"Smart Growth America completed a study for Collier County quantifying the difference between sprawl and smart growth in the RLSA," Fryer said at one of the meetings. "According to SGA, sprawl will cost the taxpayers $3.8 billion more than smart growth over the next 20 years."
Gatherings advocated by Collier entities were held, and mostly content citizens signed off on a plan for what is known as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area. Some mandates as part of planned rules for developing in the RLSA also were tossed out last year after the company and others lobbied county officials for removal. But by the time it got to the County Commission for approval, a last-minute provision was worked in that many of those participating residents didn't know about, based on public records and meetings. This quietly opened the door to almost triple the land Collier forces and others can develop as part of the RLSA, alongside Florida panthers, bears and other wildlife: About 70 square miles worth of massive construction. "A few days prior to the adoption of the plan by the (county commission) in 2002, policies (were) added to the final draft," planning board chairman Edwin "Ned" Fryer has said. "The workshops, the stakeholder sessions, the public meetings had all unfortunately ended. So the public was not aware that these policies had been added nor had it been informed.” The Barron Collier family usually gets its way with "friendly" help, and the paving of that path has continued in 2021 as more ventures and measures come up for consideration this month and next. How did we get here? Almost a century ago, Barron Collier returned from Tallahassee having convinced state legislators to concoct a county out of what had been part of Lee County, which opposed the move. "I am anxious to do some big developing in Collier County," said Collier, Florida's largest landowner who possessed much of the region in what is now the state's biggest county. "I felt that I could do it much better with a friendly county administration." Yes, friendly. It's a theme. Then about 20 years ago, representatives of companies tied to the late founder and others went to Tallahassee and persuaded the state to head off plans that would have limited big development to protect environmentally sensitive eastern areas of Collier. "The baseline zoning is one unit per five (acres). In places it was proposed to go one unit per 20. In other places, it was proposed to go to one unit per 40," Barron Collier Companies Senior Vice President Tom Jones said last year. "It made much better sense to the community and to us to put a planning process in place." Gatherings advocated by Collier entities were held, and mostly content citizens signed off on a plan for what is known as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area. But by the time it got to the County Commission for approval, a last-minute provision was worked in that many of those participating residents didn't know about, based on public records and meetings. This quietly opened the door to almost triple the land Collier forces and others can develop as part of the RLSA, alongside Florida panthers, bears and other wildlife: About 70 square miles worth of massive construction. "A few days prior to the adoption of the plan by the (county commission) in 2002, policies (were) added to the final draft," planning board chairman Edwin "Ned" Fryer has said. "The workshops, the stakeholder sessions, the public meetings had all unfortunately ended. So the public was not aware that these policies had been added nor had it been informed." Barron Collier Cos. is developing the town of Ave Maria in eastern Collier, which will have 11,000 homes and 1.7 million square feet of retail and office space on its 4,000 acres. This file photo was provided by the Buccheri family of Ave Maria, who saw this bear appear at their window shortly before Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission officers fatally shot it across the street from their home. On May 25, the County Commission is scheduled to consider a pair of villages by Collier Enterprises, another company with roots that trace back to Barron Collier. An initial village, Rivergrass, approved last year by the commission, has been tied up in the legal system, with appeals planned on court decisions. To get Rivergrass through, commissioners had to conduct a historically rare override of the planning board, which had rejected what was devised. The County Commission went on to replace three members of the planning board, which this year reversed course: It's now recommending approval of the most recent iterations by Collier Enterprises. Some mandates as part of planned rules for developing in the RLSA also were tossed out last year after the company and others lobbied county officials for removal. A County Commission vote of those is scheduled for June 8. Among previous planning board concerns during hearings had been how much all this will cost locals, whether now or later. Several national and Florida organizations studying the RLSA have issued reports expressing worries for taxpayers. "Smart Growth America completed a study for Collier County quantifying the difference between sprawl and smart growth in the RLSA," Fryer said at one of the meetings. "According to SGA, sprawl will cost the taxpayers $3.8 billion more than smart growth over the next 