Well, we will go ahead and get started here. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the January 30th, 2026 Forever Advisory Committee meeting. I'm still getting used to that six number. My papers can attest to that. But welcome. Um, we are
going to do a quick roll call here and then we have some housekeeping. The agenda the roll call. >> Jessica G >> here. >> Suzanne Shyber, Kelly
>> here. >> Gerald Faser >> here. >> John Gamble >> here. >> And then John Maluso >> here. Vanam >> here
>> with Derek Lontaine is absent and we have a vacancy district 5 and we have a quorum. >> Thank you. Now we have Kelly online. Um so we will need a motion to allow her to virtually participate. >> So moved. Second.
>> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. >> All right. Welcome Kelly. >> All right. And then to kick off Of course. Um to kick off the agenda before we go to public participation, we have a special guest star, Russ Brown, um who's going to come up and give us a quick
update. >> Not sure that's the definition of special guest star, but thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, Madam Chair, madam vice chair, honorable members of the committee. Russ Brown, deputy county attorney. I was asked to come here this morning uh and give a brief synopsis of one of your subcommittees for the
charter review committee that's going on right now. So, the charter review committee is comprised of 15 members that were appointed by the county council. Miss Shyber is one of those committee members and uh they broke themselves up into two subcommittees. One is uh an environmental subcommittee
uh that I've been participating in and at that environmental subcommittee on Wednesday, today's Friday, excuse me. On Wednesday, the subcommittee voted to advance out of the subcommittee and send it to the main committee by a vote of 4 to one. a proposed charter ballot
amendment that would establish a registry that increases county council voting requirements for the transfer of conservation land. And so that would go to the electors in November. And the ballot language reads as follows. Shall the Valuchia County Charter be amended to establish a conservation land
registry allowing the county council to add or remove land by a majority vote by a majority plus one vote of the entire council. and land on the registry will not be subject to sale, divestature or transfer by the county unless used for public purposes or the land is taken by
eminent domain. And so that's the ballot question that if the uh larger committee of 15 members by majority vote approves to put it on the ballot, that'll be the question before the electors and that would add section 1314
to the charter which will be called the registry and protection of conservation lands. And subsection A that would be added to the charter would read as follows. A registry is created to consist of conservation lands owned by the county of Valuchia. The registry will be known as the Valuchia County
Registry of Conservation Lands and any properties listed thereon will not be subject to sale, divestaturure or transfer by the county. Properties may be added to or removed from the registry by resolution approved by a majority plus one vote of the entire county
council. Subsection B would be added to section 1314 as well, which states, "The above restrictions on removal or transfer or use of property from the registry and the effect of being on the registry do not apply when the property is being used for a public purpose by
the county or taken by a state, federal, or other entity having lawful authority to exercise the power of imminent domain over county owned lands. And so that just allows the exception that's already in law for imminent domain purposes, which I think there's maybe two properties in my history that I'm aware
of that have been taken by imminent domain. Uh they both in my recollection were up on uh 17 for the widening of 17 up in Pearson. We had a couple properties that FDOT came in and was under the threat of imminent domain. And then the other is for uh public purpose
for county to also allow us to expand roads to uh add uh schools, stormwater facilities, whatever the case may be that that benefits the public. And so that would be what would be on the ballot in November if it's advanced out of the committee by a majority vote. I
believe it's going to happen on February 9th. So happy to answer any questions or >> question. Yes, sir. >> Did did I hear you say that it's going to to add properties? It's going to take a super majority, too. uh semi may be added to or removed from
the registry by a resolution approved by majority plus one vote. >> So that means any properties that we vote vote now for Felia forever or entities when it comes before the council going forward they'll have to have a super majority to add any of these properties.
>> It by the language it would be to add or remove land by majority plus voting. Yes, that's correct. everything now even to add will be a super I I don't know >> I think that's to add it to the registry correct and so one of my questions and I do just want to note for the record for the minutes that Mr. Lamontane has
arrived. Um, I think the question becomes, you have a registry. What qualifies as conservation land? Because Valuchia Forever is very clear, but the county owns lots of property and so what do you put in that registry? I think is a council decision of kind of the
>> won't most of Valuchia forever land go into the registry? >> That's a presumption. Yes, sir. >> So when all so all Valuchia forever land will have to be approved by a supermajority now instead of a base majority >> to add to the registry. Well, that's but are we saying the same thing? If all
Valuchia properties forever property is going into the registry, therefore to add anything to Valuchia forever is going into the registry. Therefore, it's going to have to have a supermajority vote >> or is it a two-step process? >> I think it would be a vote to purchase and then a vote to add to the registry.
>> Correct. So you may have a simple majority for a purchase of evolution forever land and then you would need a supermajority to put that land on the registry >> is how I would read that language. But >> that's the way I would interpret.
>> Does everyone understand public purpose? >> Well, I don't know what your definition of public purpose, but I guess it would be good for the public, right? >> It's a very wide >> It's a pretty broad definition. There's some uh state agencies have it defined in statute, but also case law.
Essentially, it's a it's a purpose that benefits the public for I mean there's a whole benefit test that goes into spending taxpayer dollars. Essentially, you can't spend it on a private entity that's only going to uh get that benefit. So, >> it's taxpayer dollars. You have to go
through a certain test in the court if you're challenged. But it comes down to what those things I talked about, expanding roads, uh, schools, fire stations, those types of things, parks. So, so basically too, uh, down the road, if we had a nice piece of conserved
property somewhere and it was closer in and they, as expansion of growth goes out to it, we could say, "Hey, we want a school there." and instead of paying, you know, 50 or 100,000 an acre for land, let's go out here and go out to this conserved property and pick it up
for pennies on the dollar and build schools. That'd be a decision for the county council, but you know, in the in the past, like I know there's some projects that are contemplate, I don't know if they've happened yet, but where uh maybe it's adjacent to a road and they want to build a sidewalk. So, for
example, like public engineering, excuse me, county engineering would or has reimbursed the forever funds for the actual price, whatever that price is. Not the not the highest and best use of conservation land, but the highest and best use that the appraisal that the county purchased the property. So,
that's been the practice, but that could be changed >> and that would take a super majority to do that though >> to do >> if you want to do an imminent domain by county. Say, let's use a school for example. If I want to go out and I need 100 acres for a new school campus and I want to go out here to, you know, we can
pick any number of parcels that are in here. They're already under conservation. So, we can go in there. Would it take a super majority for the council to approve that to for eminent donities or would it just be a they can do that automatically because it's for the
public good? I it would be well I in running through the process it would just be a majority vote because the supermajority is only about the buying or selling of of the land originally. So in my hypothetical the county already owns the land and then you're deeming you need a certain percentage for public purposes.
>> So so for public purpose it's just a majority >> I I believe so. Yes sir. That's what I would interpret it as. >> Unless they were transferring it to the school board for ownership, >> right? But that's that's outside county hands at that point. That would be a super majority to transport to the school board >> to a different entity,
>> right? >> If it's in the >> take it off the register, >> right? Because it would be in a different entity's hands at that. >> Okay. >> I have a question. Yes, >> ma'am. >> Um, when land owners sell their land to the
county for conservation, are they told that it is not in perpetuity currently? >> It is currently in perpetuity under this program. the easements, but the purchase is just the funding review. Correct.
