Expert: New Florida governor risks repeating past growth mistakes

A recommendation to Governor-elect Rick Scott that the state transportation, environmental and planning agencies be combined suggests a return to Florida's past growth management mistakes, a University of Florida planning expert said Tuesday.

Scott's regulatory reform transition team suggested combining the Department of Transportation, Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Community Affairs during the 2011 legislative session. The team also suggested that the state eliminate local comprehensive plan amendments as a barrier to job growth along with the "development of regional impact" (DRI) process involving state oversight of major developments.

Jim Nicholas, professor emeritus of both law and urban and regional planning at the University of Florida, said labeling the Department of Community Affairs a regulatory "job-killer" as Scott did during his election campaign is "laughable" because of the excessive amount of homes and commercial space that was built prior to the collapse of the real estate market.

Florida, Nicholas said, created its growth management system to reduce conflicts between neighboring counties and between cities and counties. Counties would frequently push landfills to the edge of their boundaries and push traffic and other problems into the next jurisdiction.

"We've been there -- we are doing full circle," Nicholas said. "And my view is we got people coming into office now who don't remember. They were either, frankly, living someplace else or are too young."

Some developers, he said, won't be happy with having the DRI process eliminated because that removes the regulatory protection for their approved developments. And he said he isn't sure what cost-savings would occur by merging three departments, which he said now have distinctive roles.

Transition team member Billy Buzzett said his group that looked at DCA didn't suggest merging the three departments. He referred questions about that recommendation to Regulatory Reform Transition Team Chairman Chris Corr, who could not be reached for comment.

Buzzett, an attorney from Santa Rosa Beach, said his group looked more at the role of the state in planning rather than any particular agency. He said some local governments now have sophisticated planning staffs and that the state could play a broader role in planning over a longer timeframe.

"You've got a lot of land that is held by a few of the large corporations or families," he said. "Does it make sense that more concentration and more focus be placed on that and to see if there is an opportunity for common ground between those [interests] and the state and the environmental community?"

Charles Pattison, president of 1000 Friends of Florida, said combining the three agencies into one could work -- but it depends. Nicholas serves on the board of 1000 Friends along with other professional associations.

1000 Friends of Florida earlier this year failed to win legislative reauthorization of the Department of Community Affairs. Pattison said having a growth management agency still is important, but he added that a consolidated agency could work with the right leadership.

"You are going to have somebody who believes in the growth management mission -- that there is a state oversight role," he said. "And with that function and role comes the same authority to say 'no' from time to time."

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Judge not pleased with Florida in Everglades case

A federal judge on Friday expressed support for a new $1.5 billion federal plan to reduce Everglades pollution while raising concerns with Florida's response to the proposal, according to the Associated Press.

United States District Judge Alan. S. Gold, who in April threatened the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency with contempt of court over chronic water problems, on Friday told agency officials he will use his authority to help implement the new plan quickly. The Friends of the Everglades and the Miccosukee Tribe sued the federal government for failing to enforce the Clean Water Act.

The EPA developed a $1.5 billion plan for clean up of water flowing into the Everglades. But South Florida Water Management District Executive Director Carol Wehle wrote a letter to the court in September saying her agency couldn't afford the projects, citing declines in property tax revenue because of the real estate market.

According to an AP report, the judge said Friday that he was "not all that pleased" with Florida's lukewarm response to the EPA proposal.


View Larger Map

Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of the Interior announced a plan to raise another 5.5 miles of the Tamiami Trail highway across the Everglades, where work now is underway on a one-mile bridge. Along with other restoration projects, the new bridge would allow an unconstrained flow of water to Northeast Shark Slough.

"If ultimately authorized and funded by Congress, this proposal will benefit the environment and economy of South Florida," Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in a news release. Everglades National Park officials and environmental groups, including the National Parks Conservation Association, also said they were pleased with the announcement.

Back in court on Friday, a top U.S. Justice Department official said EPA would press forward with its plan without delay, according to AP.

Parker Thomson, attorney for the state Department of Environmental Protection, said the state mainly wants control over issuing the stricter discharge permits, which EPA could take over if they don't meet certain standards. Thomson said Florida could do a better job regulating the farm discharges, but nothing happens immediately.

"We can do it, and we will do it," Thomson said. "You can argue about the amount of time, but you can't argue reality -- it will take time."

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Attorneys defend court ordering Florida environmental groups to pay

Attorneys for Martin County and two development firms are defending a state appeals court decision ordering environmental groups to pay for challenging a Martin County land-use decision.

The 1st District Court of Appeal on Tuesday ordered 1000 Friends of Florida and the Martin County Conservation Alliance to pay attorneys' fees for the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Martin County and two development firms, Martin Island Way LLC and Island Way, LC.

Judges Paul M. Hawkes and Brad Thomas said the environmental groups' appeal was frivolous. They said the groups couldn't show how they were affected by Martin County's decision to reduce the lot sizes required in a newly designated fringe "urban service" area and therefore lacked standing.

But an attorney for the groups said he agreed with Judge William A. Van Nortwick Jr., who wrote in dissent that the sanctions "will create a precedent that will severely chill appellate advocacy." The groups said Martin County failed to provide predictable and meaningful standards for the new land-use designation to protect environmental resources.

The Florida Department of Community Affairs in July filed a response with the appeals court stating that the groups have legal standing to file the legal challenge and that sanctions against them were not appropriate. A department spokesman said Thursday that agency officials are still reviewing the ruling.

The development firms asked the court to order the groups to pay attorneys' fees, which could total more than $20,000, said Bill Hyde, an attorney for Martin Island Way LLC and Island Way, LC. He said the initial challenge and subsequent appeal were "bizarre" given that his clients contend the land-use change will enhance environmental protection in Martin County.

"I would say that it [ordering attorneys' fees] is frankly long overdue," Hyde said. "This case ... should never have been brought in the first place."

Martin County did not ask the court to impose sanctions but agrees with the order even though the county's legal costs are negligible, Assistant County Attorney David Acton said.

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Federal court to hear Everglades case Friday

Leading up to a federal court hearing in Miami on Friday, Friends of the Everglades is calling on the state to require polluters rather than taxpayers to pay for cleaning up the "River of Grass."

Friends of the Everglades and the Miccosukee Tribe have sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over failure to clean up water flowing into the Everglades. U.S. District Judge Alan S. Gold in April issued a blistering order criticizing EPA and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for circumventing requirements of the federal Clean Water Act.

Gold in September ordered EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to appear at the hearing in Miami. But that order was overturned by the 11th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

In a Sept. 30 letter to the court, representatives from the South Florida Water Management District said a $1.5-billion list of projects outlined by the EPA over the next nine years cannot be achieved. District Executive Director Carol Wehle said the district's property tax revenue had dropped by 30 percent since 2008 because of the collapse in the real estate market. Likewise general revenue appropriations from the Legislature had dropped by 78 percent.

Friends of the Everglades says sugar farmers should be paying for the cleanup -- not state taxpayers.

"The state could be doing much, much more to fairly allocate the costs of pollution between taxpayers and the people who caused the pollution," said Alan Farago, the group's conservation chairman.

A water management district spokesman declined to comment beyond referring to the Sept. 30 letter. And DEP on Wednesday filed a 26-page notice of compliance with the federal court, saying state and federal agencies were "acting expeditiously" to comply with court orders.

Representatives of U.S. Sugar Corp. and Florida Crystals on Thursday were not immediately available for comment.

(Photo provided by the South Florida Water Management District. Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida appeals court orders enviro groups to pay attorney fees

A state appeals court ruled on Tuesday that environmental groups must pay the attorneys fees of Martin County, the Florida Department of Community Affairs and development interests for appealing a land-use case.

Richard Grosso, an attorney for the groups 1000 Friends of Florida and the Martin County Conservation Alliance, says the ruling sets a chilling precedent for groups that seek to enforce state growth management laws.

Martin County in 2007 reduced from 20 acres to two acres the minimum lot size required in 191,000 acres of designated agricultural land in western Martin County. 1000 Friends of Florida and the Martin County Conservation Alliance filed a legal challenge, contending the land-use change failed to establish meaningful and predictable standards for protecting environmentally sensitive lands.

An administrative law judge determined that the change won't create urban sprawl or more development because homes would be clustered on smaller lots with open space set aside for agriculture, conservation or parks.

When the groups appealed, the 1st District Court of Appeal ruled that they lacked the legal standing because they were not affected since there was no increase in development. The majority of the three-judge panel then imposed sanctions and ordered the groups to pay legal fees incurred by the county, DCA and intervenors Martin Island Way LLC and Island Way, LC.

