back to home page

MINUTES
VOLUSIA FOREVER ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Thursday, March 28, 2002
9:00a.m. – 5:00p.m.
VOTRAN Complex, 950 Big Tree Road
South Daytona, FL 32119

Meeting Called to Order

Reid Hughes, Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:04 a.m.

Roll Call

Reid Hughes, Chair, instructed the Recording Secretary to record the roll of the Members in attendance, in which eight (8) Members were present.

Approval of Minutes

Reid Hughes, Chair, called for a motion to approve the February 20, 2002, Minutes. Member Gordon Kipp made a motion to approve the minutes with no corrections or addition. Member Dennis Bayer seconded the motion that carried by unanimous voice vote.

Introduction of New Committee Member

Chairman Reid Hughes welcomed and presented the newly appointed Advisory Committee Member, Phil Maroney, who replaced resigned Member Doug Daniels.

Proxy Voting

Chairman Reid Hughes explained that excused Member Carrie Stewart completed the Ranking sheet and requested that Frank B. Gummey, III provide the Committee with the ruling on absentee voting.

Frank B. Gummey, III explained that there is not a provision in Resolution 2001-69 or the Committee’s By-Laws that permits proxy voting. Therefore, with the absence of such a provision, a member would have to be present in order to vote on any matter that comes before the Committee.

Member Dennis Bayer requested if Member Carrie Stewart’s vote could be utilized as a reference by the Committee even though it could not be part of the voting.

Frank B. Gummey, III stated that the decision to utilize Member Carrie Stewart’s vote as a reference would be up to the Committee.

The Committee did not have any objection to utilizing Member Carrie Stewart’s vote as a reference.

Process/Procedure Review

At the request of Chairman Reid Hughes, Rob Walsh provided the following review of the Ranking Process/Procedures:

1. Determine Eligibility of Florida Audubon Property.
2. Rank & evaluate all properties that have been determined as eligible with staff providing a review of the evaluation reports, and slide presentation/pictures of the properties.
3. Property Owner/Representative would be allotted 3-minutes to provide any additional information.
4. Public participants would be allotted 3-minutes each for comments.
5. Questions and Answers from the Committee to staff and/or property owner/representative.
6. Each Member would rank the properties with a number from 1 to 12 or 13 (1 - being the best).
7. Staff would add those numbers for a total, divide the total by the number of Members who are present and provide a total average score, with the lowest score being the highest ranked application.
8. The Committee would create an "A" and "B" list, per Resolution 2001-198, after all the properties have been ranked. He emphasized that the properties on the "A" list are the properties in which the Committee has determined to be the most important and they must be eligible for matching funds. The "B" list properties are important, but are not the highest priority, and may not be required to have matching funds. He reminded the Committee that the program was established with the premise of obtaining matching funds to "get the most bang for the buck." However, the Committee does have the ability to fully fund an acquisition.
9. The Committee would forward their recommendations to the County Council.

Chairman Reid Hughes explained that the Committee’s recommendations would be presented to the County Council on May 2, 2002.

Member Dennis Bayer asked staff to explain the process after the Committee’s recommendations had been presented to the County Council.

Rob Walsh explained that the County Council would review the Committee’s recommendations, make any adjustments deemed necessary, and provide staff with the authorization to proceed with the acquisition process (i.e., locating matching funds and submitting an application for funding). He further explained that the Committee’s schedule had been adjusted to fall in line with FCT’s application cycle.

Douglas Weaver explained that staff would recommend that only 2 or 3 applications be submitted to FCT, thus ensuring quality applications. He further explained that staff would be recommending the source for matching funds based upon the property’s size, connectivity to other conservation lands, water resource, probability of success, etc.

Conflict of Interest

Member Richard Schuler requested clarification on the issue of "conflict of interest" as he is a member of the Florida Audubon.

Frank B. Gummey, III referenced Resolution 2001-69, Section VIII, Membership Restrictions, to explain that a member of an organization does not constitute a conflict of interest. However, if the member is a board member, officer, employee, consultant, advisor, or has a contractual or beneficial relationship with that organization, there would be a conflict of interest and a "Conflict of Interest" form (CE 8-A) would be required from the Committee Member along with public disclosure of this conflict of interest.

Chairman Reid Hughes publicly disclosed that he was a board member of the Florida Audubon, which created a conflict of interest regarding the Florida Audubon property. He provided a "Conflict of Interest" form (CE-8A) to the Recording Secretary and turned the meeting over to Vice-Chairman Dennis Bayer.

Discussion and Determination of Eligibility for Submitted Application

Florida Audubon – Rob Walsh provided the following information about this property: 1) it is approximately 16 acres in size with the bulk of the property being submerged lands; 2) is located east of US Hwy. 1 near the Spruce Creek Preserve (a map was used to further depict the location of this property); and 3) the initial review report does demonstrate that this application meets the Committee’s criteria for eligibility.

