ITEM 2 by gox16621

VIEWS: 19 PAGES: 30

									ITEM 2:

REQUEST: Consideration and approval of December 13 and 14, 2007 meeting
summaries.

DSL Staff Remarks: None.

DSL Staff Recommendation: Approve December 13 and 14, 2007 meeting summaries.

ARC RECOMMENDATIONS:

(   ) APPROVE
(   ) APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS: ___________________________________________
(   ) DEFER
(   ) WITHDRAW
(   ) NOT APPROVE
(   ) OTHER: _________________________________________________________________
                  Acquisition and Restoration Council (ARC)
                           Public Hearing Summary

                                          Agenda

PUBLIC HEARING:              Thursday, December 13, 2007
TIME:                        9:00 a.m.
LOCATION:                    The Department of Environmental Protection
                             Conference Room A, Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building,
                             3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida

Present: Mr. Lane Green, Vice-Chair and Citizen Member; Ms. Vickie Larson,
Citizen Member; Mr. John Browne, Division of Forestry (DOF); Mr. Gary Cochran,
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC); Mr. Albert Gregory,
Division of Recreation and Parks (DRP) Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP); Mr. Ryan Wheeler, Division of Historical Resources (DHR); and Mr. Grant
Gelhardt, Department of Community Affairs (DCA).

ARC Staff Director, Mr. Jim Farr, Division of State Lands, DEP.

ITEM 1:

Announcements

-Ms. Klena sent regrets for medically related absence.
-Fog has delayed flights.
-More emails on projects arrived overnight.


                                       OLD BUSINESS

ITEM 2:

REQUEST: Consideration of October 11 and 12, 2007 public hearing and meeting summaries.

Spelling of Tim Breault’s name to be corrected.

Motion to move to consent agenda made by Mr. Gregory and seconded by Mr. Cochran. All in
favor.


                                      NEW BUSINESS

ITEM 3:

REQUEST: Consider the proposed 2008 ARC Calendar.

Motion made to accept this calendar moved and seconded.
                                      LAND ACQUISITION

ITEM 4: [For December 13th meeting only]

REQUEST: Receive public testimony on the three new proposals under consideration
for addition to the February, 2008 Florida Forever priority list and the projects on the
existing August, 2007 Florida Forever Priority List.


ITEM 5:

REQUEST: Consider Project Evaluation Reports for new projects.

1. Crossbar/Al Bar Ranch (Pasco County), full fee acquisition:

Ron Daniels, Pasco County coordinated a series of speakers on the Crossbar/Al Bar Ranch
proposal. They spoke in the following order: Mr. John Gallagher, County Administrator for
Pasco County; Mr. Pick Talley of Pinellas County; Mr Jack Marramo, Vice Chairman for Pasco
County Commission; Ms. Ann Hildebrand, Pasco County Commissioner; Mr. Michael Cox,
Pasco County Commissioner; Ms. Renee Weisner-Brown, Environmental Land Program
Manager for Pasco County; Mr. Fritz Musselman, Land Resource Director for the Southwest
Florida Water Management District (WMD); Ms. Jennifer Seney, Executive Director, Pasco
Wildlife; Barbara Howard, St. Pete Audubon; Mr. David Kandz, Conservation Chair, St.
Petersburg Audubon Society.

The speakers discussed the following: The support of the county commission for this project;
the support of the citizens of Pasco for this proposal; the critical linkages it would provide; the
“Penny for Pasco” land acquisition initiative; the taxes that Pinellas has paid on the Pasco land
in agricultural production; the need to get this property off the utility asset list; the water rights
owned by the Regional Water Authority; the recreational potential and the education center;
the presence of burrowing owls and scrub jays; the value of wetlands; the support by the
Pasco Environment Land program’s land selection committee and their commitment to his
acquisition as partners in funding; the initiation of a Greenways and Trails and Blueways
master planning effort by Pasco; Pasco and Pinellas working as partners; the WMD’s
willingness to partner on the Crossbar portion of this proposal if that’s what it takes to protect it;
the project’s regional significance and the project’s hydrological significance; and, the future of
this area as a tourism destination.

The following questions were asked by ARC and answered as follows:

Q: The production wells will continue to be used on the site. Will the augmentation wells
continue to be managed by the water authority?

A: No. That will be the responsibility of the management team that the environmental program
is managed under and it will just be an electric bill.

Mr. Farr noted that the Project Evaluation Report would need to be amended to show that the
Water Management District would be concentrate on acquisition of Cross Bar and the Division
of State Lands would concentrate on Al Bar’s acquisition. Mr. Cochran, FWC, indicated for the
record that his agency might be interested in putting in a management prospectus for Al Bar if
it was approved for the list.

2. Myakka Ranchlands (Sarasota County) fee-simple and less than fee acquisition:


                                                  2
Mr. Albert Joerger, President and Founder of Sarasota Conservation Foundation, coordinated
the speakers as follows: Senator Lisa Carlton; Representative Mike Grant; Representative
Keith Fitzgerald; County Commissioner Paul Mercier; former Senator Bob Johnson; Jono
Miller, founder and chair of Sarasota County’s Environmentally Sensitive Lands Program;
Belina Perry, manager of Sarasota County Natural Resources; Dana Gourley, representing the
homeowners of the neighborhood adjacent to High Hat Ranch; Mr. B. T. Longino, representing
Longino Ranch; Mr. Jim Turner, representing the interests of Hi Hat Ranch; Mr. Alan Horton,
who camped as a Boy Scout on the Longino property 60 years earlier; Mr. Fritz Musselman,
SWFWMD and Dr. Richard Hilsenbeck, The Nature Conservancy; Mr. Michal Walton,
representing Walton Ranch. All spoke in favor of acquiring the lands within this proposal as
soon as possible to prevent this area from being developed.

As introduction, Mr. Joerger explained how they had resolved the issues of management and
proposed fee and less-than-fee for the proposal. Sarasota County had agreed to manage the
802 acres of Hi Hat Ranch that would be proposed for fee purchase, though if fee purchase
were not possible they might settle for a conservation easement over those 802 acres. The
Longino Ranch would be a conservation easement purchase and they would buy the
underlying fee on the Walton Ranch. The State would then buy a conservation easement from
Mr. Longino on what is called the Walton piece. He said that the Longinos would be open to
having some limited public access on the parcel that is currently known as the Walton
property.

Other points made about the Myakka Ranchlands project included the following: This was an
inter-generational moment as the heads of the ranching clans look for ways to buy out those
members of the family not interested in ranching anymore and still maintain the stability of this
undeveloped landscape; These acquisition would buffer Myakka State Park and link to other
public conservation lands; The WMD is committed to conservation in this particular area,
having purchased almost 17,000 acres on its own, as sell as partnering with Sarasota County’s
Environmental Lands Program and the State to purchase an additional 38,200 acres; The
WMD is committed to this project and willing to partner where they see fit and have funding
available. These lands were identified in the Closing the Gaps document as a biological
hotspot; FNAI’s analysis shows that 68% of the project is an FNAI habitat conservation priority;
99% provides for surface water protection and 100% is within an aquifer recharge area; The
December purchase of the new Carlton easement acquisition by the WMD will enhance
connectivity past what is seen on the map; The development pressures being felt by these
large landowners is significant; Senator Bob Johnson was praised and thanked for his efforts
in protecting the Myakka River; Mr. Jono Miller was thanked for his 20 years of effort on the
Myakka River Management Coordinating Council; Ms. Larson, ARC member, had visited these
properties and noted that these acreages are examples of well managed, sustainable
agriculture and that exotics were noticeably absent.

3. Pillsbury Mound (Manatee County), fee-simple acquisition:

Charlie Hunsicker, Manatee County Environmental Office, coordinated the speakers. Vice
Chair Jane VonHahmann, Manatee County Board of Commissioners, spoke in favor of the
project, requesting assistance in the purchase of the site under the Emergency Archeological
Property Acquisition Act. Mr. Hunsicker then spoke, noting that Manatee County would
assume management responsibility for the property when purchased. Mr. Scott Bassett, an
attorney and resident in the neighborhood adjacent to the site, then spoke about discovering
the site for sale and noticing that vegetation was being stripped from the surface of the mound.
The mound is the “last survivor” of a total complex of mounds, all the rest destroyed. He urged
purchase and preservation of the mound. Ms. Brynneann Besi, Executive Director for the
South Florida Museum, stated the museum’s position that the State would be the best entity to
preserve and protect the mound; it is not in keeping with the museum’s mission and they do
not have the resources to protect it properly.
                                                3
Q: Does the museum own any other real estate outside of the museum?