But in dissent, Judge William A. Van Nortwick Jr. said the case was "not close to providing a basis to impose sanctions." The erroneous standard used by the majority to impose sanctions "will create a precedent that will severely chill" those who seek appeals, Van Nortwick wrote.

Attorneys representing Martin County and the intervenors could not be reached for comment. Grosso, executive director of the Everglades Law Center in Fort Lauderdale, said his clients will consider their options, including appealing to the Florida Supreme Court or asking the 1st District Court of Appeal to rehear the case.

Grosso said his clients disagree with the administrative law judge's finding of fact that the groups will not be affected. And Grosso said that in response to their appeal, the majority judges with the 1st District Court of Appeal relied on the same facts established by the administrative law judge, creating a "Catch-22" that resulted in the sanctions.

"Enforcement of the growth management act will be a nullity" if the ruling stands. Grosso said. "No one will seek to enforce it any more out of fear of sanctions for attorney fees."

(Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida PSC approves rate freeze for Florida Power & Light

The Florida Public Service Commission on Tuesday voted 5-0 to approve a settlement with Florida Power & Light Co. to resolve a controversial rate-hike request denied by the commission earlier this year.

The PSC denial in January of a $1 billion rate hike request played a role in the Senate's refusal in April to confirm two reform-minded PSC members appointed by Gov. Charlie Crist. Two other commissioners were ousted last summer by the PSC Nominating Council appointed by the Legislature.

In August, Attorney General Bill McCollum, FPL and other intervenors agreed to a settlement in the rate case. The agreement would freeze utility rates through 2012 while preserving the company's return on equity.

Approval had been delayed by a legal challenge filed in September by FPL with the First District Court of Appeal. The utility sought to have Commissioner Nathan Skop removed from cases involving the utility. FPL says Skop, a former utility employee, has blamed them for the PSC Nominating Council's decision not to nominate him for another term.

But the PSC asked the court to allow the rate case to move forward on the settlement agreement. FPL says the agreement would help its 4.5 million customers by allowing its rates to remain among the lowest in the state.

On Tuesday, representatives of the Attorney General's Office, the Legislature's Office of Public Council, the Florida Industrial Power Users Group, the South Florida Hospital and Healthcare Association, the Florida Retail Federation and FPL urged the commission to adopt the agreement.

Industry groups said the agreement would provide predictability for electricity rates through 2012.

The settlement was a result of numerous meetings, phone calls and drafts, said attorney Vicki Gordon Kaufman, representing the Florida Industrial Power Users Group.

"A lot of it wasn't very pretty," she said. But she added that the agreement is one "we all think is in the best interest of our clients and the state."

Senior Assistant Attorney General Cecilia Bradley credited the utility for giving in on some issues. She said the agreement emphasizes the goal of the PSC to provide reliable energy at affordable rates.

"A lot of people are still struggling with the economy," Bradley said. "And a rate freeze will be greatly appreciated, I think."

Commission Chairman Art Graham called it "amazing" that the sides were able to reach an agreement and he said that the resolution makes it easier for the commission.

"I'm glad you guys did the fighting before we had to get involved," Graham said.

Skop said the settlement agreement validates the commission vote earlier this year to reject FPL's rate increase. The return on equity agreement, he said, is exactly what was ordered by the commission earlier this year.

"While that decision was criticized, history has shown … the commission made the right decision in light of the fact the utility is financially healthy, is earning a reasonable rate of return and is able to pay dividends," Skop said.

(Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Cold weather pushes manatee deaths past last year's record

This manatee was rescued from Wakulla Springs during a cold weather snap in February 2008.

The number of manatee deaths in 2010 is already more than 50 percent higher than the record number that died in 2009 -- with cold weather this year having taken a heavy toll on the lumbering sea cows, Florida wildlife officials said Friday.

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission documented 699 manatee deaths in state waters through Dec. 5 compared to 429 documented in 2009, the agency said. Manatees, the state's official marine mammal, are listed as endangered by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Cold exposure accounted for at least 244 fatalities while many of the 203 with undetermined causes of death may also have suffered from the cold. Wildlife officials said the die-offs underscore the importance of warm water habitat, such as springs and power plant outfalls.

"We are very concerned about the unusually high number of manatee deaths this year," Gil McRae, director of the agency's Fish and Wildlife Research Institute in St. Petersburg, said in a statement. "Data from our monitoring programs over the next few years will tell us if there are long-term implications for the population."