Clay Henderson, Representative for Florida Audubon and Member of the Friends of Spruce Creek, was present to provide a slide presentation to the Committee, which depicts the location of the property (east of US Hwy. 1 near Spruce Creek Preserve in New Smyrna) and provided a brief history on the Spruce Creek Preserve. He explained that this acquisition furthers the efforts in completing the Spruce Creek Preserve, which has an approved management plan for multiple uses, and this property is within the CARL boundary of the Preserve. He also explained that the public has utilized this area as a boat ramp/launch and the Florida Audubon does not want the liability associated with this use.

Member Richard Schuler made a motion to accept the Florida Audubon Property Application as an eligible project. Member Gordon Kipp seconded the motion that carried unanimously by voice vote with Chairman Reid Hughes abstaining due to a conflict of interest.

Vice-Chairman Dennis Bayer turned the meeting back over to Chairman Reid Hughes.

Evaluation and Ranking of Eligible Applications –

Rob Walsh stated that the applications would be presented to the Committee in the order in which Staff received them, with the exception of the Kirton Farm and Akins properties. Rob Walsh and Randall Sleister reviewed Staff’s Evaluation Reports, provided aerial photographs, as noted, presented a map of the County displaying the approximate location of each property, and explained potential issues or concerns for each property as follows:

1. Catholic Diocese – Aerial photographs provided by staff. Property size, land management (i.e., controlled burning, and shoreline erosion prevention), 40 acres platted as a subdivision, and lack of connectivity to other conservation lands are issues or concerns. The property meets 13 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. Steve Triece, Representative for the Owners, was present to provide additional information. He stated that it is the desire of the Catholic Diocese to make this property public land and continue utilizing the property as a primitive camping facility for various groups such as the Boy Scouts. He also stated that the Catholic Diocese has received offers from developers for this property, as it is a platted subdivision; however the Diocese wishes to pursue the option to make this public land, first.

Mr. Mike Thompson, Member of the Sierra Club and public participant, recommended this property for acquisition, as there is a potential threat of development and a need to preserve riverfront property.

Chairman Reid Hughes stated that this property had the potential to be an application appropriate for ECHO as well as Forever.

2. Emporia/Pierson (Heinemann) – Aerial photographs provided by staff. Land Management issues: controlled burning due to the property being in close proximity to SR 40; and restoration or maintenance of pasture area. The property meets 15 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. Shane Crosby, Representative for the Owners, was present to provide additional information.

3. Kirton Farm/ Akins – Aerial and ground photographs provided by staff. Land management (i.e., controlled burning), lack of connectivity to other conservation lands, obtaining matching funds and potential contamination of property are issues. A less than fee acquisition (conservation easement with public access to lake/barrow pit) has been offered by and discussed with the Kirtons, but not with the Akins. The property meets 11 of the 29 site ranking criteria.
4. Smith – No aerial photographs were provided by staff due to air restrictions for the area (Lake George bombing range). Access to the property is an issue. The property meets 15 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. Phillip Smith, Owner, was present to provide additional information such as aerial maps and pictures of the property. He explained that additional parcels in which he owns in the Lake George Management area could be submitted to the Committee for acquisition in the future.

5. Paspalakis/ Psaros – Aerial photographs provided by staff. Obtaining matching funds and the lack of access to the property are issues. The property meets 13 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. Dino Paspalakis, Owner, was present to provide additional information. He explained that the Federal Government had been acquiring property in the immediate vicinity and also expressed an interest in acquiring this property. He also explained that a survey of the property had been provided to staff, which clarified the discrepancy with the amount of acreage owned by the applicant.

6. Southern Pines Plantation – Aerial photographs provided by staff. Prescribed burning, approved subdivision, and 20-acres leased for cell tower are issues/concerns. The property meets 18 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. Sam Roth, Representative for the Owners, was present to provide additional information. He explained that the property is very people, animal and environmentally friendly. He also explained that this property is actively being advertised for sale and FDOT has made inquiries on this property for their mitigation needs.

7. Stanaki Sections 1 & 2 – Aerial and ground photographs provided by staff. Land Management (i.e., controlled burning), the PUD and proposed road alignment known as the East Coast Beltline are issues/concerns. This property is adjacent to, but outside, the Doris Leeper Spruce Creek Preserve CARL Boundary. The property meets 17 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. James Morris, Representative for the Owners, was present to provide additional information. He expressed the owners’ desire to resolve any issues or concerns that may arise from the PUD, their willingness to resolve any other potential issues, and their desire to make this property public land.

Mr. Clay Henderson, public participant and representative for the Friends of Spruce Creek Preserve, stated that there are two (2) potential options for acquisition of this property, which are: 1) submit an additional FCT application, or 2) request an adjustment to the existing Doris Leeper Spruce Creek Preserve CARL Boundary.

Ms. Lynne Plaskett and Ms. Lorelle Friend, public participants, explained that the acquisition of this property would promote the efforts in completing and preserving the Spruce Creek Preserve.

The Committee adjourned for lunch at 12:00p.m. and re-convened at 1:10p.m.

