game is fixed, the masquerade needs to stop before we lose this natural treasure.
About 75 people opposed to the Aqua by the Bay development gathered near its entrance on the traffic circle at 75th Street and 53rd Avenue on Saturday afternoon, singing songs and carrying signs.
Horns honked in support as they chanted “Nay, nay, Aqua Bay.” Signs said, “No mangrove destruction, election day is coming,” “Enough Beruff,” “Earth before profits” and “Save our bays.”
“How do they get away with changing the rules in the middle of the game?” – Mary Onna Bode
As the afternoon sun grew hotter, they gathered in the shade of palm trees, talking in small groups about a long list of concerns over the 529-acre residential/commercial project with 2,894 homes, including a five-story building and a 13-story building.
A drone was buzzing the eagle’s nest on the property the other day, scaring the bird off the nest, one said.
Representatives of the Council of the Original Miccosukee Simanolee Nation, Aboriginal People of Florida, stood silently with their flag and feathers; the property contains an “archaeological area,” possibly containing Native American artifacts or graves, according to a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey conducted by Janus Research.
Some wondered how two Manatee County commissioners who formerly worked with project developer Carlos Beruff could be voting to approve or deny the project on Sarasota Bay on Thursday, May 4 at 1:30 p.m. at the commission chambers, 1112 Manatee Avenue W., Bradenton.
Cortez resident, business owner and former Commissioner Jane von Hahmann discussed current Commissioner Steve Jonsson’s 2011 affiliation with Beruff, as co-manager of Gold Medallion LLC. In 2004, Commissioner Betsy Benac worked as a consultant for SBC Development, headed by Beruff’s current business partner Larry Lieberman, when he planned to construct the previously-proposed project for then-owner Manatee Fruit Co. The highest buildings in that project were six stories.
“The issue transcends party lines.” – Jean Peelen
Unless the commissioners stand to gain financially from Aqua, they are required by law to vote on the project, von Hahmann said, “but they should be especially careful given their past association.”
Six of the seven commissioners, including Jonsson and Benac, have accepted at least $30,500 in campaign contributions from Beruff and his business associates (see related story).
Focus on mangroves
But the big topic of the day was mangroves.
Florida Statutes protect mangroves and require permits for their trimming or destruction. Commercial fisherman Mark Coarsey recently took photographs of the mangrove fringe to the south of the Aqua property, showing mangroves that had recently been extensively cut on Beruff-owned land. Requests by The Sun to DEP for information on the permit went unanswered.
“Don’t be a Carlos” – Katie Tupin
A former DEP employee that criticized the agency’s handling of the project was demoted from environmental administrator, a position she had held since the 1990s, to environmental consultant, according to Politico.com magazine.
Connie Bersok, a 30-year veteran of DEP, issued a memo for the project’s permit application that described her review of its proposed mitigation bank; the memo was never distributed by her superiors, then she was demoted, she told the magazine.
“That was the first indication that he (Beruff) was going to control what was done with that project,” she told Politico. “That was the clue. And things sort of went downhill from there.”
Cut mangrove branches have been dumped illegally in the bay, Coarsey said. Fishermen depend on the bay, known in the Cortez fishing village as the “kitchen,” for the propagation of marine life; juvenile species, including sea turtles, grow in the shelter of mangrove roots along the bay’s coastline.
Public meeting Thursday
A Democratic Club flyer inviting people to the protest points out that the developers propose dredging a lagoon and building a seawall landward of the mangroves, which will then suffer from erosion.
Holmes Beach Commissioner Jean Peelen forwarded the flyer in an e-mail, writing, “This transcends party lines.” At the protest, she held a sign saying, “Stop! Beruff is rich enough.”
The Sun’s written questions on inconsistencies in a county staff report on the mangroves and other issues were answered briefly by John Barnott, director of the Manatee County Building and Development Services Department in an e-mail stating, “This is an active hearing and I cannot allow staff to discuss most of this with anyone.”
To contact county commissioners about the project, call 941-748-4501 or click here for their e-mail addresses.
CORTEZ – The last time Cortezians took on Carlos Beruff, they lined up a 90-year-old woman, several seniors in wheelchairs, grandchildren, babes in their mothers’ arms and a disabled commercial fisherman along Cortez Road waving signs reading, “We are the little fish.”
For months, they filled hearing rooms with Cortez residents packed as tight as mullet in a cooler.
They beat the developer’s 2007 bid to buy the Cortez Trailer Park for $10.8 million, demolish it, displace the residents and turn it into a marina.
This time, Cortez-based FISH, the Florida Institute for Saltwater Heritage, has linked arms with Suncoast Waterkeeper and former Manatee County Commissioner Joe McClash to fight Beruff’s Aqua by the Bay project, formerly Long Bar Pointe.
The 529-acre residential/commercial project will have 2,384 residential multi-family units and 510 single-family lots, including a five-story building and a 13-story building, according to a county staff report, which states that the buildings are not expected to create any adverse impacts on surrounding developments – Legends Bay to the south, Tidy Island to the north and the planned Lake Flores to the east.
The Manatee County Commission is scheduled to decide on Thursday, May 4, the fate of two miles of pristine, state-protected mangrove fringe on Sarasota Bay, known to Cortezians as the kitchen, where juvenile fish, crabs and other marine life has long been protected by nature. The county Planning Commission recommended approval of the project 3-2 on April 13.
Beruff and partner Larry Lieberman lost their bid in 2013 to build a marina and channel at Long Bar Pointe when a judge ruled against his constitutional challenge to Manatee County’s comprehensive plan.
His new plan is to dredge out a 4.6-acre lagoon, or Estuary Enhancement Area, parallel to the shoreline and bordered by a proposed seawall on one side and the existing mangrove fringe on the other, with a break leading from the bay toward the project where the prohibited channel was located.
The construction of the lagoon will more than mitigate negative impacts to the 13 acres of wetlands in the project, and is “designed to create shallow vegetated wetland areas with deeper water refuges which are likely to create additional habitat for fish and wildlife,” the report states.
Many Cortezians, including Capt. Kathe Fannon, a former commercial fisherman who leads boat tours of Sarasota Bay, say it will do the opposite.
“People don’t come here to see high rises,” she said. “They come here to see that eagle’s nest (on the Long Bar Pointe property), and the manatees and dolphins in the bay.”
The staff report states that the enhancement area ultimately will reduce sediment transfer and damaging scour, or tidal action on mangroves.
“They claim this will keep sediments from mangroves that would degrade them, but our experts say the opposite is true; mangroves need sediments to stabilize themselves, otherwise they get scoured by the tides,” said Stuart Smith, of the Manatee-Sarasota Group of the Sierra Club and Suncoast Waterkeeper.
Seawalls have not been in favor since the 1970s in Florida partly because they cause erosion rather than prevent it, and “to bring them back now is ludicrous,” he said. “It’s a death sentence for the mangroves.
“This is the last intact coastal environment on Sarasota Bay, the best fishery on the bay, the only place you can go on the bay and not see a building,” he said. “This design is not appropriate for this place.”
“FISH wants this area protected; we here in Cortez need it protected as it plays such an important role in the very livelihood of so many who reside here in the village and make their living from the bay and coastal waters,” FISH Vice President and former Manatee County Commissioner Jane von Hahmann wrote FISH members in a call to action. “If you can, please attend the Board of County Commission meeting on May 4th; we need hundreds if not 1,000 citizens to once again show up and make it known our shorelines are of the utmost importance to us. They make Manatee County the incredible place it is.”