The new figures also could fuel the debate on whether there are enough boating restrictions to protect manatees or too many to allow for boating enjoyment.

The cold weather likely caused fewer fatal collisions with watercraft earlier in the year as manatees congregated in warm water, wildlife officials said. But the number of deaths was increasing later this year and could match last year's 97 deaths caused by collisions.

Ted Forsgren, executive director of the Coastal Conservation Association Florida, a recreational fishing group, said the deaths in 2010 suggest a need for determining the "carrying capacity" for manatees -- or factors that limit the manatee population such as access to warm water in the winter.

He noted that the agency's aerial survey earlier this year counted 5,067 manatees statewide, an increase by more than 1,200 animals from 2009.

"I think the question they would need to be very cautious about is whether they need any additional [boating restrictions]," Forsgren said.

The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission earlier this year got out of the debate about whether manatees should be classified as threatened or endangered. The commission now automatically lists any species that are classified by the federal government as threatened or endangered.

The deaths show that manatees are vulnerable and that continued boating restrictions and improvements in warm water habitat is needed before the species is reclassified, said Pat Rose, president of the Save the Manatee Club.

"They [federal wildlife officials] are going to have to reassess where they are, both with good things happening with the population but also this horrible thing happening right now with the unprecedented mortality in the population," Rose said.

(Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Photo and story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida DEP credits controversial federal water standards

Environmental groups say this algae bloom in 2009 on a tributary of the St. Johns River was fueled by excessive nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorous.

A Florida Department of Environmental Protection official on Thursday for the first time sounded a note different from the sharp criticism leveled by state officials and industry representatives towards new federal water quality standards.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in November adopted limits on nitrogen and phosphorus in lakes, streams and rivers, with agency officials saying the limits are needed to prevent algae blooms in waterways and toxic red tides along the coast. But many elected officials and industry representatives criticized the new standards as being costly to cities, utilities, industry and agriculture.

On Tuesday, Attorney General Bill McCollum filed a federal lawsuit against the EPA on behalf of the state and Agriculture Commissioner Charles H. Bronson. McCollum said the standards were adopted in an "arbitrary and capricious manner" and were an abuse of agency discretion.

On Thursday, DEP's Jerry Brooks told the Senate Committee on Environmental Preservation and Conservation that the EPA standards incorporated enough flexibility to allow the state to decide whether to implement them. Those comments also were a striking difference from the criticism leveled against the EPA earlier this year when then-DEP Secretary Michael Sole told legislators they should "be afraid" of aspects of the EPA proposal.

Brooks told the committee Thursday that the EPA rule, by delaying implementation for 15 months, allows Florida to work with utilities and industry groups to help understand the standards. The delay, he said, also allows those utilities and groups to seek federal waivers for certain waterways.

EPA also has assured wastewater utilities they won't be required to use expensive reverse-osmosis treatment, Brooks said. Wastewater utilities previously estimated the cost of meeting the standards at $97 billion over 30 years.

"I don't want you to think that as I stand here today that we think the rule EPA adopted is perfect," said Brooks, who is director of DEP's Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration.

But he added, "I believe their rule has maintained enough flexibility we can do that [adopt state regulations] and capture those things we don't think they did exactly right in the development of the regulations."

But representatives of wastewater utilities along with the Florida League of Cities, the Florida Association of Counties and the Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group sharply criticized EPA and the new federal standards.

EPA's "slipshod" approach will delay the cleanup of waterways, said Paul Steinbrecher, representing the Florida Water Environment Association Utility Council.

He also said the federal rule still requires reverse-osmosis for wastewater treatment -- at a huge cost to utilities' customers -- even if EPA officials are saying utilities will receive waivers.

"Why would you publish a rule with these limits and then say, 'But most everybody is going to get out of it and will have to meet some other number instead'?" Steinbrecher said. "That makes no sense."

After the meeting, Brooks told The Florida Tribune that industry groups still are dealing with uncertainties and frustration with the federal rule-making process. He said it will be up to the administration of Governor-elect Rick Scott to decide whether the state wants to implement the new federal standards.

"In the end they [EPA officials] left a rule sitting there on the table that doesn't box us in," Brooks said.

Sen. Charlie Dean, R-Inverness and the chairman of the Senate Committee on Environmental Preservation and Conservation said he didn't know if the committee would develop legislation but he said it will work with state agencies on the issue. He said the committee's priorities may be developed as issues arise during the 2011 legislative session.

