TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

State Needs To Keep Congress In Loop On Everglades Deal

ADVERTISEMENT

The Tampa Tribune

Published: September 13, 2008

The secrecy that enshrouded Florida Gov. Charlie Crist's plan to buy out U.S. Sugar now threatens to undermine this critical effort to save the Everglades.

Members of Florida's congressional delegation are questioning the plan and wondering why they were kept in the dark. They want straight answers about the plan to pay U.S. Sugar $1.7 billion for 187,000 acres around Lake Okeechobee.

The state water managers should provide them. Pronto. These are, after all, elected officials who have championed the Everglades. But they also care about the welfare of the agricultural workers and the wise use of tax dollars. And they want to know how the plan will affect the 20-year, $8 billion Everglades restoration plan Congress agreed to support eight years ago. The plan never mentioned a buyout of U.S. Sugar.

Concerned House members include Rep. Adam Putnam of Polk, who told the Tribune's Lindsay Peterson, "No questions are being answered about the impact of the overall restoration plan."

This all underscores the pitfalls of such secret deals.

Granted, initial negotiations for such a complex undertaking may need to be conducted in private. But when the public is given little time to scrutinize the plan and the officials are not forthcoming - even to members of Congress - about details, suspicions are going to be aroused.

It would be a shame if the deal fell apart. The acquisition would allow the construction of reservoirs where water will be stored and filtered before being released into the Everglades.

It would ensure the success of the federal-state restoration effort. Without the U.S. Sugar land, restoring and filtering the water would be possible, but far more challenging.

The purchase will not require new taxes and will be funded solely through property taxes already levied by the South Florida Water Management District, the lead state agency in Everglades restoration.

Perhaps a bigger question is this: Does the state need buy the entire 187,000 acres to restore the River of Grass? Closing all of U.S. Sugar agricultural operations would eliminate about 1,700 jobs, a concern for members of Congress and the state Legislature.

Those worrying about the economic impact should remember restoration work will create many jobs, and cleaning up the Everglades and Lake Okeechobee will attract lots of tourists.

Still, Crist and South Florida Water District officials should determine if it is possible to keep farming at least some of the land. Prior to the U.S. Sugar acquisition announcement, it had been estimated that about 100,000 acres would be needed for the filtering reservoirs.

So why not keep at least some of the U.S. Sugar land in agriculture, especially if the state can ensure appropriate environmental safeguards will be taken?

Another matter Crist needs to quickly address is the slick proposal by Florida Crystals, another sugar grower, to build an inland port south of Lake Okeechobee in the proposed path of Everglades restoration.

It's not clear an inland port is necessary. But it is certainly not needed in that remote location with no infrastructure.

An inland port, if needed, should be developed near an existing city such as Belle Glade or Pahokee, where it would provide jobs and invigorate the community.

The Florida Crystal plan for a port in the hinterlands looks to be more a real estate venture than a plan to improve trade. The company wants 9,000 acres designated for the project, far more than would be needed for the port. Crist and state water managers should make clear they'll fight any such development.

Crist deserves credit for pursuing the ambitious U.S. Sugar deal, but to keep the Everglades rescue on track, he needs to be both candid about what the state is doing and guarded about those still seeking to profit by abusing the River of Grass.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT