Showing posts with label Everglades. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Everglades. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Bullsugar calls out Big Sugar's rigged political system ... by gimleteye

Toxic algae bloom on the St. Lucie River, Florida

Big Sugar farms on over 400,000 acres -- roughly 800 square miles -- south of Lake Okeechobee, the liquid heart of Florida. The big players in the industry are billionaires; Florida Crystals owned by the Fanjul family and US Sugar Corporation, owned by the descendants of Charles Stuart Mott. Through its campaign contributions, Big Sugar controls the levers of government in Florida.

It needs levers. Big Sugar needs control because profits depend on micromanaging rules and regulations of water pollution (think, Lake Okeechobee and toxic algae) and the operation of the nation's most complex flood control system whose primary purpose is keeping sugar farms dry in wet season and wet in dry season. Regulatory and political capture is Big Sugar's game, pure and simple.

Oh. There is one more season that matters to Big Sugar: election season.

This cycle is exceptional because a massive toxic algae outbreak in Lake Okeechobee is focusing voters' attention on Sugar's role in ways that could upset its best laid political plans.

So Big Sugar is lashing out at the group taking a stand against a rigged system at the root of the toxic algae outbreak. That group is Bullsugar, whose purpose is to call out the fakery and to direct public attention toward real solutions to protect Florida's environment and jobs.

By its very name, Bullsugar elicits anxiety from the polluters it shadows.

In 2016, Big Sugar suffered a stinging defeat in the Republican presidential primary. It bet the farm on US Senator Marco Rubio to be the Republican nominee for president. That investment came a cropper. (By the time John C. Hotten published his A Dictionary of Modern Slang, Cant, and Vulgar Words in 1859, the phrase has come to refer to any failure rather than the specific failure to stay on a horse: "Cropper, 'to go a cropper', or 'to come a cropper', that is, to fail badly." In the word of our president, Sad!)

Pepe Fanjul, of the billionaire Florida Crystals empire, was first to hug Rubio when he left the Miami stage after his campaign debut. From there, it was all downhill. Rubio's shellacking by Trump shocked political operatives who calibrate Big Sugar's risk. The reason Rubio did so poorly among Republicans, garnering scarcely 25% of the primary vote, was his pathetic response to a massive toxic algae outbreak on both coasts -- the same kind that is occurring today.

If the toxic algae outbreak was the wild card in a normally predictable game, what surprised Big Sugar even more was Bullsugar's role. The grass roots start-up organized in Martin County on Florida's east coast. Its staff quickly mobilized hundreds of thousands of supporters through social media.

The role of toxics in Rubio's thrashing by Trump in the GOP primary generated practically no attention in the mainstream media. Nor did Democrats wake up to the phenomenon in the subsequent US Senate race; an election that Rubio handily won.

Big Sugar did not immediately adapt to this unwelcome development in its careful communication strategy. But it has.

State Representative Matt Caldwell, campaigning to be the next Agriculture Secretary, recently attacked Bullsugar in Sunshine State News: "From the base vulgarity of your name to the harassment and abuse hurled toward fellow Floridians to the constant stream of twisted misinformation spread to the public, your organization has all the hallmarks of a hate group." (Read more about Sunshine State News, here.) Caldwell's claim is a laughable, sad commentary of our current politics.

Big Sugar picked Caldwell from the GOP bench as an up-and-com'er through his role unseating the only Republican county commissioner in Florida with the guts to call out the rigged system that permits Big Sugar to pollute Florida waterways at the expense of taxpayers. In 2012 Ray Judah, a long-serving and popular official in Collier County was blind-sided by a television ad campaign later revealed to be organized by a political committee headed by Caldwell, resident of an adjacent county. US Sugar Corporation was the sole benefactor and spent a million dollars in the dark money blitz. It worked, and Caldwell was on his way to calling Bullsugar a "hate group".

In this election cycle, Big Sugar's political plans are clear. It is spending hundreds of thousands -- if not, millions -- to push term-limited Gov. Rick Scott into the US Senate seat held by the Democratic incumbent Bill Nelson. Although Nelson has always been respectful of Big Sugar, Scott is an energetic ally who proved his chops by bending state authority even more closely to Big Sugar's will. Scott, of course, is a friend of Trump. To succeed Scott, Big Sugar is pushing Adam Putnam -- now Agriculture Secretary -- to be governor. Big Sugar never had a better friend than Putnam, whose family wealth derived from a land sale to the state at an inflated value compared to its appraisal. To succeed Putnam, Big Sugar has thrown its weight behind Caldwell to be the next Agriculture Secretary.

Whether Big Sugar's election plans are a golden ticket or a trap door depends on Florida voters in November. Informed voters should take a close look at the results of the Bullsugar candidate questionnaire, the one that is getting Matt Caldwell and Sunshine State News all hopped up, because the only way out of this rigged system is to loosen the grip of the polluters who refuse to clean up their pollution at the source and instead force taxpayers to pay and pay and pay.

Thursday, July 05, 2018

Patriots For Pollution ... by gimleteye

Evidence of a massive fish kill in 2016 as a result of toxic algae vomiting from Florida's Lake Okeechobee

You never heard "Patriots For Pollution" because the phrase is an oxymoron. A patriot is someone who loves and defends his nation. A polluter is someone or a corporation who erodes it.

In Florida we have plenty of polluters who wear the American flag pin on their lapels. They are well educated and well paid by profits from polluting. Take the sugar industry for example. Big Sugar enjoys massive corporate welfare embedded in the Farm Bill and other hidden subsidies. Two billionaire families -- the Fanjuls/ Flo Sun empire and the descents of Charles Stuart Mott through the Mott Foundation --  control the state's water management infrastructure through political campaign contributions. They routinely use fake arguments to advance the idea that they bear the fair share of cleaning up their pollution.

US Senator Marco Rubio, in his last campaign, asserted that protecting Florida sugar was a matter of national security. That, despite the fact that sugar poisons people, poisons democracy (through its influence in political campaign financing), and poisons our rivers, bays and Everglades.

Patriots defend our shared values as a democracy. By default -- because we share air we breathe and water we drink -- that includes the environment. In other words, it is patriotic to want to protect and to defend our parks, our natural heritage, our Everglades.

For that reason, environmentalists bear the brunt of attacks by polluting corporations. They are branded as "unreasonable" or "Radical" or "against jobs". Sometimes the attacks work. Judged by the Florida legislature and Gov. Rick Scott -- a fierce protector of Big Sugar's prerogatives -- they work very well.

These attacks are crafted and replayed in the right wing echo chamber where voters are often persuaded to vote against their best interests. Like air and water quality. If this were untrue, we wouldn't have an anti-environmental grifter like Scott Pruitt as chief of the federal agency charged with protecting the environment. Or a governor who ditched the one practical start to solve Florida's water emergency -- the acquisition of US Sugar lands in the Everglades Agricultural Area.

You cannot have patriots for pollution. You can have patriots against pollution. That would be Bullsugar.

Bullsugar is a relatively young conservation group in Stuart, Florida. It was established to call out the hypocrisy of Big Sugar mouthpieces. Bullsugar advocates for faster, real progress cleaning up the toxic waste caused by Florida's mismanagement of water resources in favor of nearly half a million acres of sugarcane on the southern rim of Lake Okeechobee. For example, Bullsugar supports the purchase at fair market value of sufficient marsh treatment areas to cleanse Big Sugar's pollution and stop pollution Lake Okeechobee and drainage into the connected rivers. Bullsugar wants public lands leased by Big Sugar to be turned back storage treatment areas.

The lake is Florida's diseased heart. It is used as a sump pump for big agriculture and has been spewing huge volumes of harmful algae into arterial waterways that are used to flush the lake when water levels rise too high.

Big Sugar is expert at pitting communities and constituencies against each other while wrapping its supporters in the American flag. It hires or otherwise supports local community "advocates" to claim that massive burning on sugarcane fields doesn't harm anyone's clean air. One way it does that: brand groups like Bullsugar as "radical". It is no surprise. In Miami, lobbyists for the sugar industry have long used local community institutions to push back against environmentalists. The Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce. The universities. The hospitals. Even the newspaper.

Big Sugar and its allies also conduct whisper campaigns that suppress what should be outright public anger at the the polluters and flip it back onto the patriots. The polluters minimize the damage to the rivers. They point to peoples' septic tanks not their own massive fertilizer run-off. They use arcane legislative port-holes for fake remedies the push solutions further and further into the distance and deeper into the wallets of taxpayers.

All people should have the right to clean air and clean water. You shouldn't be forced to pay for it, because corporations have commandeered government and force you to pay for their pollution.

Remember that and trust your instincts: if it sounds like bullsugar, it is bullsugar.


(Disclosure: I am a volunteer board member of the Bullsugar Alliance.)


Tuesday, June 19, 2018

Short-Sighted Manipulation of People of Kendall. Guest Blog by Richard Grosso




Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez’s desire to alleviate traffic congestion in West Kendall is understandable. His attack on those raising concerns is not. The opposition to the extension of the 836 highway outside of the county’s urban boundary is based, not on “misinformation,” but serious concern, based on history and the realities of development practices and economics, that the county would be making a huge mistake.

Addressing traffic problems in the 21st century with a 1970s solution of building more highways is a bad investment given what we now know about how quickly new roads fill up with new traffic and open areas to new development, and about the critical need to shift away from infrastructure for cars and toward real mass transit. Miami-Dade County’s land use plan specifically reflects these understandings and, for these reasons and others, contains explicit prohibitions against building new public infrastructure — like this highway extension — beyond the Urban Development Boundary.