A: No.

Mr. Gelhardt made a motion to approve the reports as amended, with Mr. Cochran’s regarding
FWC interest in possible management of Al Bar included as well. The motion was seconded
and passed unanimously and placed on the consent agenda.


ITEM 6: [For December 14th only]

REQUEST: Develop the February 2008 Florida Forever Priority List.

Mr. Farr explained what would be done on the 14th with regard to this item. Each member had
provided a preliminary list of their top 15 projects, and those would be tallied, one point per
project. Those projects with the most votes would be placed closest to the top of the list.
Furthermore, the lists could be modified between the end of the meeting and tomorrow
morning, if the members wished, since the tally would not be done overnight; it would be done
tomorrow based on any additional information they had learned during the time between
submitting the draft list and the real-time tally to be done on the 14th. Mr. Farr said that he
would give each member a copy of his or her preliminary list so that they could review it for
possible revision before they left the meeting that day.

Q: In the materials, it appeared that there was some funding set aside for Lake Wales Ridge
and some for the Keys. In creating the preliminary list some members took these existing
commitments into account. How should this be dealt with?

A: Commitments that have been made previously will not be altered by the actions/lists the
ARC creates for the top 15 projects. However, if a commitment has been made to acquire
some portion of Lake Wales Ridge project, for instance, and Lake Wales Ridge is not in the
that list of top ranked projects, no more funding will be committed to that effort from the
remaining dollars available for acquisition. Commitment would mean “a binding agreement
that would legally stand up in court.” Verbal agreements could be questionable, but if the
owners have agreed to the state’s terms and price, those commitments will probably be
honored as well. All commitments are contingent upon approval of the contract by the
Governor and Cabinet.

Mr. Farr had contacted members if they had ranked things that fit within the parameters of this
discussion (because the entire project had already been purchased or the funding was
committed for purchase), suggested that it be taken off and another one added.

Some members wanted to review their lists to make sure they had accurately captured their
top 10, based on this information.

Q: There was a recommendation to remove Harris School from the list; was there no other
possible option on this project?

A: The project was taken to the Governor and Cabinet who said they would purchase it under
the condition that $5 million of the funding would be used for affordable housing for school
board employees. The county was not willing to agree to that.




                                               4
BOUNDARY MODIFICATIONS

ITEM 7:

REQUEST: Amend boundary of Wakulla Springs Protection Zone Florida Forever
project to include approximately 700 acres with a tax assessed value of $1,392,980.

Location: Leon County

This followed Item 10.

Mr. Jerry Parrish presented the item, Chason Woods, with the following notable points: This
would increase protection for groundwater and springs from pollution, retain historical value of
the area, protect threatened species, increase forestlands and protect the Wakulla springshed.
The area has more than 20 karst areas, a 60-foot sink and some cypress ponds. Wildlife
observed included gopher tortoise, otter, as well as turkey, deer, great blue heron, Ibis, egret,
anhinga, gambusia, and large tadpoles. The owners were willing sellers and had a site plan
approved by Leon County for the development of a total of 700 homes, which Mr. Parrish
provided. Mr. Parrish said that they wanted to know if the state would buy it instead of them
developing it and know that development would be a long-term deal.

Q: Was there a land use change done? What was the designation prior to that change?

A: Mr. Parrish said he would find out.

Q: Who conducted the archeological dig on the property?

A: Mr. Cal Jamison

Q: What was meant by saying it was a non-essential parcel?

A: It was a lesser priority than other parcels within that project, more than likely because it was
not contiguous to lands already under conservation management. The Wakulla springshed is
defined as the southern half of Leon County, and all of that cannot be acquired. The decision
was to focus on those areas with a clear indication of impacts on the aquifer, determined
primarily by dye studies.

Mr. Browne observed that there were sinkholes and exposed karst and it was directly in line
with the Wakulla Springs springhead, which was not a good place for a development.

Mr. Browne then made the motion to approve this amendment and place it on the consent
agenda. All were in favor and it passed unanimously.


ITEM 8:

REQUEST: Consideration of a 675-acre boundary addition to the Wekiva-Ocala Florida
Forever project with a tax assessed value of $1,228,740 called the Pine Plantation
Addition.

LOCATION: Orange County

This item was taken up in order.
Mr. Farr prefaced this with the acknowledgement that the acquisition of this land was
mentioned in statute as part of the language regarding the expressway loop.
                                                5
Mr. Henry Dean, representative for the landowners of the boundary modification identified as
Pine Plantation was there to present the item. He noted that the language in the statutes said
acquisition of this property should be given the highest priority. His clients are willing sellers,
but the land is not within the boundary of a Florida Forever project. The Wekiva-Ocala project
is on the A list. Other agencies (Orlando, Orange County Expressway Authority, FDOT) will be
partnering in this effort if it is added to the boundary.

Q: Will the expressway go through the property?

A: The very northern portion.

Q: Would this be considered an essential parcel?

A: This parcel is considered a high priority by the Legislature, and the DSL can negotiate on
any parcel, whether or not it is identified as essential, so it is not necessary to declare it
essential. The legislation provides for moving forward with acquisition, even if it is not deemed
essential.

Ms. Julie Wraithmell, Audubon, spoke in support of the value of this project for connectivity,
water recharge attributes, and buffering the growth that would be induced by the expressway.

Q: Will the expressway’s construction separate the property from the other managed lands?

A: Yes. A portion of the property will become part of the right of way at the northern end.
Another part will provide access to the Neighborhood Lakes property, already purchased by
the state.

Mr. Cochran noted that the FWC soil and water analysis have a good potential for gopher
tortoise relocation.

Q: Was this a normal kind of situation where the Legislature had identified an area as high
priority for acquisition in legislation? Why wouldn’t this have been a part of a DOT acquisition
or a DOT partnership?

A: Mr. Farr said that this was the first time he’d seen this situation and he had been involved in
the conservation land acquisition process since 1989. As for the second part of the question,
Mr. Dean confirmed that this was atypical but there was a lot of history behind it. After a great
deal of discussion related to extensive preservation of the basin, there was a big push to build
a beltway around Orlando. The last leg of the beltway, the Wekiva Parkway was extremely
controversial. The legislation was the result of a task force created to resolve this. The
Legislature formalized the resolution of this task force’s work in statute.

Ms. Deborah Poppell, Acting Director, Division of State Lands, made the following comments.
She appreciated the ARC’s energy and enthusiasm for “getting the job done” with respect to
identifying top priority, A ranked projects and applying the remaining $20 million to those
projects, with the hope that there can be a special appropriation and a successor program.
She encouraged them to identify the highest value parcels, based on the resources found on
the properties.

Mr. Farr noted that the only project where the entire project was committed for purchase was
Promise Ranch.

Mr Gelhardt said he had considered limited funding and so had been careful not to include
projects that were high in resource value but were also high in acquisition cost, focusing
                                                 6
instead on those that had high resource value and potential for some acquisition of multi-parcel
projects that could be expanded; he was very concerned about the high resource projects that
had not been completely purchased.

Ms. Poppell noted that there would be some anomalies, as money might become available
from the Department of Defense (DOD) for partnering on acquisition of Clear Creek/Whiting
Field, as well as this atypical situation with Legislative direction on the Pine Plantation. She
said that DSL would be working diligently to leverage where possible and get partners to get
more acres purchased.

Mr. Cochran made the motion to add this to the Wekiva-Ocala boundary, contingent upon
partnership funding being applied to the purchase. It was seconded, unanimously approved,
and placed on the consent agenda.


                                     LAND MANAGEMENT

LAND MANAGEMENT PLANS

ITEM 9:

REQUEST: Consider a 10-year Management Plan update for Edward Ball Wakulla
Springs State Park.

