Florida Legislature 2005 (click for ongoing coverage)

THE LATEST No instance available

Changes in wetlands proposal increase ire

The state senator who is sponsoring the bill says an amendment may not be the best idea, but refuses to remove it.

By DAN DeWITT
Published May 4, 2005

TALLAHASSEE - To environmentalists, a bad bill about wetlands has suddenly gotten worse.

An amendment would extend an exemption Florida Panhandle developers have enjoyed for a decade from the water management permits required in the rest of the state.

The amendment was added to a bill that would give the state sole oversight of developments that fill in wetlands smaller than 10 acres. Critics say that would make it easier to destroy wetlands.

But Eric Draper, policy director of Audubon of Florida, is most concerned about the Panhandle amendment.

"You're basically leaving out one of the fastest-growing areas of the state and one of the most environmentally sensitive," Draper said.

The new provision adds five more years to a decadeold exemption from permitting by the Northwest Water Management District.

The requirements, called environmental resource permits, help ensure that new projects will not dump floodwater or polluted runoff into nearby land or bodies of water.

The exemption was granted because the district has never had the power to raise as much money as the state's other districts.

The bill is sponsored by Sen. Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland, who said the amendment is "not necessarily a good idea."

But she won't remove it because House leaders support it, she said, and "I don't think the (amendment) is bad enough to sacrifice the rest of the bill for."

House Speaker Allan Bense, R-Panama City, backs the amendment because he thinks the permit requirement would mean higher taxes for Panhandle residents, said his spokesman, Towson Fraser.

The state set aside $1.9-million for permitting, but has no plans to fund it in the future, said Keith Hetrick, of the Florida Home Builders Association.

He said requiring permits but not funding them could bring a halt to development in the area.

[Last modified May 4, 2005, 00:56:08]