U.S. Sugar would continue farming on most of land until 2030.
By Christine Stapleton Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
When South Florida Water Management District officials recently explained why they don’t want to buy 46,800 acres of land from U.S. Sugar before the deal expires in October, they ticked off a list of engineering hurdles: Canals, pumps and man-made wetlands could not handle huge volumes of water from a reservoir environmentalists want the district to build on the site.
But what water managers have not told angry activists who favor the deal is that even if they wanted to buy the land and had the money to do so, they would have to allow U.S. Sugar to continue farming on most of it — 35,700 acres — until 2030.
That hurdle is just one of several constraints tucked into a lease-back agreement that was part of the deal the district negotiated in 2010 when it purchased 26,800 acres of land from U.S. Sugar for $194 million. That purchase was part of the high-profile, $1 billion deal proposed by former Gov. Charlie Crist about a year before he launched his failed bid for the U.S. Senate.
At that time, the focus was on the money and the lease got little attention. But Thursday — with the October deadline looming and activists still angry — district officials will lay out obstacles in the lease that they say would stymie their efforts to use the land.
Among the hurdles to be discussed at the governing board meeting at district headquarters near West Palm Beach:
• The lease allows the district to use only 10,000 acres of the land it purchased and leased back to U.S. Sugar until 2020. The district has already used up 8,700 acres of that allotment in a land swap. The district will be eligible to use another 10,000 acres of land between 2020 and 2030.
• The 2010 sales contract requires that the district have cash on hand — estimated to be as much as $750 million
— to purchase the 46,800 acres now under consideration. District officials have said they do not have that much cash available.
• If the district wanted to use the land it had leased back to U.S. Sugar for a restoration project, the district would have to give U.S. Sugar at least two years notice to vacate before it could begin construction.
• Attempting to take the U.S. Sugar land through eminent domain rather they buying it would automatically obligate the district to purchase all 153,000 acres of land proposed in the original deal in 2008. This condition in the lease effectively prohibits the district from using eminent domain.
The district has all but said it will not buy the land. Members of the district’s governing board say they prefer to see the district finish projects underway before spending tax dollars on more land — on which no project has been approved or funded.
U.S. Sugar, which does not want to sell the land, said the district has not contacted the company about buying the land.
“If the debate and discussion about the ‘option’ over the last several months has proven anything, it is that the scientific, engineering, environmental, financial and legal impediments are so numerous and so significant that they rule out any cost-effective use of the option land as a meaningful solution to the problems in the coastal estuaries or the Everglades,” said Judy Sanchez, the senior director for corporate communications for U.S. Sugar.
Environmentalists believe the district could use the land to build a reservoir to store water, which they say will reduce harmful discharges of water from Lake Okeechobee into the St. Lucie Estuary and Caloosahatchee River. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers releases water from the lake into the estuary and river when water levels threaten the aged earthen dike that protects farmlands and communities around the lake.
The powerful Everglades Foundation and Everglades Trust have led the cause to buy the land. The groups’ television ads have run during prime-time in select markets throughout the state. Jimmy Buffett played a free concert on the steps of the Capitol to urge lawmakers to back the deal. Costumed protesters rallied for the land deal at district board meetings in March and April.
Despite engineering and legal hurdles and five months remaining until the option expires, environmentalists still believe the deal can be done. The Everglades Foundation intends to renew efforts when lawmakers return to Tallahassee next month for a special session to craft a budget.
“We definitely have not given up,” said Maria Garcia, a public relations specialist for the foundation. The foundation believes that the $750 million expected to be raised by a voter-approved constitutional amendment to support land conservation should be used to buy the land. Lawmakers in other parts of the state are eyeing the money for projects in their communities.
“We’re gearing up for the special session,” Garcia said. “We want lawmakers to listen to the will of the people.” cstapleton@pbpost.com
Twitter: @StapletonPBPost