(Photo by Chris Williams, GreenWater Laboratories/CyanoLab, provided by environmental groups involved in a federal lawsuit over water quality. Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida water disputes won't be focus of new panel, chairman says

The chairman of a new select House committee addressing water issues said Wednesday she expects it to deal more with water quality issues and less with water quantity except for "big picture" issues.

On Tuesday, House Speaker Dean Cannon, R-Winter Park, said he is establishing the Select Committee on Water Policy and he named Rep. Trudi Williams, R-Fort Myers, as chairman. She also is chairman of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee.

Cannon said in a memo that the "use and management of our natural resources presents one of the most pressing challenges for the long-term health of our state."

Williams told the Florida Tribune the committee is expected to produce a report before the legislative session on what issues the committee will deal with. And the committee will hold meetings at least into the summer.

"This just happened yesterday," she said. "I haven't spoken to the speaker yet. I have to get his vision for the committee."

Williams said she expects the committee to examine the state's conflict with the Environmental Protection Agency over water quality criteria adopted by the federal agency in November. Attorney General Bill McCollum announced Tuesday the state is filing a federal lawsuit against the EPA to challenge those numeric criteria for phosphorus and nitrogen in lakes, streams and rivers.

With the issue being played out in the courts, it's not clear how the Legislature can get involved. But Williams said the committee should review the state's pollution limits -- called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) -- to compare them with the federal criteria.

"You got all the TMDLs from the water management districts and the [state] 'best management practices' [to reduce pollution]," she said. "Why isn't that good enough?"

The establishment of the committee raises concerns that the simmering dispute between water-rich North Florida and water-poor South Florida will be reopened, said Eric Draper, executive director of Audubon of Florida. There has been talk for more than 15 years -- but no real proposals -- of building pipelines from growing South Florida cities to take water from North Florida lakes and rivers.

"What I would be worried about is whether we would shift the balance of water resource policy away from water resource [protection] towards creating new water supply," Draper said.

Williams said she didn't think her committee would reopen those water wars issues. "I think what we're going to be doing is more big picture issues," she said.

She said the committee may examine whether treated or "reclaimed" waste water should be controlled by state permitting agencies or the utilities and industries that produce it. And she wants to put timelines in some bills, like the northern Everglades restoration legislation of 2007, "to make something happen."

Cannon said in his memo he expects next week to name other members to the select committee.

(Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida Cabinet approves Gainesville biomass plant

A proposed wood-burning power plant in Gainesville that would be tied for being the largest of its kind in the nation was approved Tuesday by the governor and Cabinet.

In their last meeting before leaving office, the four elected Cabinet members voted unanimously to approve a power plant construction and operating certificate as recommended by an administrative law judge. American Renewables still must receive a state air pollution permit, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection is awaiting a recommendation from Administrative Law Judge Robert E. Meale on a permit challenge.

Gov. Charlie Crist, Agriculture Commissioner Charles H. Bronson and Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink have pointed to such woody biomass plants as an important source of renewable energy in Florida's future. But some proposed projects around the state have been delayed or scrapped because of local opposition.

Bronson said Tuesday opponents had "shouted down" projects using "misinformation and faulty science." Attorney General Bill McCollum said the Cabinet must determine that a legal error occurred to reject the judge's recommendation for approval.

"I think this can be a great breakthrough," Crist said of the project, adding that he had "great trust and great confidence" in the groups that supported it.

Gainesville officials said the project will produce jobs and renewable energy using waste wood and will reduce the city's reliance on coal burning. Project supporters include the Florida Wildlife Federation, the Florida Forestry Association and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.

"The project has something of value for everybody," Gainesville Mayor Pro Tem Jeanna Mastrodicasa said. At 100 megawatts, the project would produce enough power for 70,000 homes. It would be tied with a plant under construction in Texas for being the largest woody biomass plant in the nation, according to American Renewables Inc.

An attorney for former Mayor Thomas Bussing, who filed a legal challenge against the siting permit application, said it was premature under state law for the Cabinet to vote because the air permit had not been issued. Opponents argued that the plant will contribute to pollution and global climate change and puts Gainesville utility customers at risk of rate increases to pay for the project.

"I would like to say this is not green energy," Alachua County resident Maria Minno said. "Biomass incineration has unacceptable health risks."

(Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Big Cypress land deal goes through despite concerns

In their final meeting before all four members leave office, Gov. Charlie Crist and the Cabinet voted Tuesday to approve the transfer of 29,412 acres of state land to the federal government as an addition to Big Cypress National Preserve.

The Cabinet also approved an option to purchase a 2,848-acre conservation easement in Polk County from The Nature Conservancy for $5.6 million. The group will have nine months to find a buyer willing to abide by the development restrictions imposed by the conservation easement.

Crist, Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink and Attorney General Bill McCollum are leaving office in January after unsuccessful bids for other offices. Agriculture Commissioner Charles H. Bronson is leaving office because of term limits. The next Cabinet meeting will be Jan. 18.

The Cabinet in September delayed action on the Big Cypress land transfer until after the National Park Service issued a proposed management plan for the property, which it did in November. Bronson raised concerns that a federal designation of the former state land as "wilderness" could restrict hunting, use of recreational vehicles and mechanical control of wildfires.

Big Cypress Preserve Superintendent Pedro Ramos said the National Park Service will work with the state before asking Congress to designate some of the addition as wilderness.

"Trust me, we will make sure that appropriate land makes it onto that proposal" for Congress to consider, Ramos said. And he said the management plan can be adjusted in the future by following processes established under federal law.

Rep. Matt Hudson, R-Naples, said neighboring ranch owners are concerned about wildfire spreading from the preserve. And he said off-road vehicle use, including "swamp buggy" races, are "important to who we are" in Collier County and that more vehicle trails are needed.

"I would ask you do not take away our last chip in the game [the state land transfer] until we have these issues truly resolved," Hudson said.

Environmental groups urged the Cabinet to approve the deal, which includes $4 million for the state to buy other land. Former Gov. Reubin Askew and Hobe Sound environmentalist Nathaniel Reed sent letters in support of the deal.

Bronson and McCollum said Ramos' assurances that he will work with the state swayed them to support the deal, which was approved 4-0.

"I will vote today to support the motion though I still have some hesitancy knowing things can change overnight," Bronson said.

(Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Huge Florida biomass plant up for Cabinet vote

Conceptual rendering of American Renewables proposed plant in Gainesville

A proposed woody biomass electric plant that would be one of the largest of its kind in the nation could move a step closer to reality with a Cabinet vote on Tuesday.

American Renewables and the city of Gainesville are proposing the 100-megawatt biomass plant on 131 acres at the city's Deerhaven power plant. The plant would burn 1 million tons per year of mostly waste wood to create enough electricity to power 70,000 homes, according to the company.

Gov. Charlie Crist, Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink and Agriculture Commissioner Charles H. Bronson have encouraged the development of biomass energy. But proposed projects around the state have faced stubborn local opposition and legal challenges, causing plans for some to be delayed or scrapped. The proposed vote Tuesday comes just weeks before Crist and the three Cabinet members will leave office.

Supporters say the proposed Gainesville Renewable Energy Center will produce jobs and renewable energy without contributing to climate change. The proposed plant has received support from Bronson, the Florida Wildlife Federation, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Columbia University climate scientist James Hansen, Republican Sen. Steve Oelrich and former Democratic Sen. Rod Smith, both of Gainesville.

The plant would be the largest in the nation, tied with a facility under construction near Sacul, Texas, said Josh Levine, director of project development at American Renewables in Boston. He said the Gainesville plant actually will reduce pollution by using limbs and leftover waste wood now burned in the open without emissions controls as part of timber operations. And he said the plant will help create more than 700 jobs in the region, including 44 at the plant.

"In addition to being renewable energy projects, they [biomass plants] are economic development projects," Levine said.

But some environmentalists have raised concerns about pollution and the impact on forests around Gainesville, and the local NAACP chapter has raised concerns about the size and cost of the plant. Twenty-one people have signed up to speak at the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. Several leading opponents in Gainesville could not be reached for comment on Monday.

The Cabinet will consider Administrative Law Judge Robert E. Meale's recommendation that a power plant construction and operating certificate be issued. The company still must receive a state air pollution permit, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection is awaiting a recommendation from Meale on a separate legal challenge to a proposed permit.

(Story provided by The Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

New Senate environmental chairman wants to repeal septic tank inspections

The new chairman of the Senate's environmental committee has introduced a bill that would repeal a new requirement that septic tanks be inspected every five years.

