Wanda Vanam here. Jessica Gal here. Gerald Fezer. Kelly Frasa here. Derek Lantine here. John Maluso here. Suzanne Shyber here. Um, with John Gamble and
David Sosa absent, we have a quorum. Okay, very good. That brings us to public participation. If there's anyone that wishes to speak, uh, if you're here for one of the cases and would prefer to wait until that's called, that is fine, too. I don't have
any slips for public participation. So, assuming there's no one that wants to speak right now. Okay. Then we have the approval of the April 4, 2025 meeting. Does anyone have any corrections or additions on those
minutes? Okay, hearing none. Does someone want to Okay, I'll second. Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Feeser and a second by Mr. Maloosa to accept the meeting or the meeting minutes as stated. All in favor
signal by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? Okay. Minutes approved. Next up is the election of chair and vice chair. And for that I'm going to turn it over to Miss Jonas, please. Yes.
Good morning. Um I'm Sarah Jonas, assistant county attorney filling in for Sabrina Slack. Um today is time for you to elect a new chair and so you will need a nomination in a second. Nominations for chair are open. Uh, Madam Chairman, yes. I would like to
nominate Jessica G. Okay. Can I ask Wanda, do you no longer want to be chair? I cannot be. Oh, I see. I'll second that. I don't like her. Okay. We have a motion and a second for
Miss Ga. Uh, motion by Mr. fees are second by Mr. Malooa. Um, any other nominations? I'll nominate Suzanne Sh. Okay, we have a nomination for Suzanne. Do we have a second on it? I'll second
that. Okay, and a second by Miss Frasier. Okay. Any other nominations? All right. In order. All those in favor of electing MScow signal by saying I. I. I. Any opposed.
Is there abstaining or how's it working? We're picking one or the other. We do them in the order. Okay. Okay. All right. So, we have any objections?
Okay. Very good. Miss Scout will be the chairman for the next year. I thought there was I think they didn't say no. They were just being quiet. I don't think everyone voted. Okay. Yeah. So again, any opposed?
I perhaps for clarity you can um go poll uh everybody can vote individually. Yeah. Roll call. Okay. I'm sorry I didn't hear that. We can do a a roll call vote. Okay. What? I'm confused. We're voting against
someone being chair and then what? Voting again? I don't understand the procedure here. So, this is the first time we've had this happen as far as I can remember. And that's why I'm asking. No, that's fine. Um, so you have two nominations.
Miss Gow was nominated first and so we're going to take up the vote on Miss Gow's nomination first and then if that is not su successful we we'll move on to the second nomination. So we're going to take them in order and we're going to do a roll call for clarity. So I'm not used to voting against someone being chaired
that I think is qualified or eligible. So I just want to say pardon me if I don't vote against you. Uh but I just want to clarify because I don't recall this happening in the entire time that I've been on this committee. Yeah, we had this actually two years ago. We had
two different people and we went through the same procedure. Okay, got it. I just two years is a long time and I don't recall that. Yeah. Yeah. No. Okay. Roll call vote on Miss Scout. Um, so we'll do an alpha order. So Jared
Fleaser, yes. Uh, Kelly Frasa, no. Jessica Gal. Yes. Can she vote on her? Can I vote? Clarification from legal. Yes, you can vote.
And then so Derek Lamontine, no. John Maluso, yes. Suzanne Shyber, no. Wanda Vanam, yes. Okay. So if I figured right four four. Okay. All right. So motion passes.
Correct. Okay. All right then. Vice chair. Yes. So now um well Miss Gao can take over um leading the proceedings but um
you can yes uh now we can um nominate your vice chair in a second. I'd like to nominate Suzanne vice chair. I'd like to second that. Am I taking over right now? Okay. Can we clarify that? Does a new chair become
effective at the end of the meeting? Um, since I did the prep on the um, yeah, that's that's fine. Okay. Is that what you're understanding? Perfect for me. Okay. Okay. All right. So, we have a nomination for Suzanne Triber for vice chair. Do we
have a second on that? Second. Okay. Motion by Mr. Malooa, second by Miss Fraser for Miss Shriber. Any other nominations? Okay. All in favor of Miss Shriber being vice chair for the next year signal by
saying I. I. Any opposed? Okay. Very good. That brings us to new business and today will be the first meeting that we're going to be doing both eligibility and uh sorting. So um if we could start
please with our eligibility rankings. Good morning committee members. Tim Teler uh Bush Forever program. So we are now starting the eligibility review of three projects. The first one for your consideration is going to be the Turbull Bay project.
So Turnill Bay is a a fee simple application. Staff score was 7 out of 21. The required minimum score for eligibility is 10 out of 21. 23 acres in size. It's not within a target acquisition area. Um it is adjacent to
Doris Leaper Spruce Creek Preserve. Okay. Questions for uh staff on our first property here, Trumbo Bay. I just have one question on the willing
authorization form. The individual listed is not on their like corporate documents. Do you know the relationship she has with the entity? Uh no I do not. Okay. Would the um management of this property be absorbed into the
surrounding properties or would this have to be handled differently for the management of the property? Good morning everybody. Hunter Fulmer with land management. So this is right beside um called a this is Turbull of
Door Sleeper Spruce Creek. So to the north, it's right on the boundary. So presumably this would be absorbed into that preserve. Okay. And who's doing that right now? The management of that?
That's that's us. Okay. Okay. Question. Yes. Is there any access to this property at the point? At this time, any access to this would be from the
door sleeper the preserve county side. Um, currently it's you can see it's kind of behind a development. I see where it's behind the development, but do you there's no access from the development into the property right now, right? It's fenced off or gated off or I don't it's
not fenced or gated. I just don't know if there's actually public access. Is there any up there's a little bit of uplands there right behind those houses or were the houses built up on fill? If if I may, I I can answer that, Gerald. Okay. Uh so this the Turbo Bay
tract here of Doors Sleeper Spruce Creek Preserve is only accessible to the public by water. There is a campsite on there as well as a trail system. Uh there is a service access entrance through the uh subdivision here with a gate, but that is not a public access point.
Okay. I just was curious whether this was uh because this was something we had talked about yesterday in the echo meeting is would there be accessibility to Doris Leaper now through this subdivision if they wanted to hike trails or do anything like that. At this time we do not see a path to put
a public access point through the subdivision. Um we addressed that previously in the uh in the management plan and decided the water access was the most appropriate okay access point. question, Miss Sh. Um, so my first
question is is the gate is that who who's maintaining who owns that the rights to that right now? Uh, the gate is the county's gate for the property to secure the property. Okay. It's at the culde-sac at the end
of this street here. Right. So access could be gained since the county has the gate. Uh well the access would have to go through the I think the community association there would have to grant that access as well. Okay. And did this
neighborhood flood? I do not have knowledge of any flooding in this neighborhood. Okay. Is there anyone here today about this property that could answer that? No. No.
Okay. Any other questions or comments, Mr. Lamontine? Yeah. Um, well, just to jump on what uh uh Miss Shyber was saying, uh there is a flood Oh, sorry. Can you hear me? uh a flood chart that seems to match
just generally the area. But I did want to ask a question about the um and about the archaeological sites on there. I mean I I know and I'm sure you know that you know Spruce Creek Preserve has several such sites but um the listing on
the criteria said it was a no. I just I don't understand if you guys um went there to check that or just why why it might be listed as a no um for that. Um and yeah, a few other comments after you
tell me if you have any extra information on if it's for sure not I guess. So I'll try and provide some uh context to that. Um, there is a Department of Historical Resources shape file that we
use and presumably if it was ranked to where there there was no ranking for historical resources, there were probably no sites on this property. That's correct. There were no recorded sites noted in the Florida site file for
this property, right? That have been documented. That doesn't mean that there could be something there, but you know, we we didn't go there to, you know, find mounds or things like that. So, okay. Um, yeah, I just think it's a a nonzero
probability, so it's something to consider. And and I just want to comment that um, yeah, I'm very excited about this property to add to um, the Door Sleeper Preserve. That's my favorite conservation area in the county. But um but I guess I also would like to point
out that um I I'm happy to you know I think part of the the goal of this program is is um of course uh access when possible and obviously there's the the water access but you know with all the other trails there just to have um you know conservation habitat there is
is important and obviously it seems like if um they built a subdivision right next to it they could easily expand and build on that uh similarly. So protecting it when we get it got get a chance is valuable and I guess so yeah on the criteria I'm a little um in
disagreement I suppose that it was kind of lowish because um the door sleeper preserve in general I think uh needs to have a corridor to connect to kind of those main priority one and two corridors. That's something I've been um advocating for. So again, to just help
with the health, um even if there's a lack of corridor to Spruce Creek Preserve, that expanding its total size would help its um biodiversity and uh function. Um so I I do hope that um this can be approved um especially since
again there's willing seller here and u you know it's contiguous with the parcel so of door sleepers. So that's my comment. Thank you. Miss Shber, did staff visit this property? Yes, we visited it about a month ago.
Okay. And on um page 45, what's what's the restoration? Because it's the question is about uplands, water bodies or wetlands requiring restoration minimal. And the answer was no. What needs restoring?
