BRADENTON BEACH – After Drift-In bar owner Derek Williams was named by City Attorney Ricinda Perry as the source of a Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) violation complaint against the Anna Maria Oyster Bar (AMOB), he made a public records request to the agency to clear his name.
In response to Williams’ request for information, an FDEP spokesperson confirmed there were no complaints on record and that the violation had been discovered during a routine inspection for the renewal of the city’s submerged land lease at the Bradenton Beach Pier, adjacent to the city-owned building at 200 Bridge St. that AMOB leases from the city.
The Sept. 9 email to Williams from FDEP Public Information Specialist Brian Humphreys stated, “I’m in receipt of your request for public records regarding 200 Bridge Street, Bradenton Beach, FL. I checked with our staff who advised we are unaware of any complaints received for that site, so I have no complaint records to share with you.
“Our staff conducted a compliance inspection for the state lands lease renewal as it was due to expire. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is required to inspect leased sites as part of the renewal process. During the inspection non-compliance was observed.”
On June 16, FDEP had sent a letter to the city which read in part, “FDEP compliance team conducted an inspection on 5/27/2025 for a (sovereign submerged land) lease renewal. It was noted that added over-water structures were seen at that inspection. Tiki hut structures were added on the docking structures, and the roof structures appear to hang beyond the docking structure footprint.”
FDEP requested the city remove the three tiki structures located on the south side of the AMOB outdoor dining area.
During public comment at a Sept. 4 Bradenton Beach City Commission meeting, Williams criticized Perry for allegedly telling the owner and manager of AMOB that he filed the FDEP complaint.
“I had a local merchant come to me in the last week and tell me Ms. Perry had spoken directly to the owner and the manager of the business and informed them that I had personally reported them for certain legal issues, which I’m 1,000% sure I did not do,” Williams said on Sept. 4. “I got direct phone calls from those people; they doubled down and verified it was Ricinda.”
“I was advised that a complaint was filed with the DEP by an individual from Drift-In because of the tiki roof (at AMOB) and they wondered if the city had gone through everything they were forced to go through,” Perry said at the Sept. 4 meeting.
With the results of the FDEP public records request in hand, Williams sent the following email to Mayor John Chappie and Police Chief John Cosby: “Below is the response I got back from Florida DEP in regards to the accusations made. As you can see from public records, I did not and have not reported anyone despite the accusations from City Attorney Perry. Due to recent events I chose to address her at the most recent City Commission meeting in the public forum. Otherwise, it seems I will continue to find my good name being smeared.”
“At the most recent meeting I addressed the commission and more specifically Attorney Perry about the accusation that ‘Derek Williams filed a complaint with the Florida DEP about the city pier.’ Perry immediately reacted and almost jumped out of her seat to defend her position and supposed ‘proof’ that I made the alleged call to Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Clearly the response below from DEP shows that no complaint ever existed per state/public records,” Williams’ email stated.
Williams stated in his email to the city that he also reached out to the West Bradenton fire marshal as they had previously spoken about the Drift-In AMI Tiki Bar. Williams stated the fire marshal confirmed their conversation was a “nonevent” and he had never reported anything about their conversations to the state.
“That leaves me once again bewildered and frustrated that this small local government contracted representative (Perry) continues to be unable to communicate in a civil manner. All signs point towards a different agenda for the businesses and property owners in Bradenton Beach. We deserve to know why,” Williams’ email stated.
Williams asked Chappie and Cosby to share the email with Bradenton Beach commissioners.
“They deserve a better understanding of the person that they are relying on for legal guidance and city affairs,” Williams stated.
Chappie did not respond to The Sun’s Sept. 10 request for comment.
“City Attorney Performance” will be the topic of a Bradenton Beach City Commission work meeting discussion on Tuesday, Sept. 16 at 10:30 a.m. The meeting packet that references the single agenda item pertains to the FDEP violation letter that Perry alleged was the result of a complaint made by Williams.
Open to the public, the meeting will be held in the Katie Pierola Commission Chambers at 107 Gulf Drive.
HOLMES BEACH – Representatives from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) want to make sure that city leaders know what they’re getting into if they opt to take over mangrove regulation from the state agency.
Holmes Beach city leaders are considering partnering with Anna Maria, Bradenton Beach and Longboat Key officials to locally monitor and regulate mangrove trimming and removal under the authority of FDEP. Issues of unauthorized removal of mangroves, large-scale trimming and lot clearing have led local leaders to consider taking on the permitting and enforcement duties.
FDEP Environmental Administrator Hannah Westervelt visited city commissioners during a June 11 meeting to explain how mangroves are regulated by the state and what the limits of their power would be if commissioners opt to apply to take over regulations from the state.
Florida Statute 403.9321, the 1996 Mangrove Trimming and Preservation Act, states the intent for the government regulation – to protect mangroves from unregulated removal and destruction, protect uninhabited mangrove islands and conservation/preservation lands, give property owners a riparian right of view and encourage property owners to plant and maintain mangroves.
A lesser-known regulation that Westervelt stressed in her presentation is that the act doesn’t distinguish between living and dead mangroves, therefore it protects both and the same trimming and removal rules apply even if the tree is dead.
While she said that a local municipality can create a delegation to enforce mangrove protections and make their own rules regarding mangrove trimming and removal, they are limited by established exemptions, which they cannot change. Only state legislators can change the exemption qualifications for mangrove trimming, alteration and removal.
“There is the ability for local governments to apply and obtain the ability to regulate and enforce this act,” Westervelt said. To qualify, she said the local government must create a program, budget funds for running the program, and handle both permitting and compliance.
Exemptions are not required to have a permit from FDEP, Westervelt said, though they can have an exemption verification done if the work is questioned. She said all exempt trimming, defined by FDEP as “to cut mangrove branches, twigs, limbs and foliage; does not include roots; does not mean to remove defoliate or destroy the mangroves,” must occur only in a riparian mangrove fringe. The riparian mangrove fringe is where mangroves growing along a shoreline do not extend more than 50 feet waterward from the most landward mangrove trunk to the most waterward mangrove trunk.
