[Approval of Minutes]
[Items 1 - 3]
[00:02:53]
>> WE SAY 10. IT IS THE TOTAL.
AND I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO IRON OUT.
ARE YOU GOING TO DO YOUR VOTE? AND THEN TELL YOU WHAT THE NUMBER WAS FOR EACH OF THOSE AND THEN ARE YOU GOING TO WANT TO HAVE A CUT OFF BUT WE DON'T RECOMMEND ANYTHING BELOW A SEVEN OR FIVE. THE PARTIALS ARE GOING TO HIT 10 AND THEN TO HAVE A CERTAIN SQUARE NUMBER THERE IS SOME
FLEXIBILITY TO DECIDE. >> ANY THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS?
>> THE FIRST PROCESS WE WANT YOU TO LOOK AT IT FURTHER.
RIGHT? >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.
BECAUSE IF WE SAY THERE'S NOTHING HERE WITH A LOOSE INTERPRETATION SAVES YOU A LOT OF WORK.
>> RIGHT. EACH TIME YOU BRING THEM TO YOU CHECKING ON WHOSE FORWARD OR NOT.
SO THE FIRST TIME I BRING YOU THE PARCELS THE NEXT TIME AROUND
[00:05:01]
GOING FROM THE NOMINATION POOL TO THE INELIGIBILITY POOL.SO YOU ARE VOTING TO SEND STAFF BACK OUT INTO THE FIELD TO GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. AND IF IT DOESN'T NEED THAT, THEN IT'S NOT MOVING FORWARD.
AND WITH THE ELIGIBILITY POOL AND DECIDING IF IT BECOMES UNSAFE BE WHAT WE DOING THAT RIGHT AWAY SO PUTTING THEM INTO
YOU CAN DO IT THAT WAY. YOU CAN SEND EVERYTHING AND LET THEM DO THE DECISION. YOU CAN DO THESE PARTIALS AND HERE'S HOW THEY TURNED OUT. OR YOU CAN SAY IF IT DIDN'T HAVE AT LEAST FIV OUT OF 10 THEN IT WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO MOVE IT FORWARD. AND THE PARTIALS ARE JUST THROWN OUT FOR CONSIDERATION. THEY GET HELD.
IT'S NOT A DO OR DIE IF YOU DON'T ADVANCE IT TO THE BOARD.
>> BUT IT CAN BE A CASE OF MAYBE THERE'S PARTIALS AROUND IT THAT GETS NOMINATED WITH A STRONGER POSITION OR SOMETHING LIKE
THAT. >> ANYTHING BELOW A CERTAIN THRESHOLD. YES THERE ARE ONES OR ZEROS OR ONES AND FIVES NOT 234 ON THE FIRST GO AROUND.
IT IS NOT YES OR NO. IT IS NOT THREE.
SO I THINK THE NUMBERS AND WE MOVE YES OR NO.
>> HOW MANY ARE WE CHASING? MAY BE THREE IS GREAT BUT IF WE CAN AFFORD TO BE PICKY THAN MAY BE SEVEN MINUTES SUBJECTIVE SO THEN MAY BE THE DISMISSAL BAR IS FINE AND IF WE HAVE 30 AND BELL CURVE THEN WHATEVER NUMBER GET YOU THE PARCELS IN THAT APPLICATION PERIOD. THEN THERE'S NO REASON THAT DIDN'T MAKE THE CUT CAN BE BROUGHT INTO THE NEXT POOL TO BE RANKED. MAYBE GET SEVEN IN THE FIRST ROUND SOME OF THE SEVERANCE DON'T MAKE IT IN.
I'M JUST MAKING UP NUMBERS BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH THE NUMBERS. I GUESS ANOTHER THING I WANT TO ASK EVERYBODY RUNNING THROUGH THIS, HOW SUBJECTIVE DID YOU FEEL ASSIGNING ZERO THROUGH FIVE? SOME OF THESE VALUES WAS LIKE PICK A NUMBER OUT OF THE WIND.
>> IS THERE ANY RUBRIC WE COULD USE FOR NUMBERING?
IT SEEMED VERY SUBJECTIVE. >> KNOW.
THERE REALLY ISN'T BECAUSE THE RUBRIC IS THE SCORING SHEET AND THE CRITERIA LISTED. AND THEN YOUR ASSETS IS THE DATA
SO TRYING TO NARROW THAT DOWN. >> ACTUALLY FOUND IN OUR FILES AS SHE WENT FROM ONE TO FIVE. TWO IS LESS THAN AVERAGE, THREE IS AVERAGE FOR IS MORE THAN AVERAGE AND THEN FIVE.
SO THAT IS A LITTLE BIT. >> LIKE THE ENDANGERED SPECIES PRESENT THAT HAS TO BE MORE THAN AVERAGE.