The looming decision of whether to invest $650 million into another highway expansion or modern mass transit comes at a pivotal point in this county’s history, as it is coming to terms with the necessity of re-working its water supply and flood-protection system, reducing its vulnerability to climate change and sea level rise, and restoring the Everglades upon which it relies for so many economic, recreational and other purposes. It is concerning that some in county leadership may not understand that building a highway through the Bird Drive Basin wetlands would compromise the restoration project water managers are still designing for those lands to prevent flooding and restore previously impacted wetlands in western Miami-Dade County.

The PR campaign to promote this highway may be selling fool’s gold to West Kendall residents, and the county would soon be looking for yet another new road in a few years when this one fills up with new traffic — whether or not it leads to new development in the area.

Miami Herald


Monday, May 21, 2018

Angry with the world and....Read on, it might be you too! By Geniusofdespair

From the New Yorker Magazine

I will never be the same. NEVER

My life with therapy taught me two lessons: don’t minimize and don’t deny: in other words be truthful with yourself. As a child I had become adept at lying to me to cope. Can’t do it anymore.

The way my country is going and the blinders on many of the people in the country is having a devastating effect on me. The truth hurts.

For example, one tiny example: the Everglades-Trust pushing hard in support of Trump’s pick for Governor — it is just too disgusting, too vile. If DeSantis gets in he will do everything Trump wants. I think Putnam will be equally as bad but at least he won't be in bed with the loony bin.

Am I destined to leave this world to your GRANDCHILDREN, with polluted water, reduced animal species, a toxic Supreme Court, crushing debt and xenophobia run wild? Will my generation be the Nazis of the 21st Century?

Nice to wake up and find this rushing to mind. They say “stay in the present” as a means to heal... and I laugh.

How did the Everglades Trust get pulled into this? Read on...

Monday, February 12, 2018

Maggy Hurchalla on trial in Martin County ... by gimleteye



The following is from Donna Melzer, a Martin County activist following the trial of Miami-native Maggy Hurchalla.

We've written about Maggy's contributions to Florida at length. You can read our archive, by clicking here. This week, Miami realtor/rock miner George Lindemann Jr. has been called by the defense as a material witness to claims that his company suffered damage from Hurchalla's alleged interference in a contract that has -- despite the lawsuit -- proven extraordinarily lucrative for him.

Last year the Miami environmental group founded by Marjory Stoneman Douglas, Friends of the Everglades, gave Hurchalla its highest honor: Defender of the Everglades. (I am a volunteer board member and conservation chair of the organization.)

DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU ARE A JUROR IN LAKE POINT VS. MAGGY HURCHALLA.
COMPLY WITH THE COURT DIRECTION: TREAT THIS AS YOU WOULD A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE. I do not intend nor believe that I am sending to any juror, but just in case...

Yesterday Was the START of Maggy Hurchalla's Story Being Told
(Monday - Thursday were about Lake Point's stories and Maggy's defense to testimony in Lake Point's stories).

(No tcpalm.com story found today - maybe later.)

CLARIFICATION:
Lake Point is NOT suing Maggy on Open Government law.
Maggy is NOT being accused of Sunshine Laws or Public Records violations.

Lake Point has asserted that Maggy caused them $4Million in lost rock sales -- claiming damages going out beyond 2030.

Lake Point did not produce one cancelled contracts, no loss of existing clients.

Tuesday, January 30, 2018

Voters Should Be Alarmed By Everglades "Wins" Masking "Failures" ... by gimleteye

Everglades landscape, photo by Clyde Butcher
Everglades National Park is austere. It speaks to people who will listen to its silence and in the echo of absence. It speaks volumes of heart-break, and of the wrong course and wrong direction in American politics and culture today.

What a visitor sees in the Everglades; the sawgrass prairies, lush hardwood hammocks, and the incomparable majesty of Florida Bay are not quite "diminished" or "faded" or "on life support". The Everglades are those and much more. Its casual visitor and enthusiast, alike, cannot glean what is happening to Everglades National Park by just looking.

The Everglades is more than a cautionary tale. In its damaged state it reflects our own broken promises. Here rests a diabetic who sneaks candy bars at midnight: we warned you but you go and do it anyway.

Today, wealthy and powerful special interests are re-writing the history of the Everglades. It begins with our national park system. The writer Wallace Stegner said, “National parks are the best idea we ever had. Absolutely American, absolutely democratic, they reflect us at our best rather than our worst."

Broadly speaking, the Trump White House is dismantling federal authority for our national parks and energizing their disintegration by refusing to adequately fund infrastructure to maintain or restore them. Trump's inattention is piling on the results of past administrations and Congressional budgets, steered by GOP priorities, that undermined our national parks. That, it so happens, also fits neatly into the ambitions of the stakeholders who control the Florida legislature and the Governor's Mansion.

They are specifically targeting the Everglades and the history of restoration efforts involving generations of hard-working, dedicated scientists and conservationists and millions of Americans who treasure the Everglades. Some say, not so fast. The state is moving along a path to create a $2 billion, massive reservoir just above Everglades National Park to reduce toxic discharges to estuaries and to provide cleaner water to the Everglades, to the cities, and to Big Sugar. They say, be grateful for what you have.

Yesterday, the Miami Herald underlined what, exactly, we have in Everglades National Park today: a the decrepit state of infrastructure.
“They’re really starved,” New Jersey resident Tim Corlis said Tuesday after a quick stop by Everglades’ battered amphitheater as part of a bucket-list journey to visit all the nation’s parks. “We’re very cognizant that the park service does a tremendous amount, with almost nothing.”

The massive repair backlog is nothing new — the Everglades’ to-do list totaled $58 million under the Obama administration. But the Trump administration’s approach to the nation’s wild lands, from shrinking monuments and clearing the way for drilling and mining, to slashing spending in a proposed budget, is setting off alarms. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke wants to cut the National Parks Service budget by nearly $300 million and eliminate more than 1,200 jobs — meaning 90 percent of the nation’s parks would lose staff.

Rather than ask Congress to address the $11.3 billion national maintenance backlog, the administration is also proposing doubling entrance fees at 17 popular parks during their five busiest months, angering park advocates who say the plan could backfire if higher costs drive away visitors. The administration has also ditched the nation’s efforts to address climate change, an issue especially critical to South Florida’s parks.

Earlier this month, 10 of the 12 members on the Service’s national advisory panel quit in protest, complaining that Zinke repeatedly refused to meet with them.
The crumbled infrastructure in Everglades National Park is the visible manifestation of a much deeper neglect. That neglect is based on the deliberate, willful policies of neglect -- not by the feds -- but by the state of Florida.

Look at the Everglades in granular specificity, and you will see a food chain has been exquisitely examined and studied by science. Downstream communities, in both the Florida Keys and along Florida's damaged estuaries on both coasts, are paying attention and awakening to the fact that public officials they elected to protect what they value are helping to tip the scales so that what they value is slowly, gradually and irrevocably diminished.

What is wrecking the ecology of the Everglades has been known for decades; that the gentle alteration of rainy and dry seasons delivered copious amounts of fresh water through a shallow water marsh ecosystem. It was the shallow nature of the Everglades, including deeper sloughs and troughs and islands accreting silt in the marsh, that provided the exact conditions for the flow of rainwater to nourish spectacular biodiversity higher in the food chain, from mats of periphyton to panthers, from shrimp and crab to roseate spoonbills, from mullet in the estuaries to giant tarpon in Florida Bay.

Science understands how the ecosystem operates, but humans who ordered and funded the science have proven politically unwilling to match its conclusions to what the Everglades needs. Not deep reservoirs. A bigger footprint for highly engineered, water storage and treatment marshes to clean up Big Sugar's pollution.

This partly explains why in the early 2000's, the state of Florida refused a co-equal role to the US Department of Interior in assessing the "progress" of Everglades restoration, an effort then estimated to cost taxpayers $6.7 billion and surely, now, triple that amount. The truest advocates for the Everglades ecosystem were federal scientists who represented the national interest to assess damage done by upstream water management practices directed by the state primarily to the benefit of a single special interest group: Big Sugar.

It is not just the Trump administration that has been at work undercutting the contribution of the national park system. The antagonism to federal environmental agencies was also a feature of George W. Bush's terms in the White House. Although Barack Obama made significant executive decisions to expand the footprint of public lands, the Republican Congress strongly opposed investment in the national parks and favored reducing budgets to a shoe-string.

Florida invested in the Everglades, but in ways that fundamentally asserted the privileges of polluters. Gov. Jeb Bush was ideologically opposed to a strong federal presence in the Everglades. Gov. Charlie Crist was an almost champion; negotiating a deal for the state to acquire 187,000 acres of lands owned by the Big Sugar co-cartel member: US Sugar Corporation owned by the descendants of Charles Stuart Mott. But the plan triggered a political backlash by the other co-cartel member: the Fanjul owned Florida Crystals. The Fanjuls destroyed Crist's chances to be US Senator in 2012 and elevated Rick Scott to the first of his two terms, in 2010. More than any governor in Florida history, Scott has been an enemy of Everglades restoration -- despite championing to the contrary.

One of his first acts as governor was axing the science capacity of the South Florida Water Management District. The same science capacity that the state used as an excuse to elbow out federal scientists from a co-equal role in assessing Everglades restoration in the early 2000's. Many capable, strong scientists have left or been forced out of their regulatory, science-based missions since Scott was elected.

There is benign neglect. There is also malignant, willful neglect. That willful neglect contaminates Scott's declaration of victory with a $2 billion reservoir, the centerpiece of Senate president Joe Negron's 2017 legislative agenda, without committing enough cleansing and water treatment marshes to make sure the reservoir can deliver clean, fresh water to the Everglades and to Florida Bay.

