Confusion and Consternation at Palm Beach County’s April 3rd Zoning Commission.
“Why hasn’t more been done before it got to us? Why are we the starting point here?” That line, from Zoning Commissioner William Reicherter, pretty much summed up yesterday’s hearing on Big Sugar’s rock mine proposal—officially known as the Southland project.
The project, proposed by construction firm Phillips & Jordan, seeks to excavate over 8,000 acres in the Everglades Agricultural Area on fallow land owned by Florida Crystals and U.S. Sugar. It’s been concerning and controversial since it was first revealed last fall.
Promoted as a “reservoir” or “water project,” but permitted as a rock mine, the proposal has raised serious red flags from Everglades advocates, legal experts, and even restoration officials. Despite those warnings, it continues to advance through the county’s approval process.
That’s why we showed up at the April 3rd Palm Beach County Zoning Commission to voice our concerns and urge the board to hit pause on this project.
We asked them not to recommend approval until the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) has fully evaluated whether the site qualifies as a legitimate water resources project—a required designation under the county’s Comprehensive Plan for this type of mining permit.
Despite all of that, the board voted 5-3 to recommend approval. But it didn’t go down without a fight. In fact, the whole meeting felt like a mess—confusing, rushed, and filled with unanswered questions from the very people expected to make a recommendation on a 30-year mining operation in the Everglades Agricultural Area.
A Dubious “Water Project”
From the start, the core question was this: Has SFWMD identified this site as a viable water resources project?
That’s the only way this proposal could legally qualify for a “Type 3 Excavation” under the county’s plan. But the answer is no—they haven’t.
Phillips & Jordan VP Matt Eidson, who presented the project to the commission, went to great lengths to position this as a water project, not a rock mine. But the facts don’t back that up.
There’s no formal designation from the District. And as far as we’re concerned—and as many experts confirmed at the meeting—until that box is checked, the county has no business greenlighting a mining operation in this sensitive area.
“If this is being proposed as a water resource project, then it should be advanced and evaluated that way. If this is being proposed as an aggregate mine for road building, it should be addressed that way. But it cannot be one or the other,” our Co-Founder, Capt. Chris Wittman, pressed about the process by which this project is being advanced. “Are we building a hotel or are we building a brothel? They’re not one and the same.”
First Public Hearing—With Huge Gaps
This zoning meeting was the first public hearing ever held on the Southland project. That was pointed out in public comment by Lisa Interlandi of Everglades Law Center, who explained that there has been zero formal discussion of the project by the SFWMD governing board.
“There’s been no discussion about this by any governing board at any governing board meeting that has been on the agenda. It’s been discussed a few times at general public comment, but there has been not one public meeting about this project. In fact, this is the first public meeting that’s ever been held about this project,” she explained.
“It’s not contained in any restoration documents. It’s not part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. It hasn’t been identified by the Army Corps of Engineers or the water management district as any sort of restoration project at all.”
The SFWMD Letter That Isn’t
One of the most confusing points of the hearing came when county staff referenced a December 31, 2024 letter from SFWMD Director Drew Bartlett as the basis for their recommendation. That letter, and statements from the applicant, were cited as proof that the project had been “identified” by the district.
But here’s the truth: that letter did not confirm the project as a water resource project—it simply acknowledged that SFWMD received the proposal and that it had potential. Since then, Bartlett has publicly stated and further clarified in formal correspondence that the district is just beginning its full review process, which will take at least a year before any final determination is made.
“The district has completed only step one of a seven-step process required by law to evaluate water resource projects,” said Interlandi. “That analysis has not been done. They are just getting started.”
A letter from SFWMD Director Drew Bartlett to the Everglades Coalition explaining the district is now thoroughly evaluating the project.
The Real Risk: Approving Before the Process Is Complete
Commissioner Chris Kammerer laid it out clearly: according to Policy 2.3-e-3 of the Comprehensive Plan, mining in this zone is only allowed if it supports a viable water resources project already identified by the Water Management District or the Army Corps—which has explicitly not yet occurred.
“It just seems that this project may ultimately be approved by South Florida Water Management District,” he said. “But it apparently hasn’t been yet, and that seems to be what we’re required to look at—and we’re likely, if we recommend this, going to face a legal challenge.”
Kammerer ultimately voted no on approval. Interlandi also emphasized this point in her public comment to the board. “Your plan requires this project to have been identified by the South Florida Water Management District or the Army Corps of Engineers—and that just hasn’t happened yet.”
One of the three who voted against the proposal, Commissioner Kammerer raises concerns over the project.
A Moment of Consensus—Then a Sudden Pivot
There was a moment—however brief—when it actually felt like the commission might hit the brakes.