>> I FOUND THIS TO BE A GREAT LEARNING OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE SOME THINGS I COULD NOT EVEN FIND.
ALL OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED WITH THE OVERLAY IN THE OVERLAY AND THEN THE DELAYS AND THEN SOMETHING IS POPPING UP AND YOU
[00:10:03]
DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CLICKED. BUT I FOUND IT VERY DIFFICULTAND SUBJECTIVE. >> LIKE INVASIVE SPECIES PRESENT? SO I GUESS THE STAFF REPORT WAS VERY HELPFUL IN ADDITION TO THE MAPS BECAUSE THAT WAS CALLED OUT SPECIFICALLY. THAT WOULD BE TYPICAL, RIGHT? SPECIES OF NOTE OR HABITAT OF NOTE WOULD BE CALLED OUT IN THE
STAFF WILL NOT HAVE A DIFFERENT SOURCE OF INFORMATION THAN YOU
DO. >> BUT THE HOMEOWNER OR THE
LAND, I'M SORRY. >> YES THE INFORMATION THEN WE BRING THAT INTO THE STAFF RE REPORT.
>> MAY BE SOMETHING TO THROW OUT TO THE GROUP I WOULD TAKE A FIRST STAB BUT WE CAN GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE AND CALIBRATE WHAT A ONE AND THREE AND FIVE IS SO WE WORK ON THE SAME NUMBERS.
SO FOR EXAMPLE WHETHER THE PROPERTY HAS A WELL IF IT ZERO WELLS IT IS A WANT IF IT IS THREE OR MORE IT IS THREE JUST SO WE ARE ON THE SAME STUFF FOR IF ONE IS PRESENT OF INVASIVE SPECIES IT IS A TWO THEN WE CAN CALIBRATOR NUMBERS.
I DON'T MIND TAKING A STAB AND SENDING THAT TO YOU.
>> IF YOU WOULD. >> IF THERE'S NO INFORMATION IS
IT A ZERO OR A ONE? >> I GUESS A ONE.
>> I HAVE A LOT OF ZEROS. >> NO INFORMATION WE HAVE IS
ZERO. >> ZERO WAS A TOUGH TWO ADD SO WHEN I GO THROUGH IS LIKE DOING SMART GOALS FOR APPRAISALS.
I WILL TAKE A STAB AT IT. THAT WOULD HELP ME A LOT AND THEN I CAN SEND IT TO EVERYBODY CAN I DO THAT TO OUTLOOK?
>> SEND IT TO ME. >> AND WHILE I AM HOGGING THE MICROPHONE I DO HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE AQUIFER PART A LITTLE MORE BECAUSE IT'S TOO BIG PARTS IN THE BEGINNING AND MY VOCABULARY MUST NOT BE GOOD TO USE THAT RAGGEDY POINT BUT IN STAFF RIGHT UP IT WAS AN IMPORTANT POINT OF AQUIFER RESEARCH.
MY UNDERSTANDING IT IS NOT. THAT'S BASICALLY THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER AND WITH AN HOUR YOU ARE IN CLAY COUNTY SO HOW IS RAGGEDY POINT A GOOD AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA? I KNOW IT SAYS IT IS HIGH BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SCIENCE
BEHIND IT. >> AND I HAVE NO CLUE OF THE SCIENCE BEHIND IT. I AM GOING BASED ON WHAT THE MAP TELLS ME. SORRY.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING THE AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA THEN IT GOES ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE OCEAN THERE IS NO AREA ANYMORE.
I HAVE TALKED WAY TOO LONG. >> SO I MAY ASK ON THE QUESTION. ONE SECOND.
>> HONESTLY I WAS JUST CURIOUS. SO I GUESS TALKING ABOUT WHATEVER BUT HE GOT FOR THESE IS NOT TERRIBLY HELPFUL BECAUSE WE ALL DID ZEROS AND ONES AND PEOPLE CANNOT GET TO THEM AND ACROSS THE BOARD I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THESE WOULD HAVE QUALIFIED. DID EVERYBODY GET PRETTY LOW? AT LEAST WE ALL SEE AT THE SAME WAY.
>> LET'S SHARE SOME OVERARCHING THOUGHTS.
THIS IS JUST FROM MY EXPERIENCE AS A LAND MANAGER AS MY WIFE WAS A SON A GOOD TIME FOR ME TO SHARE BECAUSE I'M TIRED.
