Columns

Lost Hope for the Everglades?

U.S. Sugar deal diverts money from concrete solutions
By: Nancy Smith | Posted: August 13, 2010 4:05 AM
Nancy Smith
More land to no purpose, more government waste in Florida. Thursday’s South Florida Water Management District vote was all that and so much more.

The unanimous vote of the governing board turned the ailing Florida Everglades – a natural masterpiece without equal – into little more than a gold chip in a game of greed and ambition.

And frankly, it made me sick.

Back on April 1, when I wrote about Judge Federico Moreno ordering construction to resume on the 16,700-acre A-1 reservoir, I believed – just as former Gov. Jeb Bush, former executive director of the Water Management District Henry Dean, and many others – that the Everglades had a chance again.

Finally, I thought, we’re going to build restoration projects, just as we were doing before we got sidetracked on Gov. Charlie Crist’s U.S. Sugar deal.

But I should have known better.

It took a newspaper from New York City to show Floridians that U.S. Sugar was taking them for a ride. And even then, they wouldn’t believe it. Land is the thing. Gotta have land. And so, with the governor’s encouragement, the U.S. Sugar deal continued through two downsizings.

Well, I spent a lot of years as an editor and columnist in Stuart writing about the folly of land purchased for something that turned into nothing – the millions of dollars spent on the Inlet State Park that never became one, the property for a public golf course that lapsed into a preserve, the rights of way purchased for roundabouts that were engineered and then canceled on a commission’s whim.

But I’ve never seen anything to match the sheer dimwitted absurdity of handing over $197 million, the sum total of all your cash – as the Water Management District did Thursday – to a seller holding a gun to your head.

On Aug. 4 the seller, U.S. Sugar, gave the district one day to agree to the deal, and a week to get the board to Thursday’s “decision meeting.” It’s that or nothing, U.S. Sugar said. And if you agree to the $197 million for 26,800 acres but have to back out of the deal later, you owe us $10 million – no excuses, no “out” clause. (The district says, yes, there is an “out” if the deal is blocked in court; attorneys say, no, there is no exception.)

And for $197 million, you get to let U.S. Sugar use 17,900 acres of dead citrus land for free, for as long as 20 years; and 8,900 acres of the sugar land for $150 an acre. Bottom line, you empty your pockets, U.S. Sugar fills theirs, you come to a dead stop, they keep on truckin’.

You’ve created one happy seller because now you can’t afford to develop any part of the Everglades restoration project. You’re broke, they’re flush, and unless you raise some taxes -- with, say, the help of a supportive, friendly governor – then you aren’t going to phase in too much restoration.

Interestingly, most defenders of the U.S. Sugar deal Thursday were establishment people – government workers and members of A-list environmental organizations.

My personal favorite speaker was Drew Martin from the Sierra Club. He somehow found a way to compare the Sugar deal with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. I guess in Martin’s mind, board Chairman Eric Buermann is Thomas Jefferson and U.S. Sugar is France.

Before Thursday’s vote was taken, the smart folks asked the Water Management District to wait. Wait to see if the three Indian burial mounds on the property can be moved. Wait to see what’s involved in cleaning up the two polluted parcels. Wait to see if the federal judge is going to grant the Miccosukee Tribe’s request to halt the sale. The Miccosukees have a point, after all. If the sale goes through, where’s the money going to come from to build a reservoir?

Here’s where I came unglued:

Kirk Fordham, CEO of the Everglades Foundation said, “We can’t afford to wait any longer. You can’t build [restoration] projects without land.”

Comments (6)

laura l.
10:27AM AUG 13TH 2010
this terible decission incapsules why the tea party sprung up and grew. this decission shows they are going to keep throwing money we dont have away. please, fellow tea partyers, join me in voting for ne w leadership that will do the right thing with our (OUR) money. thank you miss nancy.
Ben Mallory
9:49AM AUG 13TH 2010
This comment piece should be the main story on every front page in our great state. I want our Everglades fixed now, before I die. I have donated thousands to various organizations to get the job done. Thank you for speaking for me, Nancy Smith. Please do not stop writing for us. Help us all you can I beg you. Tell Jeb Bush we miss his leadership on this issue.
On point
7:06AM AUG 13TH 2010
Wow, This sums up the mess they've created better anything else I've ever read on the suject. More and more land but nothing ever gets built. Now we're broke. Land rich, cash poor and no way in sight to do anything to help the everglades in my generation. What do I tell my grandchildren.

As a donor to many of the environmental groups involved in this, I shake my head in shame at what we've let them do to us.
Charles Shinn
6:35AM AUG 13TH 2010
Thank you for the truth about the deal, Nancy. I am incredibly disappointed that CERP has been sidelined. Everglades restoration ended when Gov. Jeb Bush's 'Acceler8' effort came to a screeching halt. How sad for everglades. How sad for the Counties with a declining tax base. How sad for agriculture from which we ALL get our food (including the enviros). How sad indeed.
Tigger
11:39AM AUG 15TH 2010
Nancy, why is it that no other newspaper in the state has investigated this deal? The Herald and the Palm Beach Post had to have the New York Times come in and do their work for them. You mention that in the story, but it interesting. The press spent 8 years reporting about all of Jeb Bush's boondoggles - where he got his buddies rich on state contracts and screwed state employees. But Crist loots taxpayer dollars to the tune of far more and the papers just fall in line. Its been interessting to read all this. I supported the original US Sugar deal when I heard about it because I care about everglades restoration, but as the facts came out, this became obvious the proponents had assembled a get rich quick scheme.

And as a Democrat voter, I am happy to see McCullum siding with the deal. It gives Sink the perfect angle to attack him for more Republican bailouts.
Charlie Mills
11:23AM DEC 31ST 2010
Nancy, you are so very right; I grew up on the Allapattah Ranch and moved t o Georgia after graduation.I followed the stories about the sale and proposed land uses for the ranch and was exited about the (GOOD) that was to come of the deal.I also had my reservations.I was sickened when I took a trip to the ranch after it was made in to a wildlife management area.I took my wife and son to the Cottage Road primitive camping site and was so disappointed when I saw how the South Florida Water Management District had allowed an 80 plus acre lake teeming with fish and other wildlife dry up.Some water management huh.I saw right then and there that the powers to be were nothing but power hungry,greedy do nothings only out for self gratification.That ranch has suffered at the hands of government officials and so will anyone who sits by and lets polititions like Charlie Crist or any others like him make decisions concerning the future of Florida and what is meant to be used for future generations