Homeowner exemptions include trimming within the riparian mangrove fringe on land owned or controlled by the homeowner, including submerged land. Mangroves cannot exceed 10 feet tall before they are trimmed under an exemption, or be trimmed lower than 6 feet tall. All trimming should be done by a certified professional mangrove trimmer and within regulations determined by height and shoreline length. Any trimming or mangrove alteration that doesn’t fall within an established exemption should be discussed with the local governing authority before any work takes place to determine if the work can be legally done and if a permit is needed.
Westervelt also advised that anyone doing mangrove trimmings take before and after photos of the mangroves in case a question of a violation comes up when the mangroves are inspected. If a violation is found, she said both the owner and the person trimming the trees are liable and may be required to restore the mangroves or perform some kind of mitigation on the site.
Mangroves are protected in Florida due to the protection they provide for properties against erosion and flooding and their role as nurseries for sea life.
ANNA MARIA – Building Department General Manager Dean Jones is leading the city’s efforts to join Holmes Beach, Bradenton Beach and Longboat Key in adopting and self-enforcing local mangrove regulations.
The multi-municipality regulatory efforts were first discussed during the April 17 Coalition of Barrier Island Elected Officials (CBIEO) meeting in Longboat Key. During that meeting, Anna Maria Mayor Dan Murphy proposed that the four barrier island municipalities work together to establish a local mangrove regulation program that would supersede the regulations currently enacted and enforced by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP).
Jones also attended the meeting and on April 25, at Murphy’s request, he provided the Anna Maria City Commission with an overview of the mangrove regulation and enforcement efforts to be pursued.
Building Department General Manager Dean Jones is leading Anna Maria’s pursuit of local mangrove regulations. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Jones’ presentation referenced a much-publicized mangrove removal event that occurred in late 2023 at a canal-side home at 111 Gull Drive in Anna Maria. The presentation included photos of the property before and after the mangroves were removed to make way for a new seawall.
“Part of what brought this process about was the fact that mangroves had been destroyed by a homeowner from out of state that felt they needed a seawall and didn’t really understand how important mangroves are to our ecosystem,” Jones said.
Another presentation slide listed the five Florida counties, one Florida city and one Florida town that have enacted their own local mangrove regulation and enforcement programs since 1996. Jones said of those seven, only Sarasota County’s mangrove program remains active.
Commissioner Charlie Salem asked Jones why the other mangrove enforcement programs faded away.
Jones said some people he spoke with didn’t even know who started their local mangrove programs and whether they ended due to a lack of resources or a lack of interest.
“The good thing is DEP will allow us to enforce our own mangrove ordinances, but we have to make sure we have the resources to do so,” Jones said.
Jones said he’ll be working in unison with Holmes Beach Planning and Zoning Administrator Chad Minor, Bradenton Beach Building Official Darin Cushing and Longboat Key Planning, Zoning and Building Director Allen Parsons.
Regarding FDEP requirements for local mangrove enforcement, one presentation slide said, “To receive delegation, a local government must demonstrate that it has sufficient resources and procedures for the adequate administration and enforcement of a delegated mangrove-regulatory program. This does not preclude a delegated local government from imposing stricter substantive standards or more demanding procedural requirements for mangrove trimming or alteration outside of riparian mangrove fringe areas.”
The presentation listed several next steps to be taken. Interlocal agreements must be established with all four participating municipalities and uniform guidelines must be adopted to provide continuity regarding administration and enforcement, including the fines and penalties levied on violators.
The municipalities must meet educational requirements and administrative guidelines and enforcement and communication protocols must be developed between the four municipalities to help intercept possible violations before they occur, or in the early stages of the occurrence.
“We need to have continuity across all the cities if we’re going to make this work,” Jones said. “Mangroves are a huge part of our ecosystem. When we remove them, bad things happen. The water gets worse and the wildlife goes away. We have the ability to protect our mangroves locally. We don’t have to let what happened at 111 Gull happen again. We can have some control over it.”
After noting that he also attended the CBIEO meeting, Salem thanked Murphy for his leadership and he suggested gathering more information about Sarasota County’s mangrove regulations and enforcement efforts.
During public input, Anna Maria resident Wayne Patterson thanked Jones and said, “I live right around the corner from that last decimated mangrove effort.” He asked how the city regulates mangroves in conjunction with property owners’ desire to install seawalls.
Commissioner Mark Short noted the city commission adopted a seawall ordinance a couple of years ago that states any new seawall installed must be installed landward of any mangroves that border the property – and doing so doesn’t reduce the total lot coverage allowed.
Patterson noted that didn’t happen at 111 Gull.
“They were removed before the permit for the seawall was applied for,” Short said. “Currently the city has no remedies. We always thought DEP would be the ones to remedy the situation. In my opinion, they’re not doing their job.”
Murphy then said, “At 111 Gull he had a permit from DEP. He did not have a seawall permit yet, but he had a permit to pull out all those mangroves. That’s what we’re trying to do here to preclude that from happening again. Otherwise, it’s going to keep happening,” Murphy said.
“Until we have local control,” Jones added.
Salem then said, “Because DEP doesn’t recognize man-made canals as part of this protection, that’s why they were allowed to remove those mangroves. We would be able to prohibit that kind of removal in those man-made canals.”
When asked what happens if one or more of the barrier island municipalities can’t agree on the mangrove regulations and enforcement measures later proposed, Murphy said, “We move right on. We need to get something done. In that meeting there was a pretty thorough understanding of what we needed to do and why we needed to do it. If somebody decides to back out, they’re on their own and the other cities will move forward.”
PAST PRESENTATION
This is not the first time the city of Anna Maria has inquired about establishing a local mangrove enforcement program. In 2020, FDEP representative Hannah Westervelt and the Anna Maria Commission participated in a mangrove trimming workshop.
During the workshop, Westervelt said, “Any local government can get the delegation of authority to regulate trimming and alteration of mangroves, but a local agency has to demonstrate they have the resources and the procedures in place. To establish that local program, you have to submit a written request for delegation to the department.”
ANNA MARIA – Despite attempts by neighbors to put a stop to mangrove removal at a Gull Drive home under construction, the developer received final approval on Feb. 16 to remove mangroves and construct a seawall.