Based on the example of Everglades National Park, giving responsibility to the states for our national parks would be like handing  the treasury passcode to interests who all along profited by despoiling the kingdom.

The Everglades took many thousands of years to evolve. Man has undone God's creation in barely a century. Unless Gov. Rick Scott adds significant acreage to the reservoir plan, just north of a crown jewel of the national park system, the end of Everglades National Park is in sight. Critics of that point of view say, "Trust but verify" will see you through. But there is ample evidence that the diminished role of science and loss of expertise through budget cuts leaving agencies gasping, will strip the ability to verify, leaving elected officials to say anything and everything.

The crumbling infrastructure in Everglades National Park matches up to a much deeper problem: willfully disregarding what we know to be true yet refuse to protect.

Tuesday, January 02, 2018

A last chance for Florida's future rests with Senate President Joe Negron and the Florida legislature ... by gimleteye

Senate President Joe Negron responded to voters in his district and across the state, where toxic pollution from Lake Okeechobee is wrecking property values, quality of life and economic opportunities

On Thursday, the Treasure Coast Palm is sponsoring a town meeting featuring Senate President Joe Negron on the most important legislation to emerge from 2017 session of the state legislature; a massive new reservoir on public lands south of sugar fields to stop the toxic runoff from Lake Okeechobee and to re-hydrate the Everglades and Florida Bay with clean, fresh water.

The 2017 legislation was approved by the legislature after Florida’s coastal areas were devastated by toxic algae blooms in the winter of 2015/2016. Water managers were forced to dump billions of gallons of toxic water from Lake Okechobee. It couldn't be shunted onto sugar lands, and so managers released a toxic tsunami into waterways and badly fouled both Florida coasts.

The water management infrastructure in South Florida is controlled by the state and the US government through the Jacksonville District of the US Army Corps of Engineers. Florida Gov. Rick Scott directs policies and implementation through his appointees to the governing board of the South Florida Water Management District.

The political strings that tie Scott are pulled by the wealthiest and most powerful agribusiness producers in the United States.

Big Sugar fought Negron's 2017 legislation, but a big part of the fight -- deploying more lobbyists than state senators --  was crocodile tears. Big Sugar knows how hard it is to protect downstream local businesses on both Florida coasts, property values, rivers and estuaries and to get more clean, fresh water into the Everglades and Florida Bay without harming the resources of the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians in the process. It knows because its business is to get what it wants. In the end Big Sugar got what it wanted through Gov. Rick Scott and the legislature -- a law favorable to its terms --and more.

The state legislature inserted poison pills: a prohibition against eminent domain in the EAA, a requirement that the state negotiate for land swaps only with “willing sellers”, and a provision that allows taxpayer moneys to fund the future privatization of Florida’s water supply, anticipating the day when big landowners will be allowed by the state to sell rainwater for their own profit. If there was hope, it lay in only one place: that the District could consider a larger footprint and additional lands to secure the required water quality standard.

Environmentalists praised Senator Negron’s initiative but settled in for the long haul, knowing that the law stipulated the District had to report its recommended action to the legislature by January 9th, 2018.

That deadline is fast approaching, hence the town meeting where Senator Negron will listen to the public’s rising concern about what the District proposes, including protesters who will be bused into Stuart from the farm communities.

In December, under an accelerated, vacation-heavy time line, the District released a suite of proposals that met with immediate objection by environmentalists. While the District provided data in support of its proposals, they ignored feedback they had made serious errors; artificially inflating the efficiency of water quality modeling.

Environmentalists feared from the start that proposed solutions failed to take into account a footprint adequate for treatment and cleansing marshes to complement the reservoir. They relied on the District following the provision in the new law to explore options for an expanded footprint.

In mid-December Treasure Coast Palm wrote, "Florida Senate President Joe Negron wants state engineers to think outside the box and outside the "footprint" they're considering for a reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee In particular, Negron wants the South Florida Water Management District to "consider using any additional land available (for the reservoir), if necessary."

The Miami Herald:
Initially, a grander version pitched by environmentalists envisioned 60,000 acres. It included a portion of sugar fields long blamed for pollution and jump-started construction on a sprawling shallow reservoir south of the lake intended to clean water before it reached Everglades National Park — a project approved in a landmark Everglades restoration plan in 2000. The massive footprint allowed plenty of shallow storage to clean the water, a strict requirement hammered out through years of litigation that forced the state to stop polluting the Everglades. What landed on the drafting table of South Florida water managers was subsantially different.
In Florida Politics last week, publisher Peter Schorsch responded with a broadside from the Big Sugar playbook.

His roaming indictment blasted civic and environmental objections to the District plans. “Never satisified, environmentalists should just take win for Lake O reservoir“ aped the same outline as the Big Sugar sponsored, Sunshine State News.

Schorsch calls the outstanding issues over the 2017 Everglades legislation, a “food fight”. Environmentalists don’t know when to say “stop” and scorns the political ineffectiveness of environmentalists.

Environmentalists don’t need reminding. What they need is a level playing field. Big Sugar extracts its political money through the US Farm Bill, costing US consumers twice the world price of sugar and spinning hundreds of millions a year into Big Sugar’s pockets. The industry liberally sprinkles a portion of that money through the political ranks.

The public fears, rightly so based on at least one of the proposals, that the District plan is another step by Big Sugar to commandeer Florida water resources.

That would be a bitter pill for Senator Negron’s constituents and Florida taxpayers.

The “grand compromise” Senate Bill 10 was never meant to “settl(e) the issue once and for all” (Schorsch’s words) because federal court judgements on water quality in the Everglades are the backstop to legislative trickery on the Everglades.

Whatever progress has been made in Florida on behalf of environmental protection has been through federal courts, particularly in Everglades restoration where stinging judgments against Florida and Big Sugar, for allowing water quality to be trashed, remain the only bullwark against a tide of toxic political money.

Yes Big Sugar can buy election outcomes, but it hasn’t cracked the code to the federal judiciary.

It was, after all, the 2003 attempted heist of Everglades water quality law by Big Sugar and then Gov. Jeb Bush relating to standards, metrics and measurements that triggered nearly a decade of litigation by the Miccosukee Tribe and a small Miami environmental group, Friends of the Everglades, founded by Marjory Stoneman Douglas. That litigation resulted in a declaration of victory by Gov. Rick Scott who pledged $880 million in taxpayer money to fix his allies’ pollution. Environmentalists mostly agreed that the Scott Restoration Strategies could meet stringent water quality goals. Today, they claim the state is reversing course with an ill-conceived plan that will unravel every gain to date.

It has always been the case that “fixing once and for all” the discharges from Lake Okeechobee, so flthy water doesn’t puke on downstream communities on both Florida coasts, would have to pass the test of federal court judgments based on sound science.

The water quality standard protecting the Everglades is written in stone for a simple reason; if you violate the water quality standard, the Everglades ceases to function. This is not a “food fight”. It is scientific fact.

If Big Sugar gets its way, there is going to be a mini-Lake Okeechobee built with walls thirty to forty feet high for a deep reservoir with the same stagnant water as Lake Okeechobee. An alternative plan does exist — provided by highly competent scientists of the Everglades Foundation — but the District has refused to consider an option based on more land, whether or not the land is in public ownership.

Schorsch accuses environmentalists of “moving the goal posts”. It is a kind of drive-by shooting that glides by the fact Big Sugar's key players are engaged in the ultimate act of moving of goal posts: reverse the federal court decisions protecting the Everglades.

States rights is a potent theme in the nation’s capitol. Count on Gov. Rick Scott to raise the issue with President Trump during private meetings: "We need to end the administrative state and rein in the bad federal judiciary, which is holding back 'jobs'." In the case of Big Sugar, those jobs will be embedded in massive industrial and suburban development it is planning planned in the Everglades Agricultural Area only a few miles west of Mar-a-Lago — if they can confuse the science, manipulate fact, and knee-cap federal water quality regulations protecting the Everglades.

Big Sugar wants the federal judgments gone. They are working it, because they know so long as the judgments stand, it is going to be impossible to re-write the science.

That’s not a "food fight": it is a fundamental attack on the system of checks and balances essential to our democracy.

The only hope of mitigating disastrous, toxic pollution coursing out of the lake is a plan that includes a treatment area footprint adequate to the purpose of storing, first, billions of excess water during flood season, and gradually cleansing through a landscape of filtering marshes.

Contrary to agitators set to the task by Big Sugar, that does not require upheaval of communities in the Everglades Agricultural Area.

No one is talking about sacrificing jobs. It is a matter of using available land already owned by the public and swaps with Big Sugar billionaires to achieve critical purposes; protecting all downstream communities, the Everglades and Florida Bay.

“These environmental groups refused to be satisfied,” Schorsch writes and scolds environmental groups for “showing a great deal of ingratitude”, a Trumpian theme and half-step from “let them eat cake”. With Trump and Scott, it is too often the case that to know the truth of a matter, flip what they are saying inside-out.

Eventually voters will express their disgust at the ballot box. Whether property values, water and taxes are forever lost as sacrifice zones for Big Sugar depends on Senator Negron and the Florida legislature.

This is our last chance.

Thursday, December 07, 2017

Art Basel George Lindemann victorious but at what cost? ... by gimleteye

This is surely one of the craziest Florida stories that has never been fully reported: Miami art collector George Lindemann's role in undoing a legacy of Florida water law. It is complicated with many chapters, but the main point is that in Florida -- unlike Texas, say -- rainfall and fresh water is a public resource. You don't get to own rainfall in Florida.