>> Right. So, I think we've had this discussion or maybe we haven't. Um, you know, it's in per it's in perpetuity till it's not in perpetuity. >> So, >> so by creating that amendment,
>> we're actually taking it out of perpetuity. >> No, ma'am. I didn't say that. you you so anything that's bought right now by the county could be sold tomorrow if the county council decides to do that under state law. It's currently permissible. There's nothing in the program
>> that prevents the selling of property. >> Kelly, we have a lot of feedback. If you could mute and then it's not Kelly. Never mind. Thank you. state law under I think it's 125.35 allows a county uh government to sell and convey property. So the rules of
forever are beholden to that state statute. We can't do what the legislature has deemed otherwise. Um, I will say in my understanding, I'm not aware of any property outside eminent domain that the county council has ever sold, but the council can now sell
property if it if necessary, if it if they wanted to. Maybe that's a better word. >> Um, since the time I've been here, I can't think of any properties that don't have partnerships. Do we have any properties that don't have partnerships out of
curiosity? >> Sure, we do. Yes, we do have a few parcels that were purchased solely with flute forever. They do not have a partnership. >> Other questions for Russ on the charter language? >> So, um just just following up on what
Suzanne just said. I just wanted to check. So, I mean, if there's a partnership, then it's not as easy to sell. Is that what the point was? Well, there's conditions you'd have to meet under that partnership, whether it's paying back the funds they contributed or other conditions, presumably whatever the deed or the easement says,
>> and this I think would only relate to an properties that we are the county is the owner of. So, if we have a partnership in St. John's has ownership and we just provide maintenance, this isn't covered by the registry. >> There are some dyed though. I mean, when
you said just like owns one manages, sometimes it is dually owned by I have another question. >> I can answer that. So, we do have joint title on some properties that are joint owned, but there will be one assigned lead manager of that property, but title
is uh joint owned. Um, does this amendment in any way disqualify future matching funds from our partners and particularly Florida Department of Environmental Protection,
but but other partners as well? >> No, ma'am. And the council's current policy under forever is to uh what's the right word to uh increase forever dollars with part finding partners to match I don't know what the right phrase is but
>> yeah the resolution I believe uses language to seek funding partnerships >> seek funding partnerships to increase our dollars. >> Okay. >> That does not >> I know that but this doesn't >> No ma'am it does not >> other questions. All right. Thank you for taking the time. >> Have a good day.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Next up, do we have any public participation forms for general public comment? >> All right. Perfect. And then the first agenda item is approval of the December 12th, 2025 meeting minutes. Those are on
pages 3 to nine of the backup. Um, does anyone have any comments on it? And if not, a motion. If no one has comments, I'll make a motion that we approve them as written. Okay, we have second and we have a second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed?
>> I. >> Kelly, just for the record, that was in favor. >> Yes. >> Got a little bit of a delay, so we'll hold before I ask for the post. >> Okay, >> perfect. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Uh, so then we are moving on to new business. Um, first on the agenda is the 2026 work plan and goals. You can see that um back up in the packet and we'll go through that item. Um, I don't know, staff, do we want an overview before we get into committee comments or
just dive in? >> Uh, just uh annual reminder, you know, the the work plan and goals are set forth in the res resolution approved by council. Uh, so these are council's uh goals for the advisory committee and the program. Um, but I would like to make a
point on the annual report for 2025. Um, the program added over 5,000 acres to conservation lands and that's an accomplishment that hasn't been done in a number of years. Um, so, uh, again, I just like to point out that's a big
accomplishment for the program. >> I said shows how fantastic staff has been on getting great properties before this committee and council. All right. All right. So then in general, we've got a committee discussion on the work plan and goals. Um, as stated, the actual
plan and goals are pulled directly from the resolution. If you would like to discuss those and kind of the annual reporting, we can. And I believe that what if this is finalized today, we would target um potentially bringing this forward to a March County Council meeting for approval.
>> Correct. If approved today, this would be taken to council uh tenatively in March. >> Right. So, we'll open it up to committee comments. I have some questions. Okay. Um, I have a few questions. When was the last time the program was audited?
>> Uh, Forever receives an audit annually. Every year >> internal audit, correct? >> Correct. Is there is there any way to add an education element to this
for the county to do a public like a public update education in every district once at least once a year as part of our goals. That's not explicitly stated in the resolution for education. Uh Valuchia
Forever does have an education component through the land management side through the explore Valuchia program um that is out there, but I believe that that's different than what you're asking for. Mhm. And so I'm calling it education, but I'm asking
can staff do public updates as to about the program, what's been accomplished, where it is now, um what what the goals are, that type of public update in each district.
Yeah, staff u does that throughout the year, but we have various tools out there. You know, the transparency dashboard is a good tool uh to keep current on what's uh been acquired u when we have properties that would be under our management. There are, you know, ribbon cutings and social posts
that go out as well. >> No, I'm asking for like a public meeting. A public meeting at the libraries um one in each district where it's advertised and you do whatever a one-hour update, maybe you
allow questions from the public, that type of thing. So, I think that we I think we can note that as a recommendation and I think that staff can discuss with council if they'd like that. I don't think that we have the authority to add that to our
work plan. Um, but I do think, you know, we've got the press releases, but you're saying more of a public workshop after hours kind of for a public outreach of the program beyond the application letters that go out. Is that what you're thinking?
>> I I'm looking for a public update from staff for each district like once a year. And I would say that based on the current climate of what we just discussed that this would be the most appropriate time to tell the public
about the program. So yeah, that's that's what I'm asking. I'm not trying to like get into the weeds here, but I think we are in the weeds here. I can't help that because I didn't bring us the weeds. I'm just simply asking if it's possible to do and if we can't do it as
a committee um as part of our goals. I mean I have to accept what's legal but I am still making the request. Let me just ask this. Is anyone up here
opposed? I mean, I'm sitting here talking and, you know, maybe I'm way out in left field on my own. Is anyone opposed? And if so, why? >> Suzanne, let me make a comment, please. I I've always been an advocate of giving the public as much information on programs as possible. I agree with you.
Uh, you know, I would support presenting that to the county council for a recommendation. Absolutely. wonder. >> Yeah, the dashboard has been brought up and I think the dashboard has done an excellent job on telling the public what
we have, what properties we have, what properties are on the A list, what are on the B list. Maybe we could do something as simple as breaking it down on the dashboard or adding something to the dashboard per district. You know, like district one, we saw this, district
two, we saw this. um that might be an easier way to do it. And if people are interested, they certainly can go on our dashboard at any time. >> The only problem is is what about the people who don't even know about the dashboard?
>> I mean, that's part of the reason I'm kind of I mean, I agree the dashboard's been great as far as created, but what about the public that doesn't know about the dashboard? Well, if we're going to inform them about meetings, we can inform them about the dashboard. I mean,
it's the public has to do their part, too. They have to go to where the information is. And if the information's on the dashboard, and we can direct them to the dashboard just as easily as we can direct them to a meeting. And I'm
not saying I'm opposed to holding meetings, but I'm just not sure if we're going to get that. And I'm thinking maybe if you're looking for district by district information, we could add something to the dashboard per district. Just an idea.
>> And even a summary update of a Valuchia Forever year in review of the purchases and property locations by district would be great. And I would say I'm also not opposed. I just don't, like I said, I think we can make a suggestion and as this comes forward to council, it could be stated um if there's discussion and
feedback that we'd love to see a public outreach component, including the potential for public meetings. Um I don't think we can say we want staff to conduct a meeting in each district one time a year. I don't think we have that authority, but I think we can give the hope to council.
>> I'm open. That was just a suggestion. you know, as long I'm not like stuck to that. >> Uh, one question. How many people on this in this group get updates, social media updates from the county?
>> I get the press releases every time for the forever purchase. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That covers a lot of it. >> Um, they put stuff out regularly. I mean, I sometimes see a couple of uh emails a day even. So, a lot of it is,
you know, I did a lot of public meetings over the years and I can tell you is for the most part unless there's something that's really pissing the public off, they don't show up. So, you have you might go to a library in New Smyrna and
20 people show up and you have five staff people there and you organize everything. that I don't think in this day and age that's the most effective tool for the time and effort. I think social media you stand a much better chance of getting to a lot of people.
Maybe not all the people but a lot of people. So, um I think if they if they're putting stuff out like that through the uh PIO's office in the county, that's probably a better way of trying to educate people than it is, you
know. Um, I I know I wish more people knew about what was going on, but the fact of the matter is is most people aren't really interested. They got other issues they're interested in, and that's not one of them. And maybe because it's been a well-run, well financed program
that they voted for, you know, threequarters of the voters voted for it. So, I mean, that's in itself that's pretty good. Um, one other question on this is about the small lot acquisition program.