With the consent of both the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), mangroves have been removed and construction of a 116-foot seawall began along the waterline at 111 Gull Drive beginning the week of Feb. 21.
“I have lost this battle and I accept that, but we haven’t lost the war; we’ve gained awareness of our environment. I’ve pulled the fire alarm on this,” said Ronnie Leto, an environmentalist and self-described whistleblower who lives across the canal from the Gull Drive property. “The sad part is, it’s not a homeowner doing this. It’s a developer doing this for profit.”
The property is owned by Sharp Real Estate Development of Hingham, Mass.
According to the Sharp Development website, “The private lot sits at the end of a cul-de-sac on a wide, open waterway” and has an expected list price of $6,195,000.
The work there had been stalled since December when neighbors reported mangrove removal to the FDEP and the city of Anna Maria.
“I was in my front yard putting up Christmas lights when I heard the machines,” Leto said in December. “I went out back and saw a backhoe ripping out mangroves.”
In a Dec. 18 email from Anna Maria Mayor Dan Murphy to The Sun, Murphy wrote, “The City received a complaint from a resident on Dec. 4, 2023, regarding the extensive removal and alteration of mangroves at 111 Gull Drive. As a result of this complaint, city staff visited the property and confirmed that mangroves had been removed and fill dirt had been added in its place.”
A permit for seawall construction had not been issued by the city and a stop work order was posted on the property on Dec. 6, according to Murphy.
“On Dec. 13, 2023, staff received several complaints from residents that mangroves had been removed yet again, despite the stop work order,” Murphy wrote. “One of the complainants shared a video of workers removing the mangroves and noted that the complainant called the Manatee County Sheriff to the site on the eve of Dec. 12, 2023. City staff visited the site on Dec. 13, 2023, and observed workers actively removing mangroves.”
Murphy wrote the stop work order had been removed and staff reposted it.
“The City of Anna Maria has confirmed that Mason Martin LLC, the contractor for the construction of the house at 111 Gull, was the entity that removed the mangroves,” Murphy wrote in a Dec. 19 email to The Sun.
FDEP issued an exemption on Sept. 19 for the construction of an approximately 116-foot seawall with a 2-foot-wide concrete cap and 815 square feet of backfill to level the property.
Following complaints the agency had received on Dec. 13 about mangrove removal, FDEP inspectors conducted a site visit on Dec. 22.
The FDEP final inspection report on released on Jan. 11 stated in part: “The inspection revealed that construction had commenced and a portion of the mangroves on the property were removed within the exempt activity’s footprint. Erosion control devices were installed upon request after the inspection.”
According to that report, 67 feet of mangroves had been removed, leaving 49 feet of mangrove fringe.
“The canal system is considered Waters of the United States (WOTUS) and is within retained waters. Therefore, additional authorization is required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE),” the FDEP report stated. “The Department notified the property owner that they should continue to coordinate with USACE and to not continue construction until a USACE authorization is obtained.”
On Feb. 16, the USACE issued the required authorization, according to Army Corps spokesman David Ruderman.
“The authorization included a requirement that the applicant purchase mangrove credits from the Tampa Bay Mitigation Bank before construction of the proposed seawall,” Ruderman wrote in a Feb. 22 email to The Sun. “I don’t have any details on the dollar amount of the credit but have asked for that info and will pass it on if/when I get a response.”
The Army Corps of Engineers mitigation credits can provide wetland mitigation for impacts within its federal wetland mitigation service area, according to the Tampa Bay Mitigation bank website.
“Mitigation banking is a practice in which an environmental enhancement and preservation project is conducted by a public agency or private entity (“banker”) to provide mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts within a defined region (mitigation service area),” according to the FDEP website. “The bank is the site itself, and the currency sold by the banker to the impact permittee is a credit, which represents the wetland ecological value equivalent to the complete restoration of one acre.”
Mitigation banks are authorized by a state permit, issued by either a water management district or the department, and by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as a Mitigation Bank Instrument (MBI), according to FDEP.
“The cost of a ‘credit’ often seems high at first look (initially listed at $100K-$150K per credit); however, the cost is often significantly lower than the cost of designing and permitting on-site mitigation projects taking into consideration land costs, consulting and engineering fees, and delays in project implementation,” according to the Tampa Bay Mitigation website.
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.
CORTEZ – The Cortez Village Marina ownership group is named in a new complaint that alleges the marina is being operated without a state-issued environmental resource permit or is being operated in violation of that permit.
Representing developer Marshall Gobuty’s Hunters Point Resort & Marina ownership group, Cortez Road Investments & Finance Inc. (CRIF), attorney Susan Martin filed the complaint with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) on Aug. 22.
The complaint seeks injunctive relief to stop the alleged “illegal activities” of the MHC Cortez Village LLC marina ownership group.
The complaint notes Cortez Village Marina is part of the Loggerhead Marinas group that owns 23 marinas throughout Florida and is affiliated with Equity LifeStyle Properties – a company that owns a controlling interest in more than 400 manufactured home communities, RV resorts and campgrounds.
The complaint names MHC Cortez Village LLC, Loggerhead Marinas and FDEP as respondents and says, “CRIF requests enforcement, including a temporary injunction, followed by the permanent injunction, to stop the illegal activities of the marina to avoid irreparable environmental impacts and harm to CRIF’s private canal.”
The new complaint is part of an ongoing dispute between Cortez Road Investments and MHC Cortez Village regarding the proposed construction of 49 Hunters Point docks along the privately-owned canal that borders the Hunters Point property on the three sides.
The canal area highlighted in blue is owned by Hunters Point and extends to the Cortez Village Marina’s western boundary, on the right. – Manatee County Property Appraiser | Submitted
Built in the late 1950s, the man-made canal extends from the humpback bridge at 127th Street West to the eastern edge of the Holiday Cove RV resort property. When Gobuty purchased the Hunters Point property in 2016, he also purchased the portion of the canal that extends from the humpback bridge to Cortez Village Marina’s western boundary. The canal is the only means for marina clients to access the nearby Intracoastal Waterway (ICW).