During the Jeb Bush terms as Florida governor starting in 1998, the right to privately own water surfaced as a possibility, through the agency of a subsidiary of Enron, a Texas company closely affiliated with the Bush family, whose spectacular bankruptcy defined the excesses of the dot.com boom. Floridians treasure their fresh water resources but to large agricultural interests, if the rainfall they capture or that springs up from underground could be harnessed and sold, it would be liquid gold.

The water privatization story in Florida politics faded with Enron but never went away completely because Texas billionaires like the owners King Ranch know exactly what liquid gold smells and feels like: in Texas, fresh water is private property. The King Ranch owns key parcels in the Everglades Agricultural Area.

Now the privatization initiative is gathering steam thanks to a bizarre capitulation of the Rick Scott administration in litigation with Lindemann over his property in West Martin County.

Last year's key piece of legislation signed into law by Gov. Rick Scott and proposed by Senate President Joe Negron actually includes a provision for TAXPAYER money to be used to scope out the engineering challenges of marshaling rainfall water as a PRIVATE utility. It also involves the connection between Lindemann, whose family is the largest private shareholder of Verizon grown out of talc powder business, with Big Sugar billionaires; the Cuban American Fanjul family whose holdings include Florida Crystals.

Lindemann is a relative newcomer to Florida. Before owning Lake Point -- lands he pledged to split into a rock mine for cement products and in part a conservation area, he was a real estate developer in Miami concentrating on the Biscayne Boulevard corridor. The Fanjuls are a vertically-integrated hemispheric force in the sugar business and heavily influence Florida politics through the outsized contribution of the sugar subsidy in the US Farm Bill; the corporate welfare that not even conservatives in Congress have been able to dislodge.

In other words, subsidized sugar -- costing US consumers nearly twice the world market price -- provide outsized profits to Big Sugar that turns around and sprinkles dark money campaign contributions throughout the political system. A similar subsidiary relationship may define the Lindemann / Fanjul connection because the only thing more profitable to Big Sugar than growing sugarcane would be if it could sell the water on its lands; exactly what the Lake Point project became.

Big Sugar acreage -- some 800 square miles south of Lake Okeechobee -- formerly defined Everglades wetlands, provided by nature. They are now highly cultivated private property whose irrigation needs -- not too wet when it rains, not too dry when the rains stop -- drive Florida politics and water management infrastructure. That faulty equation leaves out the Everglades and coastal real estate owners, putting enormous sacrifice on the backs of property owners and taxpayers, that environmentalists like Maggy Hurchalla have spent their entire lives struggling to rectify.

It is also the equation that now engrosses George Lindemann when he purchases Lake Point, with no prior experience in the battle between Big Sugar and Everglades activists. (For a recent article in the Treasure Coast Palm, click here.)

The litigation over Lake Point may have ended between Lindemann and Martin County, but Lindemann seems determined to push Maggy Hurchalla and her like-minded allies into the ground with legal expenses that far exceed the capacity of ordinary citizens.

With so much Big Sugar money filtered like confetti through the legal and political ranks, it is no wonder that the underlying stories are so lightly reported.

Eye On Miami has tried to keep the Maggy Hurchalla story in view. Here is a link to our archive. Interested readers ought to spend time here, especially the "Achiever" interviews with Hurchalla.

We reprint the following with permission of the author.


December 5, 2017

I’m Maggy Hurchala. For the last five years I’ve been involved in a SLAPP suit. That is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Look it up in Wikipedia. They will tell you it is legal bullying meant to intimidate, bankrupt, exhaust and SHUT UP critics.

Martin County and the SFWMD also got slapped in the case of Lake Point vs. SFWMD, Martin County, and Maggy Hurchalla.

I can’t talk about that lawsuit because it is, as they say, “ongoing.“ The trial date has been set and moved three times. It is now set for Feb 5. I am looking forward to the time when we can talk about the issues and facts out loud and under oath.

Sunday, August 06, 2017

Everglades Fee Proposal: Just Plain Wrong ... by gimleteye

Clyde Butcher, Ochopee
A special user tax for our national park, the Everglades, seems just wrong, even if you are not an outdoor enthusiast. Never mind kayakers. Our national park system represents the best of America: the willingness to make sacrifices today, including our tax dollars, so future generations can appreciate God's gifts of nature without any kind of intermediary interpretation. (Hint: nature is not a golf course.)

Our national parks tell Americans, irrespective of race, creed, or income: this is what we inherited (or seized, as the case may be) and this is what we hold in trust for you. Then again, the Trump administration and Department of Interior are outright hostile to public resources like national parks.

Americans broke sweat and bled to create and to protect our crown jewels. That doesn't matter to the Trump wrecking crew, but it should -- to you.

From: Florida Bay Outfitters [mailto:info@kayakfloridakeys.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2017 11:25 PM
To: wekayak2@gmail.com
Subject: Attention All Paddlers! Everglades Fee Proposal

Dear Paddlers,

The Everglades National Park has sent out a proposal for usage fees and we find it to be quite unfriendly to the paddling community especially here in the Keys. The boating community in general is being targeted for fees that seem somewhat unfair especially since the Everglades National Park has no services to offer in the Keys. They have no boat ramp, parking areas or any access to the public whatsoever. There are upcoming meetings that you should be aware of and if you can, please attend or participate by contacting the Park Service. At Florida Bay Outfitters we are all for protecting our parks and our environment and willing to pay to do so, but fees and use need to be regulated in fairness in order to protect the resources. Sorry for bringing this out at such short notice. Here are some of our concerns...   

1) A vehicle driving in the main entrance is $30 (good for 7 days). It doesn't say if there is an additional charge per person. So, if there are 4 people in the car their cost is $7.50 each. If you come down to Florida Bay Outfitters and you launch your kayaks with 4 friends and your plan is to cross over the intracoastal waterway 1/3 mile out from our beach, your cost will be $15 a person ($60 total) beginning Oct 2018. This January your cost is $12 per person. Under age 16 is free. (good for 7 days). Most recreational paddlers don't generally get to far to begin with and being the most environmentally compatible form of vessel, user fees from this end of the park is quite frankly upsurd. The park should stick with overnight wilderness camping fees only for paddlers unless of course the park can show us overuse/abuse by human powered vessels. We doubt they could. No paddler fees from the Florida Keys!  

2) A yearly pass is fair for those who live here but that is just bringing in revenue for the park and does not having anything to do with controlling numbers to protect against overcrowding/abuse. There are limits for how many people can camp in designated areas but there is no limits on how many people can visit those places in a day. Like everywhere things are getting overcrowded and concerns on limits should be the priority in order to protect the environment and give the people who are participating in the wild an actual wilderness experience. A users fee may curb some of the overuse but that will be short lived as we see more visitors and more full time residents taking place. So a reservation plan of some sort may need to be implemented, along with a fair day use fee. 
3) Again the Everglades National Park has zero places for you to launch or access the park. You will either have to own property or use access through businesses. There are some access points owned by the local government but nothing from the federal government. Kind of like taxation without representation.
4) The intra coastal waterway runs along the entire coast of the Everglades National Park. Do cruisers have to pay up if they decide to anchor up for a break, lunch, a swim or for foul weather? We are talking Florida Bay and the Gulf of Mexico here. The intracoastal waterway was designed and made for safe passage. Do boaters passing by need to pay an entrance fee to get fuel in Flamingo? Perhaps a somewhat more reasonable boundary could be developed for boating safely and local boating activity that don't interfere with watching the sunset with friends from their vessels, in their own backyards (Blackwater Sound for example) and other areas that are not of critical concern. And just for reminders, the National Parks are paid for by all of us tax payers to begin with.
Thank You for your support
Frank & Monica Woll

Monday, July 17, 2017

Independent science under attack by the State of Florida ... by gimleteye

Miami, March For Science, April 22, 2017
When it comes to using independent science to affirm what is happening in the real world, the State of Florida is abdicating its responsibility.

The direction comes from the top. One of Rick Scott's first acts as governor was to slash the science budget of the state agency charged with Everglades restoration; the South Florida Water Management District.

Environmentalists had good reason to be alarmed. Restoring the Everglades ecosystem requires attention to biodiversity on the microscopic scale. It had been determined, after decades of litigation in federal court, that more than ten parts per billion of phosphorous, laid out by the ton by Big Sugar in its fertilizer run-off, and the Everglades dies. Firing the scientists is not a route to success.

The New York Times Sunday Magazine, From "Arks of the Apocalypse", published a dismal essay on the state of the planet that resonates in the Everglades.
“There is,” he said, “a very intense feeling that we’re losing biodiversity quicker than we can understand it.”
That's happening very intensely too in the Everglades. Decades ago a very public decision by Congress and the State of Florida lead to a massive investment using science to guide the restoration of Everglades biodiversity. It was called, at the time, the most comprehensive environmental restoration project on the planet. It also resonated with the emerging concern about global warming. One Glades activist, Joe Podgor, famously quipped, "Saving the Everglades is a test. If we pass, we may get to keep the planet."
A growing consensus among scientists holds that we now live in the Anthropocene, an epoch defined by humanity’s impact on planetary ecosystems. We are responsible for the current die-off of species, not some asteroid or volcanic eruption.
In Florida we are responsible for massive damage to the Everglades. The main culprit: pollution by Big Sugar streaming out of 400,000 acres south of Lake Okeechobee.

Future generations will examine what happened. According to a Sunday Tampa Bay Times report,
The head of the state agency overseeing the multi-billion-dollar Everglades restoration project said this week he will no longer let his employees cooperate with the top scientists who are supposed to be advising the project.