BUT I WILL SHARE WITH YOU GUYS A LITTLE BIT OF MY THOUGHTS AND I PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BUT I THINK I'M A LITTLE FRUSTRATED WITH WHERE WE ARE AS A COMMITTEE. AND NOT ON THE STAFF SIDE OR ANYTHING ELSE BUT THERE IS AN OVERALL POINT THERE'S
[00:15:01]
$42 MILLION TO BE SPENT. THERE'S ONLY SO MANY PLACES TO SPEND IN THE COUNTY. AND HONESTLY THE VALUES THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT AND A REALTOR COULD SPEAK MORE TO TH THAT, THERE'S ONLY SO MANY ACRES YOU CAN SPEND IT ON.SO SOME OF THIS STUFF WITH PRESERVATION AND THAT KIND OF STUFF IS WELL AND GOOD BUT IT IS JUST SO LIMITED AND IF YOU LIKE WE COULD COME UP WITH THESE RUBRICS BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY IT WILL BE DOES MR. WILLIAMS HAVE A PROPERTY WITH AN AQUIFER RECHARGE? AGAIN THERE'S NOTHING ON THE RUBRIC THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH VALUE.
THEY COULD NOMINATE MY OFFICE BUT YOU DON'T HAVE $500,000 TO SPEND ON THAT. NOR DOES IT DO WHAT WE WANT IT TO DO AS FAR AS PRESERVING MORE GREEN LAND FOR THE COUNTY.
SO UNTIL WE SEE REAL PROPERTIES AGAIN ALL OF THESE WERE LOW.
MAYBE AT THE ONE ON THE CREEK HAD SOME VALUE THE MOST OF THE OTHERS WERE CLEARED LIKE THE AIRPLANE PARKER SOMETHING.
I JUST FEEL LIKE THE IDEA THAT IT JUST SEEMS WE ARE TRYING TO ACQUIRE FEE BUT IT'S AN UNREASONABLE EXPECTATION TO ACQUIRE ANYTHING FREE. WE ARE TOO FAR BEHIND 40 CHILEAN DOLLARS AND WE COULD OF DONE SOMETHING BUT NOW THE PRICE TAG IS BEYOND SITES $42 MILLION WE COULD'VE BOUGHT A LOT BECAUSE TRANSACTIONS HAPPEN WITHIN THAT.
BUT I DON'T THANK YOU COULD BUY $420 MILLION WHAT YOU BOUGHT $42 MILLION. AND THERE ARE SOME PIECES THAT ARE CERTAINLY AVAILABLE THAT I THINK THE CONSERVATION ROUTE IS MORE OF A THING FOR US. BUT I DON'T SEE THAT ANYWHERE.
AND I THINK PARTNERSHIPS ARE GOING TO BE IMPORTANT.
IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO PARTNER WITH OTHER PEOPLE WITH CONSERVATION EASEMENT MONEY THEN MAYBE WE CAN GET TO A VALUE.
BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE MAYBE THERE IS SOME OF THAT GOING ON BUT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS THAT'S MORE IMPORTANT. THERE IS A PIECE OF PROPERTY WE CAN DO THREE DIFFERENT ENTITIES WITH $10000 AND WE MAY BE ABLE TO PRESERVE SOMETHING. BUT NONE OF THAT IS IN OUR MATRIX FOR OUR MAKE UP. I DON'T KNOW I'M A LITTLE FRUSTRATED AND HONESTLY BEING IN AGRICULTURE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY EVEN THOSE WHO STARTED IN AGRICULTURE AND REALIZE IT HAD TO BE IN RESIDENTIAL TO MAKE MONEY.
SO THERE'S NOT A LOT OF MONEY AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF TIME.
SO HONESTLY RANCHERS ENFORCERS MAKE DECISIONS BECAUSE WE ARE POOR AND WE HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS QUICKLY AND THIS FEELS LIKE IT'S TAKING FOREVER. I GET IT GOVERNMENT IS A LOT OF MONEY WE HAVE TO ANSWER TO THE PUBLIC AND IT IS FRUSTRATING.
I'M READY TO QUIT CUT BAIT AND GO FISHING.
>> THIS IS GREAT WE HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE AND IT'S A LOT OF HARD WORK AND STAFF IS DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THIS BUT I'M READY TO SEE SOMETHING TO SINK MY TEETH IN AND MAKE A DECISION ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN SOMETHING THAT IS ALREADY
PRESERVED. >> I CAN'T MAKE A DECISION UNTIL I KNOW THE DECISION TO BE MADE. THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT WE WILL BE FIRST ROUND AND THEN RECOMMEND SEVERAL FOR YOU TO BRING BACK TO US FOR A SECOND ROUND SO WE ARE NOT SCORING IT IT IS JUST YES OR NO? OKAY.
SO MAYBE I WILL BE LESS FRUSTRATED WHEN I SEE THAT.
BUT IT IS A TIME COMMITMENT AND HONESTLY WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING. BUT I SAY ALL THAT TO SAY WHEN I WENT TO THAT I THOUGHT THEY ARE ALL ZERO.
