State Department of Economic Opportunity issues rare objection to U.S. Sugar development plan
By Craig Pitman
Tampa Bay Times
Published: Nov 6, 2014

A state agency that has approved almost every development project submitted to it has balked at U.S. Sugar's plans to develop land currently slated for Everglades restoration.

On 67 square miles of sugar land southwest of Lake Okeechobee in Hendry County, U.S. Sugar and Hilliard Brothers of Florida, another sugar company with adjoining property, have joined forces on a project called "Sugar Hill."

Their plan would plop 18,000 homes and 25 million square feet of stores, offices, warehouses and other commercial buildings amid the rural landscape, even though some of it is land the state has an option to buy to help restore the River of Grass.

Hendry County officials wasted little time in approving the Sugar Hill development in August. But then four state agencies - the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the Department of Environmental Protection, the South Florida Water Management District and the Department of Transportation - all raised strong objections, as did environmental and planning groups.

Now the state Department of Economic Opportunity, which in its three years of existence has rarely objected to anything, has declined to approve the changes to Hendry County's land-use plan.

Instead, it noted that the changes sought for the Sugar Hill project provide "no assurances of natural resource protection." It said the plan can either ditch the idea of any development in areas designated for Everglades restoration, or some time in the next 180 days show "why these lands are no longer appropriate for conservation or Everglades restoration activities."

That was one of 34 specific objections, ranging from flood protection to farmworker housing, which need to be addressed in the next six months if Hendry County and the sugar companies want the plan approved, the agency said.

Opponents of the Sugar Hill plan hailed the agency's move. The plan was "poorly designed, would have caused irreparable harm to the environment, and at best was little more than a profit grab by developers at the expense of taxpayers," Erik Eikenberg of the Everglades Foundation said.

Charles Pattison of the growth management group 1,000 Friends of Florida, said he thinks the sugar companies and Hendry County will have a tough time revamping the plan so extensively in such a short time.

"You couldn't ask for a longer list of objections," he said. "It would be pretty daunting to cover all of it. I think that's going to be very difficult."

"It would appear that it's fatally flawed," the Everglades Law Center's Lisa Interlandi said. "The objections raised went to the heart of the (land-use) plan amendment."

U.S. Sugar spokeswoman Judy Sanchez said in an email that company officials are "reviewing in detail the very thorough … report from the Department of Economic Opportunity on the Sugar Hill Sector Plan, and we look forward to working with Hendry County, the DEO and the reviewing agencies to address the issues, recommendations and comments."

DEO officials said in an email that the list of objections "speak for themselves.''

The sugar companies submitted their plan while U.S. Sugar was busy taking Florida politicians on secret hunting trips to King Ranch in Texas. Among those who have attended: Gov. Rick Scott, Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam and incoming House Speaker Steve Crisafulli.

A Times/Herald analysis of campaign records found that since late 2011, U.S. Sugar paid more than $95,000 to the Republican Party of Florida for at least 20 weekend trips - destinations unspecified on public documents - within days of more than a dozen Florida politicians registering for Texas hunting licenses.

But U.S. Sugar, Republican Party officials and the politicians who took the trips have all been reluctant to say much about the trips, which were not mentioned in Scott's or Putnam's official schedules, or disclosed under the King Ranch name in RPOF documents. The silence prevented any public scrutiny of whether the sugar industry is using these trips to influence decisions on such issues as the future of the Everglades or state water policy, which is scheduled to be a key issue in next year's legislative session.

Times staff writer Michael Van Sickler contributed to this report. Contact Craig Pittman at craig@tampabay.com. Follow @craigtimes.