LOCATION: Wakulla County

Mr. Lew Scruggs and Mr. Scott Spaulding were present to answer questions. It was noted that
Ms. Sandy Cook, current park manager, was leaving at the end of the month and both Mr.
Scruggs and the Chairman told her she would be missed. Mr. Cochran commended the staff
on an excellent plan.

Ms. Carolyn Kindell, FNAI, acknowledged Mr. Savery’s DRP Resource Manager of the Year
Award.

Mr. Cochran moved the item forward on consent. The motion was seconded and it passed
unanimously.

The following question was asked regarding the consideration of the plan:

Q: When was this plan last brought before ARC?

A: It was last considered in 2001, but there were a multitude of plans done with in a very short
time frame, and which are now being spread out over a ten year period to make the
development and consideration of updates a more manageable schedule. This plan also
includes the River Sinks addition, which has been included in the plan since the 2001 version.


ITEM 10:

REQUEST: Consider an initial 10-year Management Plan for Colt Creek State Park.

LOCATION: Polk County

This followed the discussion of Item 6.

                                                 7
Mr. Lew Scruggs and Mr. Scott Spaulding were present to answer questions.

Q: Could DRP provide a time line for the proposal of when ecological restoration would take
place? The same for facilities development? What was the source for the species occurrence
data?

Mr. Gelhardt made the motion to move the item to the consent agenda, with ARC comments
included. The motion was seconded, passed unanimously, and the item was placed on the
consent agenda.


ITEM 11:

REQUEST: Consider a 10-year Management Plan update for Shell Key Preserve.

LOCATION: Pinellas County

Ms. Pam Leasure, Pinellas County, Mr. Steve Harper, Pinellas County Ecological Services
Program Coordinator, Ms. Barbara Howard, St. Pete Audubon, and Ms. Kristin Penny
Summers, citizen, were there to support this item.

Ms. Leasure made her presentation, which included the history of the project - what had been
done over the last seven years and the plan as presented. Changes since the last plan were
the prohibition of dogs and alcohol within the preserve, a required license for camping, and the
delineation of three areas set aside for passive recreation only. These changes were backed
up by data collected between 2000 and 2007, working groups, and recommendations from
experts like the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and were unanimously approved by the Board of
County Commissioners in October. Management has been the product of a partnership of
interests, including the Sheriff’s Department.

Ms. Carolyn Kindell, FNAI, commended the county for the solid, scientifically-supported
revisions to the plan, saying it was a “model for all of our coastal parks and preserves.” She
said it was “one of the best I have seen of true adaptive management based on solid data
regarding natural resources and how they change, and also visitor impacts and how visitor
pressures change through time.”

Ms. Julie Wraithmell, Audubon, opened the discussion of the plan for the local Audubon
representatives, noting the County Commissioners’ approval and commending the staff for the
monitoring they conducted to justify the changes to the plan and inform decision makers. Mr.
Dave Kandz, Conservation Chair, St. Pete Audubon, noted that this has been a great
public/private partnership. Ms. Howard offered her full support of this well-researched plan
and said that none of the new restrictions would keep people from going to the island, but they
did provide opportunities for Audubon volunteers to educate the public about nesting areas
and leaving baby chicks alone. Dave Howard, St. Pete Audubon and Shell Key Preserve
volunteer, was looking forward to not having to pick up broken glass on his trash pickup
details. He was in support of the changes that had been made in this update.

Ms. Larson provided her two brief comments about the plan. The shoal grass, Halodule,
needs to be corrected in the plan, and though it is not necessary, she thought it would be
helpful to provide a paragraph that explains the importance of seagrass beds for not only
marine fisheries industry, but the state’s economy, using relevant NOAA and FRMI data.

Mr. Cochran commended the Pinellas County staff on their work.


                                                8
Mr. Cochran moved the plan forward on consent with Ms. Larson’s recommended revisions.
The motion was seconded and it passed unanimously.


OTHER LAND MANAGEMENT ISSUES

ITEM 12:

REQUEST: Modification of compensation requirements for a 79± acre, non-exclusive
easement to the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) across a portion of the
Point Washington State Forest.

LOCATION: Walton County

Mr. Farr introduced the item, noting that this was a revision to an easement request ARC
approved in 2000 which would have resulted in the acquisition of 79 acres within the
boundaries of the Point Washington State Forest. The DOT has come back, asking that this
be revised to allow them to purchase 40 acres in Point Washington, and 80 acres in Pine Log
State Forest, due to the increased cost per acre within the Point Washington State Forest in
the intervening years since the initial approval of the compensation.

Q: This was more acreage than originally approved, but it is two different sites, meaning that
DOT would be mitigating for a road widening in the Point Washington area with acreage in
Pine Log.

A: Public Land Administration’s perspective on this request --- that it had been determined that
the 40 acres to be acquired was a compatible use of State Forest lands, that DOT only got an
easement as opposed to fee title and the BOT retains ownership, and the highway provides
enhanced access to the state forest. The additional 80 acres in Pine Log, from their
perspective, was a positive addition.

Q: Is Public Land Administration looking to the impacts on the tax-exempt status of any bond
financing?

A: In this case it was an exchange between two public entities, which made it an easier
decision. Dr. Brock added that the IRS did not care whether it was conservation land or a
public highway.

Mr. Gelhardt moved the item to the consent agenda. It was seconded and unanimously
approved.


ITEM 13:

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure a perpetual right-of-way easement, containing 8.46
acres, more or less, to the Florida Department of Transportation, is consistent with the
Linear Facilities Policy.

LOCATION: Washington County

APPLICANT: Florida Department of Transportation (DOT)

Mr. Farr introduced the item. The 8.46-acre perpetual right-of-way easement affected Pine
Log State Forest and the widening of State Road 79.

                                               9
Mr. Gelhardt noted that he had received the additional information he had asked for, including
an alternative analysis not included in the agenda item. All but one of his concerns had been
addressed.

Q: If the purpose of the storm water facility is to enhance the state forest and park, shouldn’t
the facility be constructed so that there is no fence? This facility is to exist in perpetuity. It can
be done and has been done around the Tallahassee area adjacent to commercial ventures,
apartment complexes, schools and other higher population areas.

A: Mr. John Duncan, DOT District III, said that the primary purpose of the fencing was to limit
liability. This site has a recreational complex nearby, and across the State Road 79 are
residences. The DOT wants to reduce the possibilities of residents and visitor drownings. No
agreement was reached on this discussion.

Q: Where is the proposed addition? Where is the map? Are they proposing to buy 50 acres
somewhere within the area, or do they have a site?

A: The site is in Pine Log. The DOT proposes to acquire a 50-acre strip that will be mitigation
for the Division of Forestry. There was also mitigation for wetlands that will be for the WMD,
based on about $90,000 per acre- funding that is contributed to the WMD.

Mr. Browne moved the recommendation that this be done but with no fence and the caveat
that the liability issues would be deferred to the DEP and DOT counsels. The motion was
seconded and the item was unanimously approved.


ITEM 14:

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure (1) a temporary construction easement, containing
0.01 acre, more or less; and (2) a perpetual right-of-way easement, containing 5.09
acres, more or less, to the Florida Department of Transportation, are consistent with the
Linear Facilities Policy.

LOCATION: Walton County

APPLICANT: Florida Department of Transportation (DOT)

LOCATION: Point Washington State Forest
          Sections 20, 29, 30, 31 & 32, Township 02 South, Range 19 West

Mr. Farr explained this item relating to a perpetual right-of-way easement of 5.09 acres and a
temporary construction easement of .01 acres. The DOT was widening U.S. 331, building a
storm water retention pond.

The information Mr. Gelhardt said he requested but had not received was sent to Mr. Farr that
morning (Dec. 13), but it had arrive after he had left the previous day.

Q: What was the reason for fencing that retention pond? Long-term sustainability and
aesthetics of a park would suggest that storm water ponds should not have fences around
them.

A: Mr. John Duncan, DOT, said that fencing the storm water pond was to reduce liability.



                                                  10
Mr. Gelhardt said that he would like to defer this to the next meeting and get a liability
determination before moving forward with this one; he did not believe there was a liability issue
with this particular site.


Mr. Browne asked if DOT was willing to forego fencing this until they could find a reason to
fence it, which DOT agreed to do, and Mr. Gelhardt found an acceptable compromise.

Q: Was it reasonable for ARC to make a general policy statement? When there is a request
for a retention pond on existing public lands, the proposal should not include fencing, without a
good reason why it absolutely must be there, other than standard DOT policy.

A: The DOT would check whether the DEP requirements would dictate the fencing, since DOT
does it to get the projects permitted, based on storm water quality issues.

Mr. Gelhardt recommended that the DOT talk with the City of Tallahassee.

Mr. Cochran added that, from FWC’s perspective, storm water areas should be designed to
approximate a natural pond or wetland system in terms of shoreline contour and the steepness
of the slope, recognizing that this might require more acreage and other tradeoffs. The design
is important.

Mr. Duncan, DOT, noted that they worked with the Division of Forestry to make the ponds
compatible with DOF uses as much as possible.

Mr. Cochran moved the item forward “with the recommended modifications that Mr. Gelhardt,
Ms. Larson and Mr. Cochran made with respect to the site, on consent.” The motion was
seconded and passed unanimously.


ITEM 15:

Request: Consideration to ensure a 50-year private access and utility easement within
Lake Talquin State Forest, 30 feet by 1,200 feet (0.83 acres) is in compliance with the
Board of Trustees Incompatible Use Policy.

LOCATION: Gadsden County

Mr. Farr noted that Mr. Bill Higdon, the landowner, was there to answer questions.

Q: Are there any residents or structures on the property? Or is this in preparation for building
a structure?

A: There is one unfinished home that is dried-in, and one slab. Development was stopped
until they could secure the easement.

Q: Has approval to cross the gas pipeline been obtained?

A: Yes, that actually went with the property prior to being purchased from Mr. Higdon.

Q: Could the easement be restricted to two houses?

A: That would be no problem at all.


                                               11
Mr. Scott Woolam, Chief, Bureau of Public Land Administration, DSL, noted that it was
specified that the easement only be used for those residences; not open to the public down the
road.

Ms. Larson moved the item forward to the consent agenda. The motion was seconded and
unanimously approved.


ITEM 16:

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure that a modification to Easement No. 31156 between
the Board of Trustees, St. Johns River Water Management District, and the City of
Ormond Beach is in compliance with the Board of Trustees’ Incompatible Use of Natural
Resource Lands Policy.
COUNTY: Volusia

This item was taken out of sequence to accommodate a presenter’s attendance needed at an
11:00 WMD board meeting.

Isaac Turner, City Manager for the City of Ormond Beach, Judy Sloan with the City of Ormond
Beach, and Rich Berklew with the St. Johns River WMD were there to present.

Ms. Sloan made her presentation, reminding the ARC that this property had an easement
placed on it by the City in 1987, when they installed two test wells. In 1994, with the land still
under private ownership, the city obtained a seven year Consumptive Use Permit (CUP) and
constructed four production wells and the pipelines necessary to convey the water to the
eastern treatment plant. The permit required wetland monitoring. In 2001, the city requested a
20 year CUP, which the WMD granted, since there had been no adverse impacts observed
from the four producing wells. In 2003, the city requested a pipeline easement and in 2004
they got a CUP for three new wells and associated monitoring wells. Since this is now public
land, the city was now asking ARC for authority to construct these wells referenced in the most
recent WMD permit.

Rich Berklew made comments to the effect that the WMD staff had found the project did meet
the reasonable, beneficial use test and the WMD board did approve the project and request
that the ARC approve it as well.

ARC asked the following questions:

Q: What would the fallback be if putting in these three new wells did not resolve the city’s
saltwater intrusion issues?

A: It would be up to the city to propose something else if that happened. The city would have
to come back to the WMD and work something else out.

Q: Were there conditions in the permit to allow a modification of the drawdown in the face of
the continuing drought, if it began to affect the wetlands and responded that there was weekly
monitoring and biannual reporting to determine adverse impact?

A: If such impacts were determined, the city would have to readdress the issue in a way that
did not negatively impact the wetlands.

Q: Has the city implemented water reuse programs?


                                                12
A: The city has had a program in place since the early 1990’s and continues to expand its
reuse efforts. The city is at over 50 percent beneficial reuse and is committed to reaching
70%.

Q: Is the compensation being proposed appropriate for the development of an additional
pumping activity, since this is an actual increase of 1.7 million gallons a day rather than
spreading the same amount of pumping out among more wells and this is the mining of water,
just as a sand mine or a timber operation or wellfield, for which compensation is paid? Isn’t
this precedent-setting? What sort of requests will we be seeing from other cities as there is a
great demand for additional water?

A: This wellfield began when the land was in private ownership, which makes it a more unique
situation. It was acquired by the state and the WMD with undivided interest and with the
wellfields already on it. No other properties that the state owns in les-than-fee have
easements for production wells, though there is one that has an allowance for commercial
water wells on it. The purchase of this property weighed heavily on the WMD’s mission of
public water supply. While this situation is unique, recent policy is that there will be no 50
percent undivided interests and properties acquired with the WMD’s in the past several years
have been partitioned.

Mr. Gregory moved the approval of the staff recommendation to approve with the correction to
the name of the aquifer- Florida to Floridan. Mr. Browne seconded the motion. The motion
passed unanimously.


ITEM 17:

THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED AT THE OCTOBER 12, 2007, ARC MEETING

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure that a 50-year electric utility easement to the City of
Ocala across Silver River State Park and the Cross Florida Greenway is consistent with
the Board of Trustees' Linear Facilities Policy.

Location: Marion County

Mr. Farr explained that this item had been deferred because there was some question about
the amount of compensation being provided to achieve a net positive benefit. The
compensation has been set at $76,500, down from the $100,000 originally proposed by DRP.
More detail was put into the determination and the dollar value was recalculated and was less
than previously stated. Mr. Switt was there to represent the City.

Mr. Cochran noted that it wasn’t actual cash; it was in-kind work to be done by the City
personnel or a qualified contractor.

Mr. Cochran moved the item. It was seconded and unanimously approved.

Mr. Switt offered his comments regarding the previous discussion on the design of storm water
ponds. He said that some areas in Ocala were unsightly and not useable by the public.
Instead of fencing, Ocala uses curbs.

Mr. Farr inserted a Good Cause Item at this place in the agenda. It was a request for a
temporary construction easement to the Orlando Utilities Commission on Hilochee Wildlife
Management Area. There to speak on this item was Tasha Buford with the law firm of Young,
Van Assenderp, Charles Easterling with Orlando Utilities, and Carl Bullock with the design firm
of Golder and Associates.
                                               13
Ms. Buford noted the purpose was to provide compensating flood storage related to impacts
from the enlargement of access pads at the base of the OUC power line structures. The
power for these lines comes from the Polk County power plant. The lines were approved by
the Governor and Cabinet in 1981. She had slides to illustrate her points. The item is to
address the growing electrical demand in the area and eliminate the overloads (up to 130% at
the time of this request) of the design capacity by upgrading the transmission lines. This is
also being done to meet the requirements of the group that sets the standards for this area of
Central Florida. Finally, they made a commitment to have the upgrades ready and in place by
June 1, which necessitated the introduction of this good cause item. They have most of the
approvals needed, other than ARC’s approval to do the work on the South Pond restoration.

Mr. Chuck Easterling of Orland Utilities pointed out that the pads constructed 25 years before
were not anticipated to use the kind of equipment that will be used to effectuate this upgrade.

Mr. Carl Bullock, architect/engineer, collaborated with the FWC “to locate areas that were
appropriate for the compensating flood plain storage.”

Q: The larger keypads will stay in place after the work is done. Will additional fill be put on
State public lands?

A: Yes, within the easement.

Q: So you’re putting in more fill and compensating for that by doing something to the pond?

A: Yes. The WMD has described it as a “cup for cup replacement.” Put a cup in here; scoop
a cup out in another place. The pond is an old, manmade borrow pond that needs restoration
and is adjacent to the 100 year flood-plain. The goal is to do more than scoop out the pond;
they would do some enhancements and make it more like a natural lake. The slope will be
more natural, with a 10-to-1 gradual slope. The spoil will be taken offsite. There will be no
cost to the state for the restoration.

Q: Is the purpose of the easement to do the work around the borrow pit/pond?

A: Yes. It is temporary so that they can get in, do the enhancements, get out, and not hold
title.

