BRADENTON – Manatee County commissioners reduced wetland buffers in a 5-1 vote on Oct. 5, defaulting to the less restrictive state of Florida minimums from more restrictive county standards.
Buffers between sensitive wetlands and new upland development are reduced from 50 feet to 25 feet. Buffers between outflowing wetlands and new upland development are reduced from 30 feet to 15 feet.
Prior to the public comment session of the meeting, Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge gave an indication that he would not be swayed by the upcoming speakers.
“The government is being asked to provide a land buffer – that’s the taking of property rights away from the citizen,” he said. “Is the juice worth the squeeze? That’s the ultimate question here.”
His conversation then took a political turn. He said he felt the board was being targeted by “radical climate activists” because the board is comprised of Republicans, and claimed that environmental groups were using children as “political pawns.”
The remarks drew groans from the audience.
Commissioner Mike Rahn said, “I’d like to get back to stormwater questions and concerns.”
During the public comment portion of the land use meeting, more than 30 people, including representatives from the scientific community and private citizens, spoke during the four-hour public hearing. Additionally, nearly 500 public comments were emailed to commissioners prior to the meeting, most opposed to a reduction in wetland protections.
Brice Claypool, 15, represented environmental advocacy group Kids for Clean Water at the meeting.
“I’m not a political pawn,” he said. “People ask me why are you doing this? And that’s because I love our local environment. I’ve been watching terrible things happen to our environment. I fear everything I love about our community is at risk of being lost. We need to start taking care of our waters. I’ve been dismayed by this board reducing protections for our waters despite the papers and evidence to support this.”
Claypool presented an open letter to the commission signed by 100 local youth.
Colin Curtis outlined what he sees as threats to the local environment.
“I’m a fisherman and I’ve seen the demise of water quality in Manatee County,” Curtis said. “We have three things going against us in Manatee. First, It’s low elevation, which means a slow drainage of our contaminants. Having a narrow buffer zone exacerbates this process. Second we have a low tidal exchange. This is not enough to clean our rivers and estuaries of the contaminants including fertilizers that sink to the bottom. Third and most importantly are the overzealous developers, assisted by you guys. The common people of this county deserve clean water over the profits of developers.”
Glenn Compton spoke on behalf of ManaSota-88, a non-profit organization with a stated goal of protecting the public’s health and the preservation of the environment.
“We own four lots in Manatee County, they would be described as coastal wetlands,” Compton said. “We don’t feel there’s a government taking of our property, because you can’t do things like take down the mangroves or build a seawall. We feel there are rules and regulations in place that need to be followed for the benefit of the community and the environment. So we don’t believe the idea that wetland buffers is a taking of land by the government.”
Compton said that the board is expanding the role of government by encouraging development in a flood-prone area.
“You’re going to have to provide services when the storm comes,” he said. “You’ll probably have to have federal flood insurance programs that will become more numerous in Manatee County. After the storm has passed, you’re going to have to deal with post-storm assistance which will be a cost to the taxpayers. This is an expansion of government into private property rights.”
Ken Piper said the purpose of this proposal is to “continue a policy of easy development for crony capitalists.”
“This proposal subjects the county to more state control,” Piper said. “True conservatives wish to retain local control while favoring smaller government. The problem with protecting the fee simple property rights of developers is that ignores the property rights of the rest of us. The problem is you are claiming you are enhancing the property rights of the developer and you’re forgetting about the taxpayers’ investments through their property and their infrastructure.”
Chris Costello of the Sierra Club asked the board not to make this a partisan issue.
“It can’t be political, it can’t be partisan,” she said. “I refuse to believe Republicans care less. Your decision today will decrease protections. Do not make this a partisan issue, please.”
John Mast, representing the Manatee-Sarasota Building Industry Association, spoke in favor of the amendment.
“The primary objective of changing the comprehensive plan is to streamline and smooth the efficiency of the permitting process,” Mast said. “This alteration aims to minimize duplication in government regulations, ultimately reducing the time required for permitting procedures.”
Abbey Tyrna, executive director of Suncoast Waterkeeper, spoke to the board.
“I’m here not only representing Suncoast Waterkeeper, but the 2,331 signatures we received on our Save Our Wetlands petition,” she said. “We’re eliminating protections for all viable wetlands.”
Rusty Chinnis, of Suncoast Waterkeeper and The Sun’s outdoors columnist, said more protections, not less, should be in place to protect the water.
“This is not being anti-development. Development is going to happen, but we need to consider smart development,” said Chinnis, a former builder. “Please carefully consider what you’re doing here. Everybody who comes here, who buys these homes here, come here because of the water quality. These are our waters. We shouldn’t be looking to the state. We should be looking to Manatee County and concerned, wise and informed commissioners.”
At the end of the meeting, Commissioner Jason Bearden made a motion to approve the change to the comprehensive plan. The motion was seconded by Van Ostenbridge, with a 5-1 vote in favor. Commissioner Ray Turner was absent from the Oct. 5 meeting. Commissioner George Kruse cast the lone dissenting vote.
The ordinance reads in part: “Adoption of an ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Manatee County… amending policy herein so that the county’s wetland impact mitigation standard and its wetland buffers requirements for isolated wetlands is consistent with state standards; allowing for engineering solutions to be considered adjacent to environmentally sensitive coastal wetlands; deleting text from the above-cited objectives regarding wetlands to achieve consistency with state standards.”
The hearing was the second on the reduction of wetland buffers. The first, on Aug. 17, ended in a 6-1 vote in favor of transmitting a comprehensive plan text amendment to the state of Florida, effectively reducing Manatee County wetland buffers. Kruse was also the lone voice of dissent in that vote.
According to McClash, “Challenging the elimination of our wetland policy by our county commissioners is a huge undertaking that needs community support. The decision is so wrong in many ways. There was no science to support the decision. The disrespect shown by the commissioners to the public at the meetings could only be described as surreal. The biggest reason is the unknown impacts on our coastal environment. We know certain trends are evident. Our water quality trend is not great; with excessive fish kills, excessive Lyngbya (poopy algae), and even people getting severe infections from swimming in our waters. We know the sea level is rising. We know wetland buffers, especially in the coastal areas, are critical to mangrove adaptation and the so-called “engineering solution” can’t replace the value of the current 50 feet of land required for mangroves to survive. Without mangroves, our whole coastal ecosystem collapses.