20 years." However, the county has come up with a math formula that doesn't follow its own typical protocol for some of its other government counts or that used by agencies such as the U.S. Census. Its lower threshold allows the Collier companies and others to argue that growth is paying for itself through impact fees and other means and they are meeting rules dictating projects should be at least "fiscally neutral" and not burden those already living here. Collier Enterprises lawyer Rich Yovanovich has defended the practice. "They've gotten it right in Collier County for many, many, many, many, many, many years," Yovanovich said. "I've been here 30 years and started out as an assistant county attorney doing impact fees." The plan for the RLSA would add 300,000 to the population, according to federal permitting data discussed in county hearings, not quite doubling how many currently reside in Collier. But it's a far cry from the number who lived here when Barron Collier made his promise as part of the historic land decision that removed oversight from Lee County: to develop the 215-strong Everglades City into a "splendid," thriving, modern destination for future residents and tourists, the potential west coast twin version of Miami, with the help of the Tamiami Trail, as reported in the newspapers of the day. "I do not blame the people of Fort Myers and the rest of Lee County for the attitude they have taken but want to assure them that the development that will be made in Collier County will help all the west coast of Florida," Collier told The News-Press in 1923. The Collier plan didn't exactly work the way it was intended for Everglades City. Everglades City's Bank of Everglades, which opened on July 9, 1923, two months after Barron Collier convinced state legislators to concoct a county out of what had been part of Lee County. A Collier goal had been for a thriving city, but the bank was eventually moved for opportunities in Immokalee. After the 1929 market crash, many Collier companies couldn't pay bills in ensuing years. By 1933, Collier conceded he was at least $17 million "in the red", which in today's dollars amounts to about $354 million. Bankruptcy filings of numerous Collier companies continued into the 1940s after his death in Manhattan. Now, in a new century, more promises, more assurances and more friendliness in a promotional video touting the RLSA. "We have the ability to maintain and keep Southwest Florida among the most beautiful and pristine places in the country," Barron Collier Companies CEO Blake Gable said. "The citizens of Collier County can be assured that this will be one of the most environmentally friendly regions in the entire country." 
Bioaccumulation and biomagnification of microplastics in marine organisms Michaela E. Miller ,Mark Hamann,Frederieke J. Kroon Published: October 16, 2020 doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240792 Bioaccumulation and biomagnification of MPs, and associated chemical additives, in marine environments are often inferred in the literature on marine MP contamination. This review demonstrates that MP contamination occurs across all five main trophic levels in a general marine food web. Moreover, bioaccumulation of MPs occurs in numerous individual marine species across four main trophic levels representing consumers. The relative importance of different exposure pathways contributing to MP bioaccumulation, however, is not necessarily clear and needs further examination. While chemical additives have been detected in a few marine species collected in situ, results from laboratory exposures indicate that environmental exposure to chemical additives per se affects bioaccumulation more strongly than exposure to chemical additives associated with MPs. In contrast to MP bioaccumulation, this meta-analysis of in situ studies does not support biomagnification of MPs from lower to higher trophic levels in a general marine food web, even though trophic transfer of MPs has been reported in a few laboratory studies. Indeed, MP bioaccumulation appears to be more strongly linked with feeding strategies, rather than trophic levels, of marine species. Finally, bioaccumulation and biomagnification are two critical concepts used in ecological risk assessments to determine the extent of pollutant transport within food webs. This review highlights the need for targeted field-based and experimental studies to elucidate the possible routes of uptake of MPs (and associated chemicals) and provide confidence in the use of these endpoints in the MP literature. |
ECOSWF signs on to request to EPA
Property Rights and Public Rights Go Together