The new dispute stems from the permit challenge MHC Cortez Village initiated after Cortez Road Investments received an environmental resource permit from the Southwest Florida Water Management District in 2021. That permit allows for the construction of the Hunters Point docks.
In response to the issuance of that 2021 permit, MHC Cortez Village filed a petition naming Cortez Road Investments and the Southwest Florida Water Management District as respondents. The petition alleged the Hunters Point docks would impede canal navigation for marina clients, especially those with larger boats, and negatively impact marina operations and profitability.
86 solar powered homes are being constructed on the Hunters Point property. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
MHC Cortez Village sought and received a hearing before an administrative law judge in hopes of the judge issuing a recommended order for the water district’s governing board to revoke the permit or modify it in a manner that lessens the impact of the proposed Hunters Point docks.
With administrative law judge Bruce Culpepper presiding, that hearing began in June, continued for three days in mid-August and is scheduled to resume on Sept. 1.
Complaint allegations
The complaint alleges Cortez Village Marina is operating without a valid permit because the permit obtained by the previous marina owner was not properly certified when transferred to the current marina owners.
“The permit could not have been transferred because the project was not built and is not operating pursuant to permit conditions. Therefore, there was no automatic transfer of the permit,” the complaint alleges.
“MHC Cortez Village LLC does not have a valid environmental resource permit and is operating without a permit in a manner to cause environmental harm,” the complaint alleges. “Alternatively, if DEP finds the marina legally holds permit number 41-0255306, then there are major violations of the permit conditions. The marina has profited from its illegal activity in the amount of at least $181,000 for the month of July alone.”
“CRIF respectfully requests DEP immediately order the marina to cease the unauthorized activities at the marina. If necessary to stop the illegal activities, CRIF requests that DEP seek an immediate temporary injunction in Manatee County circuit court,” according to the complaint.
“The marina admits in its petition that the marina has 365 permanent boat slips. During testimony, the marina’s general manager, Skip McPadden, also admitted the marina has additional temporary boat slips. Condition number 45 of the DEP permit states the permittee shall ensure the docking facility will be limited to a total of 295 boat slips – 272 dry and 23 wet – inclusive of all shoreline and upland storage,” the complaint says.
The complaint notes McPadden and boat captain Chris Karentz testified that many marina clients are inexperienced boaters who could potentially collide with the proposed Hunters Point docks.
The complaint notes MHC Cortez Village’s 2021 complaint and recent testimony by McPadden confirmed the marina also operates a service department.
“The marina has therefore admitted it is violating the permit which states, ‘Boat maintenance or repair activities requiring removal of a vessel from the water, or removal of major portions of the vessel, for purposes of routine repair or maintenance shall be prohibited for the life of the facility, except where removal is necessitated by emergency conditions which have resulted in or can result in the sinking of a vessel,’” the complaint states.
The complaint references a website that states Cortez Village Marina clients can do their own repairs and the marina offers hull, engine and propellor repairs.
The complaint notes that McPadden recently testified that marina employees use the canal to test vessels before and after repairs are made.
“Immediate action is necessary to close the illegal service department since it is an unauthorized operation,” the complaint alleges.
The complaint also alleges the marina has not complied with reporting requirements for its stormwater and drainage system.
“Therefore, there are no reasonable assurances that the marina is complying with the stormwater conditions of the permit,” the complaint alleges. “CRIF personnel have seen, during heavy storms, surface water flowing from the marina property into the canal. This results in the release of oils, greases, lubricants, gases and other fluids into the private canal which discharges to the ICW and then Anna Maria Sound.”
MANATEE COUNTY – The Suncoast Waterkeeper organization remains concerned about the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (FDEP) response and oversight of the mangrove trimming that occurred earlier this year at the Aqua development.
Currently being developed with numerous single-family and multi-family structures, the Aqua development, previously known as Long Bar Pointe, is located in unincorporated Manatee County between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay, lined in places with state-protected mangroves.
The mangrove trimming that occurred earlier this year created a better view of the bay from the multi-family residential buildings being constructed on the Aqua property. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
On Aug. 19, Suncoast Waterkeeper founder and Vice-Chair Justin Bloom emailed a letter to FDEP environmental specialist and compliance coordinator Derrick Hudson and several other FDEP staff members, including FDEP Southwest District Director Kelly Boatwright and FDEP Secretary Shawn Hamilton. Bloom also sent the letter to state legislators Jim Boyd and Will Robinson Jr.
The letter’s subject matter was “Long Bar/Aqua Mangrove trimming violations,” and was signed by Bloom, Suncoast Waterkeeper Chair (and The Sun’s outdoors columnist) Rusty Chinnis and Executive Director Abbey Tyrna.
“Thank you for following up on the numerous citizens’ complaints relating to mangrove trimming permit violations at Long Bar Point (Aqua),” the letter began. “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 that corresponded with the GPS coordinates contained within the inspection report were 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 letter states.
Significant amounts of mangrove trimming debris remain along the Aqua development shoreline. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
“Furthermore, from what we have seen, there has been no compliance assistance offer, no warning letter, no notice of violation or other enforcement action taken. This is concerning to us. We believe that but for our advocacy, the DEP would have dropped the matter long ago without finding any violations. We want to see DEP play this matter out according to your own rules and regulations,” the letter states.
The Waterkeeper letter included a link to several photographs Chinnis took on Aug. 17 of the trimming debris that remains along the Aqua shoreline.
Trimming concerns
In February, FDEP received two complaints that questioned whether the mangrove trimming that occurred along the Aqua shoreline was conducted in compliance with state laws and regulations. FDEP received a third complaint in April.
In May, FDEP released an investigation report that included a site inspection overview stating that Hudson and FDEP staff member Pamala Vazquez made their first site visit to the Aqua property on April 26, accompanied by Medallion Home/Long Bar Pointe/Aqua representatives Rob Bosarge and Chris Chavez.
Hudson conducted a second site visit on May 3, accompanied by Chavez and Dave Fister, the arborist who owns the Fort Myers-based Coastline Tree Service company that recently trimmed the Aqua mangroves.