ALL THE PROPERTIES AS FAR AS IF THEY CAME UP ANY OF THESE CAME BEFORE ME I WOULD SCORE A ZERO. SO NONE OF THEM HAVE ANY VALUE
TO ME. >> I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE TO DO THE RUBRIC AND THE PROCESS BUT JUST READING OVER THESE FROM A LAYMAN'S PERSPECTIVE THE ONE THAT REALLY JUMPED OUT WAS THE RAGGEDY.ONE BECAUSE ONE OF THE MAIN DRAWS FOR MY HUSBAND AND I
[00:20:02]
21 YEARS AGO WAS HAVING ACCESS TO THE WATER AND WALKING INTO THE WETLANDS WOULD HAVE A BEAUTIFUL VIEW OF THE ST. JOHN'S RIVER THAT IS WHAT I MOVED HERE THAT'S WHAT I WANT AND I THINK A LOT OF THE RESIDENTS CAN AGREE WITH THAT.THAT IS JUST MY LAYMAN'S PERSPECTIVE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RUBRIC BUT THAT'S WHAT JUMPED OUT AT ME.
>> I THINK THAT WILL BE OUR VOTING POINT ALSO WE ARE ALL FROM DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS. SOME PEOPLE MAY HAVE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION AND BACKGROUNDS I'M IN WATERWAY CONSERVATION SO FOR ME THERE WILL BE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION THAT WILL MAKE US GET TO A COMMON GROUND.
>> I GUESS WHAT I AM GOING IS A FEEL WHEN YOU GET THEM IN FRONT OF US IT WILL BE INTUITIVE IF WE ARE GOING TO BE YES THIS NEEDS TO BE PRESERVED. NOW I REALIZE BECAUSE WHERE A PUBLIC ENTITY WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF SCORING MEASURES.
BUT I FEEL LIKE HONESTLY I WAS A YES IT NEEDS TO BE PRESERVED.
BUT UNTIL I SEE IT AND AGAIN YOU WANT TO HAVE A BOARDWALK AND A VIEW OF THE ST. JOHN'S AND ACTUALLY DOES THAT HAVE SOME PRESERVATION VALUE BUT IF IT WASN'T ALREADY PRESERVED AND ACQUIRING THAT THAN WHAT DOES THAT COST? AND AGAIN I KNOW I KNOW NUMBERS MEAN EVERYTHING BECAUSE WE HAVE NO NUMBERS BUT THE NUMBERS MEAN MORE TO ME AS MUCH IS ANYTHING BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SPEND $42 MILLION ON RAGGEDY.EVEN IF IT DOES HAVE A BEAUTIFUL VIEW -- -- VIEW OF THE ST. JOHN'S WE COULD TAKE THAT MONEY AND DO SOMETHING MORE WITH IT.
>> ON THE MATRIX IT HAS A QUESTION ABOUT ACQUISITION ISSUES AND I HAVE A QUESTION MARK AND THERE IS NO INFORMATION TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. I HAVE SEEN IN OTHER COUNTIES WHERE THE COMMITTEE LIKE THIS WILL FORWARD THE PROJECT AND SAY WE GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO GO CRAZY IF YOU THINK THEY ARE WORTHY TARGETS. THEN ONCE A STAFF NEGOTIATES THE DEALS THEY COME BACK TO US WITH THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE AT THAT POINT IT'S NOT CONFIDENTIAL ANYMORE.
IT COMES BACK TO US AND THEN WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION AND THEN IF WE THINK IT'S WORTH GOING FORWARD ON THE 1 ACRE 300 MILLION OR WHATEVER. WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THOSE OPTIONS. THAT IS ANOTHER IDEA.
I HAVE SEEN THAT WITH OTHER COMMISSIONS.
>> THE WAY OUR PROGRAM IS SET UP THAT HAPPENS AT THE FOURTH LEVEL. WITH THE MONEY PART OF IT.
>> THEY WOULD MAKE THE FINAL DECISION BUT WE COULD RECOMMEND SOMETHING AND SAY WE RECOMMEND TO GO FORWARD BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY
HAVE THE FINAL SAY. >> AND YOU ARE RECOMMENDING.
>> BUT THE VALUES? THAT IS WHAT HE IS SAYING.
IF YOU ADDED THAT EXTRA STEP THAT WE COULD SEE THOSE AND THEN SAY WE RECOMMEND OBVIOUSLY THE BOARD HAS FINAL DECISION.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S HOW OTHER COUNTIES DO IT.
>> WE CAN BRING THAT UP TO THE BOARD TO SEE IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE THAT THAT IS A CHANGE OF THE PROGRAM.
