Dock permitting

Argued staff is applying coastal tidal codes to a landlocked, lock-controlled basin; mean low water doesn't exist there, so the 25% / 25-foot rule (Section 3965 B2) is the only lawful standard and staff is 'administratively erasing' a safety boundary.

Cited a history of staff datum errors, including the 2022 dredging project, claimed staff withheld Swiftmud enforcement records and mangrove destruction data, and asked the board to freeze South Gulf Cove dock permitting based on tidal data and enforce the 25-foot rule.

A 57-year area resident and fisherman, he insisted there is no tide in South Gulf Cove — only rain and sprinkler drawdown — and mocked the tidal premise behind the dock measurements.

A professional engineer whose firm produced the Lenar surveys, he explained the -4 foot depth was conservatively keyed to the 0.9 NAVD average water elevation to guarantee boat lift access, and that strict 25% compliance would strand boats in water too shallow.

Said staff's calculations create boating hazards and cited a September 28, 2026 Swiftmud notice of as-built deviations (compliance ID 437458) documenting swale encroachments and mangrove destruction at Harbor East, for which he said the county bears liability as adjacent landowner.

Alleged staff are using bad data in dock permitting and continuing design of a banned parallel lock, risking the $6.1 million state grant.

Representing Friends of South Gulf Cove, demanded a transparent engineering review of why tidal datum rules are being applied in a lock-controlled, non-tidal canal system.