There's mosquito ditching in the mangroves. In addition, there is a sizable acreage of Brazilian pepper infestation, but the mosquito ditching um is uh quite significant. I'm not exactly sure of the
time that it was done, but it's been there for quite a while. So, you're saying that it needs dredging? Is that what I'm It would be restoring the historic condition. So, I think it would be refilling the mosquito ditches. That
would be the restoration we're speaking of. Well, I have a question now. I'm somewhat confused. You talking about filling in the ditches now? Have they done that in Door Sleeper? The rest of the park they filled into the the mosquito ditches. Nick, are you aware of any restoration that has happened on
mosquito ditch? There's been no uh significant mosquito ditch restoration on the preserve that we have. Um this mosquito ditches on this particular site, as Hunter mentioned, have been there a while, and if we were going to restore that, it would be a significant
restoration project. We no plans to do that, though. It would be a long-term plan if we had it in the door sleeper management plan. There would be a long-term plan to do that. Restoration of the mosquito control ditches is a priority of the water
management district. If you all remember, we are doing it on the 70acre Sternstein piece that we bought in Oakill with the water management district. Um, but I'm sure that they would approach us. Um, so I could see it being a short or medium-term project if
they have the grant money um rather than a longer term if we paid for it. I have a question. So did the Dora sleeper um project require it uh any of the fill the
mosquito ditching? There is no requirement in the management plan to refill mosquito ditches. Okay. Thank you. And I'm sorry, did you say this is within or not within the optimum boundaries for the Doris Le Creek
Preserve? This property is not in the optimum boundary for the preserve. It is on the border of it. Okay. Okay. Miss Shber, did you have a I have I have a question. So pertaining to this and pertaining in general as far as mosquito
ditches and restoration goes um in this case you're talking we're like talking about filling in ditches but yet on the Ford property it was talked about dredging the ditches by St. John's. So when do you make a decision
to either dredge the ditches or to fill in the ditches? because I've never heard of filling in the ditches until today. So, that is the common restoration technique for mosquito ditch restoration. Um, and and if if we can answer any more questions
to help with this question uh regarding the quality of the natural communities on the site, we're happy to answer them. But that's really the question it sounds like you're working on is you're you're going back and forth on whether you believe that this staff score is
correct. Well, what also raised a question is when I asked if it you had um visited the site because on page 42 it says wetland information has been field verified but wetlands can eress in um
ingress and eress over time and I did not anticipate the mosquito ditch conversation going this route. So, I'm just trying to clarify the amount of restoration the property
needs being that it's adjacent and connecting to a current important Valuchia Forever piece of property. I mean, Doris Leaper is one of the most important pieces of land conservation in
all of Valuchia County. That's not my opinion. It's been stated publicly numerous times. So, I also was kind of thrown off at the answer that there's a gate there that the county has. So, um I
just think that maybe the neighborhood would probably allow access. I don't know. That's a guess. They will not. We've had this conversation with them before. It's a a gated community. Okay. And the roads are owned by the HOA and they will not give us access. Okay. I
appreciate this information. So, I'm just trying to get there is all. Um, okay. Mr. Lament, I wanted to uh just clarify on the uh
the the parcel. Well, first of all, I I mean it I appreciate that. Yeah, we're we're going through the conversation. And um you know, we have another property that's well over a thousand acres and um I I know we're seemingly scrutinizing the the smallest ones and sometimes
letting the biggest ones just kind of go. But um in terms of uh the the use of the property and and um you know, Valuchia's uh management of it, I feel like if it is not in our control uh
as a county that it still would affect the Doorsleeper preserve. So for instance, if there are, you know, invasive plants there that, you know, for sure if there if we don't acquire it, it's still going to it will migrate into our preserve. So by, you know, perhaps acquiring such a parcel, we will
be in more control and again partner with these other uh water management districts, whoever else to help all the other things necessary. But I think for the health of the preserve, it would would benefit us, especially if um these things might not be restored or protected otherwise. Um and again uh
however long that might take or you know if there's other funding sources that's that's a different you know time question but I think just for acquisition and who's kind of maintaining it for for the protection of the rest of it like again just I when you mentioned that there might be some
invasive there like I don't know if the owner of of it now um you know has the the the power to to kind of control that or has the the knowledge base to to do that. So again, I I guess that's definitely leans more towards why I
think it extra needs protection, not because it's like we should abandon it. Like it's right there and it's it's uh um you know, if it needs some work, then um I think it's worth it for the greater uh good of the Door Sleeper Preserve that we we work on that. So that's my opinion again. Thank you. Okay. All
right. And remember, um we need to all vote the way we feel. the staff has given us their interpretation and and it's up to us to vote as to whether we feel it's eligible or not. Uh any other comment, Miss Cow? Yeah, I think that I agree with the statement that the
proximity to door sleeper is the the main benefit of this site, but I'm struggling with the criteria and I I think we struggle often when it is mostly marshland on property. We've run into this before um on the valuation and review on the usability of our funds to
purchase it. Um, I don't I do want to say I don't think this is a development potential. It's just an opinion. Um, but it seems almost impossible. Um, but I wanted to note that if this is not found eligible for fee simple, I would
like to see it come back as an easement, I think it would have a better chance of review, but they have only selected fee simple, which is a challenge for us. Okay, good point. All right. Any other questions?
All right. Is anyone actually since you just stepped out about the easement? Um I when we vote is it automatically because I thought when we voted it's automatically for I know they list be
simple here but can it automatically be pursued as an easement without bringing it back? I think the property owner has to pick both for us to say if we pick fe simple and it ends on an easement that's okay. But if they've never said easement, we can't say go get an
easement. Agreed. That's was my understanding too that if they marked either or we could go ahead and do it, but if they did not, we had a vote on what they requested and then it's up to the property owner to come back. Correct. and go through the fee
simple I mean excuse me go through the easement process. That's correct. And and if if it's the consensus of the committee, we can send an email to the property owner's representative informing them of this option or opportunity. But but today it's a vote on fe simple.
Do we need to make a motion to get you to send an email depending on how this vote goes? Uh you do not need to make a motion. Um it it certainly seems it's the consensus of the committee that we should uh that you're requesting staff reach out. We we don't need any uh formal action on it.
Yeah. So I mean I I know I guess if that is kind of a financial question that I feel is maybe not I guess in our purview. We're not really supposed to look at the price but I mean for what it's worth you know they can negotiate it's not it's not even uh it's less than 300,000 I guess is for 20 something
acres adjacent there. But I mean, so I I think if it's the price again, we're not supposed to really consider just the quality of it. But um I mean, fe simple like I don't see the difference if uh if they're it's a pretty low price, but um might as well
just own it right out. But again, it's totally an opinion and uh hope that we can um yeah, at least give it a chance. Thank you. Okay. All right. Any other comments, questions? All right. Would someone like to please
make a motion on Trombbo Bay whether we consider it eligible? Uh, I'll make a motion that it's eligible. Okay. Motion by Mr. Llama, excuse me. Do we have a second? I'll second. And a second by Mr. Malooa.
Okay. So, we have a motion to find the property eligible. All those in favor signal by saying I. I. opposed. No. No. Okay. I believe we had four to three. Okay. All right. So, the vote was four
to three property not eligible. Okay. All right. Do you know who was the which I could I couldn't tell from the sound. Sorry. You can call the question call do roll call vote
if you don't mind. Right. So, Wanda or Yeah. Wanda Vanam, no. Jessica Gal, no. Gerald Fezer, no. Kelly Frasa, no.
Derek Lontaine, yes. Don Maluso, yes. Suzanne Shyber, no. Did you say no, Suzanne? I'm sorry. Okay. to vote. I'm sorry. I thought it was 43 52. Before we move on, can I just say will
staff please follow up about the easement? I'm just point blank asking. I don't think anyone opposes that. So, yes, ma'am. Thank you. We'll reach out. Okay. That brings us to Deerry Point,
please. Okay. Okay. Uh, next property for your consideration is uh, Deberry Point. It's a fee simple application. Staff score is 11 out of 21. 10 out of 21 is required. It's around 95 acres.
There is no target acquisition area. And it is closest to the Lower Quiva River Preserve State Park, which is across the river, but not in the county. Thank you. questions for staff.
All right. Easement on this one. We again have a community butdding up against it. Do we have any access to this through that community? So, our understanding is that it's a private uh these are private roads within a gated community. So, my answer
is no. Okay. So, at this point, it would be river access only. Yes, ma'am. That's our understanding. Okay. All right. Thank you. Other questions for staff. Still maintain. So, is there are there any docks along
the water there or anything uh like a little place to um access it with the boat? I guess our understanding is there is no infrastructure. Okay. Um I I guess yeah I also again just
seeing how close it is to the other reserve. Um I think I I really don't think uh yeah we should focus on necessarily um it's access for us although for people I think its use as
habitat and wildlife uh refuge doesn't mean we have to to be there all the time but um that's just my opinion. And I think um you know being u a very green space that um you know would potentially otherwise be developed is is worth
saving especially when it would be uh u protected as people view it um walk or going down the river there. So I I think it's a good a good property. Um, and I I guess I haven't heard anything about
there being any um much need for restoration, but if there is any um please let me know, I guess. Okay, other qu Suzanne, did staff site visit this?