The inspection requirement in SB 550 earlier this year was promoted by supporters as a springs protection measure. But legislators voted during the special session on Nov. 16 to delay the program start from Jan. 1 to July 1 after an outcry from some rural landowners about the cost. That bill has still not been sent to Gov. Charlie Crist, who has the power to veto it.

Sen. Charlie Dean, R-Inverness and the new chairman of the Senate Committee on Environmental Preservation and Conservation, has introduced SB 130 to repeal the requirement during the 2011 legislative session. Sen. Lee Constantine, a Winter Park Republican who was committee chairman before leaving office in November because of term limits, filed SB 550 along with an amendment to include the inspection requirement.

Dean says septic tank inspections should be required only in "critical areas" to be defined around springs rather than statewide.

"We need to treat every springshed different on its own merit and on its own environmental concerns," Dean told the Florida Tribune. "If we have a springshed, what contaminants do we have on Silver Springs (in Ocala) as opposed to one 15 to 18 miles in the woods some place?"

In 2009, Dean opposed a springs bill that would have established protection zones around springs. He proposed several amendments that led to the bill being delayed in its final committee stop. (See "Senator proposes slew of springs bill amendments." )

The Florida Department of Health now estimates that the inspections will cost $150 to $200 and septic tank pump-outs will cost $150 to $450 each, according to a bill analysis. If the inspection discovers failures in the system, homeowners would have to pay for those repairs.

Jim Stevenson, former chairman of the Florida Springs Task Force, says the Legislature's delay of the inspection program is a "cop-out." He said the program was promoted as a springs protection measure but most of the benefit would go towards protecting drinking water quality for residents with private wells.

He said establishing springs protection zones, as Dean suggests, would also help water quality. But he said the Legislature from 2005 to 2009 failed to adopt Senate bills that would have taken such action.

"They (legislators) have had an opportunity to do it the past five years but they haven't," Stevenson said. "So when are they going to act?"

Dean is co-sponsor of SB 82 filed by Sen. Evelyn Lynn, R-Daytona Beach, which would also repeal the septic tanks inspection requirement. Rep. Marti Coley, R-Marianna, has filed a a similar measure with HB 13.

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Agency withdraws proposed growth rule changes after veto override

The Florida Department of Community Affairs has withdrawn two controversial proposed rule changes because of the Legislature's override of the governor's veto of HB 1565.

HB 1565 requires legislative approval for proposed regulations that could cost more than $200,000 a year for all businesses across the state. Supporters said the bill would prevent agencies from imposing burdensome costs on businesses while environmental groups argued that it would tie the hands of agencies that enforce environmental laws.

In vetoing the bill, Gov. Charlie Crist said the requirement could create more red tape for businesses and require legislative approval for nearly every agency rule. The House voted 99-21 and the Senate voted 32-7 to override the veto during the Nov. 16 special session.

The Department of Community Affairs last week published a notice saying it was withdrawing proposed growth management rule changes.

DCA spokesman James Miller said while there were no cost studies done, both rules obviously would have triggered the requirements for legislative review. He said they also were withdrawn because they could not get approved before Gov.-elect Rick Scott took over.

"We decided we would cease rule-making and the new administration could pick up where we left off or wipe the slate clean and start over," Miller said.

Both proposals faced opposition from industry groups.

One proposed change would have established a requirement that local governments demonstrate the need for more development by comparing population growth projections with the amount of development already allowed. DCA Secretary Tom Pelham said several counties already allow far more development than is needed. But the Association of Florida Community Developers said that proposed rule change could restrict local economic development and that it overextends DCA's authority.

The other proposed change would implement requirements of 2008's HB 697, an energy bill that required local government growth plans to discourage urban sprawl and include greenhouse gas reduction strategies. The Association of Florida Community Developers and the Florida Chamber of Commerce raised concerns about the potential cost for small businesses while the Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group said the proposal was not authorized by the Legislature in HB 697.

Charles Pattison, president of the growth-management advocacy group 1000 Friends of Florida, said businesses may suffer if agencies have to enforce laws but can't adopt rules that create more certainty for businesses. "My sense is you will see many fewer administrative rules just because of the agency having to go through that process for the economic assessment," he said.

Gary K. Hunter, an attorney and lobbyist for Association of Florida Community Developers, said he supported HB 1565 but it had nothing to do with the proposed DCA rule-changes. "The legislature is in session in 60 or 90 days," he said. "It isn't as if there would have to be a long wait for the Legislature to look at those rules.

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)