(David Guest, Earth Justice) A recurring objection to any suggestion to improve the land use rules is that any restriction would violate the property rights of affected landowners. While the protection of rights to own and use private property is a foundation principle of our society, the principle comes with a corollary: that private property cannot be used in a way that impairs the rights of others. This corollary principle isn’t just limited to throwing garbage over the fence onto your neighbor’s property. You can’t build a pulp mill in a residential neighborhood because of the odors, noise, and traffic. Nor can you build a Walmart inside a quiet neighborhood, because of the constant noise and traffic. And unless you are going to pay to widen the road, you can’t build a new subdivision on a road that would cause a road to back up into miles of stop and go rush hour traffic. Public policy debates are never about whether to respect property rights; they are always about the harm that the new use will cause to the neighbors and to the public, and about the increased costs the public would have to bear. If the property rights argument is based on the theory that any adverse effect on neighbors and the public doesn’t matter, it is simply wrong. Property rights advocates seek refuge from this property rights corollary in the Bert Harris Act Property Rights Protection Act, which confers on landowners a right to government compensation if the government excessively restricts existing uses or vested rights. That Act doesn’t even suggest that it extinguishes the rights of neighbors and of the public. One case clearly illustrates the Act’s purpose. Several years ago, Indian River County told a company that it could build a concrete plant under existing zoning and regulations, and then changed its mind after the company had construction well underway, including construction of a railroad line. As you can imagine, the court applied the Harris Act and ordered the county to pay compensation. But the Harris Act does not say that the government has to pay compensation any time that it restricts the use of private property; otherwise, every owner of undeveloped land would claim compensation for being barred from building a pulp mill. It requires compensation only for vested rights, such as site-specific zoning approvals. It is our right as citizens of a free country to own and use private property. It is equally our responsibility as citizens to use our property not to harm others by what we do on our property. from ManaSota-88, Inc. a 501.c3 Public Health and Environmental Organization
HEALTH RISKS OF PHOSPHOGYPSUM The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) needs determine the long-term health effects of exposure to toxic and hazardous substances associated with former phosphate mining and processing sites, and phosphogypsum (gyp) stacks. EPA has stated that as many as 40,000 people living on former phosphate mining lands in central Florida are being exposed to dangerous levels of radiation from contaminated indoor air in central Florida homes. 21 former phosphate mining sites may be eligible as Superfund candidates for EPA's National Priorities List. A comprehensive health risk analysis on all Florida phosphate reclaimed mine sites is needed. We are concerned that too little is being done or is being done to slowly to address a serious health problem. Further delay in responding to the problems of elevated levels of radiation and chemical contamination associated with former phosphate sites and gyp stacks is unacceptable. Such a delay can only be viewed as a deliberate attempt by EPA to circumvent their duties to protect human health and safeguard the environment. The phosphate industry has had more than 70 years to address their problem of disposal of phosphate related wastes. More than 1 billion tons of cancer causing phosphogypsum wastes have been dumped on Florida. Over 30 million tons of waste is annually being produced by the industry. We are no closer to finding a solution to the long-term safe disposal of radioactive phosphogypsum than we were 70 years ago. The phosphate industries radiation pollution problem has become Florida’s problem. Accordingly, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency must: 1. Conduct a comprehensive health risk analysis on all Florida gyp stacks and phosphate reclaimed mine sites. 14 reclaimed phosphate lands are currently in use by the public as recreational areas throughout the State. Additional testing is needed to determine the extent and source of pollution at these reclaimed mine sites. 2. Conduct inorganic and radiochemical surface water and fish tissue sampling in an on-going monitoring process at all former phosphate sites currently accessible to the public for fishing. Several endangered or threatened species, as well as anyone consuming fish caught at the former phosphate mines, may be adversely impacted by the contaminated sites. 3. Conduct an ecological risk assessment for all gyp stacks and former phosphate mine sites. Radium-226 and radium-228 have been identified at levels above the EPA cancer risk screening concentration standards on-site at the former phosphate mining facilities such as the Tenoroc Fish Management Area (TFMA). Land mined for phosphate exhibits higher radioactivity at the surface than it did before mining. Phosphate mining exposes radioactive materials and can increase surface and ground water radiation levels. The elevated levels of radiation pose a considerable threat to human health and the environment. 4. Conduct measurements for the purpose of determining employee exposure to toxic and hazardous substances, and the potential for long-term health effects of working on-site at gyp stacks and former phosphate mine sites. EPA should determine if these sites are in compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 and OSHA Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR). ManaSota-88 does not believe the phosphate industry should be permitted to externalize the costs of their phosphogypsum waste disposal problem at the public’s expense. The cost is too high. |
