The meeting was conducted this morning and went as well as could possibly be expected. Assistant County Attorney Turner did an excellent job of conducting it.

The DEP, although given notice as required by statute, did not show up.

In addition to Mr. Turner, County Attorney Michael Hunt and Natural Resources Director Roland Ottolini and two people that did not give their names represented Lee County. The Cape sent City Manager Gary King, Assistant City Attorney Griffin, and City Engineer Oliver Clark. The public included three people from Pine Island, two from Cape Coral, and a television cameraman/reporter—all of whom were allowed to watch but not speak.

Mr. Turner explained the requirements of Florida Statute 164 and the purpose of the meeting, which is to attempt to avoid litigation. He added that he had been instructed by the BOCC not to agree to anything that did not include restoration of the Ceitus Barrier, but they could discuss other related matters.

Mr. Griffin objected to the presence of the public and wanted to know who they were. Mr. Turner denied that request.

Mr. Griffin said that if we restore the Barrier, It would not last long, maybe less than a year � and we cannot afford to waste money. [This is a new and rather strange claim by Cape Coral—the Ceitus Barrier lasted for almost 30 years before it was wiped out by Hurricane Charlie.]

Mr. Griffin said Mr. Clark would present the science behind their argument. Mr. Clark based his presentation on two premises—

(1) He said every last attempt (he claimed there were three) to engineer a Barrier that would keep the fresh water in the Spreader has failed and that the water always escapes into the mangroves through what he calls breaches. [Comment: This has long been the Cape argument—it ignores the fact that the fresh water is supposed to flow through the mangroves just as it has done for thousands of years, and that the Ceitus Barrier was there to help not hinder that process.]

(2) He said “There is no water quality problem—the water quality in Matlacha Pass is good and the water in the Cape canals is even better, well within guidelines.” He presented graphs with water quality testing data, all generated internally by the Cape Staff, that shows Cape canal water to be of excellent quality. He added however, that “The water is only good when there are no manatees in the area.” � [Comment: This too has always been the second leg of their argument the Cape consistently maintained during the 2.5 year EMA proceedings that only water quality problem in SWF is manatee poop. The Cape continues to ignore the DEP recent designation of 3 of the 4 North Cape Creeks as impaired and the recent water quality grades of D awarded the Caloosahatchee River and Pine Island waters. ]

Mr. Griffin and Mr. King both expressed their doubts as to the existence of any scientific data supporting restoration of the Barrier. [Comment: The Councilman that represented the City in the EMA proceedings last year erroneously reported to the City Council and staff that all of the EMA scientific entities and studies opposed restoration of the Barrier—actually all of the scientific entities and the many published studies supported restoration. He also erroneously reported that the EMA stakeholders opposed restoration of the Barrier—actually the vote was 14 to 4 to restore the Barrier. The Councilman’s erroneous report was distributed throughout Cape Coral in a City Council Bulletin and to this day has not been corrected, so it is entirely possible that Mr. Griffin and King are being sincere. Of course, litigation is not a good place to find out you have been deceived. ]

Mr. Turner said the County would present the evidence supporting the EMA agreement in due course and all the County wants is to enforce the Consent Order.

The meeting ended only an agreement that the Chapter 164 time frame of 50 days should be extended by the parties to avoid landing in the middle of the holidays.

Phil Buchanan