The compliance status determination listed in Hudson’s report references “minor non-compliance.” Regarding a return to compliance, Hudson’s report says, “It is recommended the permittee provide the pre and post trim photos required by the permit within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Please ensure during the next trim event, photographs are submitted 14 days prior and 14 days following the activity. Please contact department staff to schedule a joint site inspection within 30 days following the trim event.”
When contacted by The Sun on May 17 regarding the inspection report, FDEP Press Secretary Alexandra Kuchta said, “The mangroves appeared to be healthy and trimmed within the permit limits. Trimming did not result in more than 25% of the foliage being removed and trimming did not induce tree mortality. 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.”
Additional correspondence
On June 23, Hudson sent an email to Fister, which he also copied to Chaves, Bosarge and Medallion Home founder, CEO and president Carlos Beruff.
Hudson’s email contained an aerial map that identified where the mangrove trimmings took place and several pages of inspection photos and photo descriptions that referenced “oversized trimming,” “aggressive trimming,” “spot of significant trimming litter left,” “trimming location below authorized height,” “location of possible tree topping” and “tree removal.”
In his July 1 response to Hudson, arborist Fister wrote, “On June 29th we conducted a site visit to the mangrove fringe at Long Bar Pointe. We did observe that not all trimming debris greater than 3 feet (in length) or 3 inches (in diameter) was completely removed from the fringe. We will be responsible to clean that debris from the fringe. It is our desire to allow this to take place during the next trimming event.”
Fister also suggested some of the trimming debris cited in the FDEP photos may have been the result of previous trimming efforts.
On July 12, Hudson sent an email to Chavez and Bosarge that included the following FDEP-requested actions: Within 30 days (by Aug. 12) remove the trimmings longer than 3 feet long and/or larger than 3 inches in diameter, remove the ‘hot spot’ trimmings and large piles of authorized trimmings, provide pre and post photos of the work conducted and investigate and provide photos of map location #5.
Overall enforcement concerns
The Suncoast Waterkeeper letter also addressed FDEP’s overall enforcement efforts.
“We have witnessed a disturbing pattern of mangrove trimming violations and a lack of DEP enforcement, particularly in Manatee County. Manatee County still has significant mangrove coverage, (but) permitted and unpermitted mangrove trimming and removal is taking a disturbing toll on these precious environmental resources. We believe that property owners and contractors perceive that DEP is not providing oversight and that there will be little or no consequence removal. The environmental degradation that results is significant,” the letter states.
The Aqua/Long Bar Point shoreline looked like this before the mangroves were trimmed. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
In closing, the letter encouraged FDEP officials to take appropriate actions to protect the remaining mangroves along Sarasota Bay and to also protect the integrity of the environmental laws and regulations that pertain to mangrove trimming.
To local fishers, the importance of mangroves is evident. Intertwined with the twisted roots, there’s a web of life that’s inextricably bound to the snook, redfish, trout, flounder, grouper and a plethora of other gamefish that they seek. What can be less apparent to those that make a living elsewhere is the importance of mangroves as a critical source of food and protection for fish and people.
These ancient coastal forests provide an abundance of food for manatees, dolphins and sea turtles as well as sustenance and nesting areas for critically endangered seabirds. All these links in the chain of life provide the ineffable sense of beauty and wonder that continue to attract people to this region. They also protect and sustain a vibrant economy in ways that might not be as apparent.
What’s less well understood, and just beginning to be appreciated, is the protection mangroves provide against powerful hurricanes and rising waters that longtime residents have seen firsthand. With all that mangroves provide for us and our quality of life, it would seem they would be revered and protected at all costs.
Unfortunately, just the opposite seems to be the case.
When local fishing guides began to question me about what they considered extensive mangrove trimming along the Sarasota Bay shoreline, I went to investigate. What
I observed shocked and angered me. That was April 4 of this year, and I flew a drone and walked the shoreline to document what I witnessed. There were numerous large mature mangroves that had been cut, were denuded of leaves and appeared dead. There also was a large amount of cut debris in the water, including branches that were of greater diameter and longer than allowed under Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) guidelines.
When I reached out to FDEP in April to file a complaint, I was informed that Karen Willey, a local environmental advocate and business owner, had filed a protest two months earlier in February 2022. When I questioned Willey, she said she had been reading the Washington Post and had seen an ad for Aqua by the Bay that featured an image looking west with an unobstructed view of Sarasota Bay she had never seen before.
When I called FDEP to inquire why no actions had been taken, the response I received indicated that they had sent a letter to the permit holder about the complaint and had not heard back from them. They also stated that they couldn’t get on the property to inspect without permission from the property owner. After raising the issue with Florida state Rep. Will Robinson, Sen. Jim Boyd and the Manatee County Commission, an inspection was done which claimed that the conditions of the permit had been met.
Astonished, I sent an email challenging the FDEP inspection report with images showing my concerns.
At her request, I sent GPS-tagged images to Hannah Westervelt, FDEP Compliance Assurance Manager, and received a reply indicating that inspectors were being sent back to the site to investigate.
Subsequently, Westervelt contacted me to say that two inspections were conducted that confirmed our concerns. The permit holder was given until Aug. 12 to reply to the letter and we are currently waiting for the response.
It’s unfortunate and ill-advised that state regulators are not performing their duty in a timely manner to protect the citizens and businesses of Florida, present and future. But it wouldn’t be fair to lay the blame only with the FDEP. People I have spoken to who deal with state regulators on a regular basis fault prior Gov. Rick Scott with eviscerating the FDEP and spawning a mass exodus of the brightest and most committed regulators.
The people I spoke to at the agency, including Westervelt, were responsive to my questions and concerns and ultimately addressed the issue. My guess is the agency is struggling with a limited budget and staff. That’s where we the voters come in. It’s incumbent on the citizens of Florida and Manatee County to elect officials with a proven record of protecting our most important and vulnerable resources.
How this is resolved is still to be seen, but rest assured that groups like Suncoast Waterkeeper will make sure it doesn’t become just a cost of doing business for the developer. I don’t have a crystal ball but I’m guessing that future developers, builders and your children and grandchildren will judge us for the decisions we make and actions we take.
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.”
