At Thursday's Manatee County Commission land use meeting, commissioners will cast a final vote on plans to gut the county's wetland protection policies. If board members move forward as anticipated, the move will hand developers a victory in their ongoing battle to create greater profits at the expense of much-needed environmental protections. 

If approved, the policy would get rid of the county's strictest wetland protections, which require up to 50-foot wetland buffers when development is adjacent to our most critical wetlands. The county's policy would instead defer to the minimum buffers required by state statute (15-25 feet).

The policy change was brought forward as "staff initiated," even though multiple staff members told TBT that they had been pressured to recommend the changes. When staff would not comply with the most egregious elements of what developers were pushing, Alec Hoffner, an environmental scientist who was employed by the firm the county had engaged to advise on its rewrite of the comprehensive land use plan, was asked to weigh in.

When Hoffner agreed with staff that the elimination of the 50-foot buffer requirement was not a sound policy, rather than heed the now twice-given advice, the county engaged Daniel DeLisi of DeLisi Inc., a "consultant" with no background in whatsoever in environmental science or wetland science to make the case to the board and the public that the actual experts had been unwilling to make.

Wait, wait, it gets better. DeLisi had previously been employed by developer Carlos Beruff when he unsuccessfully attempted to sue the county, arguing that its wetland policies were unconstitutional. To clarify, the county had successfully defended its wetland protection policies in court against the very consultant it would later go on to hire to "advise" the board in taking what the developer had failed to convince the courts of and instituting it as policy—essentially giving away its expensive, tax-payer funded victories.

In mid-August, after a litany of citizens gave public comment as to why the proposed policy would be severely detrimental to the county, the Manatee Planning Commission voted 4-2 to recommend that the county commission deny the proposal. Despite that recommendation and another onslaught of public comment—100 percent of which was against the proposed policy—commissioners nonetheless voted to transmit the item to the state for comment. 

That has historically meant that the matter has been decided. While the board often explains to the public that such votes are merely decisions to transmit the matter to the state and see what the relevant agencies have to say, in practice, it has essentially meant, we've made up our minds, or, more to the point, been told what to think by those who put us in these seats.

By this point, your Manatee County Commission is barely even trying to maintain an illusion of democracy. The BOCC hearing was utterly farcical, as, one after another, commissioners ignored the science being presented, whether by actual wetland experts or citizens armed with easily accessible scientific evidence that supports the current policies as bare minimums while nodding along to DeLisi's claim that he was unaware of any such data and seeming pacified by his promise to make sure they would be apprised were he to come across any.  

Spoiler alert: it is all but a given that DeLisi did not take even a peek at the litany of scientific data, virtually all of which rebukes his position. Again, to be clear, that position is that the "consultant" is "unaware" of any "science" that suggests that having larger wetland buffers than the state minimums has a positive impact on water quality levels or that reducing buffers would have a negative effect.

See how that little trick works? As long as DeLisi doesn't look at what has been put right in front of his face by the public, he can truthfully claim to be unaware of it, which would seem to be a selling point were someone to set up shop as a "consultant" willing to advise in a manner that actual scientists would never be comfortable with. Such a ruse clearly does not work all that well when you position him as an "expert witness" in a civil suit, but if you could buy yourself a local government body and then have elected officials direct top administrators to ensure he is hired to do what their own staff experts are unwilling to, you just may be able to get your way, even if you have to walk the long way around the barn to get there.

Manatee County is already suffering the effects of decades of rule-bending and breaking that have allowed developers to cause harm to our waterways for the sake of more units in every development regardless of the environmental consequences. This board may not have been responsible for that reality, however, they have continued to double down on the all-growth-is-good ethos even as those consequences stare us in the face via all of the algae and cyanobacteria issues that plague our local waterways and threaten not only our quality of life but our tourist-dependent economy.

Keep in mind that our current conditions came to be with the current policies in place, making an extremely strong case for their inadequacy, while rendering the notion that they can be weakened without further consequence utterly nonsensical. Your commissioners have suggested that the policies amount to a "taking" of private property rights. The courts did not agree because local governments are indeed empowered by our state's constitution to implement restrictions on development in such cases whereas there is an overriding public benefit. What's more, when developers purchase land, they do so knowing full well what limitations to its development exist and at a price that reflects its potential uses and development density. 

In reality, this policy was brought to you by developers, for developers, and will amount to one more way in which existing residents continue to subsidize the true cost of unsustainable growth patterns that are directed solely by the potential profits of those who buy influence among policymakers. As if that were not bad enough, it will also amount to another giant giveaway for the phosphate mining industry, which is subject to the exact same wetland buffer policies as residential and commercial developers. Worst of all, our already very serious water woes will be exponentially exacerbated.

Yes, this clown puppet board is all but sure to vote in favor of gutting the existing policies, despite the clear-cut case against such action and virtually no argument for it that is even in the neighborhood of sound. They have their marching orders and fear the wrath of their paymasters much more than that of voters—which is exactly what must change. So, let them know loud and clear. Email your commissioners, or, if you can manage, show up on Thursday and give them another earful. Most of all, make sure your less-engaged friends and neighbors are aware of what is afoot and what it means to their future quality of life, especially if they like to boat, fish or enjoy our local beaches.

If we cannot prevent the inevitable today, we can at least make it more likely that those who have shirked their responsibility to be a steward of the public good pay a steep price for it come next November when four seats on the board will be up for grabs. Throwing money at elections usually works best when the fewest people are paying attention.

related:

County's Effort to Gut Its Own Wetland Protections Gets Murkier

County Commission Shows Public Who They Work For

Wetland Policy Banana Republic Style

Dennis "Mitch" Maley is an editor and columnist for The Bradenton Times and the host of our weekly podcast. With over two decades of experience as a journalist, he has covered Manatee County government since 2010. He is a graduate of Shippensburg University and later served as a Captain in the U.S. Army. Click here for his bio. His 2016 short story collection, Casting Shadows, was recently reissued and is available here.