Commentary: Everglades clean up benefits everyone | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Opinion

Commentary: Everglades clean up benefits everyone

The Miami Herald

November 23, 2010 12:19 PM

The latest twist in the U.S. Sugar land deal comes too late to matter much right now. A Nov. 18 Florida Supreme Court ruling says the South Florida Water Management District can finance the land deal using bonds because it would serve a public purpose -- Everglades restoration. But the district has already bought the land, albeit a lot less of it than originally intended, using all of its cash reserves.

What a saga this has been. Gov. Charlie Crist surprised everyone in 2008 by announcing plans to buy U.S. Sugar land, more than 180,000 acres, for $1.75 billion. The purpose was to use the land to help the ambitious and costly joint state-federal restoration agreement.

The Miccosukee Indian Tribe, Florida Crystals and the Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida sued to stop the deal. They said the proposed purchase took funding away from restoration projects already on the books. The plan was seen by many critics as a bailout for U.S. Sugar.

But it was hard to argue against taking so much land out of cultivation -- even though that wouldn't have happened immediately. Under the terms of the Crist deal, the district would have bought the land and leased it back to U.S. Sugar until it had the money to convert it to water storage areas and cleanup projects.

To read the complete editorial, visit www.miamiherald.com.

Read Next

Opinion

This is not what Vladimir Putin wanted for Christmas

By Markos Kounalakis

December 20, 2018 05:12 PM

Orthodox Christian religious leaders worldwide are weakening an important institution that gave the Russian president outsize power and legitimacy.

KEEP READING

MORE OPINION

Opinion

The solution to the juvenile delinquency problem in our nation’s politics

December 18, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

High-flying U.S. car execs often crash when when they run into foreign laws

December 13, 2018 06:09 PM

Opinion

Putin wants to divide the West. Can Trump thwart his plan?

December 11, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush, Pearl Harbor and America’s other fallen

December 07, 2018 03:42 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush’s secret legacy: his little-known kind gestures to many

December 04, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

Nicaragua’s ‘House of Cards’ stars another corrupt and powerful couple

November 29, 2018 07:50 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service