UPDATED May 10, 2022 – ANNA MARIA – A silt fence has been erected on the undeveloped beachfront property at 105 Elm Ave., reigniting interest in an ongoing permitting process.
Bradenton resident Fedora Campbell owns the beachfront property at 105 Elm Ave. Permitting records obtained from the city of Anna Maria list Greg Gagne as the permit applicant and the Anna Maria-based Gagne Construction firm as Campbell’s contracted construction company.
The recent appearance of the silt fence does not mean the proposed construction has been fully permitted by the city and the city commission. Elm Avenue does not currently extend to Campbell’s property. Elm Avenue currently ends near the driveway for the home at 107 Elm owned by Wendy and Robert Jordan.
A city-issued right of way permit would be required for the construction company to install an unpaved, shell-covered extension of Elm Avenue in the city right of way which would then provide access to the 105 Elm driveway. The city-owned right of way at the west end of Elm Avenue also serves as a beach access entrance. On April 20, the Anna Maria Building Department received a right of way access plan from Gagne Construction.
The unpaved portion of Elm Avenue currently ends near the Jordan’s driveway and the beach access entrance. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
On May 1, The Sun asked Anna Maria Mayor Dan Murphy about the recent installation of the silt fence.
“No vote has taken place regarding the use of the city-owned right of way. A permit to build the house has been submitted and is pending review. Meanwhile, before a permit can be reviewed, the property needs to submit soil bore samples for analysis. A silt fence is required to do the soil bore. Hence, a silt fence is up at the property,” Murphy said.
“No permits have been issued. As it stands now, no permit will be issued until the right of way issue is run by the Planning and Zoning Board for comment and then taken to the city commission and either approved or rejected. If the commission approves the right-of-way permit, then the Florida Department of Environmental Protection must also review and either reject or approve the permit request. If all approve, then a permit can be issued,” Murphy said.
Driveway access
According to Section 114-421 of the city code of ordinances, “Generally, with the exception of the planting of grass or 250 filter mix, no encumbrances of any kind, such as trees, bushes, rocks, stones, plantings, pea gravel, crushed shell, etc., shall be placed or constructed on the right-of-way within 8 feet of the edge of pavement without the written approval of the director of public works and a majority of the members of the city commission.”
Building Director George McKay issued this right of way permit for 107 Elm Ave. in 2007. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
On Nov. 14, 2007, then-Public Works Director George McKay approved a right-of-way work permit related to the construction of a home at 107 Elm. That permit references an “extension of driveway.” An accompanying document dated Nov. 21, 2006, references a “road extension in right of way” and noted the materials used to extend Elm Avenue to provide access to 107 Elm were to consist of #250 sand mix, FDOT screenings mix or filter mix. That permit resulted in Elm Avenue being extended without the use of asphalt or concrete. McKay’s administrative issuance of the 2007 right of way permit was not presented to the city commission for approval.
The site plan for 105 Elm proposes a driveway that connects to an unpaved extension of Elm Avenue. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
The need for a city commission-approved right-of-way permit was the subject of a memo that Campbell’s attorney, Kevin Hennessey, sent to the Anna Maria Building Department on April 20. Hennessey’s memo prompted a written legal opinion in the form of a memo from Anna Maria City Attorney Becky Vose, which she sent to Murphy and Hennessey on April 26.
In his memo, Hennessey cited Section 114-604 of the city code of ordinances which states, “The director of public works is authorized to approve an application/permit for right of way utilization which is in compliance with this article. After approval of an application/permit by the director of public works and payment of the required fee by the applicant, a copy of the approved application/permit will be issued to the applicant.”
Hennessy’s memo stated, “It is our position that the city code allows for administrative approval, by city staff, of the proposed right of way improvements, without the need for approval by the planning and zoning board or the city commission.”
Hennessey’s memo stated, “It is also the experience of Gagne Construction that the city has never previously made it a requirement to go in front of the city commission or planning and zoning board to get approval of a similar access/driveway work in a city right of way. The city’s public records also show that the driveway approval for the 107 Elm Ave. home, which similarly was in the Elm Avenue right of way, did not require city commission approval. The owner of 107 Elm Ave. did go before the city commission for a setback variance, but nothing in the agenda or minutes reflect any discussion of the right of way permit. Mr. Gagne also called Mr. Whitehead, who was part of the permit process for the 107 Elm Ave. property. Mr. Whitehead said the city commission meeting was not a part of the requirement for the right of way permit.”
A city-issued right of way permit has been requested for the use of the city-owned right of way that also serves as a beach access point at the west end of Elm Avenue. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
In her memo, Vose stated, “Mr. Hennessey concludes that an administrative approval of his application is necessarily justified. I disagree with Mr. Hennessy. The authority of the director of public works to approve an application/permit for right of way utilization is limited to instances when such utilization ‘is in compliance with this article (Section 114-601).’ The section really begs the question of whether the application/permit should be granted.”
In 2017, Murphy restructured the city’s building, planning and code enforcement departments and reassigned McKay to serve as the city’s building department coordinator. Murphy assigned Dean Jones to serve as public works manager, a title Jones still holds. McKay is now an hourly employee in the city’s building department.
In her memo, Vose stated, “It should be noted that the position of director of public works is currently a vacant position. In the absence of a director of public works, the authority that would be vested in such director is actually exercised, if at all, by the mayor. Even if there were currently a director of public works, the provision that ‘the director of public works is authorized to approve an application/permit for right of way utilization which his compliance with this article’ does not mandate that the director of public works necessarily take such action, particularly due to the provisions of Section 114-421, requiring the approval of both the director of public works and a majority of the members of the city commission under certain circumstances with appear to apply here.
“In this instance, due to the possible far-reaching effects of this decision, the public scrutiny relating to this subject and the provisions of Section 114-421, the mayor, acting in the stead of the director of public works, has chosen not to make this decision himself, but rather refer it to the city commission to make that decision,” Vose stated in her memo.
“It is my opinion, that under current conditions, the city commission does have the authority to make the decision as to the approval or denial of the application for right of way permit. It is my understanding that the city will schedule your application to be heard before the planning and zoning board for a recommendation, then schedule your application to be heard before the city commission for final decision,” Vose stated in her memo.
The 105 Elm Ave. right of way use permit is scheduled for discussion at the Monday, May 16, planning and zoning board meeting at City Hall at 2 p.m. The meeting will be open to the public.
Regarding the right of way permit approval process, Murphy said, “As our city attorney interpreted the code, the director of public works only has authority over 8 feet of the right of way in front of a residence. In this case, we’re looking at approximately 70 feet of right of way and the right of way is public property and the city is the guardian of that public property. Hence, that’s the reason an employee cannot give away public property for public use. That’s a matter for the commission to decide.”
Coastal construction concerns
Through their North Carolina-based WAJ Rustic Vacations LLC, the Jordans bought the beachfront home and property at 107 Elm for $4 million on April 1, 2021. On April 23, the Jordans then bought the undeveloped 103 Elm property from Steven Decker for $500,000. The 103 Elm property is located seaward and west of Campbell’s property.
On July 6, 2021, Wendy Jordan sent Murphy an email that referenced the Jordans’ efforts to also purchase the 105 Elm property.
“We first offered the lot owner $2 million dollars for her lot; she is 83 years old. She asked for $2 million and we met to set the closing and then she turned it down,” Jordan stated in her email.
In that email, she also stated, “For those who immediately say, ‘You are only worried about your view.’ Of course I am worried about my view. We paid for a view and it is in jeopardy of change that will ruin the wildlife.”
Wendy and Robert Jordan’s beachfront home at 107 Elm Ave. currently has a mostly unobstructed view of the beach and the Gulf of Mexico. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The Jordans have publicly opposed the construction of a new home at 105 Elm through the Preserve AMI website and public awareness campaign they launched a few months after purchasing their new home. According to the Preserve AMI website, the Jordans and some of the other Preserve AMI supporters are also concerned that allowing Campbell’s home to be built seaward and west of the state of Florida’s Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) would establish a precedent regarding the development of other undeveloped properties seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line.
On June 25, 2020, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection provided Campbell with a notice to proceed and a permit for her desired construction activities at 105 Elm Ave.
On Aug. 3, 2020, attorney David Levin filed a petition for a formal administrative hearing with the Florida Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH). Levin filed that petition on behalf of potentially impacted property owners David Morris, Ling Liu, DAR Real Estate Enterprises and Richard Theidel. The Jordans did not own the 107 Elm property at that time.
“Campbell’s proposed structures do not comply with the applicable requirements and are not eligible for a CCCL permit. Petitioners seek a final order revoking Permit No. ME-1341,” Levin stated in his petition.
In response to that request, administrative law judge Francine Ffolkes later presided over a six-day DOAH hearing. On June 7, 2021, Ffolkes issued her written recommended order which stated: “It is hereby recommended that DEP enter a final order granting Campbell’s application for a CCCL permit to construct a single-family residence and associated structures seaward of the CCCL.”
These plans illustrate what the proposed residential structure at 105 Elm would look like. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
On July 20, 2021, Interim FDEP Secretary Shawn Hamilton signed the final order that formalized Ffolkes’ recommended order. The final order provided a 30-day appeal period. On Aug. 12, 2021, the Jordans filed three notices of appeal regarding Hamilton’s final order, but at the advice of Levin, they later decided to stop their appeal process.
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.
ANNA MARIA – Bradenton resident Fedora Campbell is moving forward with her plan to build a three-story, single-family home on her undeveloped beachfront property at 105 Elm Ave.
“There has been so much notoriety about proposed construction at 105 Elm in our Con 1 (Conservation) Zone,” Mayor Dan Murphy told city commissioners on Feb. 10, referring to objections by neighbors that the project would block their Gulf views. “It’s not appropriate this afternoon to weigh in on this. I just want to you be cognizant of the fact that late last week we received a building permit application to do construction in that lot at 105 Elm and that it’s under review.”
Murphy did not provide any additional details regarding the city permitting process.
The building permit application obtained from the city clerk’s office was signed by Campbell and lists Greg Gagne as the permit applicant and Anna Maria-based Gagne Construction as the construction company.
The construction agreement between Campbell and Gagne Construction references the construction of a new single-family home and driveway and a $1.635 million contract price that calls for 50% payment upon acceptance of the agreement and the remaining balance due upon completion of the construction project.
The 105 Elm Ave. site plan refers to a proposed Elm Avenue extension. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
A site plan included in the permitting documents refers to an area identified as “Proposed Elm Avenue,” which indicates a desire to seek from the city an extension of Elm Avenue that would provide for a driveway connection and vehicular access to the 105 Elm property that currently has no such access. The drainage plan refers to a driveway connected to a proposed shell-covered portion of Elm Ave. If approved by the city, the extended portion of Elm Avenue would be located on a currently undeveloped, unpaved city-owned right of way that includes a beach access path.
The 105 Elm Ave. drainage plan proposes a driveway connected to a shell-covered portion of Elm Avenue. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
Section 114-421 of the city code of ordinances addresses prohibited uses within city-owned rights of way and the need for city commission approval to encumber a city-owned right of way: “Generally, with the exception of the planting of grass or 250 filter mix, no encumbrances of any kind, such as trees, bushes, rocks, stones, plantings, pea gravel, crushed shell, etc., shall be placed or constructed on the right-of-way within 8 feet of the edge of pavement without the written approval of the director of public works and a majority of the members of the city commission.”
Neighbors opposed
Elm Avenue currently ends near the driveway of the beachfront home at 107 Elm Ave. that Wendy and Robert Jordan purchased for $4 million in April 2021.
The Jordans oppose Campbell’s proposed development because it would obstruct their existing view of the beach and the Gulf of Mexico. The Jordans disagree with a 2021 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) ruling in which an administrative law judge upheld the building permit FDEP previously issued in 2020 for the construction of Campbell’s home seaward of the state’s Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL).
The Jordans’ opposition includes the still-active Preserve AMI campaign publicity launched in 2021 with the assistance of family friend and advertising and creative resource, Patrick Coyne. The campaign initially included yard signs and newspaper advertisements urging Murphy and other elected officials to “Do the right thing” regarding any future permitting decisions made at the local level.
