Amicus Curiae Brief — South Florida Water Management District v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians

| a Supreme Court, us |

4 FIL FE })

No. 02-626 SEP 10 2003

In The si i

Supreme Court of the Anited States

o

SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT,

Petitioner,

V.

MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS, et al.,

Respondents.

¢

On Writ Of Certiorari To The

United States Court Of Appeals

For The Eleventh Circuit

¢

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE

THE CITY OF WESTON, FLORIDA,

IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER

o

SUSAN L. TREVARTHEN

Nancy E. STROUD

Counsel of Record

WEISS SEROTA HELFMAN PASTORIZA

GUEDES COLE & BONISKE, P.A.

Attorneys for Amicus Curiae

The City of Weston

3107 Stirling Road, Suite 300

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33312

(954) 763-4242

COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO. (800) 225-6964

OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831

QUESTION PRESENTED

Whether the transfer of untreated water from one

natural source to another requires a National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under the

federal Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1342.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

QUESTION PRESENTED...............ccccseceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees i

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..............:::ccceeeeeeeeeeeeeneees iii

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE .........2....000000000000s 1

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT..............:ccccceeeeeeseeeeeneees 3

FACTUAL BACKGROUND ...........ccccccccseeeeeeeeeeeenneees 4

SITET cccsisiisinpscdsnccndstedconnsccsceecescoseossanecsocccooes 5

I. ENJOINING THE SOUTH FLORIDA WaA-

TER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FROM

OPERATING THE S-9 PUMP STATION

WOULD NOT BE IN THE PUBLIC INTER-

EST BECAUSE OF THE RESULTING HAZ-

ARDS TO THE CITY AND ITS SIXTY

THOUSAND RESIDENTS..............::0cceceeeeeees 5

Il. A NPDES PERMIT IS NOT NECESSARY,

BECAUSE OTHER FEDERAL, STATE, RE-

GIONAL AND COUNTY REQUIREMENTS

ADEQUATELY PROTECT WATER QUAL-

ITY IN THE C-11 WEST BASIN, AS

SHOWN BY THE CITY’S EXAMPLE. ............ 8

CONCLUSION ..........0cccccccccrscscssccccccccccererecesenassscecees 14

ill

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page

CASES

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, et al. v. South Florida

Water Management Dist., 280 F.3d 1364 (11th

ee passim

STATUTES AND REGULATIONS

Everglades Forever Act of 1994, Section 373.4592,

IT anand ies crrnterearenmenmninenainnaneunnnmnmanents 12

OTHER AUTHORITIES

Broward County Water Preserve Areas, at http://

www.evergladesplan.org/pm/projects/proj_41.cfm

(last visited on September 9, 2003) ..............ccccceeeeeeneeees 11

Ted R. Brown, Regulating Wetlands: The Florida

Approach, SG096 ALI-ABA 99 (2002) ........... siceedeaniinmemeibiens 5

Burns & McDonnell, Final Report, Everglades

Protection Area Tributary Basins, Conceptual

Plan for Achieving Long-Term Water Quality

Goals (March 17, 2003) at http://www.sfwmd.gov/

org/erd/bsfboard/waterquality.pdf (last visited on

September 9, BOOS) ...............c.cercscccsssssorerereerecersesees 11,13

City of Weston, 2002 Performance Report, http:

//www.westonfl.org/notices_events/annualreport/

Weston2002AR.pdf (last visited September 9,

City of Weston, Agenda and Minutes of the City

Commission Meeting of May 20, 2002, available

at http://www.westonfl.org/commission_minutes

_info/minutes/MinutesMay202002.pdf (last vis-

ited on September 9, 2003) ............ccccceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeneees 11

iv

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES -— Continued

Page

City of Weston website, Demographics, at http:

/iIwww.westonfl.org (July 2003 population data,

last visited September 9, 2003) ............:ccccccceeeeeeeeenreeeeees 4

City of Weston Existing Land Use Map (April 19, 1999),

available at http://www.westonfl.org/commission_

- departments/existing.htm! (last visited on Sep-

Gammmbber B, BOGE) ...cccccccceccccssessceccsccsssesssescsscsssssssssesses 10,

City of Weston website, Weston History, available

at http://www.westonfl.org (last visited Septem-

City of Weston Zoning Map (April 29, 2003), available

at http//www.westonfl org/commission_departments/

zoning.html (last visited on September 9, 2003).....10,

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan website,

at http//www.evergladesplan.org (last visited on

September 9, BOOS)............00ccecccscccecssocsseseorssecesorsssserees

Martin Merzer, Blustery storm could cause floods:

Canals lowered in preparation for rain as system

strengthens, The Miami Herald (August 14, 2003),

www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/weather/

6526708.htm (last visited on September 9, 2003).........