8. Bushnell – No aerial photographs were provided by staff due to air restrictions for the area (Lake George bombing range). Land Management (i.e., controlled burning), property size, and lack of connectivity to other conservation lands are issues. The property meets 11 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. Jay Bushnell, Owner, was present to provide additional information.

9. Ocklawaha - Aerial and ground photographs provided by staff. Lack of access to the property is an issue. This property is adjacent to, but outside, the Doris Leeper Spruce Creek Preserve CARL Boundary. The property meets 17 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Ms. Lorelle Friend, Representative for the Owners and public participant, was present to provide additional information. She explained that this property could be incorporated as part of the Spruce Creek Preserve, which the Committee has identified as a priority area much like the Volusia Conservation Corridor.

10. Warensford (Barberville) – Aerial photographs provided by staff. Single family dwelling on the property is a concern as is the fact that most of the property is improved pasture. The property meets 12 of the 29 site ranking criteria.
11. Warensford (Seville) – Aerial photographs provided by staff. Access to the property, obtaining matching funds, and the lack of connectivity to other conservation lands and other property owned by the applicant are issues. The property meets 15 of the 29 site ranking criteria.
12. Mullins – Aerial photographs and a map of University Highlands that depicts properties owned by the applicant along with properties owned by the County were provided by staff. Land management (i.e., controlled burning), access to the property, timber pirating, squatters, obtaining matching funds, high costs associated with land acquisition (i.e., property surveys), and the lack of connectivity to other conservation lands and other properties owned by the applicant are issues. However, the University Highlands area has been targeted as a potential area for small lot acquisitions. The property meets 10 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Mr. Larry Mullins, Owner, was present to provide additional information. He explained that this is a water recharge area and would provide a start in the small lot acquisition process. He also explained that a GPS (Global Positioning System) and old survey maps from the state were utilized to determine the approximate location of his properties.

Chairman Reid Hughes again publicly announced his conflict of interest regarding the Florida Audubon Property and turned the meeting over to Vice-Chairman Dennis Bayer.

13. Florida Audubon – Aerial photographs provided by Staff and Clay Henderson, Representative of the Owners. Sovereign land is an issue along with ownership of property already being held by a conservation entity. The property meets 11 of the 29 site ranking criteria.

Vice-Chairman Dennis Bayer turned the meeting back over to Chairman Reid Hughes.

Chairman Reid Hughes reminded the Committee of the policies that have been established and need to be considered during ranking, which are as follows: 1) adjacency to other public lands; 2) size; 3) the property’s resources, and 4) potential for matching funds. He also reminded the Committee of the two (2) areas that have been identified as priority areas, which are the Volusia Conservation Corridor and Spruce Creek Preserve.

Douglas Weaver requested, for historical purposes, that each Committee member identify his or her Ranking Sheet by writing his or her name on their sheet.

After Staff provided the total averaged scores and the Committee reviewed the ranking list, Member Dennis Bayer made a motion to create a Group A list, which includes the properties ranked No. 1 through No. 5; and Group B list, which includes the properties ranked No. 6 through No. 13. Member Anne Hallum seconded the motion that carried unanimously by voice vote.

The Ranking, Score and Group determinations are as follows:

Discussion ensued regarding the issue of matching funds after Chairman Reid Hughes asked staff if contact had been made with agencies who could be willing partners.

Rob Walsh stated that staff had been in contact with the St. Johns River Water Management District to establish the District’s intent and willingness to partner on several of the properties. He also stated that staff could not determine at this time if any of the state agencies would be interested in providing matching funds on any of the properties.

Douglas Weaver explained that another source of potential funding could be from a newly formed program, "Rural and Family Conservation Act." However, presently funds are not available from this program. The Kirton/Akins properties were referenced as potential candidates for this funding source. He also explained that, without a track record, staff could only provide a guesstimate for potential funding sources based upon adjacency to other conservation lands and other factors/characteristics of the properties.

Discussion ensued regarding small lot acquisitions where staff explained that they would be developing an acquisition process, and presenting a request for authorization from the Committee to actively pursue specific areas that have been determined as a priority (i.e., University Highlands, West Daytona Acres, Cape Atlantic Estates).

Discussion ensued regarding the issue of bonding as a potential funding method for land acquisition. Chairman Reid Hughes reminded the Committee that the County Council had not ruled out this type of funding, but the County Council would review all recommended financial options before making the determination to bond.

Douglas Weaver reminded the Committee that this program was designed to be "pay as you go," however, the option of bonding had not been ruled out.

Other Business

Rob Walsh requested that the Committee make a determination regarding the necessity to hold a meeting on April 17, 2002. After the Committee determined that the meeting on April 17, 2002, was not necessary, Member Richard Schuler made a motion to cancel the April 17, 2002, meeting. Member Dennis Bayer seconded the motion that carried unanimously by voice vote.

Douglas Weaver explained that the application deadline for the next cycle of applications would be June 30, 2002, which would create cycles from January 1 through June 30, and July 1 through December 31 each year.

Adjournment

Meeting adjourned at 2:54p.m.

back to home page

 Public information produced by Volusia County Government