THE CODE IS WRITTEN THE WAY IT IS.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION AND THEN TELL US.
IT WOULD TAKE SEVERAL MONTHS TO MAKE CHANGES.
IT IS A GOOD POINT. >> JUST EXPERIENCE BUT FOR THESE QUESTIONS THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE INFORMATION TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THAT. AND THIS COULD BE WHERE YOU PUT YOUR CONSERVATION INTO QUESTION TO GET EXTRA POINTS IF IT'S A CONSERVATION EASEMENT BUT WE DON'T HAVE A QUESTION FOR THAT.
>> IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING WE DID APPROVE THINGS WITHOUT KNOWING THE NUMBERS AND THEN LET'S SAY RAGGEDY POINT TO GET PURCHASED FOR $40000 AND WE ALSO RECOMMENDED FOUR OR FIVE OTHERS AND NOW THERE'S NO MONEY LEFT. [LAUGHTER]
[00:25:04]
>> THAT IS WHERE I AM TRYING TO GO.
BECAUSE I HAVE A SNEAKING SUSPICION YOU ARE ABOUT TO LOSE THE INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW THE PROPERTY OR MOST OF THEM. AND IF WE DON'T MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO KNOW THE PROPERTY OWNERS THEY CAN TELL YOU THAT YOU CAN OR CANNOT BUY IT PRETTY MUCH FOR THE VALUE THAT IT WOULD TAKE TO BUY IT THEY WILL LOSE INTEREST AND THEN YOU'LL BE IN A SPIRAL OF RECOMMENDING.
IF RAGGEDY POINT WAS NOT PRESERVED ALREADY HOW MANY ACRES? OH MY GOD.
WHAT WOULD THAT COST RIGHT NOW? UPWARDS OF $500,000 AN ACRE.
SO I THINK IN THE WETLANDS THEY HAVE A VALUE BECAUSE YOU COULD PUT THEM IN A MITIGATION BANK BUT ANYWAY I'M SAYING THERE IS A COST TO EVERYTHING AND I THINK IF WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WE CAN INTUITIVELY COME UP WITH THAT AND PASS THIS WITHOUT HAVING TO ACTUALLY HAVE A VALUE. WE JUST HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I THINK IT IS AT LEAST BENEFICIAL TO HAVE THIS PROPERTY ON SOME TYPE OF LIST. THAT WAY IF WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PURCHASE IT ALL ON OUR OWN WE CAN GO ARGUE FOR THE BIGGER ACQUISITION PROGRAMS. I THINK LARGE SCALE THAT IS THE STATES JOB. AND THAT TYPE OF THING.
WHEN I THINK OF THIS PROGRAM I THINK SMALL WINS THAT ACCUMULATE. IT IS WITHIN A CERTAIN RADIUS OF THE TRUSTEE AREAS THEY HAVE LAID OUT AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I DON'T THINK IT IS COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS TO LOOK AT THE SMALLER PROPERTIES BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T THINK THESE PROPERTIES HOLD ANY VALUE I'M LOOKING AT IT FROM A PERSPECTIVE BUT THIS IS WHERE THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE DECLARED CRITICAL HABITAT AND WHILE THERE MAY NOT BE ANY LOCAL SIGHTINGS THE PUBLIC PROPERTY MEAN SOME TYPE OF CONSERVATION EFFORT HAPPENED THERE IN THE FUTURE WHETHER IT'S A GOOD SPOT RIGHT NOW OR NOT.
AND IT ALLOWS FOR AT LEAST SOME TYPE OF PROGRESS IN THE FUTURE.
IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
>> LET ME ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THE MONEY.
I KNOW YOU SAID WE MAY NOT KNOW WHAT COULD A REALTOR GIVE US A VALUATION OF THE PROPERTY IN HIS OPINION? NOT SAYING WHAT A SELLER WOULD TAKE BUT HE THINKS THIS IS WHAT
IT IS WORTH BEFORE WE GET THEM? >> COULD HE? YES. THE BOARD WHAT I AM THINKING ABOUT IS WHEN YOU ARE NEGOTIATING A PURCHASE OF SOMETHING, WHAT YOU WANT TO HOLD SOMETHING BACK BUT YOU DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO HAVE THE DOLLAR AMOUNT YOU ARE WILLING TO SPEND HER THINK SOMETHING IS WORTH PUBLICLY PROVIDED BEFORE YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO NEGOTIATE.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO I AM NOT SURE IF THAT IS
SOMETHING. >> LET'S SAY YOU THINK IT IS IN WORTH OF BALLPARK BETWEEN 50900 THA BOTTOM OR TOP WE THINK WITHOUT DOING A TRUE MARKET ANALYSIS KIND OF A BALLPARK TO SAY IS NOT A 50 MILLION-DOLLAR PROPERTY MAY BE A HALF A MIL
MILLION. >> RIGHT NOW FOR EVERY PROPERTY IT IS THE VALUE WE KNOW IT'S UNDER MARKET VALUE BUT IT IS AN EQUITABLE RANKING BETWEEN PROPERTIES AS A COMPARISON OF
THIS PROPERTY VERSUS THIS >> COULD BE HAVE THAT ON OUR
[00:30:04]
DATASHEET THAT THE PROPERTIES ARE EVALUATED SO WE HAVE THE TAXABLE VALUE SO THEN WE CAN SEE THAT NUMBER THAT GIVES US ASTARTING POINT. >> UNDERSTANDING THE ACTUAL PURCHASE PRICE WILL BE DIFFERENT BUT IT DOES GIVE YOU A FRAME OF REFERENCE, YES. WE CAN ADD THAT.