Doug Rekenthaler Jr. et al., Irene Drenches Flor-

ida, Brings More Rain to Flood-Weary North

Carolina, DisasterRelief.org (October 26, 1999),

www.disasterrelief.org/Disasters/991018irene5/

(last visited September 9, 2003) .............ccccceeseeeeeeeeeeeeees

Neil Santaniello, Water Board to Spend $33 Million

Saving Weston Land From Development, Sun-

Sentinel (September 13, 2002), www.sun-sentinel.

com/news/local/broward/sfl-cpwater13Sep13.story

(last visited September 6, 2003) .............:ccccceseeeeereeeeeeees

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES — Continued

Page

South Florida Water Management District, Ever-

glades Stormwater Program, Program Summary,

Urban and Tributary Basins Program Elements

(November 1999), at http://www.sfwmd.gov/org/

reg/esp/pdfs/espsum/utb. pdf, (last visited on Sep-

Cg Tee

Summary of C-11 West Basin Program, at http://

www.sfwmd.gov/org/reg/esp/cllw.htm] (last vis-

ited on September 9, 2003) ...............cccsssecseeceeeeeeeeeeeeeees

— -_——_- -—

1

INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE

Amicus curiae, the City of Weston (hereinafter re-

ferred to as the “City”) submits this brief in support of

petitioner South Florida Water Management District

(hereinafter referred to as the “District”) seeking reversal

of the lower court’s decision in Miccosukee Tribe of Indi-

ans, Sam Poole v. South Florida Water Management

District; Friends of the Everglades v. South Florida Water

Management District, 280 F.3d 1364 (11th Cir. 2002).’

The City has a compelling interest in seeing that the

question presented in this case is answered in the nega-

tive, and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision

reversed. That interest is as a permit holder discharging

to the District’s water management system and as a

taxpayer, along with all City property owners, with ulti-

mate responsibility to fund the District’s activities. The

NPDES program is the wrong program to address water

quality issues associated with the transfer of water.

The City offers its own experience, as an example of

the multiple ways in which municipal stormwater is

already heavily regulated. Efforts to protect and improve

water quality within the City pursuant to these programs

include:

' Pursuant to Rule 37.4, the law firm of counsel for the City serves

as the authorized law officer of the City, so no motion is required.

Pursuant to Rule 37.6, amicus City represents that counsel for the City

authored this brief in its entirety and that no person or entity other

than the City and its representatives made any monetary contribution

to the preparation or submission of this brief.

2

(a) the creation of one of the largest and most

successful wetland mitigation projects in the

country by the City with no federal or state fund-

ing, and its continued management and mainte-

nance by the City;

(b) the City’s voluntary participation in a Dis-

trict program to institute Best Management

Practices in the management of City property

and monitor water quality indicators; and

(c) the District’s plans to develop, by the end of

2006, a massive Stormwater Treatment Area in

the City through which all water in the C-11 Ca-

nal will be diverted prior to reaching the S-9

pump station.

Together, these activities are projected to reduce the phos-

phorus load in the City’s stormwater runoff by at least 85%.

Requiring the District to meet the requirements of the

NPDES program now, prior to the full implementation and

benefit of these activities, would require wasteful and

duplicative investments in short term treatment solutions.

The City is located in the C-11 West Basin, Broward

County, Florida, bordering the western edge of the devel-

oped area protected from catastrophic flooding by the

District’s levee system. The majority of the City’s storm-

water runoff ultimately flows into the C-11 Canal. The S-9

pump station, which is the object of respondents’ attack,

controls the water levels in the C-11 Canal and, when

necessary, transfers water from the canal into Water

Conservation Area 3A. Miccosukee, 280 F.3d at 1366. As

noted by the Eleventh Circuit, “Without the operation of

the S-9 pump station, the populated western portion of

Broward County would flood within days.” Jd. at 1366.

