- June 15, 2025
-
-
Loading
Loading
While the elected members of the Manatee County Commission in 2024 vowed to reinstate wetland protections the former board cut, the move is facing a possible delay.
The former board removed a policy from the county’s comprehensive plan that required up to 50-foot wetland buffers, which is beyond the state requirement of 15- to 25-foot buffers.
Commissioner Mike Rahn voiced his concerns at the April 3 land use meeting that attempting to reinstate that policy would invite a lawsuit.
He was the only commissioner to vote against the measure, so the vote during the required second public hearing should have been a formality.
But during the May 8 land use meeting, the comprehensive plan amendment didn’t make it to a vote. Manatee County staff members asked commissioners to continue the item to a later date, which has not yet been set.
In the week leading up to the meeting, the staff received letters from five state agencies: Southwest Florida Water Management District, Florida Department of Transportation, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Commerce and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
Not all the letters stated outright opposition to the policy’s reversion, but none of the agencies stated support for the measure either.
With the exception of FWC's letter, which had no recommendations, the letters reiterated Rahn’s argument: Senate Bill 250 prohibits any measure that makes construction or reconstruction more burdensome or restrictive in counties impacted by Hurricane Ian.
Manatee County is one of 11 counties on that list.
FDEP referred the matter to the Florida Department of Commerce due to "questions of compliance." The department came back with a straightforward recommendation to not act on the amendment.
However, the agency offered to provide technical assistance in regards to the elements of the amendment that are “restrictive or burdensome.”
The department also warned that if the county receives reviewing agency comments and they are not resolved, these comments could form the basis for a challenge to the amendment after adoption.
FDOT initially responded to the county April 9, stating the amendment was not anticipated to have “significant adverse impacts to transportation resources or facilities of state importance.”
Upon further review, the agency changed its mind.
“Larger buffers require additional mitigation,” reads a letter from FDOT dated May 2. “This may impact projects on the transportation network, including transportation resources and facilities of state importance, that might be required to meet buffer or mitigation requirements.”
FDOT provided a recommended remedy — "Follow the state standard."
“(The letters) should have just been called Exhibit A, B, C, D and E,” Commission Chair George Kruse said. “It feels like we’re being baited more than we’re being honestly dealt with by Tallahassee.”
Kruse said the letter provided the necessary wording to hold the board liable for knowingly violating the law and removing them from office.
While the land use meeting didn’t unfold as commissioners would have liked, commissioner did identify ways in which they can push ahead with their ultimate goal to reinstate the buffers.
First, Senate Bill 250 will no longer apply as of Oct. 1, 2026. Commissioners can revisit the issue Oct. 2, 2026.
Until then, they can protect wetlands with their votes. Kruse said he won’t vote to pass projects that defer to the state minimums for wetland buffers.
McCann is focused on the legal argument.
Following the meeting, he told the East County Observer that the buffers can’t be more restrictive or burdensome because the larger buffers were in the comprehensive plan when Senate Bill 250 was enacted.
“And our land development code never changed the distances,” he said.
While Pam D’Agostino, the county attorney, was present at the meeting, it was quickly decided for the benefit of any impending litigation that she brief commissioners in private.
