Everglades land deal prompts conflict questions on water board

Thursday’s high-stakes vote on the fate of Gov. Charlie Crist’s $536 million land deal with U.S. Sugar Corp. raised potential conflict of interest issues with differing results. The board of the South Florida Water Management District on Thursday agreed to extend the March 31 deadline on the contract for a $536 million Everglades restoration land deal with U.S. Sugar. Board Member Joe Collins abstained from the vote to buy the 73,000 acres because of his business connections to U.S. Sugar. Board Member Shannon Estenoz defended her right to vote from criticism that her husband’s law firm benefits from environmental supporters backing the U.S. Sugar deal. The U.S. Sugar land would be used to restore water flows from Lake Okeechobee to the Everglades. The deal has been hailed by environmental groups, but opponents question its cost and potential impact on Glades communities that rely on agricultural jobs. Collins was supposed to provide the voice on the board for Glades communities that for months had been left without a representative, due to a previous conflict of interest. U.S. Sugar Vice President Bubba Wade Jr. stepped down from the district board after the governor in June 2008 announced plans for the district to buy up U.S. Sugar land for Everglades restoration. Glades community leaders for months called on Crist to replace Wade, but he waited until after the land

deal was initially approved by just one vote. In July, Crist appointed Collins to the board. Collins on Thursday announced that he would not vote on the land deal because he works for the Lykes Brothers agricultural company, which has contracts with U.S. Sugar. Also on Thursday, Estenoz announced that she would not abstain, despite criticism that her husband’s law practice, The Everglades Law Center, is backed by environmental groups that are among the U.S. Sugar deal’s biggest supporters. Numerous times during her tenure on the district board, Estenoz has announced instances where her husband – Richard Grosso – represented issues that potentially overlapped with board business. Estenoz, one of the most vocal supporters of the U.S. Sugar deal, said her decisions are driven by her own 16 years of Everglades advocacy, not by her husband’s law firm. Estenoz said the state Ethics Commission backed her decision to vote. “There is no truth to these suggestions,” Estenoz said about potential conflict concerns. “I do not have a conflict of interest.” The district board Thursday voted 8-0, with Collins abstaining, to extend the deadline on the U.S. Sugar contract for six months. The delay allows time for the district to try to deal with budget concerns and resolve a pending legal challenge.

View post:�
Everglades land deal prompts conflict questions on water board

Leave a comment

Name (required)

E-mail (required)

URI

Your Message