Q: The easements for the pads were pre-existing to Hilochee’s public ownership?

A: Yes.

Mr. Cochran noted that this was unusual in that there were lots of mined pits on Hilochee and
they hoped they would be able to do some more of these types of enhancements.

Q: Why is the pond being enhanced? To satisfy whom?

A: The Water Management District brought up the compensating storage issue.

Mr. Gelhardt moved the project forward to the consent agenda. The motion was seconded
and it passed unanimously.


                                 INFORMATION/ DISCUSSION

ITEM 18: [December 13th only]
                                                14
Update on amendments to rule chapters 18-2 and 18-24, Florida Administrative Code,
pertaining to conservation lands management plan requirements and to consideration of
amendments to Florida Forever project boundaries by the Acquisition and Restoration Council.

Dr. Brock provided a brief summary of the amendment to 18-2 and 18-24, FAC. Based upon
feedback from the Joint Administrative Procedures Committee (JAPC), any boundary
amendment must be less than 1,000 acres in size, less than 10 percent of the original project
boundary, and less than $2 million in the county property tax assessor’s estimated value of the
property. If it does not meet all three of these criteria, it must be considered as a new project
and go through the more lengthy and in-depth evaluation process. If it is valued at less than
$500,000, the proposal will automatically be approved as a boundary amendment.

Q: How many amendments has ARC done that would no longer qualify as a boundary
amendment?

A: A lot.

Q: When does it go into effect?

A: The ARC meeting in February, 2008.

Q: Will applications that are proposed as boundary amendments but don’t meet these criteria
be considered within the first or second cycle application deadlines?

A: Yes.

Q: What was JAPC’s rationale?

A: It was a big fight to keep any criteria to allow for boundary amendments to go through a
less involved process and the ultimate defense that they found acceptable was that these had
been used since 1986 or 1988 and there was a historical utility to having this set of criteria
slightly different than that for new projects.

Q: It looks like the language says “or” not “and” .

A: JAPC’s position is that if you don’t meet any one of the criteria, you’re a new proposal.

Q: What about the option of three ARC members voting to waive the rules?

A: From JAPC’s perspective, that was not a viable option at all.

This exploration of the new boundary amendment rule sparked a discussion among the
participants at the hearing. The FWC was planning to propose rolling the three Florida Keys
Projects together. Some thought that this action ran counter to the exercise of identifying the
highest natural resource value projects. Mr. Gregory said that beginning the next day’s
meeting by reconfiguring the projects would not be helpful to the process.

Mr. Farr made it clear that the A list and the B list would continue to exist; the goal was to
identify the top 15 projects. Within the A list, this exercise would create a subset of projects
ARC has identified as the highest priority based on their natural resources.

Dr. Brock said that the Board of Trustees would be considering the Florida Forever report and
the high resource list that came out of the next day’s meeting as two separate items. Mr. Farr
added that this same exercise would be repeated in June, similar to what had been done
                                                15
during the time of Preservation 2000. At that time, the acquisition cycles were 12 months
instead of 6 months. Mr. Green commented that made more sense. Mr. Gelhardt noted that
doing this exercise got people engaged, if nothing else.

Ms. Larson commented that she wanted to keep the Keys consolidation and the St. Joe and
Upper St. Marks consolidation open for consideration. She thought it made good sense to
combine those, though she did not think any of the projects should be split up. Mr. Green did
not think that the issue of combining should be decided without adequate time for the
principals to consider it.

Mr. Gregory asked if ARC was at this point in the cycle and ARC was not doing this
identification exercise, what would the process be for this combining or splitting of projects?
Wouldn’t there be a process leading up to those sorts of decisions? Dr. Brock said there had
been no defined process, though there had been occasional instances of projects being
combined, for a number of reasons.

It was determined that this was not time to go through this sort of lumping and splitting
exercise; it was turning an orderly process. Mr. Browne said that he thought the projects
should be chosen from the list of projects as they existed this meeting day. Any other
considerations were for another day.

Mr. Cochran noted that there should be a “housekeeping” list soon, and this issue of combining
or splitting projects should be on it. He suggested that DSL consider this discussion and some
of the suggestions that had been raised, decide the DSL position and how it would affect the
projects, and ARC could consider consolidating or separating them at some future date, rather
than the following day’s meeting.

Dr. Brock said that there had been suggestions that the first draft of the list be released – the
ones that you will start with tomorrow morning. Chairman Green said that some may make
changes to their list based on the day, so their list for consideration tomorrow is not yet
available. The general consensus was that they were not done with their lists yet. Ms. Larson
suggested that the draft be made available in the morning, then step through the new project
decisions, then hand out the final lists from each and break and come back. Mr. Gregory said
it was public record, but Chairman Green wondered how to handle this when there were only
12 people left in a room that held 100 people first thing in the morning. Mr. Farr noted that the
list would be on the computer tomorrow, up on the screen, where it can be manipulated.

Chairman Green wanted to know if it was acceptable for him to cast one of his votes for a
project that Tall Timbers has an easement on part of the property and was told that all he had
to do was disclose that; he would not need to abstain from voting.

Dr. Brock asked them to make any changes they needed to on the drafts they had first
provided. There will be a draft and a final. It was decided to let each member read off their 15
projects and mark them on the spreadsheet; it can be set to tally.

Mr. Jim Muller, Muller and Associates, thanked everyone for participating in having some
semblance of a ranking process; he said it energized people and increase participation overall.
He thought this exercise should be done at least once a year, if not in June, with the same type
of process. Dr. Hilsenbeck, TNC, had some comments that he decided to forego; he wished
he hadn’t seen the list at all and had waited until the following day.

The meeting adjourned at 5:31 p.m.



                                               16
ITEM 19: [December 14th only]

Discussion of the role of the Acquisition and Restoration Council in shaping a Florida Forever
successor program.


ITEM 20:

The following management plans for properties smaller than 160 acres and minor
amendments to management plans have been approved since the October ARC meeting.

Management Plans:

South Tampa Greenway (OGT, 14 Acres)
Miami Circle at Brickell Point (DHR, 2.2 Acres)

Minor Amendments to Management Plans:

Etoniah Creek State Forest (DOF), installation of composting toilet at primitive camp site.
Blackwater River State Forest (DOF), placement of an RV dump station at the Krul Recreation
Area.
Etoniah Creek State Forest (DOF), re-alignment of West-V Road.


                                      GENERAL ISSUES

ITEM 21: [For December 13th only]

REQUEST: Receive public comment on general land acquisition and management
issues not included on this agenda.

Senator Ken Pruitt spoke in favor of the Florida Forever and the Florida Communities Trust
Programs, noting the large crowd in attendance at both recent meetings. He was in support of
the the Indian River Lagoon Blueway Florida Forever project. This was just recently added to
the Water Resources Development Act in Congress. He introduced Dr. Shirley Pomponi,
President and CEO of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, and Bill Heffler from St. Lucie
County government, both of whom spoke in favor of the project. Mr. Heffler added that the
County Commissioners expressed their appreciation for all ARC does and their support for
Florida Forever. He conveyed that the County Commission would do all they possibly could to
make sure that Florida Forever will continue.

Mr. Bob Joyner spoke in favor of the West Aucilla River project which is land he owns. He
confirmed that they were trying to work with the FWC to provide hunting opportunities to the
handicapped or youth duck hunts and expressed his concern that he wanted to make it
possible for his land to remain in the hands of his family. He was followed by Chris Cabellero,
his representative, who characterized the project as sort of a manageably sized pilot project for
special opportunity hunts. He requested that it be moved to the A list and acquired.

Mr. Mark Glisson introduced fourth term at-large Leon County Commissioner Cliff Thaell, past
president of the Florida Association of Counties, to speak on behalf of the Millstone Plantation
project and Chason Woods, a boundary modification for the Wakulla Springs Protection Zone
Florida Forever project. Both have as natural attributes aquifer recharge and protection. Mr.
Glisson also introduced Pete Mallison, representing owner of the 80 acres immediately
adjacent to Millstone who is interested in selling a conservation easement, as well; they

                                               17
support the Millstone project being on the A list. Mr. Glisson indicated that the legal issues
surrounding the property should be resolved within the year.

Mr. Mike Knight, Program Manager for the Brevard County Endangered Lands Program, spoke
in support of keeping the Indian River Lagoon Blueway and the Brevard Coast Scrub Project
on the A list for Florida Forever.

Mr. Ed Isenhour, Volusia County Division of Land Acquisition Managemen, spoke in support of
the Volusia Conservation Corridor, Spruce Creek, and the Indian River Lagoon Blueway. He
also reported that the Upland Ecosystem Restoration Project efforts were ongoing in Volusia
and the county appreciated the support of the UERP.

Dr. Hilary Swain, Archbold Research Station, spoke in support of the Lake Wales Ridge
Ecosystem project remaining on the A list and making its acquisition a high priority and
finishing the job. She noted its uniqueness (“there is no other Lake Wales Ridge.”), its multi-
county support and other partnerships. Roberta Pickert, GIS manager at Archbold, spoke
about the importance of acquiring the scattershot of privately owned parcels to provide for
prescribed fire management.

Mr. Manley Fuller, Florida Wildlife Federation, spoke in support of the St. Johns Blueway, the
Northeast Timberlands, the Ochlockonee Conservation Area, and Lake Wales Ridge. He also
advocated the creation of a strengthened successor program, urging all to make their
legislators, the Governor, and the Tax Revision Commission aware of this need.

Mr Jesse Bortwick spoke in favor of Escribano Point and the Nokuse Plantation North projects,
on behalf of the Air Force. He said that they had recently been able to get $1.8 million to be
used for Escribano or Nokuse.

Q: What is the impact on Nokuse from noise of the Joint Strike Fighters coming to Eglin?

A: The need is to maintain compatible development on that property, as Mr. Davis has been
doing.

Q: Is there a timeline on using that 1.89 million available now?

A: Five years before it goes away, but the longer it takes to get it on contract the harder it will
be to get more money.

Q: Can the information on the analysis of the changes regarding the military be provided to
put in the project description for these projects?

A: Yes.

Q: Could you provide the Division with an appendix or a letter with those documentations as a
part of the both of those projects?

A: Yes.

Commander Dave Dahl, DOD, spoke in support of Clear Creek and Escribano Point, as well
as the Northeast Florida Timberland project. In particular he urged state acquisition of Clear
Creek; DOD has $ 5.03 million available in Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
(REPI) funding to offer up as an acquisition partner for that.

Q: Where is the Jacksonville area field?

                                                 18
A: Within the Northeast Florida Timberland project, and it has been approved and submitted
for REPI funding. DOD is waiting for commitment from the state on that one.

Mr. Marty Martin, DOD, spoke in favor of the Clear Creek project that there is some funding
for, and for which they have agreements from the Navy and Santa Rosa county. It is
supposed to be an A project with 75% Florida Forever and 25% Navy funding.

Ms. Marlene Conaway, Tallahassee resident and Conservation Trust of Florida board member
spoke in favor of filling in the Ocala-to-Osceola Greenway, working with the other partners in
this effort, which include the Florida Trail Association, the USDA, the Office of Greenways and
Trails, the Florida Wildlife Federation, the Forest Trails Council, Defenders of Wildlife,
University of Florida, and Florida National Scenic Trail and potential funding partners of the
Suwannee River Water Management District and Camp Blanding. She asked those who had
come with her to support this project to stand up so that the ARC staff and members could see
who they were.

Mr. Tom Hoctor spoke in support of those projects in the Florida Ecological Greenways
network, the Camp Blanding-Osceola Greenway and the Northeast Florida Timberlands being
critical linkages. He noted that it would go from Orlando to southeast Georgia and serves as a
corridor between the two major black bear populations – the Ocala bears and the Osceola to
Okefenokee bear population and provided details using maps to further explain the
connections and possible disconnects from development that could occur in this area. Camp
Blanding potentially has some funding to assist in buying lands adjacent to the camp so
military lands that could be managed to provide additional habitat for red cockaded
woodpeckers were identified on the maps.

Mr. Jim Muller spoke in support of the Northeast Florida Blueway and the St. Johns River
Blueway. He noted that Matanzas Inlet was the last undredged inlet on Florida’s east coast.
The St. Johns River is an American Heritage initiative – one of only four in the nation. There
were letters and emails sent to DEP and ARC members in support of these projects.

St. Johns County Board of County Commissioner Cyndi Stevenson spoke in support of the
Northeast Florida Blueway and the St. Johns River Blueway projects, recounting a recent
sailboat trip up the east coast of Florida and the distinct differences upon arriving along this
section of the shoreline.

Ms. Sarah Bailey, St. Johns County Commissioner, spoke in support of the Northeast Florida
Blueway and St. Johns River Blueway, noting that they had 70 acres on Julington Creek that
they intended to keep in open space in perpetuity and she wanted to see all these other
properties kept that way as well.

Tony Cubbedge, Land Management Coordinator for St. Johns County, spoke in support of
these projects ( and ½ of the management staff), adding that St. Johns County owns
approximately 19,000 acres along the St. Johns River Blueway and has used $13.5 million
dollars to do it. They also own 2,000 acres along the Northeast Florida Blueway and maintain
14 parks along the Atlantic Intercoastal Waterway.

Mr. Paul Johnson, Environmental Consultant, spoke in favor of the Northeast Florida Blueway
and St. Johns River Blueway Florida Forever projects and mentioned that he had helped
decide which part of Florida’s east coast was most suitable for a National Estuarine Research
Reserve, and that was Guana-Tolomato-Matanzas NERR which is right along these two
projects. There were 7 DRI’s pending or proposed in the Matanzas area which are likely to
result in lowering the water quality of that system and the overall integrity of a system that
federal and state laws have attempted to protect.

                                                 19
Ms. Larson, citizen member, ARC, observed that St. Johns was experiencing growth pressures
similar to those experienced by other counties years before and said that many citizens had
contacted her directly asking her to stop development – and that it is a challenge to the County
and the County Commission to put development where it belongs. She challenged the county
and the DCA to do their job in putting development where it belongs.

Mr. Glisson coordinated speakers in favor of the Lake Santa Fe project and the Clay Ranch
project. He began with Lake Santa Fe, asking those who had come in support of it to stand,
noting that the Suwannee River WMD had agreed to partner with the Alachua County Forever
Program to purchase property north of Lake Alto (part of Lake Santa Fe). The largest
landowner within the project (south side of the lake) has decided he’s going to consider a
bargain sale. He mentioned that Mr. Bob Ballard, DEP, had said that we needed to buy more
waterfront property and this was freshwater waterfront, or interior waterfront.

Mr. Glisson then moved to the Clay Ranch project, a piece of property he said he used to
trespass on as a child, to fish. He introduced Ms. Cathy Cantwell, Acquisition Chair for the
Putnam Land Conservancy, who had maps showing that Clay Ranch was the best option to
keep the connection for the wildlife who use the corridor. She also noted that Mr. Tommy Clay
was the President and founder of the organization. Mr. Clay spoke about the threats of estate
tax and that they had been fortunate and able to hold onto all their land thus far, but it was
getting tougher. Ms. Laura Day waived her time to speak in support of Clay Ranch, and Ms.
Allison Blakeslee waived her time to speak in favor of Lake Santa Fe.

Ms. Julie Wraithmell, Wildlife Policy Coordinator for Audubon, spoke and provided a hard copy
of a list of projects that the Florida Audubon chapters consider important and intend to be there
to support the management of after the project is purchased. These include: Crossbar/Al Bar,
Myakka Ranchlands, Tiger Island Complex, Northeast Florida Blueway, Adams Ranch, Big
Bend Swamp, Florida Keys Ecosystem, Florida First Magnitude Springs, Green Swamp, Lake
Wales, North Key Largo Hammock, Rainbow River, Upper St. Marks, Wacissa, Wekiva-Ocala
Greenway.

Mr. Mark Middlebrook spoke, representing the City of Jacksonville and the St. Johns River
Alliance, a coalition of 13 counties along the St. Johns River. He was supporting Pumpkin Hill
Creek project and was optimistic that due to the market slow down, there were some parcels
that it might be possible to acquire that had not been possible before. The North Florida Land
Trust was committed to raising private dollars to assist in acquiring Pumpkin Hill land.