Did did we get any small lots in the year because there's none reported. So, I didn't know if that was a that was on purpose or that. >> Pardon me. Tim Delford with Forever
program. >> Number three, I didn't see any results down here. I didn't know whether we picked up. >> So we do continue to work on small lots. We have a couple in process right now, but we do have a hierarch hierarchy of projects. So the obviously the big larger transactions are first and
foremost and so we pick up the small loss when staff time allows. So we've been had a very busy season. We do have some in pro process right now though. >> Okay. >> Thank you, >> Suzan. I do support the I do support the
idea of having annual meetings for districts. I think that that's just one more step to get information out to the public, especially those who are not on, you know, on the computer or have links coming to their email. I think it's very
important to reach all voters. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Kelly. the lawyer in me has tried to draft a one of the statements that would work into the goals. Um, and this is a starting point for the committee. I'm just trying to get something out there because I would like to have this today so that we can track
that council meeting date. Um, what if we included an item seven that said something along the lines of support public outreach efforts by county staff regarding program achievements and goals with the recommendation for public meetings and information sessions to be held annually or as the county council
deems appropriate? Yes, I believe >> we've got some comments. >> If I could, a number of the uh council members are holding town hall meetings now, too. And this might be an opportunity if if the whoever's holding
the town hall meeting reaches out to staff and says, "Could we have someone come in and go over this?" it could be done at a single meeting rather than adding another meeting. So that's just an idea as well. >> Other comments
>> I'm just wondering >> that's a great idea. >> Uh how much role I guess individually we might be able to play. I'm just wondering I think I heard before that personally we're supposed to be ambassadors for the program. So I mean I maybe feel I should be doing more and
you know holding some kind of a information session myself you know obviously as an individual I can't do it with other members on the board u but uh would that be appropriate or because I think the motion said just for staff I mean I want to not just put the onus all all on staff I feel like maybe we can do
something but yeah getting the word out there if people are already on the email list then they're already know about the program so emailing them to come to an in-person meeting it seems like the cross I'm not so you have a lot of questions still. But I I like your suggestion kind of as as >> I would probably just say from a
sunshine lawn protection standpoint if we if others wanted to attend those sessions, which would be likely, it's best if staff leads the presentation um just so that then we don't automatically have it where someone in the audience can't speak because a member is presenting.
All right, other comments or a motion? I move to support what Jessica read out loud for an education component of our Felicia Forever program.
>> A second. >> All right, we have a motion and second to add item seven, which I've drafted and will give to staff but read aloud. Other discussion on that? >> Jessica, can you please read it again? Sure. >> Thanks. um support public outreach efforts by county staff regarding program
achievements and goals with the recommendation for public meetings and information sessions to be held annually or as the county council deems appropriate. >> No, thank you. That was that last sentence is very appropriate. >> Other comments.
>> All right, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Those opposed? I >> I >> again I think Kelly was in favor. She seconded it. Just clarify. >> I said Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Absolutely.
Go ahead. Sure. >> Um I'd like it. >> Uh I want to open up discussion about within our goals. This committee states that we support
perpetuity and partnerships. >> Do you have a wording suggestion for that? >> Well, pretty straightforward. The Valuchia Forever Committee supports perpetuity and partnerships. Can you let can you expand for my understanding what you mean by
perpetuity and partnerships and distinguish it from the overall program goal of seeking partnership funding? Just what we're additionally looking for. The overall goal of partnership funding is fine. I would simply like it stated
in our goals and perpetuity is perpetuity of land that we are voting on um and approving as far as um our recommendations the lands that are purchased.
I'm a little confused here. I I got and maybe I read this wrong. Are these not the county council's goals for the program? >> That is the baseline of where they came from is our resolution. Yes. >> And we have authority to kind of add goals.
>> We have the authority to change that. >> Not to change the resolution, but to add personal committee goals that don't conflict with that >> to kind of charter our course through. >> But that that shouldn't be added to something that's approved by council. Right.
>> So this form is not approved by council. the planning. >> I'm forward doing it, but I just think that that may be a recommendation from this committee >> and not that you just say, "Oh, we're going to do seven and we're going to do eight and and add them on. They're not
added on until the council approves it. Right. >> The council will approve this work plan and goals." So, they could remove it if they wanted to. Um so that is why it will go to council but the the baseline right the the starting point is pulled from the resolution um each committee
including echko um reviews their work plan and adds and changes goals year to year so I think it's appropriate to add notes if we would like um recommend they get added >> correct >> that's what we're doing >> correct >> okay >> yep >> okay
>> we've always discussed the work planning goals and we've actually made recommen recommendations before. One of the recommendations that was made that was fairly significant was when we um pursued expanding the wildlife
corridor uh the uh conservation corridor. Sorry, I get my verbiage right there because that brought in more funding. >> Yeah, but that's not here, right? >> No, that's in the past. I'm only giving you an example of something that we did before. >> But you're you're wanting to add to
this. I'm only reviewing today's and I'm trying to discuss these items I'm bringing up so that we as a committee support perpetuity and we reiterate
our partnerships which Jessica pointed out is in the mission and I'm bringing this up again because of the timing of what is what we just discussed earlier.
>> Wanda, >> well, one of the stated purposes of the committee is to make recommendations regarding applications for and participation in federal, state, and district land acquisition and capital improvement grant programs. So if we
wanted to do that, we could point to um the stated purpose of our committee and that we are, you know, reiterating our support of item F in the U stated purposes of the committee.
That doesn't address the perpetuity, but that does address the partnership portion of it. >> Yes. So, we could um restate that purpose. Um I'm just thinking of the language you just said and
just in expand and build and say, you know, we continue to support the >> Yeah. Just like >> So, you're asking staff to put this together to take in front of the county council for >> correct? >> Can I ask uh should we separate it into
two just would that be helpful? perpetuity and partnerships like eight and nine. Is that not together? Is that the plan? >> Yeah. So, I think that you we can do either um anyone on this committee can
make a motion and we'll have a second and we'll vote on it. I think that uh my recommendation would be to keep us solely within the line of our ability and powers of the committee versus recommendation. So, as Wanda noted, that is outlined in the committee goals. Um I
don't know that the um duration is necessary outlined in the goals, but it's kind of an inherent that we'd love to see this program continue on in perpetuity with the purposes. Um I don't think a general statement like that um is a problem. So I think that we just
need to balance. >> And if if I may just to add to the discussion, um the seeking partnerships is already in the resolution. >> Yep. don't think there's a problem then with reiterating our support of that
within these goals just as a reminder and as far as uh the perpetuity um I I don't I I guess I'm not I get that what you're saying from a legal standpoint
but why is a committee Are we not able to put our support forward? >> I think the deter Yeah. Want to go ahead first? >> No, I was just going to say the mission of Valuchia forever. This is taken right
from our dashboard and right from the resolution uh finance the acquisition improvement of environmentally sensitive water recreation protection and outdoor recreation lands and to manage these lands as conservation stewards in perpetuity. So that's the mission of
Valuchia Forever. So if we want to do this, I think we can point to our mission statement and say that we're re-emphasizing our mission or the mission of Alia forever
and it may be most powerful. I'm just thinking that at the beginning of this before we get to 2026 work plan and goals to just have the mission restated and kind of bold underlined because it is right there already in the mission that our guiding
principle is I I think that's takes care of what I'm asking but I'm asking the committee to lend their support to our mission to basically reinstate it that we support our mission sometimes things are not obvious just
putting the mission on there. If they know what the mission is, that's great. But for us as a committee to support our own mission in these goals, I don't think that's asking that much. That's all that's all I'm trying to do.
>> I'm just trying to take things that are already in the resolution or are already available and written so that we're not creating something. Yeah. And I think we have the groundwork here because we do have our mission statement and we do
have the resolution that states the things that we're trying to do. So emphasizing that I don't have a problem with. I'm just trying to figure out how to do it within what we already have. >> I appreciate that. >> So we have two proposals um a little bit
before us and not restate where I think we are and then the committee can decide how to take them as a motion. Um the first would be add an item eight to our goals which would just be an item um noting something along the lines of our continued support and then adding item F
on partnerships from the resolution um using that exact language. And then the second is to add before this 2026 work plan and goals a statement that just says program mission and copies and pastes the approved program mission for
the program before we get into goals. I cannot make a motion. So if anybody would like to make one or two. Um >> I'll make the motion to ex to uh accept your proposal. >> Okay. Miss Shber's proposal. Just word
smithing. Do we have a motion? Do we have a second? >> I second. >> Okay. Discussion. Discussion on that. My only comment is I think we're being redundant here because it is already in the mission statement. But if it, you
know, if it pleases, I I mean, six of one, half a dozen of the other, but we already got it. But if you want to spell it out to them and let them remove it, I mean, it's kind of a political ploy, but I'm good with it. >> I mean, that it's a good way of looking
at it. Now, it seems that there's four votes for slowing down or eliminating the program. So, the more you bring in front of them right now, the more opportunity there is, the next thing you know, the mission
statement is change. It doesn't say perpetual anymore. And then what are you going to do? I mean I I think one of at least in my view when the discussion came up about a goal of 50% of the
county that fired off a lot of people. Okay. Now we're going to buy as much land as we possibly can. Well, you don't ever need to talk about a number and and there's no taking that back. The
toothpaste is out of the tool on that. But I'm not a one to start bringing stuff in front of count this council, the next council. I think you might be able to depending on who gets elected,
but I think you're crazy to start floating more stuff to them. And I agree that it's a great thing to say, but it's not a good thing to take in front of the council and have four people change the
program or just or try to vote to change the rule. So I I'm just saying is sometimes it's better not to be in the middle of things. Just my two cents.
>> Mer, I would say that the council's already brought it to us. I didn't bring the 50% here to do any damage to the program. Um, and it's not in the goals if you notice.
Did you notice that? But this is the mission statement where the 50% was not part of the mission statement which was made clear. That was staff's goal. But this is the mission
statement. If we can't get behind the mission statement because of politics, then why are we here? Because this is the mission statement. As Miss Vanam even said herself, um I I support the mission statement. I
don't know why we can't publicly support the mission statement. And you know, um I I didn't I would say that this has been brought to us. I'm bringing it up today. It's
been going on for months now. I do think it's time to address it and I think it is going to be addressed publicly. So what that's where I'm at. So I'm just going to add a few notes here. One, I just want to clarify for anyone listening online that there has not been
any formal action by council to modify Fuchsia forever at this time um or provide any changes. there have been um comments made and discussions that may come up and I think that there is a point that um when the work plan is on
the agenda um if it wants to be discussed I think it will be discussed whether or not we include these tweaks or not. Um so but I think that as a committee we can decide how to proceed. Um, I do want to note that the discussion on the thresholds and all of
that, this committee did take an action to instead just say that we overall recommend the continued purpose of the program. Um, which I think is in keeping with what we have um, before us so far, but without any numerical thresholds as discussed and noted. Um, so I think if
it's going to be discussed, it's going to be discussed and we serve at the pleasure of council. So that is where we we take our direction. uh just a a comment uh I don't know how we can you know words smmith uh these changes or not changes but recommendation I guess or
recommendations um but I do think it's important to include the why if possible and you know if we just say like we want partners uh or we want you know well perpetu perpetuity I mean we we do this a lot we know what it's about but
sometimes It's important if we're being clear that like we support this not to just say it and like people should just do it because we say it if that makes sense but because this is saving stuff in perpetuity is necessary for like you
know life to function in this county like forever. Like it's not because oh we just like don't want you know people to buy. It's like saying the why out loud will help prevent it from being countered perhaps. So like if there is
some other person to say like oh well I mean that's that's how I would add to it if we're going to support the mission. I see you disagree. The only reason I'm shaking my head is um Wanda's point
was well made that the mission statement exists and I'm just asking us to reiterate what exists the our support for what exists and if we can't do that then
quite frankly as a committee we're I wouldn't know why we were here. So, I'm just asking for support for what already exists in the mission statement. >> So, we we have a motion, a second on the floor. Um, we can't have more
discussion, but I did want to ask um Wanda, if you could reread item F and the program mission for Yep. Oh, do we have Kelly? Do you have a comment? >> Yeah. I just I just don't understand why why we
wouldn't show our support for the mission statement. I mean the program itself is a wonderful program that you know that that currently right now has been brought up in a discussion outside of
this chamber on whether or not you know the perpetuity of the land. So, I mean, I think it's pretty vital at this time that we have the opportunity to reiterate our mission statement and show our support that
we support what was originally um in the mission statement. >> If if I may, I'd like to provide just a little context to the committee. Um, you know, today is the the goal setting session. So, this is really for the annual goals. Um, some of what I'm
hearing is more about statements, uh, that you want to make a statement. Um, those are, you know, excellent, you know, pathways to contact your, you know, council person that appointed you or if you have people that, um, you know, really want to reach out to make that statement, you know, they should
contact council for that. Um, but I just want to give a little guidance on, you know, a goal versus a statement for the goal setting session today. I didn't find mine as a statement as more of reiterating the goal.
>> Thank you. Y and the way our current goals are written or our um work plan and goals are written, it's a soft approach. We're just stating that we're supporting uh small lot acquisition, we're supporting force and farmland. Um, I think if we
continue in that vein, um, and just say that we support the mission of Lucia Forever stating what it states and we support the, um, the stated purpose of um, the financing partners
to do it in a very non-aggressive soft way that these are things that we would like because I agree with Mr. Gamble. There's times when you don't want to be getting too aggressive.
>> I agree with you on that. >> We do have an active motion, but we're in discussion. >> Well, will your discussion influence a vote on the motion? If so, we'd like to hear it first. >> I have one other comment to make, but we'll go after the >> Okay.
Derek. Y um I still just had some thoughts or comments. Um so I do support the mission of Valuchia forever. I think we I guess we all do, but I suppose hypothetically I'm just curious like if
we didn't, would we be like eligible to be on the board? I kind of feel like I guess we didn't technically take like an oath to support the mission. And I just feel it's like if I use the uh you know metaphor of if we were uh like you know elected officials which we're not but
like you take an oath to constitutions. I feel like I took an oath to Valia forever. I mean I know I didn't formally I suppose but uh so it's just I'm just thinking uh the counterfactual on like well what if we didn't support the mission like and we did send our I just
trying to think it through either way. seems that yes, we have to support the mission. Um, so the only thing I think that would be beneficial is to say why we support the mission, which is what I brought up earlier, but I suppose if it's inherent in there, if people want to ask us individually, we can say we all have our good reasons, but um I hope
it works out and you know, I'm sure uh there'll be a lot of uh if the public does support it at 75 plus percent, then I think um either way, if for whatever reason, if people uh want to try to change in a way that they don't support it, I think the public will will react.
act. Uh so hopefully whatever we do, we uh just show our support for what the majority of people want. >> Yeah. And I would say that I think the the current motion before us is just a restatement of the mission before the work plan and goals as it exists and is adopted by council and adding the
language about supporting the adopted resolution on partnerships. Um I think that intrinsically each individual in this county has a different reason for why they support this program and voted to approve it. So I don't know that we want to get into that as a policy statement. Um do we have other
discussion on the language of the motion? Are we ready to vote on this? >> Certainly. So we will uh the current motion as I understand it is directly preceding the 2026 work plan and goals on this paper to just add a line that
says the program mission and state it as it exists and is adopted. Um, and then to add an item eight, which is to continue to support and then to insert the language from item F of the resolution on partnerships, which Miss Vanam can read for us.
>> Is your microphone on and participation in federal, state, and district land acquisition and capital improvement grant programs. So, So that is the current motion. Any >> that that is the motion.
>> All right. That is the motion. So we are going to move to a vote. I will have more of a delay for Miss Rasca. Uh all those in favor please note it by saying I. I. >> I. >> Any opposed? I
>> that motion will pass with two dissenting. Um other comments on the >> I don't think my mic was on. Sorry. >> I >> and that's an I in favor of the motion.
>> Yes. >> Thank you. So that remains the same two desenting. Um I have one item. It is just that goal three. Um it currently reads support the acquisition of conservation lands through implementation of the small lot acquisition program. Um well it is
certainly implied we don't have a current statement of just supporting the acquisition of conservation lands. So I would suggest for the committee for consideration that we clarify that item that says support the acquisition of conservation lands including purchase of properties through
implementation of the small lot acquisition program. We could do that or what is already there. Support the acquisition and improvement of environmentally sensitive water resource protection for some farmland and outdoor recreation lands. I
mean that's I agree with what you're saying. We don't have anything in there about just general environmentally sensitive land. So >> committee discussion on approach there. I I am comfortable with either of those um suggestions, although I would need it
restated to take notes for staff if we go with I just think that we're getting a lot of bogged down on what we already have included in our mission statement and other elsewhere in our uh rules and
regulations. So, I don't know, we we don't need to go too far overboard. I mean, we can say conservation lands, we can say recreational lands, we can say, you know, there we can spell them all out, but they're already spelled out elsewhere. And this is just kind of where we want to work towards that. And
so, the more generic we can be, the better off we are. When we get too specific, we come up to something and and I think of several parcels in the future that make are already in process. And we can say, well, they didn't meet exactly what you had here. These have more of a recreational component or
something. And we say, well, we didn't say recreational. She said conservation lands and it's like okay well how far do you want to go with it more we can leave broad and look at the parcel by parcel and how it fits the public rather than spelled out stuff that you know we where
we try to cross all the tees and dot all the eyes and miss something. Uh I I just am concerned that we go too far. I'd rather leave our our work plans and goals pretty pretty generic and and go from there is my opinion. And I agree. I just think that our
primary goal as a committee is not currently reflected in our work plan um in that manner. So I think some language to just clarify because I think when this is adopted that is council saying here is your directive for the year. And so just want to make sure that it's covered and it is a restatement of goals
and policies certainly. Um but unless they are digging through the resolutions, it is sometimes good for us to have this to go by for the our year of work. >> Gerald, your your mic >> for recreational lands. What how far is the program? I mean, I know as
environmentally it's pretty spelled out, but if we want to acquire land to put in a soccer field, is that outside of our purview of Veria forever? >> I think it the program definition is resource-based recreation. That's the adopted policy.
Um, so that is the question of the ages, >> passive recreation. >> Well, and I just, you know, I I see that as where sometimes we buy the land and other entities help improve it, >> but uh still having a green space down the road, a hundred years from now,
as some council members like to lose, having just a green space out there to look at could be a uh for our we may want to put a tree museum in. >> And uh I'm just again, we seem to have a trend where we want to look 100 years down the road. And that's what I'm looking at. How much land can we acquire
now that'll meet future needs of the public that may have a different definition of environmental or conservation lands? And that's I I don't know where to go with that because but but it is something that if we can put it in our goal to acquire those lands now
may have another purpose down the road but it may not be con development. It may be uh I just rec other recreation, outdoor recreation. And I know that gets into purview of echo and that's when I put my other hat on. But but I see a symbiosis here that we we've not
achieving yet. And uh I don't really know how to get there, but and I don't know if we want to spell it out in our work plan and goals, but we do need to cover as much bases and be as broad and generic as we can be. So whether it's a conservation lands, a lands, and you know, and then small land acquisition or
whatever, I I don't care. I'm not going to try to words smmith it today. But uh that's my general thoughts. And I I will note on that um that the question relating to resourcebased recreation um has been discussed and presented to the
county council um and a backup on an agenda item a few months ago um where the county legal put together kind of the overview of what resource-based recreation means and council has kind of moved forward under that review. Um so I know that's been discussed but I don't
off the dome. Can I make a comment on the soccer? I think the way I would word it is like you can kick a soccer ball around just to feel use a couple trees as your goalposts and that's totally acceptable. That's how I would think of it. But like if you're going to manicure the grass and you're going to put in all these other stands and stuff that would be not
passive. I mean so nothing I like to kick a soccer ball around sometimes and yeah just make it informal and I think be one with nature and that's uh how they do it in other countries when they don't have all fancy stuff too. I >> would just say that our criteria already exist. If
>> if I may, I'd like to add a little context to that. There there is a guiding resolution for the management of conservation lands as well and it states, you know, to provide appropriate uh resource-based recreation that is compatible with the site's natural
resources and overall management regime. So, management plans are created for these areas. Um, a soccer field I don't see as a type of use that would be normally compatible with a conservation land, but an open green space in that conservation land uh, certainly would be
determined, you know, at the time of the manual plan. >> So, we do not have a motion on the floor. Um, there were a few suggestions. Um, and chairs can't make motions. So, I'll defer to the team here on if we
want to add a clarifying statement for item three. Yeah, I have no objection to adding um either adding a separate item or or expanding on the small lot acquisition program by saying support the acquisition of conversation conservation
lands through the implementation of the small lot acquisition program and support the acquisition improvement of environmentally sensitive water resource protection and outdoor recreation lands that meet the program criteria. And I think that covers the recreation
aspect clearly as well and uses that language. >> Okay. >> Is that a motion? >> I'll make that motion. >> Do we have a motion? >> Second. >> And we have a second. Any discussion? >> Oh, >> any discussion on that motion as a followup. >> So that is different than what you were
suggesting. Maybe >> correct. And we'll work to make sure that language is written down, but I think the the intent is the same. Yeah. >> And it just uses existing program language to restate it. All right, no further discussion. All those in favor, please note it by saying I. >> I.
>> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I. >> That will pass with one dissenting. Do we have any other comments on the work plan and goals and annual report? I I guess just um we've done a few
different votes here, so I'm not sure if we this is actually now in there or not, but I guess when I read number four, I kind of read it already that it says, you know, if we're doing uh trying to acquire or support protection through less than fee conservation. I did
consider that like the desire to get partners because then we're not paying full fee for some land. I guess I don't know if if it would be appropriate to perhaps that would be where that could be placed if we did want to say less than fee conservation including through
having partnerships. Uh just now that I'm reading it again, I kind of just thought of this now, but um if that's part of the goal to like use our money wisely, you know, through these easements because easements of course are like cheaper in general, like that would be where to add the uh >> partnership
>> and partner to help support our limited resource financially um for acquiring maximum land. So >> So we did already vote to add that partnership language as item eight. So we would have to modify that if that was the goal. >> Yeah. No, I I guess I was just if anyone
has any thoughts on if it be better to add it in, but I we already kind of did the other vote, so just throwing it out there. If for some reason uh that uh could be together with what we already have, then it's not like we're adding so
much. So if they like uh well they I say our our our friends uh at the county council um you know don't necessarily agree with adding new things then you know just clarifying what's already there is more palatable sometimes but u and that's how I read it just so you
know I don't even think technically needs to be changed but just my interpretation is that I don't know if anyone else agrees kind of with that view just throwing that out there as a comment. And I do just want to generally note and maybe I spend too much time watching advisory committee meetings and their
work plans um is that many committees revise and add things to their their goal and policy statements and it is not I think the political hot button that we may suspect um just for you know I do think that we should be careful on language but I do think that um a goal
of our committee is to say this is our our guiding policy and here's what we're looking at um I think our last ENRACH work plan was like three pages long. So, we're doing great on keeping it brief. So, >> yeah. And I think it's important that it's not we don't give the appearance
that we're trying to change anything. All we're doing is supporting what is already there. And that's all we have to say. I think >> other comments or recommendations. >> Yeah, I'd like to make mine. Um, the big
problem that I see with the program currently is when they denied the bonding of the money. That that really hamstrung the program because if you can only spend what you collect each year, most the big parcels that aren't currently
bought aren't going to get bought. And those are really important things. The last time we did the program, they bonded. They spent all the money in like the first five years. It's the smart thing to do for the taxpayers. You get
the most bang for the buck. Those properties aren't going to be cheaper 5 10 years from now if they're even available. They'll probably go for development or something in between. And I think I know I did assume that
that would be the council vote to bond the money because it's such an intelligent thing to do. And and when they did that, they basically cut the program down to nothing. Okay. And the next council may change all
that, but to me, this group should make the recommendation that we believe in bonding the funds that it's smart and we've got lots of property that we can spend the money on. It's not like there's nothing out there
to it's just a useless bond and we don't have anything to spend money on. And I think we really as a group need that needs to go to council and let them know that this committee believes that was a mistake not to bond
and they ought to revisit it. and that's just where I'm coming from and that's the most important thing that's happened to this program in the last year. >> So, as far as I'm concerned, >> I microphone
>> I agree with you. I don't know if that should be in our work plan and goals or not, but I think that that would be a motion that would be uh worthwhile to send to the council that that you know with our more in-depth detail of what's going on in land acquisition than than
maybe the council because they have so many other issues on their plate that we fully support that. I would agree to a motion that, but I don't know that it needs to be in our work plan and goals. That would be part of supporting what already exists, which
>> Yeah. And the ballot question spec the ballot language specifically has on there. Um, including issuing bonds. I mean, that was part of the ballot question, including issuing bonds. >> And it is, and I agree with that, and it's another thing that's already in there, and we shouldn't have to support
it, except the council now has said, "No, we don't want to do that or and so, >> oh, no, I agree." And so, >> and I'm a little perplexed as to how we're supporting what already exists and I fully support, but we weren't willing to just say our mission statement.
>> We haven't had an issue with that yet. >> All of it. >> Yeah. There's not been an issue. I'm only bringing out stuff when there's an issue that we need to to address. If it's something that's already there and we're continue, yeah, let's go and no sense being redundant. But when we reach to a point to where we have we see the
council uh different uh uh differentiated from what's in there then then I have no problem bringing that out and and a point and showing that that hey here here's what was approved here's >> question. >> So >> I have a question have you watched the
meetings since >> let's narrow in a little bit on this >> of October to now. >> I've watched most of them. Okay. >> I I think you would understand why. And I am the the 50% the reason I brought
that up. I wasn't the first one to bring it up. >> Oh, I didn't even think you brought it up. I heard 36% Brad Herb say it in front of council. I I never knew that it was you. You had authored that. >> No. >> So, it wasn't any ain't against >> I I understand. It was just I just wanted to make sure because that
statement keeps coming up and I wasn't It came >> I know. I know. People people have hung all kinds of stuff on. It was just a an idea. But you know the the financial part of it is I mean it's critical. It's really
critical and and we probably should have got out in front of that but I don't think anybody ever saw that coming. >> Sure. So, I think that's a good thing to say at this point that to reiterate and if you're and if you're going to make changes that are going to council, I
think an addendum on the bottom is we believe in bonding. >> Yeah. And that's what I was going to um ask staff in terms of the statement of if it's in the work plan or not. And I think as a committee we can decide either way, but this will also have the agenda item summary. And so if we wanted
to include a statement or recommendation that is not in here, we could have a statement in the agenda item summary that in addition the committee recommended continued support of financing the program including through the ability of bonds as voted on by
75.6% of the population or or something to that respect. So we'll leave it to the committee to decide and make a motion on what form we'd like it either in this or on that statement. I would like to say that uh I I know we
can uh go either way it sounds like on this. I just want to make sure we're unanimous. I guess that would be my I could definitely go with what was said as just a separate thing. Um I could go with it being as an amendment or as part of the goals like either I just just for the sake of it sounds like we all
believe the same thing basically that it should be bonded. should decide kind of maybe before we vote which way is most uh effective and just it's more effective to be unanimous uh in whatever we do if we do kind of all agree with that bonding is the right thing to do
which any economics person will tell you is um unless for some reason uh yeah I can't think of any reason to to not I mean I don't even want to counter unless like our whole whole state floods and then like we waste all this money and we can't pay it back or something and I that would be the only thing I can
possibly think of, but that's uh not going to happen hopefully or we got other problems if that's the issue. So, um just I just want to say again I could go with what was being mentioned first uh or we can do both maybe. I don't know if it's just throw it in there twice.
Why not? Do you have preference as the >> Well, I I I would like that if they were going to if the staff's going to send something to council that we have a vote and that they can say the committee
supports bonding for >> and I I think that we never we never took a stance. I think we all agree with that. I mean, I'd hope we would, but I think that And I don't mind that being
brought back up in front of the council. I worry about bringing new things that they'll change the mission statement. And that's why I voted against that stuff. It's not that I love the mission statement. I'm in this because of what the program stands for. But I I think
when you bring redundant things back to them, they they start looking at it and they they they may decide they want to change it in some way and they may have the power to do that. I'm just saying is they've already voted on the bonding. So we can't we're not losing anything by
bringing that forward. if they red discuss that maybe one of them changes their mind and I'm just because to me that that is the way we could help staff the best to in the public. I mean the idea is to
purchase these lands and we've got some fantastic properties that are never going to get bought unless they bond and even then they may not. But the fact is we don't stand a chance unless we do that. And
you know, I'm passionate about that. I mean, you guys know. Um, but I I just think that we ought we we ought to and I'll make the motion that we support bonding for the uh Forever program.
And I I if there's a second, we'll have a vote on it and they can pass that on to county council and on their next, you know, agenda. Did you make a motion? He did. >> Yes, I did. And I will second that motion. >> No. In discussion and and we can have
more. I >> do. We want to support the verbiage that we already vote vote that all the 75.6% voted on because that's >> I think that can be used as clarity. I think overall the bonding capability motion makes sense. That's what I would
suggest that and I don't think it requires changing the motion at all. I think it is good as is that the understanding of the committee be that in making that vote we would authorize staff anytime the bonding discussion came up to note that
Valuchia Forever approved and made a motion to support that. Um, and also as a part I would say as a backup of this item in the agenda backup to just note that it was also recommended by the council to continue the support of bonding for the program just so that
they can state that multiple times if it comes up as a separate item in addition to this. >> And a question to staff isn't that issue coming back before council again? We have a presentation on the Valuchia forever criteria to council uh scheduled
currently for the second meeting in February >> and that and that will be talking about bonding and and the benefits of that maybe or maybe I see a >> well well bonding's already in the Forever process. >> Um >> we we know it's in the process.
>> It's it's it's a council decision to use it or not. So, we will be presenting to council um an overview of the Blusher process at that council meeting for council's discussion. >> Well, that's something we may personally I think I may attend it and I want to
listen to John get up and talk to council there at that meeting about it. >> It's on my calendar already. >> All right. >> And that's the 17th and it's an evening meeting. >> Afternoon meeting y but I'll be back.
All right, we have discussion. Yeah. >> So, yeah, I just wasn't sure. Uh, does that mean there will be a vote then on that February meeting? I'm just cur I'm not as familiar with the process of how those meetings were or it's just a discussion, but still we can provide comments or the public can provide com comments.
>> We'll be presenting to county council and council will give staff direction going forward. >> Okay. Um, and just on the motion again, I I wanted to clarify if there was an exact wording or it's a general statement of support or I did want to add in if we are doing like an exact
statement what you had or was said earlier about the the urgency or the need to revisit I guess explicitly but I guess if it's being revisited already then just every time it's visited to mention it um and the the need to do it sooner rather than later because it can't just be like oh we support bonding
like you know 10 years from now or something. I mean like now just make sure that's for the sake of uh 100% uh you know explicitly what we want that's I think should be part of the statement >> and to county staff is kind of the direction and thoughts there on the
agenda backup for this and statement on any future items that deal with bonding that forever the committee has recommended support of that is that do you need anything more specific okay all right we have a motion and a
second. Do we have any further discussion? All right. Um, all those in favor noted by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Kelly, are you available to vote? >> I >> Any opposed like sign? All right, that
passes unanimously. Any further comments on the work plan and goals? Okay, we have voted on each change individually, but I think we have not voted to adopt the overall. So, with those changes noted, um, can we have a motion to adopt the work plan as revised
in this meeting? >> So, moved. >> Second. >> Right. We have a motion in a second. All those in favor, let it be noted by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? All right. That will carry unanimously. And can we get a copy of
that sent to us once all those revisions are I guess >> the final version the minutes for next time >> and it will be on the council agenda but yeah we'll work through. Okay. All right. The next um items are committee review and
sorting into A and B list for our cycle six applications. >> Good morning. Tim Teler with the blue forever program. As was um expressed by the chair, we are now ranking two projects that you've previously found eligible. Um they are the Little Hog
Creek and Winona Road uh applications. First one for your consideration is Little Hog Creek. This would be a fee simple acquisition roughly uh 818 acres in size. Uh staff scored it 16 out of 21 for the site ranking criteria and the minimum required criteria is 10. We are
in uh early discussions with the St. John's River Water Management District as they manage uh a great deal of surrounding property uh adjacent to this piece. Uh attributes include it is within the Florida Wildlife Corridor. It has the uh natural resources natural
resource management area designation as well as the environmental core overlay. And with that, we stand by for any questions. >> Any questions on this? If not, we will entertain a motion for an A or B list designation. >> I have a I have a question. Sure. Um,
it said there was um no archaeological survey done. Would one be done if if the property were purchased? >> It's a possibility. Um, usually what we do on these is look at the master site file to see if anything exists
currently. I I would think it depends on if uh St. John's actually purchases this or if we purchase it, if there's an actual if we pay a consultant to go out there and do an archaeological resource study on.
So, it's a possibility. I guess that depends on the agency and the appetite if we want to do that. Um, the other question I have is maybe a little odd, but what district is this in? Is it in one?
That's the way I'm I'm thinking. But I'm just curious because it mentioned Orman Beach and I thought it just I'm just asking. >> I say it's right on the Pomemetto cur. I know I was involved in that when because they were wanting to cut DeLeon Springs
up about three different ways and uh uh so we were fighting that but I know that you know they all come over and dip a little bit out of the west side >> and I don't know that I don't know that that what is the one up in the northeast district three
>> it it's not district three um it's this I believe is in uh Troy Kent district that's why it's listed under four is the norththeast quadrant of the county and I don't know if it comes all the way over to Highway 11 or not. >> It It does. This is about where the line is where where it splits up with I
believe district one. >> Another question I might Sorry. Did you you >> No, I I I'm just going to say this question is important for me to know because of the current climate on the council and I'm that's why I'm asking. I really would like to know the answer.
And I I tried to like there's not a property address so I couldn't really search it. And I did the closest property. I I can't quite tell. >> Um just >> where's our G? >> We're going to confirm that. One second.
>> Thank you. >> It is most likely Troy Kent, but I'll I'll check to make sure because I think he goes all the way to Marsh Road. Hold on a second. I believe State Road 11 is the dividing line which this property borders, but we'll confirm for you. When I plugged in one of the addresses
that was near the prop, really like as close as I could probably get, it came up in district one. But I again that's a guess. So I'd really like to know. >> Question.
St. John's you is going to manage this. So, we're at the preliminary discussion stage right now. It would be a natural fit as they manage the surrounding property and they haven't been opposed to that concept, but I'm not going to uh make any statement that would commit them to any future actions.
>> Okay. I I just I' I'm somewhat familiar with this property. I've been on years past and parts of it are absolutely beautiful, especially along Hall Creek. Um uh and Haw Creek is a major drainage basin for western Valuchia County. So,
it's always good to have that. Uh, I don't when you brought up the historical archaeological stuff, you know, a lot of that right next there, that little area you see there that's cleared is the old Clifton Cemetery, which if you're ever out there riding around, it's very interesting to to walk through that. I
mean, they're all Clifton, but they're uh way way back. I mean, that the Clifton settlement started back in the 1830s and 1840s up there at the corner of 40. They're to the north of this property used to be the old Overland Road that went from east to west. And I don't even know if there's any remnants of it left. I believe it's to the north
of this property before 40 came in was put in. So, uh, but anyway, I I think this is a very good piece of property and if we can manage it right, I it could have a lot of really nice recreational activities. There's a lot of land already around there that you can go the Plum Creek areas and hard
island and all that. But, uh, anyway, if I may, I confirmed it is District 4, Troy Kens District. I I would move to approve this property for uh uh a list. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion.
All right. All those in favor? Let it be noted by saying I >> I >> I >> Any opposed? All right. That is on the A-list. That is a great site. >> And then up next we have the Lake Winona Road property.
>> Good morning everyone. uh Hunter Falmer, chief of land management. The next property we have for ranking is the Lake Winona Road. This is coming in as an A easement, 115 acres. Uh this was ranked 13 out of 19 by staff out of the
required nine. Uh currently there is no matching funds and it is also in the Florida wildlife corridor envir ecological core overlay and the natural resource management area. Take any questions.
Questions for staff on this application? >> Question. That bus up to Hard Island to the north of it. Correct. >> Yes, it does. It's on the other side of the Hard Island from Hall Creek. It's on the opposite end of Heart Island, but yes, it does. >> I thought it went all the way up there. I thought that was hard island to the
north. I >> have a question. >> Yes, sure. >> Is there is I see there's some type of dwelling over in the bottom right hand corner. Is that is that a a home or something
being used or is this an old map? >> On the site description here, it says there's a single family home on site. Uh it does have an address. It says it has ancillary structures. >> Yes, there's a home and a house there on the corner >> and they would remain. This is an
easement application. >> Oh, it's not. Okay, that's right. So, someone probably lives there. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Questions? All right. Any further questions? Then
we'll entertain a motion by the committee. >> Move we put this on the A-list. >> All right. We have a motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> A motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of designating this on the A-list, please say I. I.
Kelly, did you vote on that? >> Yeah. Did you not hear me? >> No, it was I. >> Thank you. Any opposed? All right, that passes unanimously. That is the last official business on the agenda. So, we will go into staff
comments and property updates. >> Okay. So, I'm going to work through the uh projects that we're currently engaged on and provide you an update on those projects. I'll start out with the McMillan Agricultural Easement. This has been approved by the county council uh
and our funding partner, the St. John River Water Management District for acquisition. We're in the due diligence stage right now. That's phase one and survey and we'll look to close this as soon as possible. Uh the next one that I'll move to is the Tamoka Farms Road project.
Okay. Um, still in an active uh, acquisition process. We're just dealing with a couple of background issues. I'll just characterize them as just some light matters that need to be addressed before we could potentially engage the D as a funding partner there. Still very much active, still uh, have regular
updates to the owners and um, hope to bring that forward very soon. I'm going to mention the Bennett Road agricultural easement. give Ashlin some time to put that up on the screen. But the reason I'm mentioning it is as we go through these
updates, I'm going to provide you a little bit of additional information and that is who made it into the uh rule and family lands protection program application ahead of the deadline. So the Bennett road has been submitted to the rural and family lands program. Um additional background that program as
you know is administered by Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. We have a monthly standing meeting meeting with their acquisition department uh where we discuss potential projects we can pick up in partnership. We usually discuss a 50-50 program
split. Uh so they are excited to see applications come in from Valuchia County and I just express that to you to say that we have a high degree of confidence as long as their funding and our funding remain in place that we can continue to acquire these agricultural easements that are in both program uh cycles.
The next one I'm going to go to is the Carowway Lake Conservation Easement. So, you've probably heard about this. This is going to go to county council on the 3. Um, this is a funding partnership with the Florida Forever Program. They would contribute $8 million. The
Valuchia Forever program's contribution would be $379,000 for an agricultural easement across roughly 493 acres. Um, I'm going to move to the Henry Enterprises
uh application. Pardon me. Henry Enterprises is also on our rural and family lands uh list. So, this is another one that when we get it formally listed, we'll be able to move forward in a potential partnership with those uh
FDAX uh partners. Uh, next one I'll bring forward is Cypress Ranch. Cypress Ranch is Cypress Ranch is in the initial uh acquisition stage. What I mean by that is we've just completed the background title work on the property
and we're now starting the appraisal process. So these are the steps that we complete ahead of making any type of an offer on the property. So that one is now in an active status. we are engaged with the land owner and moving forward to an offer stage in the future. Uh the next one that I'm going to bring
to your attention is the lef agricultural easement. So there's two things to mention on this. Number one, we have regular dialogue with the family on how to structure this easement and uh we have come to an agreement and uh we are now
awaiting the appraisals to come in. At the same time um we appreciate their cooperation. They did submit an application to rural and family protection program. Depending on the timing uh how this one develops and the and the uh family's position, I'll
describe it as the family's position. Uh it is something that if if uh we can make it to later this year, we might have an excellent partner in the state, but if the family um determines that we need to move at a more accelerated pace, we can still put this package together and put it under in front of the county
council for consideration as a solo forever project. Uh next one is the Southerntherland project. This is also one where we worked with the land owner to have an application submitted to the rural and family lands protection program. So another future
potential partnership on that one. Lake George Road is the next. So Lake George Road, we are now beginning uh background work ahead of a potential offer to the owners of that property. Uh again, initial uh buildup phase to to
proceed an offer there. Uh the next one that I'm going to mention is the Riverbend Ranch property, southern Valuchia County. It's a large uh almost 1300 acres in size right on the St. John's River. So, um without going into
the detail, uh we have a verbal agreement on price. Uh we are in the process right now of drafting the contract language. It's got to be approved by a potential funding partner, which would be the St. John's River Water Management District. It has to be approved by the owner's attorney. So, it's a little bit premature to discuss
too many details other than to express to you that this one we we have a verbal agreement on price and it's just a matter of putting the details together now and getting this in front of the county council. And that completes the update on the active projects. If there's any questions, be happy to answer them.