On June 25, 2020, FDEP provided Campbell with a notice to proceed and a permit for her proposed construction activities. The FDEP approval allowed those whose substantial interests may be affected by the department’s action to petition for a formal administrative hearing.
On Aug. 3, 2020, attorney David Levin filed a petition for such a hearing with the Florida Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) on behalf of potentially impacted property owners David Morris, Ling Liu, DAR Real Estate Enterprises and Richard Theidel. This administrative action took place before the Jordans bought the home at 107 Elm.
“Campbell’s proposed structures do not comply with the applicable requirements and are not eligible for a CCCL permit. Petitioners seek a final order revoking Permit No. ME-1341,” Levin stated in his filed petition.
These architectural drawings provide a side view of the proposed residential construction. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
In response to the petitioners’ request, administrative law judge Francine Ffolkes presided over a six-day DOAH hearing. On June 7, 2021, Ffolkes issued her written recommended order, which stated, “It is hereby recommended that DEP enter a final order granting Campbell’s application for a CCCL permit to construct a single-family residence and associated structures seaward of the CCCL.”
On July 20, 2021, Interim FDEP Secretary Shawn Hamilton signed the final order that formalized Ffolkes’ recommended order. The final order provided a 30-day appeal period. According to an FDEP spokesperson, no appeal was sought.
On July 6, 2021, Anna Maria Building Official Luke Curtis sent an email to Murphy that referenced two previous building area determinations made by two different third-party firms in 2017 and 2018.
“The buildable area determinations confirm that the lot located at 105 Elm is a buildable lot as per city code, but that the final determination would be made by the FDEP,” Curtis stated in his email. “Prior to any building permit being accepted by the building department, a development permit, along with a site plan – including but not limited to access to the property, sewer, water and electric utilities – will need to be considered and approved by city commission.”
ANNA MARIA – Despite opposition to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP)’s approval of construction on a vacant beachfront lot, no one has yet requested a judicial review of the approval.
On Tuesday, July 20, FDEP issued a final order regarding an administrative challenge to a construction permit and notice to proceed that FDEP issued to 105 Elm Ave. owner Fedora Campbell in 2020.
“The final order granting Fedora L. Campbell’s application for a Coastal ConstructionControl Line (CCCL) permit to construct a single-family residence and associated structures seaward of the CCCL on Anna Maria Island in Manatee County, Florida is approved subject to the general and specific conditions set forth within the permit,” states the final order signed by interim FDEP Secretary Shawn Hamilton.
According to the FDEP website, “The Coastal Construction Control Line Program regulates structures and activities which can cause beach erosion, destabilize dunes, damage upland properties or interfere with public access. CCCL permits also protect sea turtles and dune plants.”
FDEP’s final order notes that any party to this proceeding has the right to seek a judicial review of the final order by filing a notice of appeal with the department in the Office of General Counsel within 30 days.
When contacted by email on Thursday, July 29, FDEP spokesperson Jon Moore said, “A judicial review has not been filed in this matter.”
According to the city of Anna Maria, no additional applications for city-issued building permits were received last week regarding 105 Elm Ave.
Elm Avenue and the existing utilities connections currently end near the driveway of the home at 107 Elm Ave. recently purchased by Wendy and Robert Jordan. The Jordans oppose the development of 105 Elm Property, in part because it would obstruct their existing beachfront view.
The Jordans’ Preserve AMI campaign also expresses concerns about a potential precedent being established regarding the development of additional undeveloped lots seaward of the coastal construction line in Anna Maria and elsewhere along the Anna Maria Island shoreline.
Previous permit activity
On Jan. 15, 2020, Gagne Construction President Dan Gagne sent a letter to Anna Maria Building Official Luke Curtis regarding the proposed development of 105 Elm Ave.
“Attached, please find proposed construction plans for a new single-family residence at 105 Elm Ave. Please provide me with a letter of no objection that will be submitted to the Department of Environmental Protection indicating the proposed project does not contravene local setback requirements or zoning codes,” Gagne’s letter stated.
One day later, a building permit application seeking a letter of no objection was stamped as received by the city, as was a residential building and impervious coverage calculation worksheet regarding Campbell’s property.
These previously submitted plans illustrate the proposed residential development sought for the 105 Elm Ave. property. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
On Jan. 23, 2020, City Planner Chad Minor sent a letter to Rolando Gomez, permit manager for FDEP’s CCCL program. Minor’s letter stated the proposed construction of a single-family home at 105 Elm “has been reviewed and does not contravene the city of Anna Maria local setback requirements of the zoning code.”
Minor’s letter also noted 105 Elm Ave. is located in a Conservation 1 (CON-1) zoning district.
According to the city of Anna Maria’s current code of ordinances, “The CON-1 district is intended to limit development in areas considered vital to the maintenance of water resources, areas of unique or valuable topographic or subsurface features and areas of significant environmental or ecological importance.
“Areas within the CON-1 district should be either preserved or conserved, depending on conditions existing on the lot. Land within the CON-1 district may be appropriate for single-family residential development and related passive recreational facilities in limited circumstances,” the code states.
“Development and development activity within the CON-1 district shall be based upon a determination that the property contains a buildable area appropriate for the proposed development,” according to the code of ordinances.
On Feb. 14, 2018, then-building official David Greenbaum sent a letter to Joel Christian, a senior scientist with the E Co Consultants firm. Greenbaum’s letter pertained to whether 105 Elm was considered a buildable lot according to city code.
“A review of the two reports demonstrates that there is a buildable area on the lot located at 105 Elm. This letter is to confirm that the city of Anna Maria is approving the applicant applying to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for their determination of buildable area for the lot located at 105 Elm. The city has determined that the request for a determination of buildable area to DEP would not contravene the city of Anna Maria regulations,” Greenbaum stated in his letter.
On July 6, 2021, Anna Maria Building Official Luke Curtis sent an email to Mayor Dan Murphy regarding the potential development of 105 Elm Ave.
“Prior to any building permit being accepted by the building department, a development permit, along with a site plan including but not limited to access to the property, sewer, water and electric utilities, will need to be considered and approved by city commission,” Curtis noted in his email to Murphy.