South Florida Water Management District executive director Pete Antonacci declared at a public meeting Thursday that his agency will no longer work with the National Academies of Science — one of the nation's premier scientific organizations — because science advisers there won't "tend to their knitting."
The report by Craig Pittman, "Everglades restoration project leader tells top scientists: Stay in your lane", is a sharp reminder that the disintegration of federal authority for protecting the environment is providing cover for throttling independent science in the states by big polluters who control the levers of government.

Despite the fact that Floridians do want the environment protected, the current fad of lies and misdirection casts a pall on prospects ahead. The Times notes the phenomenon:
Academics have even taken to studying the psychology of this human response — one such book, for example, is titled “The Anthropology of Extinction: Essays on Culture and Species Death.”
Back in 2000, when the road map for the state federal partnership -- costing billions -- was established, the involvement of the National Academy of Sciences was the only point where environmentalists held hope for the massive plan to restore the Everglades. (I was chair of Sierra Club's Florida Chapter Everglades Committee at the time.)

In other words, we knew -- and decision makers agreed -- that the complexity of Everglades restoration needed independent, fact-based assessments of progress; not just to ensure that results were being properly organized but also to be a truth-teller in the case that special interests railroaded billions of taxpayer dollars to line their own pockets while calling the theft something else. Like "progress".

State politicians are reinforced by quid pro quo's from Big Sugar. Their impulses, with respect to Everglades restoration, were intended to be balanced by federal interests: the US Department of Interior -- with responsibility for America's national parks -- and the US Army Corps of Engineers, the earth-moving, canal building, river-channeling agency and cooperative partner of the South Florida Water Management District.

Since environmentalists were left on the sidelines in 2000 with Everglades restoration, leaving protection of the public interests to insiders, the question arose: who would vet, or ensure, that Everglades restoration was moving in the right direction, with the right sequence of projects and public investments?

The Everglades panel of the National Academies of Science was a sturdy and extraordinarily important part of the plan to reassure the public that billions would not be wasted or diverted to paper-over the profit motive of wetlands destroyers.

The NAS panels take their responsibilities with extraordinary care, substance and skill. Unlike Florida-centric science programs, where careers can be blown up if agency funders decide they don't like one's shoe size, the independence of the National Academies is foundational to the national interest in fact.
The National Academies of Science is America's top collection of scientific minds. Congress created it in 1863 to provide "independent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology." Election to its ranks is considered one of the highest honors in science.
Antonacci's complaints drew no comments from his bosses at the water district, but Cara Capp of the National Parks and Recreation Association said he's making a mistake.
"It's disappointing to see the state of Florida turn its back on the scientific body that has contributed so much to our knowledge about the Everglades," Capp said. She said her advocacy group "feels strongly that independent science must be the driving factor for restoring the Everglades. 
So did Congress when it approved the Everglades restoration program in 2000. One requirement that it put on the project was that the people building it frequently consult with scientists to make sure they were doing it right."
Antonacci, Gov. Rick Scott's former general counsel, has turned the South Florida Water Management District into an office extension of Big Sugar. He is taking aim at fact; a mini-version of the tragedy playing out in the nation's capitol, where another ideologue -- Scott Pruitt, head of US EPA -- putting a chainsaw to the budgets of federal scientists studying climate change.

Antonacci's suggestion that the University of Florida's Water Institute could replace the National Academies is an insult to the voters and taxpayers.

Science matters, and in the face of unfathomable transformations we triggered in nature, we need to change course. Sadly, when changing course affects the profit margins of the state's biggest campaign contributors, the State of Florida doesn't have the guts to stand up for what ultimately sustains us all.  Only enlightened voters can rectify that injustice.

Monday, June 19, 2017

Everglades History: Recognition to Johnny Jones. By Geniusofdespair



A bit of Everglades History:

Johnny Jones 1985. - 1932-2010
From the Palm Beach Post via USGS.gov
2006
The names Johnny Jones recalls are all writ in sky-mirroring water, across hundreds of miles of sawgrass, under pearl-gray rainclouds in the wide, wind-ruffled Everglades.

As is his own.

Marjory Stoneman Douglas, Art Marshall, Bob Graham - they all recognized how extraordinary, how unique the Everglades were. They all fought to save them. They may have succeeded; they may yet have fought in vain. The Everglades may yet be lost, despite a federal plan to rescue the remnants, which amount to less than 50 percent of the original extent of the place.

But if the Everglades are saved, even partway, it will be in considerable part due to the unremitting efforts of an ornery man who never finished high school, a plumber by trade, a hunter by obsession, a man who badgered politicians so relentlessly they finally threw up their arms and surrendered.

"Johnny had a leadership style that combined intimidation with personal pain. He'd let you know with no misunderstanding how he felt about things," said Graham, former Florida governor and U.S. senator. "The most original thing about him was his tenacity. He was like a pit bull. He wouldn't let loose until he had chewed you up.

"He came along at a period when everything in Florida was up for sale, and he believed Florida was not a commodity to be consumed. In the '60s, '70s and '80s, he convinced a lot of people that Florida was a thing of value, to be conserved. He was in the leadership of that transition. He was active in a series of financing proposals that made it possible for environmentally vulnerable land to be saved - they all had Johnny Jones' fingerprints all over them."

Jones was the driving force behind the 1981 Save Our Rivers Act, which looped the Kissimmee River back up again after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had made it a shotgun-barrel-straight ditch that canalized its waters straight into Lake Okeechobee, drying out tens of thousands of acres of wetlands and ruining the hydrography of south central Florida. Jones fought successfully to replumb it, get it back the way it used to be.

Jones spearheaded the legislation that created the Conservation and Recreational Lands of Florida Act of 1979 (CARL), which gave birth to the "Florida Forever" and "Preservation 2000" programs that aim to acquire and preserve as much of the state as possible for public use and visitation, while leaving it pristine and undeveloped.

"I wrote CARL in my back bedroom on a yellow legal pad," Jones boasts offhandedly.

"It's true," his wife, Mariana, affirmed. "He woke up one morning at 2 a.m. and went back into his study and wrote the whole concept out. CARL, at least the idea behind CARL, was done right here in that back bedroom."

"Johnny Jones was instrumental in acquiring the Big Cypress Preserve for the state," said Manley Fuller, who succeeded Jones after his 16-year tenure as president of the Florida Wildlife Federation. "He was intimately involved in the establishment of the 765,000-acre Big Cypress National Preserve, both to protect the land from development schemes and to allow a great place for quality outdoor recreation, especially hunting, and a place for the Florida panther to roam."

"He used to drive me crazy," laughed Juanita Greene, formerly environmental writer for The Miami Herald and now head of Friends of the Everglades, a group founded in 1969 by Marjory Stoneman Douglas. "When I was back writing for the paper, he would call me up all the time and yell, 'Hello, babe!'

"He would never let go. He would just wear you down. But in the end, his causes were so good you had to like him. We clashed a lot about hunting, because he is such an avid hunter. I don't like to shoot birds and he does. So I thought he was a gun-toting fascist at first, but he went back to the days when these wetlands were covered with ducks, and it was a hunter's paradise. He realized that wildlife needs habitat, and habitat has to be preserved. That's how he became a conservationist, by being a hunter," Greene said.

Today, Jones greets you sitting, wearing suspenders, sitting in a chair in a house he built and roofed himself on what used to be a narrow pineclad street. Now it is Haverhill Road, and a flume of steely traffic travels it all day long, north and south, into the noisy night.

"We bought this house in 1953, 5 acres. He cut the cypress logs for the ceilings and walls and let them dry for a year under the house," Mariana says.

"It's amazing how much Palm Beach County has changed in our lifetime. In 1938, we lived on Garden Avenue at the corner of Military and Southern; there were just seven houses and two dairies. Now look at it."

Jones is not in the best of health, having suffered a heart attack and a minor stroke some time back. But he still spits like a downed power line that remains dangerous, a force to be respected and reckoned with. He still has embers of his old truculence when it comes to Florida, which for him is a mind-kingdom of inexpressible wealth and memory. He alternates between quiet, thoughtful reflection and sudden blazes of expression.

Is he optimistic or pessimistic about the future of the place?

"Pessimistic," Jones declares. "I used to be optimistic, but now, because of the growth . . . " he trails off into sudden silence. Then he sparks back: "We haven't learned anything from these hurricanes. We've got so many housing developments built in wetlands. The Army Corps of Engineers is not infallible!"

"Here," says Jones. "Come on back here. Here is where I wrote most of my legislation."

He leads the way into his back bedroom, brightly lit by the noonday sun, which casts a huge map of the Everglades into sharp relief, with arrows pointing where the water ought to flow and doesn't anymore, and would, if only the restoration plan were implemented!

"If they would just . . . " and he begins a complicated exposition of the 2,358-square mile ecosystem that underpins the whole southern peninsula. For him, it is still a cause not quite lost and well worth saving.

'The state shall seek . . . '

"I remember writing CARL up here in this room," he repeats. "It was going to be funded with a half-cent sales tax. It was going through the legislature like gangbusters.

"Then Phil Lewis (who served as Florida Senate President from 1978-80) said: 'We can't earmark the sales tax. Maybe we can use the severance tax from minerals, phosphate and oil.' So the money was found."

How do you write a bill?

"First it comes to you, one thing, the idea," Jones answers. "Then it comes together. The state shall do this, the state shall do that. I later found out that it is better to write 'the state shall seek to' instead of just 'shall.' The legislature doesn't like specific money rules, but they'll come up with it if you give them some leeway."

"Then I wrote 'Save Our Rivers,' " Jones says. "I wrote the bill. Then I had a heart attack. They wanted me to take it easy, but I wanted to call Bob Graham. I said, 'If you don't bring me a phone, I'll have another heart attack.' So they brought me a phone."