Respondents do not dispute this fact. Id. at 1369-71. Thus,

3

the City has a compelling interest in the outcome of this

case, and urges this Court to agree with the Eleventh

Circuit that such an injunction can never be an appropri-

ate remedy.

+

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

South Florida’s regional water management system

existed for decades before the enactment of the Clean

Water Act in 1972. The United States Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) has never required that such

transfers and diversions operate pursuant to Clean Water

Act NPDES permits. To do so now, as sought by respon-

dents, would upset decades of settled expectations and

place at risk billions of dollars in public and private

investment. The City and its more than sixty thousand

residents are directly at risk should the District ever be

forced to discontinue operation of the S-9 pump station.

The City is not insensitive to environmental issues,

and is proud of its status as home of one of the largest and

most successful locally funded wetland mitigation projects

in the country. It and other agencies have taken many

steps to control the amount and improve the quality of the

stormwater runoff discharged into the District’s water

management system and through the S-9 pump station.

These programs are projected to reduce the amount of

phosphorus, a key indicator for the Everglades, by over

85% in the next three to five years. The City agrees with

the District (and other amici supporting the District) that

numerous provisions of federal, state and local law are

more 9ppropriate mechanisms than the NPDES program

4

to address potential sources of pollution or naturally

occurring conditions in municipal stormwater.

¢

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The City is located in the C-11 West Basin, Broward

County, Florida, bordering the western edge of the devel-

oped area protected from catastrophic flooding by the

District’s levee system. The City is home to over 60,000

residents, and the taxable value of its property was nearly

$5 billion in 2002. See City of Weston 2002 Performance

Report, www.westonfl.org/notices_events/annualreport/weston

2002ar.pdf,p.2 and www.westonfl.org at “Demographics.”

The City was incorporated in 1996, but the property

comprising the City was developed beginning in the late

1970s and had been in agricultural use prior to that time.

Development began following approval of a 1978 “Devel-

opment of Regional Impact” by Broward County. The first

residents arrived in 1984. See www.westonfl.org at “His-

tory.”

Prior to its development, the City, along with the vast

majority of Southeast Florida, was part of the historical

Everglades. Miccosukee, 280 F.3d at 1366 and 1369, n.8.

Water naturally flowed to the south, towards Florida Bay,

and intermingled east to west. The majority of the City’s

stormwater runoff is collected through a system of lakes

and canals. This stormwater runoff flows south, pursuant

to a state permit subjecting the City to water quality

requirements, into the C-11 Canal operated by the Dis-

trict.

The S-9 pump station, which is the object of respon-

dents’ attack, controls the water levels in the C-11 Canal

5

and, when necessary, transfers water from the canal into

Water Conservation Area 3A. Miccosukee, 280 F.3d at

1366. As noted by the Eleventh Circuit, “Without the

operation of the S-9 pump station, the populated western

portion of Broward County would flood within days.” Jd. at

1366. Respondents do not dispute this fact. Jd. at 1369-71.

Transfers and diversions of untreated water are

essential to the design and operation of Florida’s regional

flood control system. The development of the City of

Weston relied on the existence of this system of flood

control. The City was master planned and the develop-

ment process was heavily regulated by county, state and

federal law. See generally Ted R. Brown, Regulating

Wetlands: The Florida Approach, SG096 ALI-ABA 99

(2002). All aspects of the City’s development were in

accordance with all applicable environmental laws, and

the City has never been found in violation of any of its

permits.

¢

ARGUMENT

I.

ENJOINING THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MAN-

AGEMENT DISTRICT FROM OPERATING THE S-9

PUMP STATION WOULD NOT BE IN THE PUBLIC

INTEREST BECAUSE OF THE RESULTING HAZ-

ARDS TO THE CITY AND ITS SIXTY THOUSAND

RESIDENTS.