After a long and winding discussion, several board members seemed to align around the idea that too many questions remained unanswered. Commissioners raised concerns that the project hadn’t met the basic threshold of being identified by the South Florida Water Management District, that the board lacked clear information, and that approving a 30-year excavation operation without that clarity posed a serious legal and environmental risk.
But just as the board appeared to be moving toward postponement, Commissioner Lori Vinikoor abruptly moved to approve. She argued that the zoning commission should focus narrowly on the proposal from a “land-use lens,” and to let the district focus on it from a water management lens.
Her motion triggered a rushed vote—one so quick and unclear that the room couldn’t confirm who voted which way. That prompted a second vote by roll call to formally record each commissioner’s stance.
Full stream of the zoning commission. Rock mine discussion starts at 14:25, but commission debate heats up at 55:53.
But before the final vote took place, tensions rose again. The board reopened discussion, and debate broke out over remaining concerns and what, exactly, was being approved.
One commissioner even remarked that they usually see proposals much further along in the process before it reaches them—asking pointedly, “Why are we the kick-off for things? […] This is a bigger project than us.”
Commissioner Susan Kennedy agreed, stating plainly that the county’s comprehensive plan requires a designated water project before excavation in the EAA can be approved, contrary to any prerequisites from the county in the district’s process.
“There are requirements that need to be in place before we approve this. There needs to be a South Florida Water Management District project before we approve rock excavation in the EAA,” she said. “That is something that’s in our comprehensive plan that there needs to be a designated project. There is not a requirement at South Florida Water Management District that the land development be approved first.”
Some rebutted it wasn’t a mine, but Commissioner Kennedy cut through the ambiguity with a blunt truth: “This is a mine,” she said. “It would be a mine and reclamation project.”
Staff confirmed that the application was, in fact, for a Type 3 excavation, the county’s term for mining.
The board wrestled briefly with the implications, and then again, a bit abruptly, Chairman James Williams motioned for approval, and the board cast their final vote. 5-3 to recommend approval.
So What’s Next?
The Southland proposal now moves to the Palm Beach County Commission on April 24th, where county staff has recommended approval.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t over. The full county commission still has the power to stop this—or to repeat the same mistake. We may need to mobilize again, and soon.
Stay tuned. We’ll be sharing what you can do to help protect the Everglades, defend restoration efforts, and hold decision-makers accountable.
Confusion and Consternation at Palm Beach County’s April 3rd Zoning Commission.
“Why hasn’t more been done before it got to us? Why are we the starting point here?” That line, from Zoning Commissioner William Reicherter, pretty much summed up yesterday’s hearing on Big Sugar’s rock mine proposal—officially known as the Southland project.
The project, proposed by construction firm Phillips & Jordan, seeks to excavate over 8,000 acres in the Everglades Agricultural Area on fallow land owned by Florida Crystals and U.S. Sugar. It’s been concerning and controversial since it was first revealed last fall.
Promoted as a “reservoir” or “water project,” but permitted as a rock mine, the proposal has raised serious red flags from Everglades advocates, legal experts, and even restoration officials. Despite those warnings, it continues to advance through the county’s approval process.
That’s why we showed up at the April 3rd Palm Beach County Zoning Commission to voice our concerns and urge the board to hit pause on this project.
We asked them not to recommend approval until the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) has fully evaluated whether the site qualifies as a legitimate water resources project—a required designation under the county’s Comprehensive Plan for this type of mining permit.
Despite all of that, the board voted 5-3 to recommend approval. But it didn’t go down without a fight. In fact, the whole meeting felt like a mess—confusing, rushed, and filled with unanswered questions from the very people expected to make a recommendation on a 30-year mining operation in the Everglades Agricultural Area.
A Dubious “Water Project”
From the start, the core question was this: Has SFWMD identified this site as a viable water resources project?
That’s the only way this proposal could legally qualify for a “Type 3 Excavation” under the county’s plan. But the answer is no—they haven’t.
Phillips & Jordan VP Matt Eidson, who presented the project to the commission, went to great lengths to position this as a water project, not a rock mine. But the facts don’t back that up.
There’s no formal designation from the District. And as far as we’re concerned—and as many experts confirmed at the meeting—until that box is checked, the county has no business greenlighting a mining operation in this sensitive area.
“If this is being proposed as a water resource project, then it should be advanced and evaluated that way. If this is being proposed as an aggregate mine for road building, it should be addressed that way. But it cannot be one or the other,” our Co-Founder, Capt. Chris Wittman, pressed about the process by which this project is being advanced. “Are we building a hotel or are we building a brothel? They’re not one and the same.”