>> DOES THAT SEEM TO HELP? I AM A NUMBERS GUY AND I WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH THIS IS GOING TO COST US 20 MILLION PER ACRE, NO
ACRE IS WORTH THAT. >> IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE
THAT NUMBER. >> DIDN'T YOU SAY THERE ARE
SEVEN APPLICANTS RIGHT NOW? >> WE HAVE RECEIVED EIGHT APPLICATIONS I WAS GOING TO DO THAT AT THE END OF THE MEETING ANYWAY. THE REASON I HAVE THE APPLICATION WHERE THE OWNER HAS SIGNED IT ONE IS OWNED BY NATURE WAY EFFECTIVELY, THE AGENT FOR THE H AWAY SIGNED IT BUT I REACHED OUT TO THE LEGAL TEAM TO SEE DO WE NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION JUST BECAUSE THEY SIGN IT TO ACQUIRE IT DOES NOT MEAN THE FULL HO A IS AWARE WITH THE TRANSACTIONS.
SO IT IS A MATTER OF THE ADDITIONAL PAPERWORK AND A HALF FOR OTHERS THAT ARE EITHER OWNED BY A TRUST ANOTHER LLC ONE THAT HAD MORE THAN ONE OWNER. BECAUSE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT SIGNATURE OR AN AGENT SIGNATURE THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE OWNERSHIP SIGNATURE. I AM IN TALKS WITH ONE ATTORNEY FOR ONE OF THEM NEXT WEEK THAT COULD LEAD TO AN ADDITIONAL PARCEL BECAUSE THEY MENTION THEY HAVE ANOTHER PARCEL RIGHT NEXT TO IT. SO WE WILL SEE WHERE THAT GOES.
SO AS SOON AS WE CAN GET ALL OF THOSE WORKED OUT THAT WILL COME FOR SURE NEXT MONTH WE HAVE THE THREE WHERE WE HAVE THE OWNER
SIGNATURE RIGHT NOW. >> GENERALLY WHAT IS A SPLIT BETWEEN FULL FEE AND CONSERVATION USE?
>> A LOT OF THEM LEFT IT BLANK SOME CHECKED BOTH BOXES.
AND I DON'T THINK, WE MIGHT HAVE HAD ONE PICKING ONE OR THE OTHER. I DO NOT REMEMBER OFFHAND.
>> I THINK WHAT WERE TRYING TO SHOW RANKING OF CONSERVATION AGAINST THE FULL IS NOT FAIR SO THE INTENT IS TRY TO GET BOTH WITH THAT FUNDING. SO WHAT WE MAY NEED TO DO IS PULL THEM ASIDE AND SEND UP TO GROUPS THESE ARE CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS THAT ARE PRIORITIZED. I UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION AND WE'VE GOT TO MOVE. BUT IT'S ALSO A GOOD POINT THERE IS REASON AND THERE IS THIS MANY OF US TO BRING IN DIVERSE SET OF UNDERSTANDINGS TO THE TABLE AND WE VALUE THINGS DIFFERENTLY.
WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING WE CAN POINT OUT FOR A NUMBER.
SO IN RESPONSE IF WE CAN MAKE THIS SIMPLE OR WHERE WE DON'T HAVE TO BE SO SUBJECTIVE WE CAN LOOK AT THEM AND SAY HERE'S THE DATA BUT THE NUMBER OUT THEN WE CAN WHIP OUT THE NUMBERS FAST AND GET TO THE PARCELS WITH THE KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THE PARCELS CAN DO. BUT I THINK TO SAY ALL OF THEM HAVE ZERO VALUE IS AN OVERSTATEMENT FOR SOME PEOPLE.
>> I CAN SAY FROM MY PERSP PERSPECTIVE.