Without the S-9 pump station in operation, and the

ability to discharge into the C-11 Canal, the City would

routinely be subjected to massive flooding that would

endanger lives and public and private property.

6

A recent example is Hurricane Irene, in October 1999.

Although it was only a weak Category 1 hurricane, the

City received nearly twenty inches of rain in two days

according to the City’s Public Works staff. See also Doug

Rekenthaler Jr., et al., Irene Drenches Florida, Brings

More Rain to Flood-Weary North Carolina, DisasterRelief.

org (October 26, 1999), www.disasterrelief.org/Disasters/

991018irene5/.

The flooding not only immobilized the City and

damaged property; it also had a human toll. Eleven-year-

old twins and their fourteen-year-old friend were shocked

to death in the City, when they stepped into a puddle

energized by a power line. Their mother also was killed

when she stepped into the puddle in an attempt to rescue

them. Jd. Other safety and environmental hazards posed by

flooding include the back-up of raw sewage into the streets,

resulting from the flooding of sanitary sewer lift stations, as

has occurred within the City after storms in the past. Such

spills are not only immediately hazardous to human health;

they also contaminate the stormwater runoff being dis-

charged to the District’s system and thus pose a danger to

water quality. This is just one example of how flood control

systems can be essential to the maintenance of environ-

mental quality, as well as human life and property.

The District and City staffs routinely operate their

pump stations before projected storms to lower water

levels in the lakes and canals and increase the available

storage capacity. See generally Martin Merzer, Blustery

storm could cause floods: Canals lowered in preparation

for rain as system strengthens, The Miami Herald (August

14, 2003), www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/weather/

6526708.htm. Even though staff prepared for Irene by

pumping down the levels of the City’s lakes and canals,

and even though the S-9 pump station was in continuous

operation, the City experienced extensive flooding of roads.

In some cases, water was only a foot or so away from

entering homes, according to Public Works staff. It took

two weeks after the storm for water levels in the system to

return to normal, with all City pumps running and the S-9

pump station also running.

Without the S-9 pump in operation and without the

ability to discharge to the C-11 Canal, the damage in the

City would have been much more severe and long-lasting.

Even if one assumes that floodwaters do not enter houses

or other structures, all but the most major roadways in the

City would be impassable, according to the analysis of City

engineering staff. Most property would not be accessible

other than by boat or helicopter, including the City’s

hospital, and police, fire and public works facilities. Even

under ideal conditions, with a storm following a dry

period, all canals being recently cleaned out, and the

system at its maximum capacity, City staff estimate that it

could take seven to ten days for flooding to recede under

these conditions. If the storm were to follow a rainy period,

there is no way to know how much longer it might take. In

addition to paralyzing the City and preventing residents

from accessing needed services, such sustained inundation

will lead to major damage to the City’s system of surface

roads by undermining the integrity of the road beds and

damaging asphalt surfaces. Even milder flooding, that

does not render the road impassable, could damage the

road base.

The excess water would be extremely damaging to the

natural environment as well. The Citys 1,800 acres of

wetland mitigation areas are designed and managed to

maintain precise water levels at approximately 4 feet

8

above sea level. Small mammals might be stranded or

drowned, and various flora and fauna might be damaged

or killed by sustained high water levels.

Petitioner asks the Court to reverse a decision by the

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals that threatens the

operation of South Florida’s regional water management

and flood control system. Massive amounts of public and

private monies were invested in reliance on this system,

and on the various permits authorizing the development of

the City. Without this system, private and public property

in the City will be defenseless against the ravages of

flooding from storms. The City urges this Court to agree

with the Eleventh Circuit that the public interest requires

that the District must never be enjoined from operation of

the S-9 pump station.

Il.

A NPDES PERMIT IS NOT NECESSARY, BECAUSE

OTHER FEDERAL, STATE, REGIONAL AND

COUNTY REQUIREMENTS ADEQUATELY PRO-

TECT WATER QUALITY IN THE C-11 WEST BA-

SIN, AS SHOWN BY THE CITY’S EXAMPLE.

Weston was developed with environmental oversight

from various federal, state and county regulatory agencies,

and satisfied all applicable requirements. In 1976, the

District issued Permit No. 06-00060-S to Arvida Corpora-

tion, the master developer of the majority of the City. The

permit allowed the construction of a system of culverts,

lakes and canals ultimately connecting to the C-11 Canal.

