Manatee votes to reduce wetland protections in county development plan

After listening to hours of public comments Thursday adamantly opposed to reducing wetland regulations, the Manatee County Commission approved a measure 6-1 to cut text in the Comprehensive Plan for additional wetlands protections to align with state standards. 

Commissioner George Kruse was the dissenting vote.

One week earlier, the matter came before the Planning Commission and was voted down 4-2 because board members felt they didn’t have the scientific evidence to back up a move to remove additional county protections and defer to the state standard. 

“I’m glad you want science,” said Abbey Tyrna, the executive director of Suncoast Waterkeeper in an attempt to convince commissioners not to dismiss the additional protections. “I came to bring it.”

Tyrna was not alone. A stream of Manatee County residents, fishermen, local business owners and a scientist offered research and observations to the commissioners that reducing wetland protections would harm Manatee County's wetlands. They pleaded with commissioners not to reduce the buffers between wetlands and construction from 50 feet to 15 feet.

Manatee County resident Shane Wedel read wetland codes from every coastal county in Florida before attending the meeting. He said 63% of the 35 coastal counties require at least 50-foot buffers, if not more.

“If you want to turn Manatee County into Miami-Dade County or Broward County, then please, go ahead and transmit this policy,” Wedel said. “I don’t know if you want that. I don’t believe any of the citizens want that.” 

Audible anger broke out in the chambers when Chairman Kevin Van Ostenbridge read the vote. He quickly banged his gavel and took a five-minute recess. 

“We had five hours of testimony against it, everybody, not one person in favor of it, and they voted just like that,” Longboat Key resident Rusty Chinnis said. “They had their minds made up before they went in.”

Commissioner Jason Bearden didn’t speak during the meeting until making a motion to pass the measure. Van Ostenbridge seconded it. 

Van Ostenbridge stated property rights and overregulation as reasons for reducing the protections to state levels. He also emphasized that the commission wasn’t voting on the changes. The vote was only to transmit the changes to the state legislature to receive advice and feedback.

Manatee County consultant Daniel DeLisi, who was hired to review the Comprehensive Plan, had his findings questioned, and at times, outright mocked. 

“These amendments do not cause impacts to wetlands,” DeLisi said.

His statement caused laughter to erupt from inside the chambers until Van Ostenbridge banged his gavel and reminded everyone of the rules of decorum. Later, Tyrna’s comments received a round of applause. 

“We’re taking everything based upon one consultant who was against us on the exact same policy twice, and that’s what we’re hanging our hat on here,” Kruse said. “It’s like we just won the Super Bowl, and we went out in the off-season and hired the quarterback from the losing team to run our team.” 

Kruse was referring to what several citizens stated during comments that DeLisi is a former expert witness against the county on behalf of developers, a major bone of contention in the room. 

Sarasota resident Michael Barfield said he didn’t want to drink “Beruff water,” referring to developer Carlos Beruff, who used DeLisi’s testimony in two different lawsuits against Manatee County. The county won both suits, which is why Kruse compared him to a losing quarterback.

“What do you do when you can’t beat them in court,” Samantha Wassmer, with Suncoast Waterkeeper, asked. Then, she answered her own question. “You try to buy the government.”