>> Questions for staff on project list. It's great news on a lot of them. It's great to see the forest and farmlands getting a lot of activity. All right. No questions for staff on that. Um, we Oh, sorry. >> You're we're able to do most of these
purchases so far without bonding. >> So far is the key uh key language in that statement there. Uh the Riverbin Ranch is going to be a substantial uh expense and that would severely cut into our reserves without bonding. Now, there
are additional projects that we can take on, but we obviously can't work through the entire A-list, and there are some other projects that would be uh delayed if we waited till the next fiscal year to have the funds available. >> Thank you.
>> All right, other questions for staff. All right, moving on to advisory committee comments. Anybody have anything? I have a question. >> The properties that we voted on today for the the A-list. When will those be coming before the council?
>> Our target is to deliver that A-list in March. >> And could that potentially align with the work plan? Unsure, but >> uh that is roughly the same time period. Yes. >> Right. All right. And I and I'll remind
the K committee there's there's also another uh priority list from the previous advisory committee meeting going to council on the 17th. >> Yep. >> Okay. Yeah, I have a couple comments and I'm gonna probably keep asking this every meeting, but uh any update from
city of Dand on Moore Lake? Yes, I have spoken with the manager there. uh they are in the design phase of their trail system determining some funding or designs on whether they want to do um let's say some heavier duty
things like boardwalks or uh more of pathways trails. So they're still determining um their design there. Um, I have offered assistance to the city as far as uh any equipment needed to get some of those areas opened up, but we
are in active communication with them on uh pursuing public access. I uh I keep a cattle prod in my truck uh if you need it with them. I would be happy to assist it because this this really bothers me that it's taken them so long to do
anything. Which leads me up to our next the next issue and that has to do with the Talmage Gardens property that seemed to cause so much consternation to the council at that meeting. And I know it's a very expensive property and I I understand we're going to try to bring
partners into that uh hopefully and one of them might be the city of Dand. And from what I've seen so far from the city of Dand, I don't know if they're going to be a good partner or not. And if we don't get good commitment from them and get them I mean if they could if they can develop houses as fast as they do
and approve that they ought to be able to get a park put in somewhere you know or that we've already got the land for. So I'm very concerned about that and and I'm I've already expressed my concern to the mayor and probably will continue to do so. Um the uh other thing too that I
found interesting I was talking to one of the wealthy land owners out there along Lake Winona Road the other day. We ran into him because there were some cows out in the road and we just got to chitchatting and he got to talking about some of the other parcels that have been it was all originally all part of the old Shran property but now are owned by
various you know very wealthy people and some of the land prices that they're talking about if they resale would make the Jacob's property sound cheap. And what was explained to me was that currently in the state legislature,
there is bills being passed to allow these cities, and Jess, you probably know more about this than I do, that would allow development to occur on what, a thousand acres or more without any county uh uh and and we have a lot of parcels in this county that that could easily happen to if this passes
and goes through. And some of these guys are already sitting there watching that. You know, there's a couple and then you have these private equity funds. There was one I was reading about the other day. They've spent and invested $280 million in the state of Florida. They have 15 lobbyists up there in
Tallahassee right now trying to get a lot of these bills put through. So, we need to really keep that in mind on our defensive strategies and why to me it's very important that we do the bonding and try to get as many of these parcels. They're not going to get any cheaper unless people start moving to some other
state and get coming out of here. But from all indications I've seen, it's not going to slow down for a while. And so we really need to get out in front of that. We have done a great job getting out in front of it. Valuchia County is well known around the state as being a leader in conservation. Probably why a
lot of people want to come moving here. So anything that's not conserved is going to be covered up in houses. So uh anyway, uh with that again, we need to keep a fire to our partners and make sure that they get their entity and and and do the same thing. With that, that's all I have. Thank you.
>> Other committee comments. >> I just following up Caesar said uh Thousand Friends keeps very good track of the bills that are being uh put forward. So if you're not on their email list, that's something to do because they constantly give updates on the
progress. Thousand friends of Florida. Yeah. They constantly give updates on the position of the bill, who's championing it, who's against it, and you can automatically send an email in support of or in opposition to right on their website. So, um, that is very
worthwhile downloading. >> And their email blast is fantastic. They also just have a 2026 legislative session page on their website with every bill they're tracking. And they track anything related to environmental and growth management overall. that organization just sent a letter
that organization just sent a letter of support for Revolution Forever >> uh to our county council >> um from what's taking place in the current climate. They just they just
sent a letter uh very like within the last few days. >> Just just two two quick ones. Number one, I'll ask one more time before I give up if there had been any more information on Tamoka Farms Village that
Mr. Ponittowski, I think it was, came before us a couple of months ago. Any any discussion on that at all from him? I believe we sent if so, forgive me if my memory is not 100%. I believe we sent a letter on that one and received no
reply. All right. Thank you. And number two, I'd like to thank Mr. Fiser for being our local historian and bringing out the facts of all the properties out here. It's fascinating. >> I don't know if I'm a historian, but I
have lived in that area. I when it comes to Lake White on Road, Northwest Felia, I have been there on they've been around there about 65 years. So that's >> I think that qualifies qualifies. Okay. But I'd learned a lot from the old-timers that used to come around that that haveve I've heard stories. That's when we talk about lands that be, oh,
this is such a pristine land. And it's like, you know, I heard stories when that was clear-cuted back, you know, 70 years ago. And, you know, one guy used to tell me that they've seen lights when they were on 44, they could see the lights all the way up on 40. Of course, it was a road because it was nothing there. It was all cut down and cleared. And that's our corridor that we're
talking about today. So, when we we talk about, you know, pristine lands, that's for me what we want to see in the future, not what's been in the past is gone. So anyway, I I will continue to bring that up if you enjoy that stuff. Thank you.
>> Yeah, I just again want to thank staff for all their hard work and uh again I I think you guys are doing a great job uh being um you know a conduit for this uh for our views. And I know sometimes I feel like we're asking you to say like what do you want? What do you want? I'll be like well I mean technically it's
supposed to be what we want and you help us or what the council wants. But I mean what you guys want I think uh we all want the same thing and that's the to help the county. So that's I'm glad we're on the same page. But um I just wanted to clarify something that because it wasn't on the agenda and I I you know did miss the first minute of um that
presentation earlier I guess. So I was curious was were we supposed to vote on that or did was there a vote or something or just information? So for theformational part then is that that is going to be like some a resolution that is being voted on by the county council
sometime soon or we don't that's just talking. >> It is a subcommittee proposal that will go before the charter review commission committee whatever their name is for them to vote on. >> Okay. And I mean again there's no role for us to even provide a comment at all or just just in
>> I think individually you can. I think that committee takes public comment um and emails and so they their members are listed if you wanted to reach out to them. >> Okay. >> But this committee No, >> but yeah, I guess I I did have some very serious concerns. I I guess everyone did, but um yeah, I guess give us some
more time. I just didn't know uh I didn't catch the the deadline for when that committee will meet next or I guess or but uh maybe I can look that up or do the staff know offhand or >> the charter review committee meeting is February 9th.
at 5:30 and they're held at the airport in the um conference room, the McGee upstairs. >> Yes. >> Okay. And that resolution would then have to get their approval and then get county council approval before it even
comes to the people to vote. Okay. Just checking on the process. And thank you for that clarification. And um I think that's that's all I got. I Yeah, thank everyone for all their comments today. Very I I appreciate the education and history as well. >> It does. Any other comments on this
side? We're good. Um I have one tiny request and I know I keep asking for things to be added to this rankings report. U is there any way we can just add the parcel IDs on the top so that if members have questions before about districts, they can plug it into the GRM map if we don't have an address?
>> Yes, that's easy. Thank you. >> Um and then as always, thank you staff. I think it was um a fantastic overview. really love the project updates. Um, and I think we we did some good work today. Um, whoever we need to get with about notes um on the criteria, I have the language so that we make sure it's
tracking well. Um, and we we can go from there. Anything else everybody? >> All right. Thank you. We are adjourned. >> Thank you. Enterprise. So the We At
Get it.