First Public Hearing—With Huge Gaps
This zoning meeting was the first public hearing ever held on the Southland project. That was pointed out in public comment by Lisa Interlandi of Everglades Law Center, who explained that there has been zero formal discussion of the project by the SFWMD governing board.
“There’s been no discussion about this by any governing board at any governing board meeting that has been on the agenda. It’s been discussed a few times at general public comment, but there has been not one public meeting about this project. In fact, this is the first public meeting that’s ever been held about this project,” she explained.
“It’s not contained in any restoration documents. It’s not part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. It hasn’t been identified by the Army Corps of Engineers or the water management district as any sort of restoration project at all.”
The SFWMD Letter That Isn’t
One of the most confusing points of the hearing came when county staff referenced a December 31, 2024 letter from SFWMD Director Drew Bartlett as the basis for their recommendation. That letter, and statements from the applicant, were cited as proof that the project had been “identified” by the district.
But here’s the truth: that letter did not confirm the project as a water resource project—it simply acknowledged that SFWMD received the proposal and that it had potential. Since then, Bartlett has publicly stated and further clarified in formal correspondence that the district is just beginning its full review process, which will take at least a year before any final determination is made.
“The district has completed only step one of a seven-step process required by law to evaluate water resource projects,” said Interlandi. “That analysis has not been done. They are just getting started.”
A letter from SFWMD Director Drew Bartlett to the Everglades Coalition explaining the district is now thoroughly evaluating the project.
The Real Risk: Approving Before the Process Is Complete
Commissioner Chris Kammerer laid it out clearly: according to Policy 2.3-e-3 of the Comprehensive Plan, mining in this zone is only allowed if it supports a viable water resources project already identified by the Water Management District or the Army Corps—which has explicitly not yet occurred.
“It just seems that this project may ultimately be approved by South Florida Water Management District,” he said. “But it apparently hasn’t been yet, and that seems to be what we’re required to look at—and we’re likely, if we recommend this, going to face a legal challenge.”
Kammerer ultimately voted no on approval. Interlandi also emphasized this point in her public comment to the board. “Your plan requires this project to have been identified by the South Florida Water Management District or the Army Corps of Engineers—and that just hasn’t happened yet.”
One of the three who voted against the proposal, Commissioner Kammerer raises concerns over the project.
A Moment of Consensus—Then a Sudden Pivot
There was a moment—however brief—when it actually felt like the commission might hit the brakes.
After a long and winding discussion, several board members seemed to align around the idea that too many questions remained unanswered. Commissioners raised concerns that the project hadn’t met the basic threshold of being identified by the South Florida Water Management District, that the board lacked clear information, and that approving a 30-year excavation operation without that clarity posed a serious legal and environmental risk.
But just as the board appeared to be moving toward postponement, Commissioner Lori Vinikoor abruptly moved to approve. She argued that the zoning commission should focus narrowly on the proposal from a “land-use lens,” and to let the district focus on it from a water management lens.
Her motion triggered a rushed vote—one so quick and unclear that the room couldn’t confirm who voted which way. That prompted a second vote by roll call to formally record each commissioner’s stance.
Full stream of the zoning commission. Rock mine discussion starts at 14:25, but commission debate heats up at 55:53.
But before the final vote took place, tensions rose again. The board reopened discussion, and debate broke out over remaining concerns and what, exactly, was being approved.
One commissioner even remarked that they usually see proposals much further along in the process before it reaches them—asking pointedly, “Why are we the kick-off for things? […] This is a bigger project than us.”
Commissioner Susan Kennedy agreed, stating plainly that the county’s comprehensive plan requires a designated water project before excavation in the EAA can be approved, contrary to any prerequisites from the county in the district’s process.
“There are requirements that need to be in place before we approve this. There needs to be a South Florida Water Management District project before we approve rock excavation in the EAA,” she said. “That is something that’s in our comprehensive plan that there needs to be a designated project. There is not a requirement at South Florida Water Management District that the land development be approved first.”
Some rebutted it wasn’t a mine, but Commissioner Kennedy cut through the ambiguity with a blunt truth: “This is a mine,” she said. “It would be a mine and reclamation project.”
Staff confirmed that the application was, in fact, for a Type 3 excavation, the county’s term for mining.
The board wrestled briefly with the implications, and then again, a bit abruptly, Chairman James Williams motioned for approval, and the board cast their final vote. 5-3 to recommend approval.
So What’s Next?
The Southland proposal now moves to the Palm Beach County Commission on April 24th, where county staff has recommended approval.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t over. The full county commission still has the power to stop this—or to repeat the same mistake. We may need to mobilize again, and soon.
Stay tuned. We’ll be sharing what you can do to help protect the Everglades, defend restoration efforts, and hold decision-makers accountable.