"Save Our Rivers" passed the legislature. On Aug. 1, 1984, it was Jones who tossed the first spadeful of dirt into the hated Kissimmee River Canal. He was waiting for Bob Graham to show up, but Graham was late and Jones couldn't wait to start filling in a ditch he detested.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Conclusion: The Agony of Florida, Its Rivers, Bays, Estuaries and Politics ... by gimleteye

Donald Trump won the White House with talking points that stirred a devoted base. One of them: "The system is rigged." In so far as Big Sugar and the state of Florida are concerned, Trump is right. The system is rigged. But what does one do with that information?

First and foremost, understand: Big Sugar has an Achilles Heel. Big Sugar's singular vulnerability is that its reliable voters don't extend beyond a few communities huddled around the Everglades Agricultural Area. That's why Big Sugar is laser-focused on the internal clock spring of politics, but not so helping anyone understand how to connect the dots. If fact, Big Sugar is vigilant in this respect.

Florida's sugar producers are astute in doling out political money -- to both Democrats and Republicans -- through affiliations for example; allying with and funding hand-in-hand with other cartel enterprises in Florida, like the state's electric utilities, and unrelated business councils like Associated Industries of Florida. In a perfect democracy Big Sugar would only be a special interest vying on a level playing field with the public good.

Remember the public good? The ideal that a representational democracy enlightened by and for the people could arbitrate the fair and equitable relation of the branches of government to special interests? The public good was up-ended by Republicans in the late 1908's, calling for the end to the welfare state, calling on voters to embrace personal responsibility, moral values, and derided the cultural relativism of liberals.

Thirty years later, Republicans claim that government shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers. That's the entire theme of President Trump's determination to erase subsidies for alternative energy like solar.

Yet the sugar program in the Farm Bill remains untouchable and inviolate, conferring the vast profits that amass great wealth for the shareholders -- a form of corporate welfare that Republicans nevertheless embrace.

The appropriate response would be for voters -- both Republican and Democrat -- to make Big Sugar and water policy reform a litmus test at the ballot box: do you support termination of the sugar program in the Farm Bill, or not? Yes or no. Do you support a new law to provide for land acquisition in the EAA, or not? Yes or no.


Although it is hard to see the way through, because the right of corporations to give unlimited campaign contribution is hardened in a missile silo, there is always hope that Floridians will awake, someday, rubbing the sleep from their eyes like Rip Van Winkle.

When they do, they will see that there are civic groups like Bullsugar.org, like the Everglades Trust, the Southwest Florida Clean Water activists and Captains for Clean Water willing to make the arguments and draw the connection between the state's water policy and the economy and the environment; in snapshots that put Big Sugar in its appropriate context: a polluting industry that is harming democracy, harming people and harming the natural resources that Floridians love. No one visits Florida for the sugar cane.

On the signing of the new Everglades law by Gov. Rick Scott, Senator Negron said, "After 20 years of talking, southern storage is finally becoming a reality. We are well on our way to putting the harmful discharges from Lake Okeechobee into the pages of history, instead of the front pages of daily newspapers."

Environmentalists and citizens had a different idea about southern storage than the one that emerged as a result of Senator Negron's hard work in the recent legislative session. Their dream was to create enough shallow water storage to absorb the impact of flooding from Lake Okeechobee. Not a deep reservoir that shifts all the risk to taxpayers.

Instead, the new law frames a dictate from Big Sugar: you will do things our way or not at all.


You will not use eminent domain to pursue a shallow water flow-way, you will only have conversations with Big Sugar if Big Sugar willingly wants to, you will fork over public dollars to do the engineering and science so we can sell rainwater on our private property to the public, and you will require waiting a decade before revisiting this issue.

But Big Sugar does not dictate how you vote.

In 2008, then Gov. Charlie Crist had done the unthinkable: negotiated an option to buy U.S. Sugar Corporation lands in the Everglades Agricultural Area. To be sure, not all the lands were optimally located for a southern flow-way, but if 187,000 acres had been purchased with Amendment 1 dollars -- secured by a committed electorate in 2014 -- Florida would have been well on its way to increasing leverage on the big landowners inside the prospective flow-way: namely, Florida Crystals and the King Ranch, -- the largest landowner in Texas that knows a thing or two about ownership of water as a private right.

But Florida Crystals and the King Ranch had other ideas, and by the time the dust had settled on the 2010 election -- with Gov. Rick Scott and Marco Rubio securing the governor's mansion and U.S. Senate seat respectively -- even U.S. Sugar had reason to pull out of the deal.

Gov. Rick Scott was 100 percent committed to deny the opportunity to create additional storage out of sugar lands. Whether or not he understood the intricacies of Big Sugar's strategic plays to control Florida's water future, Scott was all for letting private industry have the run of the field. Navigating the arbitrage at the edge of federal and state health care reimbursement laws made him rich.

The die-off of the U.S. Sugar option was encouraged by Gov. Scott's political appointees of the South Florida Water Management District. Despite pleas from the public and environmentalists, they allowed the provision for a partial purchase to expire in 2015. Too bad. Then the rains began to fall.

As polluted water from Lake Okeechobee cascaded across incoming state senate president Joe Negron's district, the idea of purchasing an additional 60,000 acres of Big Sugar lands gained traction, but only long enough for the November presidential election to come and go -- helping to deliver to the White House a part-time Floridian well-known to the Palm Beach sugar barons as an arriviste. Big Sugar invested heavily in both Jeb Bush -- who had already proven his facility as governor ink dividing and conquering Florida's environmental and Everglades communities -- , but really supported Marco Rubio.



During the presidential primary campaign, Rubio -- who faced angry Republicans in flooded Republican districts -- defended Big Sugar's prerogatives through the Farm Bill as "a matter of national security". This -- for a commodity, sugar -- that imposes trillion dollar a year costs on the American health care system as a consequence of over-consumption. Primarily in poor communities that can least afford the cover massive treatment costs.

Conservatives who ardently believe that government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers might start asking the question in 2018 of candidates: why is government picking winners like Big Sugar?

Big Sugar supports the following front-runners. For GOP candidate for governor of Florida, the current Agriculture Secretary, Adam Putnam. For Agriculture Secretary, state representative Matt Caldwell, Big Sugar’s chief ally in people's house. For U.S. Senate, Rick Scott who will take on the senior Senator from Florida, Bill Nelson.

What about the Democrats? As Joe Negron pointed out during the legislative session, the Democrats in the state legislature -- like Senate minority leader Oscar Braynon -- proved to be some of the most intractable obstacles to delivering a clean bill including a 60,000 acre reservoir. Big Sugar knows how to ring the Democrats' bell. So long as the state’s top Democrats refuse to delineate the case against Big Sugar, the only place that environmentalists will can take solace in, according to Carl Hiaasen — "a 14,460-acre reservoir is better than no reservoir.” If a 14,460 acre reservoir can work, cooking in the hot Florida sun.

Voters should understand, too, how science is the collateral victim of Big Sugar. In a press report after Gov. Scott signed the new Everglades reservoir bill into law, Gaston Cantens, vice president of Florida Crystals, said "the initial proposal could have threatened existing Everglades restoration plans, but this most recent version uses science-based research to continue the construction of CERP projects." Cantens, a former state legislator from Miami-Dade County, is twisting the conclusion of the nation's top scientists -- in the National Academy of Science. More land to store and cleanse stormwater runoff from sugar farms and other sources of pollution.

The acquisition of additional lands is critical to solving Florida’s water crisis. In 2017 progress towards that end was diverted just like an irrigation in a ditch dug in the middle of the Everglades Agricultural Area.

In December (2016), I wrote that I didn't know "... how the Negron initiative is going to work out, except to cite from history; that initiatives to protect Florida's natural resources are of story-teller / elected officials, one after another, making promises then claiming victory with half-measures costing billions. Their dual purpose: placate restless voters and taxpayers while keeping the status quo intact. That, in a nutshell, is the history of Everglades restoration.”

Floridians need to vote with their hearts and, also, with their contributions. Make Big Sugar a litmus test. Insist that “kicking the can down the road” does not constitute progress no matter how many billions are spent.

We can move on, but -- eventually -- we are going to have to move back. Big Sugar controls Florida but it does not control the rain. Whether by drought or by flood, the day will come when a majority of voters call on Big Sugar to throw down its spears. And Big Sugar will have to do it because too many voters will have arisen from their slumber.


Also Read: part 2

Read: "Part One: The Agony of Florida, Its Rivers, Bays, Estuaries, And Politics"

Selected references:
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/10/BillText/er/PDF
http://floridapolitics.com/archives/237789-scott-okeechobee-2
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/compromise-yields-gift-for-the-everglades-78-billion-gallons-of-cleaner/2322476
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/carl-hiaasen/article148964414.html#storylink=cpy
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/florida-passes-everglades-reservoir-restoration-bill-after-20-years-fighting-big-sugar-9321807
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/everglades-activists-worry-okeechobee-reservoir-deal-doesnt-go-far-enough-9333478
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/10/BillText/er/PDF
https://gladesdeclaration.org
Help for the Everglades is on the way — maybe, CARL HIAASEN, May 5, 2017
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/carl-hiaasen/article148964414.html#storylink=cpy
https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/florida-president-clinton-trump

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

Part Two: The Agony of Florida, Its Rivers, Bays, Estuaries, And Politics ... by gimleteye

Read: "Part One: The Agony of Florida, Its Rivers, Bays, Estuaries, And Politics"




Big Sugar controls Florida except for the rain.

Managing government regulations and laws are routine costs of Big Sugar business. It takes big money to externalize the costs of pollution, say, or to increase costs to public health as a consequence of promoting added sugar in the American diet.

