Justifying our actions
To the editor,
In the month of May, the Island Reporter published two guest commentaries, one from a current County Commissioner and the other from a former Sanibel mayor. It also published a letter to the editor from the chairman of the PURRE Water Coalition.
The guest commentaries emphasized the need for immediate action to control the effect of the release from billions of gallons of polluted water from Lake Okeechobee. The necessity for action was made evident by the last discharge that made Sanibel’s beaches unusable.
In this letter to the editor, the chairman of PURRE reported that the State Legislature did not address the setback from water for the use of fertilizer. Therefore, Sanibel’s 25-foot setback will not be reduced to 10 feet, as proposed.
Which is more important to the future of Sanibel — stopping the flow of polluted
water from Lake Okeechobee, a proven need, or enforcing an unproven requirement as to the use of fertilizer?
Any continued efforts as to setbacks for fertilizer use can only weaken our lobbying for the big problem, i.e. Lake Okeechobee. Otherwise, can’t you hear State Legislatures, saying " Oh, here those (you fill in the blank) from Sanibel
are at it again."
Perhaps I missed it, but what were the results of the quality of water tests from samples taken upon adoption of the ordinance, requiring 25-foot setback for the use of fertilize, and one year later, as promised by the administration. Have any such studies been produced to justify our action?
Is PURRE a sanctioned lobbyist for the City of Sanibel and registered as such?
Sanibel and Columbus, Ohio