The first water quality program was instituted at that

time, to control the effects of the existing cattle grazing

operations on the quality of stormwater runoff. Monitoring

a

9

of water quality also began at this time, and continues to

the present.

In order to obtain District approvals for the residen-

tial development that was later to become the majority of

the City, the developer was required to demonstrate that

there would be no adverse water quality or quantity

impacts to the C-11 Canal, and the Water Conservation

Area 3-A into which the S-9 pump drained. District staff

concluded that there would be no adverse impact on water

quality from development of the project as proposed. The

surface water management plan received conceptual

District approval in 1978 via Permit No. 06-90002-S.

Modifications to these permits were issued later by

the District, as necessitated by the continued development

of the area that became the City. Each of these modifica-

tions was evaluated to ensure that no adverse water

quality or quantity impacts would result. The permit

required the developer, and now the City, to maintain a

more extensive Water Quality Monitoring Program, which

is being conducted to this day. The Program demonstrates

that phosphorus levels in the City’s water management

system have never consistently increased, from 1976 to

date, despite the nearly complete buildout of the City over

that timeframe.

The system is designed to hold water before releasing

it to the C-11 Canal, so that pollutants can settle out and

the water is cleaner when it reaches the District’s system.

As part of the requirements for development of the City,

all properties were required to have their own stormwater

management systems that retain the first inch of runoff

onsite, to allow for treatment via settling of the most

polluted “first flush” of runoff following a storm.

10

As mitigation for the impact of its development on the

environment, the developers of the City created a signa-

ture $15 million, massive wetland mitigation area. See

City of Weston 2002 Performance Report, supra at 9. See

also areas zoned “CV” and designated “Conservation Area”

(all are wetland mitigation area)on the City’s Zoning Map

and Existing Land Use Plan at www.westonfl.org/commission_

departments/zoning.htm] and www.westonfl.org/commission_

departments/existing.html. This mitigation was entirely

funded through local and private dollars, with no federal or

state funding. The project performs wetiand functions

including flood control, water quality enhancement, water

supply preservation, wildlife habitat preservation, energy

transfer and nutrient cycling.

Agencies involved in reviewing or permitting the

project included the Environmental] Protection Agency, the

U.S. Corps of Engineers, Florida Department of Environ-

mental Protection, the Florida Department of Community

Affairs, the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commis-

sion, Broward County, and a variety of environmental

interest groups. The mitigation area is protected through

conservation easements, and contains continuing require-

ments for maintenance. A Wetland Quality Index Monitor-

ing Report is used to measure whether the project is

considered successful; to date, three of the five areas in the

project have achieved success.

Another example of projects within the City that

improve water quality is the District's planned 1,700-acre,

four-foot deep Stormwater Treatment Area, through which

all C-11 canal water will be routed for storage and treat-

ment prior to reaching the S-9 pump station, which is

under construction within the City. See Neil Santaniello,

Water board to spend $33 million saving Weston land from

11

development, Sun-Sentinel (September 13, 2002) at www.

sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-cpwater 13sep13.story.

See also areas zoned “AE” and designated “Vacant” (most

are slated to become stormwater treatment area) on the

Citys Zoning Map and Existing Land Use Plan at

www. westonfl.org/commission_departments/zoning.htm] and

www.westonfl.org/commission_departments/existing.html. This

area will reduce seepage, provide groundwater recharge,

and function as part of the District's Comprehensive

Everglades Restoration Plan, the $8 billion project being

implemented by the District and various other parties. See

www.evergladesplan.org and www.evergladesplan.org/pm/

projects/proj_41.cfm. Construction is scheduled to be com-

plete, and the vast majority of environmental benefit

received, by the end of 2006. See Burns & McDonnell,

Final Report, Everglades Protection Area Tributary Basins,

Conceptual Plan for Achieving Long-Term Water Quality

Goals (March 17, 2003) at www.sfwmd.gov/org/erd/bsfboard/

waterquality.pdf, Table ES.2, p. ES-9.