Alfie and Pepe Fanjul, Florida Crystals
Expensive as lobbying, lawyering and politicking may be, millions per year are only a fraction of the windfall derived from government subsidies and sugar price supports.

Floods or drought are other matters. Big Sugar can't plan for too much rain or too little, but in both cases, the effect of weather extremes is to make crop yields unpredictable. Reducing unpredictability to the maximum extent possible challenges every farmer. With so much money at stake, Big Sugar has perfected its tools.

That's why Big Sugar practices stage craft relentlessly. It has profit and motivation to keep its adversaries at bay; with strategies and tactics sharpened with focus groups and consultants. In the meantime, as a permanent matter, Big Sugar keeps a tight grip on the levers of water management infrastructure in South Florida; the most highly engineered and complex system in the world.

Big Sugar proxies at the state water management district governing board are now challenging a new law signed by Gov. Rick Scott on May 12, 2017. After the bill was introduced by Senate president Joe Negron, it was first opposed then supported by Big Sugar. There is only reason why Big Sugar would have permitted a law to be passed that it is now fighting. That’s what it planned to do from the first. It is another phase in the industry's permanent war against government regulation.

Why would Big Sugar fight an outcome it supported in the state legislature only a month ago?

The external husk of the law provides funding for a massive reservoir in the middle of the historic Everglades. Sugar successfully derailed a plan supported by environmentalists and scientists and countless citizens to buy 60,000 acres of additional sugar lands for the purpose of cleansing and treatment marshes. Instead, Big Sugar supported the construction -- with public dollars -- of a 12 foot deep reservoir, comprising nearly 26 square miles with walls over 30 feet high.

The kernals of the new law are what Big Sugar wanted. Here's is what Big Sugar got in exchange for supporting a deep reservoir its proxies at the water management district are now fighting: 1) real hard money, 2) a regulatory framework that continues to push environmental restoration so far into the future that most of the actors now on the stage will be gone by the time science concludes whether a billion dollars was well spent or wasted and 3) assurances that if the massive lake — costing at least $1 billion — is built but then fails its purposes, then the public will have to come back to Big Sugar without the most important leverage that government has in the execution of big infrastructure projects: eminent domain.

The new reservoir will be built atop a porous geology — lime rock — and on public lands that had already been designated for water treatment. Instead of a shallow marsh, Gov. Scott and the legislature approved a deep lake. The same depth as Lake Okeechobee, a breeding ground for toxic algae.

Whether or not a massive man-made lake is built, the innards of the new law confer massive benefits to Big Sugar. The fine points of the deal are liquid gold; in addition to prohibiting eminent domain, the law includes a requirement that any deal-making involving public lands farmed under lease by Big Sugar must done on the lessee's terms, and a novel way for Florida farmers to sell rain water to the public at the public’s expense.

That last bit is a huge, because a right of private ownership of rainfall never existed in Florida law. Now it does.

The backstory is deeply woven in the spirit of a rigged competition for Florida’s fresh water supply.

In South Florida in the winter of 2015/ 2016, rains began falling heavily. In dry season. Historic, biblical rainfall. Noah built his ark for such an event but not in a presidential election year. On the east coast of the Florida peninsula, the rainfall caused a powerful state legislator to face hard choices.


Joe Negron, a well-regarded attorney from Stuart and state senator, had advanced steadily to the top of the Florida GOP leadership.
His route to the presidency of the senate in a massively important electoral state was vetted every step of the way. Negron was trusted to distribute major political campaign money through committees networked like sections of a spider’s web. Its individual strands connected through a small, elite group of directors, board members, and very wealthy funders. It is political money laundering, it is legal, and it is the American way thanks to the Citizens United decision by the US Supreme Court.

The state’s biggest campaign contributor is Big Sugar, a cartel with two primary actors: Florida Crystals, owned by Fanjul family, and US Sugar Corporation, controlled by the descendants of the Charles Stuart Mott fortune. These are billionaire competitors who even conservative critics, from the American Enterprise Institute to the Wall Street Journal editorial board, acknowledge as masters at rigging the political system to its own purposes.

For Senator Negron, under normal circumstances serving constituents in his district and Big Sugar would not be mutually exclusive. The rainfall in the winter of 2015/ 2016, with a presidential election on the horizon, was not a normal circumstance.

The flood stage in Lake Okeechobee, the diseased liquid heart of Florida, was approaching emergency level. Hurricane season — when copious rainfall is predicted to occur — was months from arriving. Something had to give. The “fix”: release massive amounts of highly polluted water from Lake Okeechobee to both Florida coasts; through the Caloosahatchee to the west and the St. Lucie to the east. As recently as 2013, these same coastal resources and communities had been nuked by polluted lake water; sending devastating algae blooms through treasured natural habitats but also right to the doorstep of Senator Negron’s constituents. Memories were raw, of fish kills and water too dangerous to touch.

In the winter of 2015/2016 civic protesters from primarily Republican districts in Florida threatened to scramble the  outcome of a presidential election
In late 2015 more than 200 Everglades scientists had signed a letter imploring Governor Rick Scott — a Big Sugar ally — to purchase at least 60,000 acres of Big Sugar lands for additional storage and treatment. Their plea was a significant reduction from what environmentalists had pleaded for a decade earlier; an increase of at least 100,000 acres. Big Sugar currently farms around 700,000 acres around the southern rim of Lake Okeechobee.

Senator Negron couldn’t ignore the logic for land purchase, although it ran counter-clockwise to the exquisitely calibrated time clock of Big Sugar.

In 2008, then Gov. Charlie Crist had negotiated an option to purchase more than 187,000 acres owned by US Sugar. Shrinking the cartel would expose new opportunities to reshuffle the political house of cards in Florida. That, in itself, was enough to send the co-cartel Fanjuls/ Florida Crystals into mad orbit.

Crist was punished by Big Sugar for his temerity negotiating the option to acquire U.S. Sugar. The Fanjuls heavily invested in his opponent, Marco Rubio. As a leader in the state legislature, Rubio had already proven his loyalty to Big Sugar. In the same election cycle, 2010, Gov. Rick Scott — a political neophyte was propelled to the governor’s mansion by his own fortune plus significant sugar money.

Fast forward to the winter of 2015/ 2016. In 2015 Roger Stone, Trump confidante, was on Big Sugar's payroll. He paid actors to counter-protest environmentalists and citizens at the water management district as the rains fell. Meanwhile, two Florida candidates for the GOP presidential nomination— Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio — gambled the Florida March primary would propel them to the GOP nomination. Both were favored sons of Big Sugar. And still the rains fell and primarily Republican districts began to join the greens.

A new grass-roots movement focused its ire on Big Sugar. Not environmental groups exclusively. Those opponents, Big Sugar had repeatedly pinned down. Groups like Bullsugar.org and Captains for Clean Water began organizing tens of thosuands of interested Floridians, finding their way around the mainstream press through social media. (At the time, I described the moment as “Florida’s Arab Spring”. I wasn’t far off, of the movement or of the backlash it triggered.)

Property owners and local businesses in Negron's district seethed with resentment. They understood the problem this way: their rights were being used as a sacrifice zone for Big Sugar. The poiednt is critical: Big Sugar has always known its unique vulnerability. Its small decision ranks, populated by very wealthy families, are no match for millions of Florida voters if they are awoken.

Senator Negron chose to calm his district. In early 2016 he pledged to dedicate his term as Senate president to legislation that would solve the pollution coursing lifeless, toxic sludge into his constitutents’ backyards.
Billions of gallons of polluted water per day coursed out of Lake Okeechobee into primarily Republican districts during the severe rainfall events of the 2015/2016 winter

Whether or not Negron knew the acquisition of 60,000 acres of land in sugar cane production was unachievable — a full year before his term as senate president was to begin — and notwithstanding Big Sugar's outrage and outer protestations, the rending of cloth and wringing of hands, a potentially explosive issue had been deflated by the incoming state senate president in a presidential election year. In a state that decided the presidency before.

This isn’t cynical politics. Heavy flooding laid bare inequities that don’t often rile voters. 29 electoral votes would be decided in November for Donald Trump. During the primary campaign he never answered a single question about Big Sugar or the Everglades or the devastated estuaries on both Florida coasts. (Rubio, on the other hand, called protecting the sugar subsidy in the Farm Bill a matter of “national security”, eliciting derisive howls from all quarters except one: his biggest campaign contributors, Big Sugar.)

In promising to address land acquisition in the March 2017 legislative session, Negron stripped the presidential campaign in Florida of a toxic mess.

In Miami, in Jan. 2016 protesters gathered outside a meeting of national non-profits to shame one of its participants: the Charles Stuart Mott Foundation that owns U.S. Sugar Corporation
Big Sugar, in the meantime, kicked into high gear its campaign to push responsibility for pollution onto any target that could fog a mirror. The industry pushed paid-for media, advertisements, local sugar advocates and recruiting indignant legislators and business leaders from North Florida to complain about the use of available funding for land acquisition. It attacked environmentalists. It attacked scientists. It attacked individuals. It recruited African Americans who would be harmed if their sugar jobs were sacrificed to the environment.

Their objections ranged from “the government already owns too much land” to “we want our region funded first.” (The land acquisition was to be funded through a mechanism put in the state consititution by voters through a popular referendum, generating 75% support in 2014, to use a portion of the documentary stamp tax generated through real estate transactions to fund environmentally sensitive lands.) Barbara Miedema, vice president of Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida, said in August 2016, "Taking another 60,000 acres of productive and sustainable farmland out of the EAA will without a doubt close down our sugar mill and put us out of business. Sen. Negron’s plan means losing a thousand or more jobs in the Glades communities, not to mention the impact to businesses in the community that provide services to us.”