Mr. Burt Eno, President of Rainbow River Conservation, Incorporated, spoke in favor of
keeping both the Rainbow River Corridor Project and the South Goethe project on the A list.
He gave an overview of the projects and an update on the threats to that natural system.
Rainbow River has National Landmark Status and is the third largest spring in the world. The
FCT funded the purchase of a 33-acre parcel in 2007. South Goethe’s Cool Springs addition
is in the recharge area for the headwaters of Rainbow Springs and River. His group is working
to get as much of this land in conservation as they can, working with whoever can help them,
as well as talking with legislators about a successor program.

Ms. Debbie Shireclag (phonetic), Executive Director, Conservation Trust, commented about
the Camp Blanding to Osceola National Forest Greenway and the Northeast Florida
Timberlands Projects, the O – to – O, stressing the importance of partnership and highlighting
in red on a map the DRI’s currently proposed. She also noted that Ed Montgomery was a
landowner who was a willing seller, and reminded ARC of MR. Montgomery’s “commitment to
conservation with the swamp conservation area.”

At this point ARC public hearing broke for lunch.

                                               20
Mr. Neil Fleckenstein, Tall Timbers Research Station Land Conservancy, spoke in support of
the Ochlockonee River Conservation Area Florida Forever project, noting that Tall Timbers’
100,000 acres includes 55,000 acres that are under permanent conservation easement in the
Ochlockonee River Watershed., and this project includes lands that close a critical
conservation gap. Tall Timbers also has additional projects underway to put more lands within
this watershed in conservation.

Dr. Richard Hilsenbeck, TNC, spoke in support of the Ochlockonee River Conservation project,
mentioning that TNC would be bringing another piece of that puzzle to ARC for consideration
during the next Florida Forever cycle.

Mr. Wes Howell, The Woodlands Company, spoke in favor of the Ochlockonee River
Conservation project, noting that there were only two landowners in the project and they were
eager to move forward.

Mr. Mark Glisson, environmental consultant, spoke in favor of the Ochlockonee River project
as well, noting its natural attributes.

Mr. Ben Fusaro, citizen volunteer, Florida chapter of the Sierra Club, Ms. Susie Caplowe,
lobbyist, Florida chapter of the Sierra Club, and Mr. George Willson all spoke in support of
Three Sisters Springs, 56 acres within the boundaries of the Florida Springs Coastal
Greenway which has support from Senators Fasano and Bill Nelson, Representative Schultz
and Congresswoman Brown-Waite. Mr. Willson said that an appraisal of this area would be
completed in January and a partnership to acquire it was being formed. Experts say this is the
number one manatee site in Florida from the USFWS perspective. Over 300 units on the
property were grandfathered. There is a new owner who might be willing to sell, and he
sought assistance in cobbling together a partnership from several sources.

Mr. Howard Pardue spoke in support of continuing the Florida National Scenic Trail
acquisitions as a high priority.

Dr. Richard Hilsenbeck, TNC, spoke in support of a Florida Forever successor program,
acknowledging that there were many excellent projects and there was a demonstrated need to
continue conservation land acquisition. He suggested putting a suite of projects on the A list
and let the legislators worry about it, as Senator Carlton had mentioned.

Mr. Jim Muller, Muller and Associates, spoke in support of Big Bend/Holopaw in Osceola
County, the Florida Keys Ecosystem, North Key Largo Hammocks, and Lake Wales Ridge
projects.




                                              21
                       Acquisition and Restoration Council (ARC)
                                    Council Meeting

                                                Agenda

PUBLIC HEARING:               Friday, December 14, 2007
TIME:                         9:00 a.m.
LOCATION:                     The Department of Environmental Protection
                              Conference Room A, Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building,
                              3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida.

Present: Mr. Bob Ballard, Deputy Secretary, Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP);Mr. Lane Green, Vice-Chair and Citizen Member; Ms. Vickie
Larson, Citizen Member; Mr. Mike Long, Division of Forestry (DOF); Mr. Gary
Cochran, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC); Mr. Ryan
Wheeler, Division of Historical Resources (DHR); and Ms. Janice Browning,
Department of Community Affairs (DCA).

ARC Staff Director, Mr. Jim Farr, Division of State Lands, DEP.


ITEM 1:

Announcements

Mr. Farr noted that there were 111 people who signed in for the public hearing.

He added, as a follow-up to discussions the previous day, that, upon further investigation, fences
were required around stormwater ponds with slopes of four to one or greater, in accordance with
DEP regulations. If there is a shallow slope, no fencing is required.


                                           OLD BUSINESS

Mr. Cochran moved to approve the entire consent agenda (Items 2,3,5,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,17
and Good Cause item.) The motion was seconded and unanimously approved.

ITEM 2:

Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consideration of October 11, 2007 and October 12, 2007 public hearing and
meeting summaries.



                                         NEW BUSINESS

ITEM 3:

Approved on consent agenda.
REQUEST: Consider the proposed 2008 ARC Calendar


                                       LAND ACQUISITION

ITEM 4: [For December 13th meeting only]

REQUEST: Receive public testimony on the three new proposals under consideration for
addition to the February, 2008 Florida Forever priority list and the projects on the existing
August, 2007 Florida Forever Priority List.


ITEM 5:

Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consider Project Evaluation Reports for new projects.

ITEM 6: [For December 14th only]

REQUEST: Develop the February 2008 Florida Forever Priority List.

Mr. Farr reminded the members of the steps for this exercise.

Ms. Larson made the motion to remove Harris School from the Florida Forever list. It was
seconded and unanimously approved.

Ms. Larson made the motion that Millstone Plantation remain on the list in its current status until the
outstanding issue is resolved. The motion was seconded and approved, with one dissenting vote.

Mr. Long made the motion to move Devil’s Garden, Mill Creek, Okeechobee Battlefield and Panther
Glades from the A list to the B list since these projects had either no willing sellers or unsuccessful
negotiations. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved.

Mr. Cochran commented that Devil’s Garden and Panther Glades were initially on FWC’s top 15
projects because they are critical landscape linkages for the panther. They were in reluctant
agreement with removing the projects to the B list. Mr. Farr said DSL recognized the importance of
these projects, which was why the staff recommendation was made to move it to the B list.

Mr. Farr discussed the Crossbar/AlBar project, mentioning that the Division of State Lands was
more interested in Al Bar. The Southwest Florida Water Management District would take the lead
on the Crossbar portion. Mr. Cochran added that Pasco County said it would participate as a
partner in this as well.

On a roll call vote, all members voted favorably to add CrossBar/Al Bar to the Florida Forever
priority list. .

On a roll call vote, five of the seven ARC members voted to rank this project as an A project. (Mr.
Wheeler and Mr. Cochran ranked it as a B project.)

On a roll call vote, all members voted favorably to add Myakka Ranchlands to the Florida Forever
priority list. .

                                              2
On a roll call vote, five of the seven ARC member voted to rank this project as an A project. (Mr.
Wheeler and Mr. Cochran ranked it as a B project.)

On a roll call vote, all members voted favorably to add Pillsbury Mound to the Florida Forever
priority list.

On a roll call vote, five of the seven ARC members voted to rank this project as an A project. (Ms.
Larson and Mr. Long ranked it as a B project.)

In summary, all three projects were added to the A list.

Mr. Long made a motion to move the West Aucilla River Buffer to the A list. This motion was
seconded and unanimously approved.

Before moving to the step where each member read through the list of their top 15 projects, Deputy
Secretary Ballard said he had understood that the previous day’s hearing had been well attended,
long and vocal. He thought that reflected that there was a huge need for Florida Forever and a
successor program. That Senator Pruitt was in attendance was another signal of that. He
cautioned all those in support of a Florida Forever project that it was not the end of the world if their
project was not in the top 15; the lobbying and support for these projects would continue, as it
would for a successor program.

The list might not be 15; it would be where the break point was, and that break point would be
decided when the list was created and tallied in real time.

In light of Ms. Klena’s absence and that she had submitted a draft list, it was determined with the
approval of legal that her list be included in the calculations.

Mr. Long made a motion to consider her list as part of the exercise. This was seconded and
unanimously approved.

There was a discussion about changing several of the scores to achieve a set of 15 (doing a re-
ranking among all those with the same total that put the list beyond a total of 15), but Ms. Browning
offered her personal opinion that doing so would take away from the original exercise.