A third example is that the City (through its Indian

Trace Development District, which operates the relevant

water management system) has entered into a voluntary

interlocal agreement with the District for a Local Water

Quality Monitoring Program for the C-11 West basin. See

May 20, 2002 Agenda and Minutes, Item 8.J., at www.

westonfl.org/commission_minutesinfo/minutes/MinutesMay

202002.pdf. See also South Florida Water Management

District, Everglades Stormwater Program, Program Sum-

mary, Urban Tributary Basins Program Elements (November

1999) pp. 15-18 at www.sfwmd.gov/org/reg/esp/pdfs/espsum/

utb.pdf and Summary of C-11 West Basin Program, at www.

sfwmd.gov/org/reg/esp/cllw.html. This Agreement involves

instituting Best Management Practices for public land

12

management, training private landscaping companies and

managers in these practices, monitoring water quality

measurements, and identifying strategies to address “hot

spots,” if any, found within the City.

These steps will continue to reduce the phosphorus

load in the City’s stormwater runoff discharges to the C-11

Canal, and thereby assist the District in meeting state

water quality standards under the Everglades Forever Act

of 1994, Section 373.4592, Fla. Stat. (2003). However, for a

variety of scientific and financial reasons, the improve-

ments in water quality resulting from these efforts will not

be realized overnight. There is no guarantee, for example,

that they would allow the District to satisfy the water

quality standards of the NPDES program within the next

year if this Court upholds the Eleventh Circuit decision in

Miccosukee. If they do not, the District would ultimately be

faced with the short-term obligation to treat untreated

water (in other words, building a costly water treatment

plant to improve the water quality in the C-11 Canal,

which might only be needed from the present to the end of

2006) or to curtail or cease operation of the S-9 pump

station.

The District’s analysis of the alternatives concluded

that other options are costly, few, and inefficient, in light of

the overall health of the Everglades. The Basin Specific

Feasibility Study for Achieving Long-Term Water Quality

Goals for the C-11 Basin recently concluded that the Basin

delivers a relatively small amount of the total phosphorus

load to the Everglades, and the cost of chemical treatment

to meet state water quality standards immediately would

be, in large part, wasted. The implementation of existing

efforts by the end of 2006 as planned, with no changes,

will lead to an 85% reduction in the phosphorus load at

13

the S-9 pump station. See Burns & McDonnell, supra at

Map of Basin, p. ES-3 and pp. ES-4 and 3-21 through 3-24.

The cost of this duplicative requirement for the

District to comply with NPDES criteria would affect the

City in two ways. First, as a District permit holder flowing

into the C-11 Canal, the City will inevitably be subjected

to additional costly conditions designed to further assist

the District in meeting its NPDES permit obligations.

Second, the City and its taxpayers will be directly sub-

jected to these unnecessary costs, because all owners of

property located in the District pay substantial sums in ad

valorem taxation each year towards the support of all the

District’s activities.”

* Moreover, the principle of requiring an NPDES permit for

movement of untreated water from one place to another raises the

question of whether the City itself would be required to obtain NPDES

permits for the various facilities in its stormwater management system,

in addition to satisfying the District's standards and permitting

requirements at the discharge into the C-11 Canal. If so, where would

the line be drawn? When the water passes through a culvert from a

subdivision lake into a City canal, will that culvert need a NPDES

permit? If not, will it be required where two canals intersect and their

waters mingie? It is hard to see what principle would limit the City’s

liability for a NPDES permit to its discharge point into the C-11 Canal.

Like the District, the City is merely a transporter of municipal storm-

water ana should not be subjected to a permitting program designed to

regulate those who release pollutants into navigable waters.

14

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the City respectfully

requests that that the decision of the Court of Appeals for

the Eleventh Circuit to require a NPDES permit for the S-

9 pump station, which has serious potential negative

consequences for the continued viability of the City, be

reversed.

Respectfully submitted,

SUSAN L. TREVARTHEN

Nancy E. STROUD

Counsel of Record

WEISS SEROTA HELFMAN PASTORIZA

GUEDES COLE & BONISKE, P.A.

Attorneys for Amicus Curiae

The City of Weston

3107 Stirling Road, Suite 300

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33312

(954) 763-4242