Yes. Okay. I have a note written to myself that the wetland was not verified, but I don't know what page that was on. Why is it
why would it not be verified if you site visited? I guess I'm asking are are you referring to something on the scoring on page 76? Wetland information has not been fieldverified. wetlands can eress and ingress and eress
over time. I can I can explain that. So, uh on page 76, you're referring to the data set that was used for GIS for wetlands layer. What that means is they interpret a lot of these wetlands through aerial or through soils. Um there has not been
a specific site visit by the agency that made this layer to verify every single well point on the ground. Oh, I see. Thank you. So that's going to be a standard on every every map page is what you're
saying the legend as it is. Yes. A lot of GIS data sets um are that way. Um if there has been a field verification, we would put it in the notes on on our site visit. Okay. All right. Thank you. So does that mean this on the site visit
did you see a wetland there? Um I'm asking like they they they visited the site. So what did they see? There are wetlands for sure. There was no delineation done. This just a
observational sort of field visit. Yeah, the site visit confirmed the data on the map when we were other questions. Okay. Does um has the city expressed any interest? This is of course a piece of
incorporated property. Has the city expressed any interest in trying to preserve this land? So, we've not had the direct conversation, but um we did speak to the property owner's representative and uh it's our understanding that the city has declined to participate in this transaction.
Okay. All right. Other questions? Anyone from the public here on this piece of property? Okay, hearing none. Would someone like to make a motion
on Deerry Point? I'll make a motion for Deerry Point being eligible. Being eligible. Yes. Thank you. Motion by Miss Faza to find the property eligible. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Miss Scal.
Okay. All in favor signal by saying I. I opposed. No. No. Okay. Probably better do roll call. Wanda Vanam. No. Jessica Gow. Yes. Gerald Fezer. No. Kelly Frasa. Yes.
Uh Derek Lontaine. Yes. John Maluso. Suzanne Shyber. No. So, it's a four to three vote. Okay. So, four to three in favor of finding it eligible. Correct. Okay. Very good.
All right. That brings us to Riverbend, please. Riverbended Ranch is uh fe simple application. Staff scored to 18 out of 21. Minimum required is 10 out of 21. It's uh roughly 1300 acres in size. It's within the uh Florida wildlife corridor, the blue conservation
corridor, St. John River 5-year acquisition plan, eco and the eco overlay layer. Um and it is addition, it is adjacent to during preserve at deep creek. Madam chairman, I would move for
approval of eligibility. Second by do we have any discussion before we vote? Miss Shiver, are you getting ready to ask a question? Yes. Um, sorry, you guys are moving pretty quick
there. Um, on the matching funds, it shows a score of two next to where it's marked. I'm assuming that you must have something in mind for matching funds, but I was kind of surprised to see it, too.
Yeah, it's um it's a little bit of a preview of uh uh the project summaries that I was going to give at the end, but um for the committee's understanding, the current House and Senate budget only allocates $18 million to the Florida Forever
budget. That was our main uh partner on this project. the previous time it was submitted to the program. Uh we've had a conversation with Department of Environmental Protection, it does not appear they're going to be able to budget funds for this uh going forward unless you know there are things that
can happen. Other projects could fall through and suddenly suddenly this this one is ready to go and there's money available. I think the uh better route in my opinion is uh trying to partner as much as we can with the St. John's River Water Management District on a project like this. So that's why it has a
relatively low score. Okay. And is it um for land management relatively easy for the county? I haven't I haven't actually been to this property, but staff has visited this um I believe two or three years
ago. Is that correct? I've visited this property multiple times and u it is easily accessible and easily manageable by by the county. Okay. And out of curiosity, what was the invasive? The invasive out there was typically
some sporadic Kogan grass on the road system. Okay. And do you um have something in mind for the resource-based recreation already? Uh there's a long list of recreation that could be used on this property.
Yes. Okay. But the the specific question is resourcebased recreation which is what we're voting on today. So we evaluate these properties with all of our resource-based recreation recreation uh in mind. Once we do a
thorough site visit and make a management plan that will determine the specific uses that are the most appropriate for the property. So, I was saving this till the end, but because it's seemingly appropriate now. Um,
we don't have definitions for resource-based recreation that I know of. I don't recall seeing them ever. Uh, I I thought I knew what resource-based was this whole time. So now I'm asking
to be provided with resource-based definitions. Not I'm not going to hold up the vote on this property, but I am requesting to know uh so that um the committee is not
put in a position as to what happened more recently because when we vote, we're voting on resource-based recreation and we're also voting on the criteria and if that criteria changes after we
vote, I don't feel comfortable with that. So again, I'm not going to hold up this vote, but I would really like to have something provided to all of us for resourcebased recreation.
So just pointing that out. Yeah, we we'll get uh something to you with a more thorough definition, but Okay. And I'm not just asking for me. I'm asking committee. Yes, we can do that. Thank you. Other questions or comments on this
property, Mr. Lamontine? Uh, yeah, just a few uh quick ones hopefully. Um, so can you describe um like all the the the man-made changes to this property that are existing? Obviously, you can see, you know, there's farmland and so forth, but are
there other um canals that have been dug or other things that um are on site at the moment? Yeah, I can I can describe some of that. So, the previous landowner has done some uh timber and wildlife management on the property as well as cattle leases. Uh
there is an improved road system on the property that's pretty good for access. Um there's been some boundary line work, some fire lines installed on the property and they are managing um for some exotic species control in some
areas as well in house. Was I'm just curious since you mentioned you know I guess sounds like fire control and other stuff. Was that partnering with the county already in that um in those efforts? It was not. It was the uh private land owner. Okay.
Um, another quick question which again I think I have a good idea of it but just for u the benefit uh on some of the maps on page like 89 or 90 I think it says there's a farm green key adjacent to it um in addition to the deep creek reserve
part uh in orange but can you explain what a green key is the To my knowledge, the green key is just the name that was given to the uh Farmington Geek Green Key in the comprehensive plan. It's just the name of the project area. Does that mean it's
it's protected? It's preserve conservation not going to be built on. Right. That's my question. Yes, that is in conservation already. Uh and this property is directly adjacent preserve at Deep Creek, which is a county-owned and managed uh preserve as well in
conservation. Okay. It was just a different term. So I didn't say you know preserve it just said green key which uh I thank you for that uh definition clarification um to on the south part at least as looking at
the map um kind of a technical question but some of those little waterways are kind of circled in black. So, if it kind of we own around it, we don't obviously well, we can't we wouldn't be owning the the river itself there, but um when it
does form those little inland lake areas, is that considered I guess still part of the the public waterway or um is it a lake on the property, I guess, or which one is which? Because some of them are kind of Well, there's a few different ones. If you can kind of
clarify, it's the question who owns the bottom land. No, Tim. Tim, the question is on on the map at the south end, the boundary appears to go around some of the creeks which appears to be public water on the river side of the property,
right? That's what he's asking. Yeah, that's Yeah. So, so um without getting into a long boring explanation, um I don't mind that. Okay. No. Okay. Back in 1845, Florida became a state. At the time Florida became a
state, if all navigable water bodies were determined to be sovereign submerged lands and and held in public trust. So what you see there where the boundary line goes around those uh surface water bodies is that remnant sovereign land that is still owned by
the state of Florida, but we can still access it if there were like canoes. That I think that's the question. The public Yes. Yes. It it does not prohibit public access. Now, um, you need to be able to get to it by water unless we own the surrounding
uplands. Yeah. Yeah. Because over time, of course, rivers do kind of, if you look at them over, you know, thousands of years, they do kind of form little side lakes. It looks like some of these might be in the process of becoming not connected, I guess. So, that's the case. It's just a lake on the property
essentially, but would be correct. Yep. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. from the riverside for sure. This is a beautiful piece of property. Go past this frequently uh with boat on the river and it's beautiful piece of property. But I'm trying to recall I was
out there about six months ago though. I can't remember if there's any uplands off the river because I know six months ago there everything was kind of flooded along there. But I I'm wondering in the south part if there's because Hickory Bluff's a great place you can pull your boat up on the beach and get out and walk around, go up to picnic tables or
do whatever. Yep. But I don't think we have a bluff along here. I don't think this has got real good river access, does it? If I recall, it depends a lot, like you said, road trip. Yeah, depends a lot on the the height of the river. And it does look like on the southern
tip when it curves around the river that there may be some trail systems in those woods on the aerial. So maybe that's high enough to on the site visit that I had, we took a jeep down through that trail system down to the W's edge. Oh, you could get to the water's edge at
that time. We could I I don't know any high water marks on the trees. I can answer that. Yes, there were some high water marks. So, uh when when the uh river is low, you can actually drive down on that area near the shoreline. When the river is high, that's going to be a flooded area. So, it it fluctuates,
but it's good as long as you have access to it from time to time. So, that that's good. Yeah, it is amazing the difference when the river is high or the river is low on all the properties around there as to what you can get at which it's amazing how six months how things have changed
in six to seven months now from the highest that we've seen it to some of the lowest we've seen. Yep. Miss Shyber, did you have another? Yeah, I um again made myself a note that resource corridor airport protection
overlay. What is the airport protection overlay? That was on the document that we received saying we were voting. It was it was in that packet.