>> BUT I DO THINK WEIGHING THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AGAINST THE FULL FEE THAN THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT WILL LOSE OUT 100 PERCENT OF THE TIME. BUT IF WE CAN USE THIS FORM BUT SPLIT IT SO THEY ARE NOT CROSS COMPETING OTHERWISE ALL FULL FEES WILL STACK UP. THERE'S JUST NOT A PLACE TO WEIGH THE VALUE OF THE FINANCIAL INCENTIVE ON THAT ONE LINE IN THE LOWER WEIGHTED CATEGORY OF SIX AND SEVEN.
[00:35:04]
>> WE VALUE EASEMENTS. I THINK WE SHOULD ADD A SECTION SO WE COULD SAVE THIS IS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
>> SO WHAT IS DIFFERENT? WHAT IS MISSING IN THE FORM WHEN YOU ARE EVALUATING THE EASEMENTS USING THE RUBRIC?
SWEAT PART OF THAT CHANGES? >> I DON'T THINK ANY WEIGHT IS ADDED BECAUSE IT IS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL EVER BREAK THEM OUT.
CONSERVATION EASEMENTS ARE VALUABLE BECAUSE YOUR MONEY GOES FARTHER AND THEN THE QUESTION YOU CAN'T BUY ANYTHING IN THIS COUNTY ANYMORE. SO WE COULD DO MORE WITH A CONSERVATION EASEMENT. IT LEAVES THE PROPERTY ON THE TAX ROLLS WITH CONTINUES TO PRODUCE MONEY FOR THE COUNTY.
THERE IS BENEFITS TO THOSE. AND I AM NOT FOR ONE MINUTE TO SAY PRIORITIZE ONE OR THE OTHER.
I THINK WE SHOULD DO BOTH WE HAVE $42 MILLION WE OUGHT TO PRIORITIZE A CHUNK OF THAT AND THEN AN EQUAL CHUNK OF THAT GOING TO THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT YOU GET LESS RETURN BUT YOU GET TWICE THE LAND ON THE OTHER HALF YOU GET LESS ACREAGE BUT IT IS PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC RECREATION SO IT BEHOOVES US TO DIVERSIFY OUR PORTFOLIO BY SEPARATING THEM PREEMPTIVELY BEFORE THEY ARE SWORN IN TOGETHER.
>> YES. WE CAN DO THAT AND TO MAKE SURE IF THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER WE KNOW THAT UP FRONT WE CAN SEPARATED IF POSSIBLE.
>> BUT IS EVERYBODY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION TO PRIORITIZE MULTIPLE TYPES OF ACQUISITION?
FOR SIMILAR FUNDING? >> ENTIRELY.
WE CAN BREAK THAT APART THESE ARE OUR FIVE.
I'M LOOKING AT THIS ONE I CAN BREAK THE EASEMENT DOWN JUST AS EASY WHEN WE PURCHASED WITH DRINKING WATER PROTECTIONS AND ENDANGERED SPECIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT BUT STILL A CONSERVATION PROPERTY THEY CANNOT BUILD ON IT THEY CANNOT DESTROY IT IT IS PROTECTED LAND.
SO I THINK WE CAN BREAK IT DOWN. I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED ANOTHER SYSTEM TO WEIGH IT BUT WE COULD DO THAT INTERNALLY.
>> I ACTUALLY DISAGREE BECAUSE I THINK THE ONLY THING THEY WOULD SCHOOL LOWER ON IS PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES BUT MANAGEMENT IS A SOLID FIVE BECAUSE YOU DON'T
HAVE TO DO ANYTHING. >> LOOKING AT THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT ANIMALS ARE PROTECTED WATERWAYS ARE PROTECTED, IT SEEMS TO BE THE WAY AND IT IS CHEAP.
OR CHEAPER. >> I THINK WHAT HE JUST SAID IS VERY IMPORTANT TO KEEP HER MIND ON THE CONSERVATION LAND.
I HATE TO USE THE TERM BUT WE COULD TIE UP A LOT MORE PROPERTIES USING THIS AS ARE TOOLS BUT THERE IS ONE THING IN THE BACK OF MY MIND WITH THE MANAGEMENT ISSUES THE ONE BELOW THAT. IT MAY NOT BE PRACTICAL TO MANAGE BUT IT CAN BE IF THEY OWN IT BUT IF THEY HAVEN'T RIGHT NOW AND TAKING CARE OF IT THAT IF IT STAYS THE SAME THAT'S THE
IMPORTANCE. >> LOOKING AT OVERSIGHT ON THE PROPERTY AT THAT POINT TO SEE IT IS AS DESIGNED.
>> DOES YES OWN ANY CONSERVATION EASEMENTS?
>> THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.
DOES HE HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT? LET'S ASK HIM.