The threat of economic hardship was only one salvo. Big Sugar applied pressure against Negron from every direction. Much of it was Kabuki — the theater of well-worn roles where everyone in the audience has seen the play and even memorized the actors’ lines.

Big Sugar knew that irrespective of the presidential outcome, the only legislation that would pass the state legislature and be signed into law would be legislation Big Sugar wanted. And it wanted a lot.

The public may have thought it was getting an additional 60,000 acres to store and treat dirty water so it didn’t have to be flushed onto their doorsteps. What they got was a bill of goods they already owned.

Pull the thread a little harder, and it takes readers back to the early 2000’s.

After decades of litigation by environmental plaintiffs and obstruction and resistance by Big Sugar, in 2000 Congress and the State of Florida signed an agreement (CERP, The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan) incorporating the need for vast new, additional storage to cleanse and treat fresh water flowing from the north to the south. Storage capacity is also the bane of Florida’s rivers and estuaries since, if there is not enough storage during flooding, both the east and west coast riverways are used as emergency relief valves for highly toxic water from Lake Okeechobee. CERP never addressed the water storage problem. It proposed, instead, more than 300 aquifer storage and recovery wells to store excess rainfall in what the late John Marshall called “Vertical parking lots”. At the time, the one federal agency with expertise on the technology, the USGS, was not even called in to consult.

Deep wells were a technological “fix”, or work-around, to a political problem just like the 26 square mile deep reservoir is, today.

No sooner had CERP been signed by both the state and federal government as a consent agreement, the state of Florida — and then Gov. Jeb Bush — set out to make the new law fit Big Sugar’s needs. Bush and then House leader Marco Rubio engineered a weakening of the federal consent agreement through a new 2003 law. Their action triggered another Clean Water Act lawsuit by the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians and a small, grass roots environmental group founded by Marjory Stoneman Douglas, Friends of the Everglades. Eventually, after six years of litigation, the plaintiffs prevailed. Faced with a clear loss, Gov. Rick Scott declared victory. He committed to a new framework agreement to comply with the 10 parts per billion phosphorous standard and earlier litigaiton, committing the state to invest $890 million in Everglades-related water quality projects.

This year’s water legislation doesn’t authorize purchase of any new lands and certainly not the 60,000 acres of additional lands deemed by scientists to be the minimum necessary to treat and cleanse polluted water that otherwise dumps on the coasts.

The point about water storage is: a volume of water — any volume — can be stored at a shallow depth on X acres of land, or, a deeper depth at a fraction of X. Which provides a better outcome? In the case of Florida, the best solution is the one that nature provides: move a vast, thin layer of water across meadows filled with grasses that slowly strip and cleanse pollutants like fertilizers and nutrients and other man-made chemicals that would not otherwise occur in the environment. Stagnant water is at constant risk of toxic algae breakouts.
Toxic runoff from Big Sugar drainage canal in the Everglades Agricultural Area
"His original project carried a $2.4 billion price tag and would have required 60,000 acres of active farmland, but he agreed to a $1.5 billion compromise that forces the South Florida Water Management District — which had repeated many of the sugar industry's talking points in opposition to the measure — to shoulder the responsibility for making sure the project is completed.” Beyond that, there are a lot of “ifs, ifs and ifs”.

Negron navigated the final bill and its provisions with only minimal public comment and practically no ventilation by legislative committees. It wasn’t a sign of strength, so much as of weakness that legislators would do nothing to cross a powerful campaign force like Big Sugar.

The deep reservoir plan — the only solution Big Sugar would approve because of its objection to sell any more of its land to the state — contains a major risk: that it will become the same vast breeding pool for toxic algae as Lake Okeechobee, whose toxic waters it is meant to replace. The problem: it will take at least a decade to find out if the lake works. In a balance between certainty and risk according to the provisions of the new law, all the certainty falls to Big Sugar and all the risk, to the environment and taxpayers.

We know Big Sugar got what it wanted out of the Everglades Bill because the industry and its lobbyists went dark as soon as the bill emerged from committee in the Senate. When the bill hit the floor of the House, there was opportunity for mischief, but Big Sugar mouthpieces mostly went quiet. There was no House version of the Senate bill. No back-and-forth. The deal had been cut by Big Sugar. Environmentalists trusted not to spill wine on the tablecloth — the Everglades Foundation and Audubon of Florida — had been given a peek inside the tent.

Democrats in the state legislature were limp. In-roads by Big Sugar to the African American caucus ensured that there would be no unity of purpose around a stronger outcome.  The bill that finally emerged, SB 10, was written in secret with virtually no input by either the public or by the legislature.

Public testimony at a single meeting, the Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, was cut short after a few testified, but not before one pleader, a doctor from the Martin County Health System, noted that heart attacks in the community had skyrocketed after the polluted water fouled the St. Lucie River. He attributed it to the stress of people’s whose properties was being used as a septic system by Big Sugar. He only got three minutes.

Finally, it was Negron’s role to keep order in the legislature, making sure the bill passed without palpitations of the heart.

“This week, a $1.5 billion, 78-billion-gallon version of the plan finally passed through both houses of the Legislature last night in a move Everglades conservationists call historic. The nonprofit Everglades Trust called the deal "the most significant victory for Everglades restoration in more than two decades.” (State Finally Passes Everglades Restoration Reservoir Bill After 20 Years of Fighting Big Sugar UPDATED, Miami New Times, May 3, 2017)

Sierra Club assessed the bill as a “win”:
“Sierra Club supported the Everglades Reservoir bill, which the Governor signed this week. We backed the bill because, on balance, its passage benefited the Everglades and Florida's coastal waters.

“The law funding construction of a reservoir will help reduce Lake Okeechobee freshwater discharges that have been producing toxic algae in the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries, as well as send clean freshwater south to replenish aquifers, the Everglades and Florida Bay. Restoring these freshwater flows to the south will also improve the resiliency of South Florida from sea level rise and saltwater intrusion.”

“… While the new law speeds up the process for storing water on public land south of the Lake, it failed to provide any of the 60,000 acres of additional sugar land requested in the original bill for water storage, treatment and conveyance. The law also prohibits the state from using the power of eminent domain to acquire sugar lands, an important tool sometimes necessary to protect the Everglades, prevent ecological collapse, and preserve the water supply for 6 million people. The law forces more water to be stacked up in a smaller footprint, driving up costs and limiting options. We also remain very concerned that the South Florida Water Management District plans to rely on Aquifer Storage and Recovery and Deep Injection Wells north of the Lake instead of buying more land and building adequate above ground storage, which would provide more ecological benefits in line with Everglades restoration goals. We are very pleased however that the law provides training programs and preference for Lakeside residents to secure jobs building the new reservoir. We hope that this is just the beginning of serious efforts to transition the Lakeside communities to a diversified, stronger economy that protects its vast natural resources and public health.”
Carl Hiaasen, in the Miami Herald, wrote, "Cautious praise for the compromise passage of Senate Bill 10 is deserved. Celebration would be foolish.”

During the legislative session, Big Sugar enlisted more than 100 lobbyists — a greater number that sitting state senators — to roam the hallways and bars.

During the 2015/2016 winter, the pollution flowing west through the Caloosahatchee River was as polluted and dangerous as the water to the east coast. 
A sweetener was added to obtain Big Sugar’s assent: permission to use public dollars to create water storage and treatment facilities on private lands.  There is still no clear explanation for why this legislation included private lands, water storage and public funding to engineer new ways to sell rainfall to the public. Not even environmental organizations can explain it, other than to agree: this state law points Florida in an entirely new direction: allowing Florida’s biggest private property owners to sell rainfall that falls on their lands, after treatment regimes that the public may have to fund, back to the public. But that’s not all.

A decade ago, Big Sugar supported the Florida branch of the Pacific Legal Foundation, a pro-property rights foundation, to lay the groundwork against eminent domain because the industry knows better than anyone in public or private life that there probably is no other way to fix the Everglades, after all the Rube Goldberg work-arounds have been tried and failed, than to return sugarcane fields to highly engineered wetlands recovery systems.

With a stroke of the pen, Gov. Scott delivered the ultimate prize to Big Sugar: a prohibition against eminent domain in the Everglades Agricultural Area while at the same time providing for the termination of the US Sugar option that would have placed 187,000 acres in public ownership.

One last part of the new law: an extraordinary provision that requires government to end leases on lands owned by the public under the following condition; to not only pay Big Sugar for both crops and waste product it has produced, but "to compensate (sic) for any documented, unamortized planting costs, and any unamortized capital costs associated with the lease and incurred before notice.” So in other words, the capital investments of a corporation are being attached to a lease — and if that lease on lands already owned by the public is broken, then taxpayers have to pay for the portion of machinery, plant and capital equipment that might have been used to farm on that land, once or twice a year.

Who is going to decide what is a fair allocation of capital costs on an individual lease? If there is no requirement for public disclosure, the question could be asked another way: what state employee would dare to bicker with Big Sugar over its profit?

Closing off eminent domain plus terminating the US Sugar option, plus mandating “willing” termination of existing leases by Big Sugar on public lands, adds up to a twelve foot deep reservoir costing a billion dollars that risks leaving Floridians, a decade ago, where they are today.

That's a different outcome than expressed by Senator Negron on the signing of the new law by Gov. Rick Scott on May 12, 2017:  “I look forward to the work ahead as we continue to work with Governor Scott and our federal partners to expedite the planning and construction of this critical project,” Negron said. “Together, we will end the plague of toxic blue-green algae that harms the health of our citizens and destroys our environment and our economy, once and for all.”



(Part Three, conclusion, tomorrow)