Airports protect. Well, it's a zoning overlay. Yeah, I was going to say typically what you have are are are glide path restrictions that restrict the height of structures as as these planes approach an airport. And I suspect that's what that is referring
to. But where's the airport? I would think the Sanford airport on this one because yeah, we'd have to take a look at a map to be able to answer that with confidence. Other questions? Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Feeser and a second by Miss Gow. Do we have anyone
from the public that wants to speak before we do the vote? Okay, hearing none. All in favor of finding this property eligible signal by saying I. I. Any opposed. Okay. Motion carries unanimously.
70. Okay. So, yep. Yep. You did. Yes. Um, so now we're going to take that same property and go through the ranking process with it. Um, this is the map showing uh Oops. Pardon me. Um I'm going to come back to the
riverbend uh map here and um uh we're now at the phase where where we can uh actually rank the project sorted into a or b list. Okay. So do you want to do the riverbin first and then the lake George or do you want to do the lake George first?
So that that's at the discretion of the committee. I was backing up uh just in case the committee wanted to stick with the um riverbend subject, but we can move to Lake George also. It's it's your it's up to you. I just pardon me.
Riverbend. Yeah, that that that's my my instinct also. We'll just stick with the same subject. Yep. Okay. All right. Do you have anything you want to add to what has been presented as we go into the sorting on the Riverbend property?
So I'll go through the the the chart here. Um so again a few simple uh almost 1300 acres in size. Uh staff ranked at 18 out of 21 with a minimum of 10 out of 21. Um potential matching funds we're just kind of leaving open right now is an open question and we can get into
further discussion during the project summary phase here. Um it is within it it also has the eco overlay uh layer attribute on top of it. Um, uh, landowner has a representative in the audience for any of your additional questions on on sorting and, um, we
stand by for any questions. Okay. So, this is in the priority one area. Correct. Yes. Correct. Questions for staff? The only thing I'll note is it is the Sanford airport. It's very close to it.
I pulled it up on Google Maps. Yep, it's right there. Okay, no questions, no comments. I'm sorry, Mr. Lamontine. Just again like to have information out there for the public. Uh, so it does list, you know, there's some rare species. Um, gives
actually a number. Um, can you uh just quickly mention uh what species are maybe expected um in that area? Um that might be rare. I guess this was 98 page I think if I'm on the right map. So definitely bald eagles would be a
possibility here. You said it was page 98. I think so. Yes. And yeah, also I just curious what it means to be a the six is higher or low because it didn't quite say what the legend of the one through six was. Maybe
I can look that up. If you if you look over on the key on the right side, it says priority one being the highest and priority six being the lowest. Six is lowest. Okay. I didn't say it on mine that that means lowest, but okay. So that's Thank you for that
clarification. Um, and then, uh, one other just question on the page 100, I guess. Can you explain the little lacrine island that's in the middle of the the water there? I guess um, whatever
land cover uh, shape file this was that we used, that just means it's a lake. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And again, that depends a lot on water levels. what's happening in there.
Okay. Other questions, comments, anything the property owner representative would like to add? No. Okay. Would someone like to make a motion on the Riverbend property whether it should be placed in the A or the B
list, please? I'll make a motion we move it to the A list. Okay. And I second that. Okay. We have a motion by Mr. Maloo, a second by Mr. Faser that this property be placed on the A list for acquisition.
All in favor signal by saying I. I. Any opposed? Okay. Again, unanimous decision. All right, that brings us to Lake George Road. So, Lake George Road is also um uh ready for sorting. Uh this is a fee
simple application, 26 acres in size. Uh it scored staff scored it at at 11 out of 21. The minimum required is 10 out of 21. We don't have any potential matching funds uh at this time. Um the attributes listed are the eco overlay and uh the
Nurma overlay. And Tim, I'll add real quick. Um it you can't tell on the photo for the sorting session, but this one is directly adjacent to the Lake George Forest and management area that the county already co-owns with the water management district and the county manages. So this is an adjacent parcel to what the county
manages. So it would be folded into the county management of the larger parcel. Yes, that would be the plan. Okay. question uh because I'm just coming in was not here when we discussed this project originally. Is there is access
to this property? Is that road go into that run along the south side of that property? Yes, that is a paved road. That's Lake George Road up in Seville George Road. Does it end there? It ends at the fish camp at the end of Lake George Road. Is there any potential? Is
there a parking corral out there off the Lake George Road? I haven't been out there in years, so I don't recall. Uh we don't have a parking corral, but the Lake George road system in the wildlife management area is open to the public for vehicular access. Um so we have several roads um within a quarter mile
of this parcel. Okay. So we don't need a parking car. Correct. Miss Kyle, and just for anyone watching the to the east and south, those are furnery screens that you see on the aerial. Is that Yes, that is correct.
Those are furies. Other questions? Okay. Would someone like to make a motion on the Lake George Road property to put it in the A list or B list, please? I make a motion to place the Lake George Road property on the A list. On the
A-list. Okay, we have a motion for Miss Second. Okay, so we have a motion from Miss Frasa and a second from Miss Shber to place this on the A-list. All in favor signal by saying I. I. Any opposed?
Okay, voted on the A-list 7 to zero. All right, very good. That brings us to staff comments and property updates. So, I'll go through the property update list that I have in front of me here.
Um, first one to update you all on is the Lake to the Lagoon RCPP project. This was our federal um matching project for agricultural easements and it was frozen for 6 months. It's now been unfrozen. Um, it that's that's great
news. Um, it it also created some unique challenges for us because while it's been unfrozen, the five-year clock has not been extended. So, we basically have four and a half years to do the work that we had scheduled for five years for that program, but it is up and running.
Um, we're going to look to open up a um land management application. Uh we've talked about um mid July uh somewhere between mid July and August to open that up for a month, get applications in for land owners who would like some land
management assistance through the RCPP. And then we'll also open up another application cycle because we had two projects that were previously in when this got frozen. We moved them to other um partnership uh streams. Um, we do have some properties that we are uh
think could be a good fit for this uh program, but we we've not had those conversations with the land owners yet. That'll that'll be coming soon. Uh the next one is the D Florida Forever uh budget. Uh we we discussed this a little bit earlier. Um the House
incentive only put $18 million into this budget. This is usually funded between 100 and as high as $300 million a year. $18 million creates a lot of challenges for the acquisition staff in Tallahassee. They they've got um
more project more projects lined up than they have funds for right now, but we've had a very positive conversation with them. Uh we think we think that we have some projects that they will still uh steer some money towards. We're working on some um uh uh appraisals right now.
Uh anticipating that they'll be brought in. We're going to keep those conversations moving. So, uh, you know, credit to the, uh, D staff for being flexible with us and also credit to Valia County, the Valition County citizens for having a funding program
because the only reason that the doors are still open for us on these limited projects is because we can bring money into deals. If we didn't have money, we'd be shut out completely right now. Um on the opposite side of that uh news
spectrum, the uh Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, they they run the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program. The the House and Senate uh uh budget currently allocates $250 million to that program. Um and and deservingly so,
they've seen their applications grow and grow and grow uh o over the uh uh application window. So there's a lot of good work to do on the agricultural easement side out there. The uh less than fee conservation easements and agricultural easements seem to be what
the legislature is more in favor of these days. They are starting to kind of back away or become less enthused about fee simple. That doesn't mean we have to change course on anything. Just kind of sharing that information for the committee and is one of the reasons why you see such a high uh input into that
rural and family lands program. Um on June 13th, uh staff attended the acquisition and restoration council meeting in Tallahassee. We were representing the John Anderson project. We were successful in having it added to what's called the strategic managed
areas lands list Florida forever category. So we potentially uh have some uh partnership funds available there to get D uh to participate in this transaction. We're we're we're
really going to have to see how money opens up on this one. This is one that uh they've let us know if funds were available because something else came through that they would be interested in participating, but they are not uh budgeting funds for that project at this time.
Uh we have started uh uh discussions with the Lef family. Remember that 990 acre uh agricultural easement application that came in? We've started discussions with them on the easement terms. This is intended to be ahead of the appraisal process. So those are two critical steps that we do on these a
easements. We order, you know, understand the title situation on these properties. We get easement terms uh agreed to uh at least verbally uh by by the landowner ahead of that appraisal so the appraisers know any uh unique
circumstances that that easement will create that might be a building envelope or something like that. Triple T Ranch. Uh we've uh before you go on there, just to bring me update because again was not here when that was approved. Are the were the ponds part of
this easement too? Were the the burrow pits that they had in is that part on this property too? Which which property general? Huh? Which properties on Lef? I don't think they may have cut that out. It might be this one has sparrow
pits. Okay, that's that's fine. I just curious whether that had them or not. Is that where they water ski? No. So, you're thinking of big So, Dawn's property on 415. This is more on the back side of Deltona. This is back near the cemetery. It was part of the
Lef property and several years, probably 20 years ago, they put had borrow pits back in there for dirt as they built Deltona up. And I don't think they've hauled dirt out of there in years. I think they finished some up and last time we were back there, it was a beautiful piece of property. I just was curious whether that was included in
what they're putting in the ement or or or not. Uh I'm going to let me take a note and we'll we'll try to get that information. I'll jump in real quick. I know they do have ponds on the property. I don't know if it's the specific uh borrow pit you're referring to, but I do know they
have some ponds on the property. Okay. the the big borrow pit that they do the ski shoots at and stuff is not on this property. Right. So, Triple T Ranch, I'm going to jump back in unless there are further questions. Okay. Triple T Ranch. I have
a question. I'm sorry. I need to go back too before we get way past um the uh John Anderson property. So, there's not funding. What happens now?
Well, that's the challenge that we have. Um, so our options are we can kind of wait until the state actually has funding available and they notify us or we can actually start that appraisal process and get an understanding from the landowner what they're willing to accept on this land. Um, it creates the
potential for Valia County to go alone and this is something that um we are going to have to face coming into the the fall and in 2026. there's going to be more projects where we're not going to be able to have partners lined up and we're going to have to go solo on these projects.
If I may, and I was going to thanks for the primer on having partners. I think it's important to keep in mind as the the first say Valuchia Forever 1.0, know we had a lot um more partner
activity from the water management district because they were getting 25% of the Florida Forever funds at that time. They don't get those funds any longer. So all of the stuff we bought with the water management district was funded through Florida Forever
essentially. Um now when we're working with Florida Forever at the state level um they they hold they will not hold joint title with us and that's something that we like is to hold joint title and we can do that with the water management district. So in many instances on the
ones that Florida Forever has went after with us they are paying the full price. So if you look at this point in time in our program, you know, I think we've spent less than $10 million in local dollars and local taxpayer dollars and
received about 30 and others. So that's going to change here as as the environment changes. So as things evolve over the next couple of years. So, I want the committee to be prepared for that, that we may go it alone on the next handful of properties, but keep in
mind that we were, you know, made whole, which we were not in the past, on the ones that we've previously bought. So, it's a balancing act for us. Um, now we do have the RCPP money that's coming in the door. So, I think that will allow us to shift some of our priorities um and
use those funds. Um it's really it's going to be hard to get 20 $40 million out the door in in five years. I will I will tell you that. Um because some you know if it's uh depending on the type of easement we can request 25%
reimbursements of um of the full price or 50%. So you know you're looking at 80 million over the next 5 years. But, uh, I just want you to be prepared and also it may
be before we have our next meeting. Um, we do have a plan. We have some offers out. And if those offers are taken by the property owners, um, we will need to bond some of the 60 million that's authorized in the referendum. We're moving in that direction at this point.
Um, our CFO's kind of philosophy is you bond what you need. So, we're not going to just go out and bond 100 million when we only need 40. Guess we couldn't do 100 because it's only 60. It's authorized, but we're not going to go uh whole hog until we know what we need. Um
so, I would be prepared for that. They did it much earlier in the last program. I feel comfortable where we are in terms of um bonding, but I didn't want it to be a surprise to you if it came as a council agenda and on these properties if we do need to
go alone on these, the potential is always there to go back and if fund more funding becomes available, for example, from Florida Forever, if this is just a one-year thing, if they get more money again, are we able to then present these properties to them and ask for
partnership even though we've already acquired. Yes. And one of the one of the strategies or pathways that Nick has taken and we will we will um you know I think increase our focus on the pathway is Florida Communities Trust. So for example the dome property
that we bought um and are turning into the and it's indoor sleeper um turning into the reuse environmental learning center because it was a disturbed site. Um, Nick is requesting reimbursement. I think was it 250,000 of the 400,000 that
we uh bought it. Yes. Um, and we have a friend on Florida Community Trust in terms of a friend, a local. So, Deb Denny's was appointed to that committee by the governor. Um, she was upset with us that we weren't bringing things forward. So, we will
make sure um from this point forward, we will have an application in every cycle to get some reimbursement dollars. Okay. The state. Okay. Very good. Okay. Sorry to interrupt you, Tim. No, it's no problem at all. Um I'm going to move on
to Careway Lakes. So, Carowway Lakes is one that um as I mentioned, we've had that conversation with Florida Department of Environment and Protection, Florida Forever staff. They are still engaged on this project, but we are trying to go fast before that uh situation changes. So, we have ordered
appraisals on this property. Now, there's a draft easement that's uh still under negotiation. Um but really time is of the essence on this project and trying to keep some of that state money engaged. So, we've got the throttle all the way forward there. uh the McMillan
Agricultural Easement. This is a a project that um a little bit later to the game. Uh we have the potential to bring the St. John's River Water Management District in as a partner. So, we're excited about that. So, we are going through a phase now where we're taking a look at the uh current
documents that we have and trying to figure out how they can be integrated in. Remember, every time we bring in a partner in, their money has their own rules for it, and we have to sometimes alter the documents that we're working with to bring that partner in to satisfy their own policies.
Uh, Tamoka Farms is uh also got a lot of positive momentum right now. Um, we've had uh one initial meeting with the family. We've made an offer on it. We're due to have a follow-up meeting with the family second week of July. Uh, I would describe that as a lot of positive
momentum. We haven't shaken hands on a deal yet, but it certainly has a lot of positive momentum at this time. Uh, Tamoka Marsh, this is uh I I don't know if I'm going too fast here. Uh, as the map adjusts, uh, Tamoka
Marsh up in northeast portion of Valuchia County um, almost completely surrounded by state land. and uh we we had originally been uh moving towards a a a large partnership with the with the uh Florida Forever staff. Obviously, the
situation's changed. We've taken a step back. We've brought in the North Florida Land Trust right now to help us. Uh it's possible those Florida Forever funds still become available, but we're preparing uh to uh work with North Florida Land Trust on a grant application to try to secure this
property. So as as these situations change um we are trying to adjust and open up new pathways to fund funding partners here. Uh Lake Harney this is the big 5,500 acre piece down in the south part of the
county. Uh so we have just started the title uh and appraisal process on that land right now. Uh we may not go directly into negotiating. Uh this is also one where we've had ongoing conversations with the Florida Forever
staff. Uh they seem to be uh very open to this property if the budget holds. Um so we are uh working on getting this uh teed up so we can um really again time is of the essence. So we want to try to move this one quickly and try to get those funds while there's still an
opportunity on it. And the last one I'll bring to your attention is the uh double eagle agricultural easement down in the south part of the county. This has uh this was a uh rural and uh family lands uh application also. So we've partnered
with FDAX on this. Um we are now entering the closing phase. We actually have a closing agent assigned from FDAX. So we are rapidly moving towards uh securing an agricultural easement over that property. And that was the end of my
updates. Welcome. Any questions? Now, Florida Forever has funding still available from last year, so to speak. So, there is a little bit of unencumbered funds within Florida Forever a little bit. and and um I would
describe it as I think we have a very good relationship with our acquisition staff and again having money has opened up uh doors but um there is still a lot of competition for the crumbs that are left and uh we are doing our best to try to grab as much of those remaining
dollars as we can. Okay. And then there were 50ome million that went for projects that were already in the loop and none of those projects were anything that Lucia Forever was involved with.
Uh there was one project that you had reviewed in New Simra Beach. There was uh um what I would describe as an island property uh New Smyrna Beach. We found it ineligible, but uh the owners were successful in having the legislature
designate money towards that project. It doesn't commit Valuchia forever. It just commits the the state of Florida to buying and preserving that land. Okay. All right. Very good. And the RCCP monies, did that get
was that part of the budget or is that did that get affected? The Lake Lagoon funds. Yeah. So, it's it's our understanding that the funds are fully unfrozen at this time. So, it's really a matter of lining up projects. Okay. So, they're not affected
by any changes in the budget as we move forward. Oh, for clarification, let me clarify here. So, when we talk about RCPP, those are federal funds that are coming through. Uh most of the other stuff when we talk about rural and family lands, Florida forever, those are state funds. Okay? So there was a pause
when the new administration came on board just like they did with any grant program essentially. Um they went through the pause the transition team reviewed the program um because it was part of the in uh inflation reduction act. Uh that was the orders to review
all uh projects associated with those dollars. It's made it through that review. So now we can continue to move forward. Okay. Very good. Very good. Okay. I'm sorry, Mr. Shyber. Can I ask
some questions? Um, the island project that was submitted by um senators out of our area. It's close to $20 million.
uh for lack of a better way to say it, can I just be direct and say is there anything that Valuchia County can do um with this any type of statement to Florida forever that that's
not um helping our own program. I'm trying to be diplomatic here. If we decline the project and it's um submitted pursued by people who don't live in Valuchia County, but it's impacting our Florida Forever money,
isn't there anything that the county can do? I understand you wouldn't want to be negative and derogatory, but we're sitting here talking about funding being cut with close to $20 million for something that
is not on our county taxpayers list of approvals. So, I'm going to answer that and and I want to clarify this is not speaking for Valuchia County itself. So you, Miss
Shyber, as an individual citizen, uh, if you wanted to take that action, what I would say is you would contact the governor. So that draft budget still has to go in front of the governor who still has veto authority on on these line items. And if you wanted to stop that project, that's how it would happen. And
I'll say too, so the the funding mechanism of the state funds is not through forever. It is actually through the water management district is what the the senator from um that area asked. Yeah, I'm sorry I misspoke but that yeah
that I meant um so I would say that you know there's process for a reason. It's a transparent process where we evaluate same thing for Florida forever and this is circumventing those processes. those
processes uh protect taxpayers. And so I think that's you know the conversation that I've had with leadership and several of our elected officials. Um I did you know I've asked the team to work out to reach out to the water management district because if it goes
through then of course we want to say well how are you going to provide some public access? Um, so that will that's our next question um to them if it goes through. But I would I think Tim Spice's advice is sound. Um, I will tell you,
um, which kind of doesn't make me worry cuz I'm really good at that, but, um, makes me feel at ease a little bit is in the last few years, every conservation purchase that came through a legislative
budget request and not through the Florida Forever process was vetoed by the governor. So he believes in the process too. It sounds I mean his actions lead you to believe that he believes in the process because that was when we met with you if
you remember the attorney their attorneys were very aggressive advocates for the property when they came and we encouraged them to go to Florida forever and they decided to not do that and they are not dumb people so there was probably a I had one more. Um, actually two more.
I'll make them quick. When the committee first reconvened for the first two years, when a committee member would ask a question by email pertaining to something within the packet, for
example, uh we used to all receive the answer back and at some point that stopped. So I can only trace it back to the first
two years. I don't know it. So, um I'm asking is there any reason that we cannot do that? And if someone wants to start talking about sunshine law, I brought one of the emails with me that's a very good example. I did not keep pursuing
all of them, but there were some good questions asked. So, I'm just curious as to why that stopped. And I I just want to say the committee doesn't isn't aware of this, but I had asked for Russ Brown to come be at our
April meeting. And the reason why I specifically asked for him because there were things that were occurring during the first two years when the committee started back and I kind of wanted to ask some of those questions because some of them I actually felt like were beneficial.
um this email that I found this morning um as I was rushing out my door because I've been wanting to ask this question for quite a while and for example this one you know goes
all the way back to 2022 and Brad you actually sent this someone from the committee which we don't know who said is the Valuchia Forever committee going to visit the property were reviewing at that time. No one knew the answer to
that. I get that. So Brad answered. I'm not going to read what he answered, but he answered. There were questions asked that pertain to the agenda. And whether someone knew or not, we got the answer back at that time. So, I'm
I'm asking and I've been wanting to ask this for quite a while, how we got away from that or whether it's beneficial I'm and I'm even open to discussion whether it's beneficial to go back to doing doing that. Now, I
wouldn't I would suggest that we stick to what's in the agenda packet. I'm not suggesting going sideways off in all these other areas, but I'm I'm I'm bringing this up. It's standard practice. And if we've if we've um um dropped the ball, then I will the buck
stops with me, I will I will take that. Um but we will we will get back to that standard practice. If if we've been getting questions and they haven't been coming to the rest of the committee, typically we blind carbon the cop the committee on our responses. Um so I
think that's what's changed is you may be blind carbon copied and we're not telling you, hey, this was asked by a committee member. We're just answering it. So, u we'll make sure that we answer the individual committee member but then send another email saying one of your colleagues asked this question. It's
just good practice in government. Thank you. And then the last thing, well, I want to remind I'm not going to go back and hash it out, but I would like for all of us to receive the resource-based uh definitions. And then the last thing I wanted to say is um at
the beginning of June um I attended the Florida Wildlife Corridor Foundation conference in Orlando. It was three days. Um it was the third third one, third annual I guess you could say, although they skipped a year there, but um they
typically do one, they were doing them every year, now they're doing them every other year. Um the conference itself was really awesome. It always is. Um I got to go on field trips the first
day. Went to Hochi Wildlife Management Center. One of the things that I wanted to express to the committee is land management is turning into a huge problem in South Florida. They have a lot of orange groves and they almost
other than development, they almost can't give them away because they're just begging for them to be purchased. And what do you do with an orange grove that's no longer producing oranges and being worked? What do you what do you do with that? So, you can imagine land
management from a expense standpoint. Um FWC said that they're being asked to uh maintain more land now than they've ever been asked before. Um so anyway, just wanted to express that.
Um the conference, I believe it had 700 attendees this year and staff was there. I saw them couple times. Um,
and Disney donated uh, I believe it was $1 million to the Florida Wildlife Corridor Foundation. And um, that was about it. I have to say I've attended each time, but this year I learned more than I've ever learned. And
creative juices were flowing in every workshop that I attended. Everybody is looking for money. what better ways to manage land, new ideas for um easements and all types of things.
So, it was pretty creative and um even though it was a little bittersweet coming off of Earth Day where everyone was at the Capitol and I went to that as well
and knowing that the budget was going to be cut, you're there to celebrate and all the photos and Valuchia County was represented with one of the Deep Creek preserve uh purchases. There was a big photo on
the wall in the observatory, but at the same time, it's bittersweet with everybody anticipating cuts of funds. So, um yeah. Anyway, that's it.
All right. Before we jump into committee comments, um anything more on staff comments? No, ma'am. Okay. All right. That brings us then to committee comments,
questions. Anyone go? Um, mine won't be brief, but it's for Wanda. Um and it is that while you are not going anywhere which I'm very thankful for um I just wanted to thank you for your leadership as chair. I think when we started the reiteration of
forever um you have had such a passion for the program of course and institutional knowledge and we would have been very lost without you. Thank you. Thank you. [Applause] You guys have uh been great. I've
learned a lot and enjoyed it thoroughly. So, thank you for all your help. Thank you, Wanda, Mr. Lee. Yeah, just a few um questions. Um so, I I guess I'll um start with some
small ones that uh hopefully maybe you can help me. I just had meant to ask this earlier, but uh on um let's see on one of the pages uh if you can maybe just get me this answer later on uh who the person signing on page 50 and 51 was
all the other statements uh you could tell but it looks like they changed it and so I couldn't read that if you can figure that out later because uh I don't think it was the same person or is it the same it is that Mr. Doyle. Is that right? Um, or is that
someone else just says off rep or something? I'm sorry, you're asking. Yeah, who's who's Yeah, it's just some of the other Sorry, just for comparison, like on the uh other properties, it was just very clear who was kind of the person, but just for the record. I can answer that,
Derek. That is the representative for the property owner signing that to Paige. So, their name is Robert Doyle. Is that Yes. Okay. Thank you. So that's why owner is crossed out on those, right? It's not there. Okay. Because yeah, I just looked. Yeah, just curious. It's just a small question. Sorry about that.
Um but uh then also I had um another a couple questions. Um so I I guess I'm not sure. Oh, we did maybe mention um about the the Spruce Creek area and what's actually in the acquisition list at the moment. I know,
and maybe other people know this as well, that we are potentially losing some of that uh acquisition um uh potential uh you know, what was originally designed for the Door Sleeper Spruce Creek preserve um you know, it's
not all acquired. Um but with like the the Pioneer Trail interchange potentially going in there, if that's um that would cut into parcel parcel that was on the list. So, I didn't know if there's a going to be an attempt to uh redraw the line of what is on the
acquisition list or who would be doing that because for instance, like if this um property that we looked at today or like other area near the Atlantic Center for the Arts is like now, you know, should be strongly considered if we are looking to do that because I think that
was your question um uh chair um about, you know, is it actually in that but like when was the last time it was kind of evaluated? if you could kind of tell me if that um could be reconsidered or like you know expanded and you know to help improve um the preserve in general.
I I can answer that one too, Derek. So uh that optimal boundary was updated at the last land management plan update when the property went to ARC. Um don't quote me on this but I believe it was around 2022 was recently. So it's fairly recent that that optimal boundary has been updated.
Okay. So it's at uh so the next meeting that how how would someone who wants to talk about that where where would they go for the next such discussion I guess th those management plans are updated every 10 years. Okay. Um so if you wanted to have a specific parcel um
added to that optimal boundary that would need to be a request to ARC outside the normal cycle. Okay. That would come from staff. Yeah. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Um, and I think uh also it was on one of
those maps with this um discussion of the the Turnable Bay property, the Atlantic Center for the Arts. That's not acquired yet, right? That's that's still in the that it said it was it was a yellow I think. That is correct. Yes. Sorry. Um
and again, maybe I sorry if I missed this. That was uh how how close is that or is that just we're still waiting on partners for that? So, we've we've given instruction to the attorney that represents ACA on what needs to be done. Um, you know, as of as of um now the
they're it's a complicated thing. They need to there's a PUD over that property. Okay. So, it's a planned unit development and that area was identified as conservation in that PUD. Um, they're telling us that it has density on it. they need to
extract it from the PUD and prove that. That's what I've essentially told the attorney. Um they wanted us to do that. We're not adding value to people's property before we buy it. So that's where we are on that on that process and it's why it's remained on the A-list.
You know, we we would recommend it coming off previously, but you know, we if I'm going to buy it and it says it has density, it needs to have the density. we the taxpayers are going to buy it rather. Thank thank you for that uh
clarification. A couple just other things in that area. Again, just apologize if it takes another minute or so. Uh but there if staff can maybe help me figure something out because I there is a property in Port Orange just along Spruce Creek a little bit to the west of this preserve. It's called the Russell
property. I thought that was at one point um acquired with some Valuchia Forever money. Am I Do you guys know if that's true or not? because right now it's just not open to the public at all via the water even though it's on the water or via the little subdivision. Um, and I think at last check, yeah, Port
Orange like indefinitely like closed it. I thought it was kind of partnered with that. If you guys do you know if that is county co-owned at least. Do you know which property I'm talking about? That that's where I'm struggling. I'm not 100% certain. Okay. Yeah. We're not
aware of any acquisition by the Russell main. Um, it could be, but we're not aware by that acquisition name. Okay. It might just be city own then, I guess. Um, but anyway, it's it's a public property that for the record I think it's it's wrong that it's kind of closed. Oh, sorry. Is this the one
that's accessed through the subdivision and there used to be a really nice house out there? There is still a house out there that I think used for like, you know, scouting trips or something. Um, and there is a doc that actually said it was public, but I think it was recently like, so if I remember correctly, I was in a conversation with Jake Johansson,
who was the city manager. Um, I I believe it is a city-owned property. The issue again, and this is what we would have at Turnpull, is that it is through a deed restricted neighborhood that has an HOA that owns the streets and a gate. And so they will not allow public
access. But question, if someone lives in that HOA, they still can't access it. I mean that's that would be a question for Port Orange honestly. Okay. Uh same with the like the Turbo Bay one like if the people who live in that like it seems like wrong if the county
or you know city and whatever case it is of like puts the lock up as I understand if there's a gate community you can't get in the gate you you're but if you are already in the gate through because you live there like why would the county or city put a lock on it because yeah
that is the case um in that that Russell one but I again for like turnable bay and other stuff I'm still curious maybe This is a question for like the legal team. Um like I can the county overrule u you know and and say you know HOA
access you you are an HOA you can't you know prevent uh access to a public thing. Um because I I mean I think that's wrong. I just personally I know maybe it's like been the precedent for many years but like I I you know these these places use you know city and
county utilities and resources and to just not let people be able to just get through there um is seems wrong and I don't know if the county could mention that because like for instance if a city owns the the road and to get to a place
can the city just say you can't you know we don't like Valuchia forever or whatever we don't want people I think you're referring to an easement, correct? An easement to get to the property. Easement or just the the roads? I mean, a road is a road to me. I know I guess
it's publicly owned, but an HOA to me, I I mean, I think they they're seemingly they should have more power than the county. I mean, that's just my thought. Is that is there anything the county can can do with that? or maybe like like Suzanne said it. Well, I don't I don't want to speak on the legal terms for
that, but uh for the land management purposes, um we would not give specific access to people in that homeowners. They wouldn't get special access. When we open our property to the public, it's open to all public and only at designated access points. Uh so, for
example, the designated access point for a waterfront property is going to be from the water. If we don't have legal access to it by land, we always try to find a way to have access to it. So, Blush County Conservation Lands are open to the public by foot. Um, but you
really need to try to get to a a trail head parking lot uh to get to those properties. Um, you know, you can take a horse or a bike or anything like that, but uh we we wouldn't go through a a deed restricted neighborhood and create an access point that we don't have
authority to, but we would try to find a different access point to get the public out there. Okay. Potentially then if if uh there's easement granted that that would solve the problem, I guess you're saying. But yeah. Okay. I'll think about this or
maybe um contact the legal team after to discuss options because I don't think that should be a barrier. But I guess my my last and kind of um question which I hope maybe I can get some input from uh our committee uh and a discussion on what what sort of lands we've talked
about this before but our we're looking for for be list um versus I'd say versus um you know easement only as opposed to fe simple because I I think we today um at least maybe with you know the turnable bay property um we
voted to to deny it as even considered as you know fe simple and I think that was wrong uh because it definitely if we just found it eligible like it could have just been a perfect property for like the bee list and if there's you know partners or gets you know cleaned
up with the mosquito thing it would have been like as a natural like you know parcel and as a you know potential you know adding to the preserve it seems like it's it wasn't like a parking lot or something like we should not calling,
you know, to me things we should not not be approving are things that are like, you know, just paved areas um and you know, that are not natural resources, but to me I I feel this was like a was like a financial thing, which you know is is what the purpose of the A and the
B is like if we can't if there's money for it or not. But like for instance, if we could have acquired a fee simple for $1, like would we still have voted no? I guess that's kind of like my like why not just own it? Is it because of a liability thing? So, I'd like to maybe get some input if it is because if they come back and say we'll do, you know, an
easement uh kind of discussion, but they still want like almost the same amount. Is that like what are we really saving? Is it is it something else other than uh that that I'm not understanding? And and then in what cases, you know, would we want it something eligible and on Blist?
Because I I'm just trying to get other people's understanding of of that because mine um is a little different, I guess. Any thoughts on that? Yeah, to me that's why we that's why we have a committee. We all bring something different. We all have different things
that we feel are important and that's why we have a committee to vote on these. And your opinion may be different than my opinion, but I think bottom line on all of these is that we're all very committed to this program and making sure that the funding is used in the
best possible way. And if you disagree on a vote, that's, you know, perfectly all right. But I don't think you can set criteria for other people on how they vote. Of course. Yeah. If if we feel that it does not meet the criteria, then
that's our obligation to vote that way, just like if we feel it does meet the criteria, and that's again why we have a committee and why we're all here. Yeah. So, I guess I'm just trying to, you know, pick your brain on on what you're thinking um in terms of, you know, for future people might want to apply and so
forth. like if it has come up sometimes like whether or not there is access to a property. um like if that's does that um you know that's obviously maybe considered in the the criteria but like it's it's not the only criteria and and
if something is buildable I don't think that's really one of our criteria whether or not you know a subdivision could be on there but seems like that that is being discussed and if it is being considered by committee members um maybe I you know we could add it to the the criteria although we don't want to
maybe open up that can again of just having to re reevaluate all the the numbering system, but I I just wanted to see if that if you think um yeah, again that for any property that like the build buildability, I guess, of it is is
is really um what's what's important because yeah, again, we could always say like, well, it's it's just going to like naturally be protected, I guess, is the theory. um and we don't want to have to manage it or if it's um something else because again if you know we don't know down the road if if we can get these
properties now and and you know the different water level changes and so forth some properties will become buildables that weren't and vice versa. So I'm just again sharing my opinion and trying to because I can't discuss this outside the committee. I'd like to, you know, know the other committee members if if we're really utilizing the B list,
if we're really just, you know, um not um at least giving it a chance for some of these properties. Um you know, moving forward if uh because again, we're we're just just advisory of course. Um and um you know, we don't actually spend the money and the the final uh you know,
council will decide everything. But again, just any any thoughts on what you would think is an ideal be property kind of I understand like I'm trying to be open-minded here. I do understand what he's saying that we don't have defined um we don't have definitions of what is
an A-list property or a B-list property. When the discussion happens, what you said is the case that we all come from a different point. And so when we vote, we vote based on, you know, what the point we're coming from. I I
just want to say I do understand what he's saying that there is no definitions for A-list or Blist. Now, with that being said, I'm going to say that I vote in good faith on what's provided to us. And um when what's what we vote
on changes down the road to something completely different, that also turns troubling to me. Um we put something on an A-list that's uh in the wildlife corridor and then it goes somewhere else to something that we did not vote on at
all. That turns troubling. So I mean I agree with Derek. There's no other time to bring this up than now. Um I that's when I came in armed with like two pages of things today because we're at the we're kind of at the beginning still of our two years and it it just is the best
time to bring these these items up. I don't have a solution for I don't I don't see a solution for um the A-list or Blist question that you're asking because it is based on opinion. The best thing to do in my opinion is to hammer
out our criteria and vote in good faith that what we're provided is what we're voting on because that's the best way to get to the A-list or B list. And as far as buildable, at
one point we we have a question um pertaining to we talked about like lines for sewer that was for new development. If it's because if it's connected, then we know that it could be built.