Mr. Long said he would prefer to see the list set at those projects that totaled 3 or more votes.
Deputy Secretary Ballard, Chairman Green and Mr. Cochran were supportive of Mr. Long’s
concept.

Mr. Long made the motion to entertain that concept, which would result in a list of 21 top A ranked
Florida Forever projects. It was seconded and passed unanimously.

The final list of 21 was identified as follows: 7 votes for Florida Keys Ecosystem and Lake Wales
Ridge Ecosystem; 6 votes for Wekiva-Ocala Greenway; 5 votes for Adams Ranch, Apalachicola
River, and Upper St. Marks River Corridor; 4 votes for Bombing Range Ridge, Caber Coastal
Connector Tract,Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem, Escribano Point, Florida’s First Magnitude
Springs, St. Johns River Blueway, and Wakulla Springs Protection Zone; 3 votes for Clear
Creek/Whiting Field, Estero Bay, Indian River Lagoon Blueway, Myakka Ranchlands, Northeast
Florida Blueway, Northeast Florida Timberlands Watershed, Ochlockonee River Conservation Area,
and St. Joe Timberlands

Mr. Long added that flexibility was critical in this effort and there would be new projects coming up.
Staff has to have flexibility to work within the range of 3 or above, and ARC is responsible for

                                               3
ensuring that no viable, important projects are ignored; they need the ability to continue down the
list as well.

Mr. Cochran moved to approve the entire final list with the additions and deletions that were made.
It was seconded and unanimously approved.

Chairman Green thanked everyone for their efforts, both as ARC members or audience members.
He appreciated that staff had provided the necessary materials to help make these decisions.

Ms. Larson noted the interest and support for the program that she had received was
overwhelming. She explained that she was the citizens’ voice and needed input on anything that
would be important in the development of a successor program.

Deputy Secretary Ballard observed that each list was different, as each ARC member had a slightly
different mission.

Someone from the audience suggested that, anytime the list is sent out, the entire A list should be
provided, with the 21 projects identified by ARC highlighted; this would clarify that the A list is larger
than just those 21 projects.) The numbers of emails, letters and other correspondence would be
useful in the description of the ranking process as well, since it illustrates the degree of public
involvement and interest. Chairman Green concurred with these comments.


BOUNDARY MODIFICATIONS

ITEM 7:

Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Amend boundary of Wakulla Springs Protection Zone Florida Forever project to
include approximately 700 acres with a tax assessed value of $1,392,980.

Location: Leon County


ITEM 8:

Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consideration of a 675-acre boundary addition to the Wekiva-Ocala Florida
Forever project with a tax assessed value of $1,228,740 called the Pine Plantation
Addition.

LOCATION: Orange County



                                       LAND MANAGEMENT

LAND MANAGEMENT PLANS

ITEM 9:


                                               4
Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consider a 10-year Management Plan update for Edward Ball Wakulla Springs
State Park.

LOCATION: Wakulla County


ITEM 10:

Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consider an initial 10-year Management Plan for Colt Creek State Park

LOCATION: Polk County


ITEM 11:

Approved on consent agenda.


REQUEST: Consider a 10-year Management Plan update for Shell Key Preserve

LOCATION: Pinellas County


ITEM 12:

Approved on consent agenda.


REQUEST: Modification of compensation requirements for a 79± acre, non-exclusive
easement to the Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) across a portion of the Point
Washington State Forest.

LOCATION: Walton County


ITEM 13:

Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure a perpetual right-of-way easement, containing 8.46
acres, more or less, to the Florida Department of Transportation, is consistent with the
Linear Facilities Policy.

LOCATION: Washington County

APPLICANT: Florida Department of Transportation (DOT)

LOCATION: Pine Log State Forest
          Sections 5 and 6, Township 01 South, Range 16 West

                                         5
ITEM 14:

Approved on consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure (1) a temporary construction easement, containing
0.01 acre, more or less; and (2) a perpetual right-of-way easement, containing 5.09 acres,
more or less, to the Florida Department of Transportation, are consistent with the Linear
Facilities Policy.

LOCATION: Walton County

APPLICANT: Florida Department of Transportation (DOT)

LOCATION: Point Washington State Forest
          Sections 20, 29, 30, 31 & 32, Township 02 South, Range 19 West


ITEM 15:

Approved on consent agenda.

Request: Consideration to ensure a 50-year private access and utility easement within
Lake Talquin State Forest, 30 feet by 1,200 feet (0.83 acres) is in compliance with the
Board of Trustees Incompatible Use Policy.

LOCATION: Gadsden County


ITEM 16:

This item was considered immediately following ARC’s vote on the consent agenda.

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure that a modification to Easement No. 31156 between
the Board of Trustees, St. Johns River Water Management District, and the City of Ormond
Beach is in compliance with the Board of Trustees’ Incompatible Use of Natural Resource
Lands Policy.

COUNTY: Volusia

APPLICANT: City of Ormond Beach

LOCATION: Tiger Bay State Forest

Mr. Farr noted that this was left the previous day with no outstanding issues, but the title is jointly
held by the Water Management District and the Board of Trustees. There is a 161 agreement on
the property and it was the WMD’s intent to use this for water while the Board of Trustees’ focus
was resource conservation. Chairman Ballard noted that Secretary Sole supported this item’s
approval, with the assurance that the City will not ever come back to ask to use the property for


                                               6
more water. Chairman Green reminded the ARC that the title of the Floridan Aquifer needed to
be corrected.

Ms. Browning moved the approval of item 16, with the caveat that there would be no further
request from the applicant for additional wells. It was seconded and unanimously approved.

ITEM 17:

Approved on consent agenda.

THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED AT THE OCTOBER 12, 2007, ARC MEETING

REQUEST: Consideration to ensure that a 50-year electric utility easement to the City of
Ocala across Silver River State Park and the Cross Florida Greenway is consistent with
the Board of Trustees' Linear Facilities Policy.

Location: Marion County

APPLICANT: City of Ocala

LOCATION: Silver River State Park/Cross Florida Greenways


                                   INFORMATION/ DISCUSSION



ITEM 18: [December 13th only]

Update on amendments to rule chapters 18-2 and 18-24, Florida Administrative Code

ITEM 19: [December 14th only]

Discussion of the role of the Acquisition and Restoration Council in shaping a Florida
Forever successor program.

Ms. Poppell, Acting Director, Division of State Lands, spoke to the members about the upcoming
discussion at the next meeting of ARC’s role in the successor program related to acquisitions and
land management reviews. She proposed to take the list back to DSL to develop some ideas and
discussions on a workplan for further refining of the list, determining what is feasible, and bring that
information back. She asked for the ARC’s assistance in developing strategies to complete projects.

Deputy Secretary Ballard talked about his interactions with legislators who are urging “laser focus”
and a tightening up of Florida Forever. He thought it would be great if we could tighten up
boundaries where we know the project can never be completed as currently bounded, and perhaps
surplussing some areas within some of these projects with a checkerboard of parcels and put that
money back into that project to complete it.

Q: How will ARC continue the project identification process that was started this time? Will it be
every six months with adding and subtracting projects? Will be an annual exercise? Can there be
discussion at ARC on a target for continuation of the process? It should be clear to the public what
the process is going to be.



                                              7
A: Staff needs to mull this over, but DSL does want to bring ideas out and be as clear as possible
in bringing that information back. Staff should be able to provide the information to make those
decisions at the next meeting and lay out criteria.


ITEM 20:

The following management plans for properties smaller than 160 acres and minor
amendments to management plans have been approved since the October ARC meeting.

Management Plans:

South Tampa Greenway (OGT, 14 Acres)

Miami Circle at Brickell Point (DHR, 2.2 Acres)

Minor Amendments to Management Plans:

Etoniah Creek State Forest (DOF), installation of composting toilet at primitive camp site.

Blackwater River State Forest (DOF), placement of an RV dump station at the Krul Recreation
Area.

Etoniah Creek State Forest (DOF), re-alignment of West-V Road.


GOOD CAUSE ITEM:

Approved on consent agenda.

Hilochee Temporary Construction Easement


The meeting adjourned at 10:30 a.m.




                                             8

								
To top