So we did have we do have a question that's along the lines of what you're um asking. I mean it's not specific. It doesn't say can it be built, but there is that question. But on the other hand, a property got voted on today that on the 2070 map shows it completely
underwater. So, um, everyone comes from a different perspective and that property passed. So, I there I don't know. I don't have
an answer other than what Wanda said is correct. But I I would say that our criteria really does matter and there's times that I more recently have been super frustrated with our criteria
even though it seems like we just went over it but actually things happened since we went over it and now I'm stuck waiting till the end to go over it again. So I don't know maybe that's maybe that's a consideration. I don't know and I know we can't go over
criteria every meeting but it does reach kind of frustrating levels. So I believe we do have a definition for A and B, don't we? That there's we do as defined in the resolution and we can
send those out to the entire committee just so you have them. Okay, Miss K. Yeah, I was going to say they are more subjective than kind of the numerated criteria a little bit on the A and B and I would say that I think as a committee we have been pretty I would say lenient or aggressive on putting things on the A
list um because we want to see those acquisitions and I think as funding sources change um you may see a shift to more B lists where we target acquisition priorities as a committee um maybe it's a thought um but I do think that as it relates to defining of eligibility
There are a lot of properties that I would love to see conserved forever. Um, but it is the question of whether Valuchia forever should be spending the money to do that. And I think that the only protection we have to guarantee what the voters wanted in Valuchia
County is to use that sciencebacked criteria based review that we've adopted. And so that's where if there's a property that would be great to see in conservation, um, but it may not be by us or it may not be based on the application that comes before us. It doesn't mean it's not worthy. It's just
how we operate under our criteria. Yeah. And I would agree with that. There's many properties that we say this would be great, but it's probably not the best expenditure of Lucia Forever funds. And um so I would agree with that.
So but do we we don't always require that like the cost be even in our packet, right? I mean I think it was on one and not on other. Yes, correct. The cost is um not applicable to the eligibility or the sorting process. Um
sometimes the applicants do send in um an asking price on that, but that um has no bearing on the committee's decision-making. uh staff handles that in the negotiation process. I'd assume it would only be negotiated lower hopefully, but I mean, well, I mean, we negotiate based off appraisals.
Appraisals. Okay. Um no, that's good to know. And again, I it's I I think and I agree with um colleagues here that yeah, we we have to use our resources wisely and um you know, I'm not trying to say we have you know, infinite money. I think though um yeah again this is my opinion that our our role is just to see
if it's environmentally important and and uh you know the next step um is you know the council's approval and again that AB sorting for sure is uh our chance to maybe weigh in on the the the immediacy of the um the funding for for that. you know, A is, you know, let's
get it right away and while the while it's a a good thing to get. But, um, but yeah, again, just hoping, you know, in the future that maybe we, you know, utilize that B more and I'm happy to reread, uh, the definitions. But that was kind of my understanding that's just they're not ready to be acquired. But
since they put through, you know, a whole packet already of nomination and staff review, like like again, I'll just bring up the the Turnable Bay for instance, it seems like we have it. It should just be kind of sitting uh in the on deck circle, you know? It's like, so that's that's B to me. And that's what I um I don't want them to have to like
start all over, but sounds like they kind of will if they apply for the the ement, but maybe not completely all over. You already have the maps and stuff, so it hopefully would be not as as hard. And and if the suggestion was to have them apply, not fe simple that that they they do that, I hope if if
they're listening, they they try because I I really I'm not sure if we'll, you know, end up with the Atlantic Center for the Arts property. And so any of those, you know, any ways to help uh uh Creek preserves. Derek, if I may, just a quick reminder to the to the committee for clarity. Um, just because it's on
the A or the B list, uh, it's not on the sidelines, we do actively pursue, uh, partnerships and negotiations on the B list as well. So, um, just because it's on the B list doesn't mean it's on the sideline. Okay. No, that's good. Again, if if we run into a bunch of money, I'm
super excited that, yeah, you can acquire those, too. Again, maybe it'll be a really good deal, you know, like very very uh discounted. And um again we can always uh keep more land uh and have it later. U so again I'm sorry if I'm just kind of uh sharing a lot of opinions or this is the time to do it
with the council. I just want to clarify that when I said that we don't have definitions for A or B list. We don't vote based on the actual final score because we can have two properties that qualify and one of them may end up on the B list. So I
just want to clarify what I what I meant by that. I didn't mean that it doesn't say anywhere and you know referencing the A or the B list. We don't have actual definition of what it is our um where we come from
individually our opinion and each of us thinks differently. I mean that's what I would I I do agree with what you're saying what you said. So, are you saying you feel we should have criteria for the Alist and the B list outside of the criteria that we've used to make it
eligible? No. Okay. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that we can have two properties that qualify to be purchased eligible. We determine them eligible and one may end up on the B list and the other one may end up on the A list. And
that's all I was trying to say while ago that I do understand where he's coming from. he's asking for, you know, overall and I I don't have an answer for him. I think what you said is as close as you can get, but I do understand where he's coming from. If two properties qualify
as eligible and one ends up on the B list and one ends up on the A list, that's that's the best example I can give that we don't have definitions of of that. And I I'm not necessarily suggesting we get them. I'm just simply
saying I do understand where Derek is coming from. We all come from a different place. We're doing the best we can with with what we're we have. Thank you, Susan. Can I ask a question since again we're supposed to discuss that in the public. So, uh you had mentioned about getting you definitions
of at least the other um resource-based uh corridor um things. um have you feel have you felt you've gotten um sufficient I I guess I'm not sure uh how much in depth we went into it like at the previous meeting but um again I
without you know rehashing too much um I mean we're talking about like you utilizing some of these properties as u as you know for for uh motor vehicles and stuff like that for racing and so forth. Is that kind of the the the concern u for some of this um and that
whether or not that is what it is used for? Well, I would say that we put together criteria and we have criteria that says resource-based and I want to know what resource-based is because I thought I knew but I'm not
so sure I know anymore. And since I haven't seen it in writing, I just want all of us to be on the same page to know what what it is and what we're voting on because if a project turns into something else
other than what our criteria is, it changes the score. And I don't I'm just pointing that out. If it you know, things are going to change. we could end up with an easement instead of a fee simple purchase or a purchase instead of
um an easement. And there's a variety of things that changes go along after after this committee voted and it's gone and we don't see it anymore. When we vote, we all vote in good faith that the project is going to be what we vote on and based on the resource-based
issue. I do want to know what it is I'm voting on because if it's something different than what I'm voting on then what happened to what I was voting on in the first place. So that's the um best way I can say it. No,
if I just continue the conversation just briefly. I I don't want to take too much more time uh but I appreciate the discussion here everyone. Um but if uh you know we don't know what's going to happen next year of course or in the next few months if you know there's other changes to these properties after we vote on we also don't know how they're going to be in 10 years or 100
years or you know longer than that right so I mean that we we have to obviously I agree vote in good faith but I I'm just saying like we should definitely air on the side of protections because you never know it might be like in in 50 years the the counties even though I
don't think they're supposed to you know might be trying to sell off some of these lands. Who knows? I mean, I I hope this never happens or anything, but um that's why I'm definitely don't want to uh lose chances to to have a bigger pool of of conservation land because we might, you know, if flooding does uh
like, you know, destroy our our beach coastline and there's huge ma mass migration inland, we might have to have people living in some of this, you know, what this farmland we just uh was purchased today in the Timberland. Like just for the sake of like humanity, we'll have to have people like, you know, moving. And so I mean obviously
that's getting a little too uh you know futuristic there but yeah well the point so um attending the wildlife corridor conference I just want to say that when there's discussion on purchases um of land uplands have benefits as well
and so just purchasing like I don't know a sliver of a wetland that is um I'm going to open a can of worms terms I'm trying so hard not to open. Um, if it's surrounded by a baseball field and
the slither of wetlands is in the middle, how beneficial is the slither of wetlands? So, if we are voting, that's why I keep saying we're voting in good faith that what is brought before us is what's going to happen. I understand the
council has the last say. I think we all know that. But let's just help ourselves by getting definitions on the things that we have not been provided. That's all I'm trying to suggest here.
Yeah, Miss Peraska. Um, so u I guess this question is for staff. We found the turn bay um property as a as a no, not elitistraable. Um,
however, staff is going to reach out as far as an easement. That would make it change the criteria and bring it back before us. Correct. I can hear you. It would come back as a uh an application and be reviewed by the
committee. Yes. Okay. And that'll give us the opportunity to um make it eligible or not. and then it would have its opportunity to go on the ARB list. Correct. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. All we can do is stick to what our
role is and do the best we can with it. And from there it it goes to staff. It's then up to staff and then finally of course up to councel. So, we have to we have to base our vote on how we feel about each individual property and uh
that's our role. So, that's what we do. And keep keep in mind that we are an advisory board. Yep. And that's sometimes that's the hardest thing to get through some of our heads that we advise and down the road it could go a
different way. Yeah. Yeah. There's no guarantees that what we how we feel is how council's going to feel. So, okay. Anyone else? All right. I've got one question and I'm just curious. I would like to ask the
other members of the committee. Um, we have a program in the county, Transform 386. I don't know enough about that program. I would like to learn a little more about that program and how and when properties are eligible for funds from
the program if there are. Um, is anyone else interested in just a very brief presentation? I'm interested in that. Okay. Okay. If we could I would just like to ask just a very brief presentation on
it. Doesn't have to be now. It can be at a future meeting. whatever works. But I just I don't feel like I know enough about that pro of that program. Yeah, of course. We'll reach out to the program. Okay. Thank you. All right. Anyone else, questions,
comments? No. Okay. Good meeting everyone. We are adjourned. Thank you. Notebooks. If you would leave your notebooks.