>> WE MAY HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS BUT WE KNOW IF THE CONSERVATION IS INDEFINITE 50 YEARS, 100 YEARS WHAT GOES WITH
[00:40:05]
THE LAND? IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU CAN TAKEBACK IF THAT MAKES SENSE. >> I AM HEARING NOISES OVER HERE. [LAUGHTER]
>> IT WAS COMPLICATED. >> I THINK THERE'S A GREAT POINT THE PROCESS BECOMES MORE REALISTIC WITH ONLY SEVEN OR EIGHT TO LOOK AT IT'S NOT LIKE WE ARE SWAMPED.
>> SO THERE WILL BE THREE FOR NEXT TIME? AND THEN WE'RE ALL PRETTY SMART PEOPLE WE CAN TAKE A COMMON SENSE APPROACH AND THEN BUY THE PROPERTY.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU THEN.
NOT FOR NEXT TIME BECAUSE YOU WON'T TO BE RANKING AND DOING A SCORING SHEET UNTIL A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AFTER THAT.
BUT WHEN WE DO GET TO THAT POINT THAT IS WHERE YOU ARE AT NOW, IN YOUR MEETING, DO YOU WANT TO BRING YOUR SHEET AND HAVE DISCUSSION AND THEN PASSED DOWN YOUR SCORING SHEETS AND I WILL ENTER THEM WHILE YOU HAVE DISCUSSIONS? DO YOU WANT TO DO THEM A DIFFERENT WAY? JUST I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT AT ALL.
DONE BEFORE THE MEETING AND SEND THE SCORES AND HAVE IT READY TO LOOK AT AND DISCUSS IT VERSUS WATCHING YOU PUT NUMBERS IN.
>> YES. WERE HOMEWORK ARE PART IS THAT
SEEM REASONABLE? >> IF SOMEBODY CONVINCES SOMEONE TO MAKE A MAKE CHANGES AT THAT POINT.
>> THAT IS GOOD. THANK YOU WE WILL DO THAT.
I WILL MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS A COPY THEN YOU E-MAIL THEM BACK TO ME AND I WILL HAVE IT ON THE SPREADSHEET HERE AND AFTER DISCUSSION IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE CHANGES THEN JUST GO DOWN
THE LINE. >> MAY WILL BE THREE PARCELS WHICH IS THE INITIAL DISCUSSION WHICH IS A SIMPLE YES OR NO.
>> YES. DOESN'T MEET THE CONSERVATION
GOALS THAT IS THE QUESTION. >> THEN IN JUNE I ASSUME ANOTHER SET OF THOSE AND THEN FOLLOW UP ON THE THREE WITH THE FULL STAFF
REPORT AND THE SCORING? >> RIGHT.
WE WOULD BRING YOU THE REMAINDER IN JUNE.
AND WE DO HAVE THAT CONSERVATION ORGANIZATION CONTRACT.
THAT WOULD GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF TIME WITH A ROLLING EVERY OTHER MONTH SO WHEN MAY YOU MAKE YOUR FIRST DECISION FOR THOSE THREE AND JUNE YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE NEXT THREE AND IN THE BACKGROUND IN JUNE NOT JUST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BUT MAYBE WE CAN GET THE CONSULTANTS TO DO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS TO HAVE BETTER DATA AND THEN JULY WE BRING BACK THE FIRST THREE WITH THE ADDED INFORMATION AND MAKE THAT DECISION TO GO TO THE BOARD OR NOT.
>> FROM THE POINT WHATEVER SUITE OF NUMBERS THAT IS IT IS 60 DAYS BEFORE WE START LOOKING? AND TAKE IT TO THE BOARD?
>> IF THAT WORKS FOR YOU. >> RELIEFIT WORKS FOR YOU
GUYS. >> IF IT WORKS FOR STAFF.
I AM HAPPY TO SAY WE ARE BRINGING SOMETHING.
>> ONE LAST QUESTION EARLY ON IN THIS PROCESS WE TALKED ABOUT YOU WANTED TO SEE THE PROPERTY. WE WERE TRYING TO DECIDE HOW
[00:45:01]
THAT WOULD WORK BUT NOW I NEED TO KNOW IF YOU STILL FEEL THAT WAY IF YOU STILL WANT TO GO OUT AND DO BOOTS ON THE GROUND TO ACTUALLY SEE AND WITH THE PROCESS DO YOU WANT TO SEE EVERYPARCEL? >> DON'T TAKE IT PERSONALLY.
MY UNDERSTANDING OF THAT IS THAT IT WAS TOO MUCH SQUEEZE FOR THE JUICE INVOLVED. I KNOW MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE IS I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO SEE WHAT WE ARE RANKING HIGHLY BUT I DON'T NEED TO SEE ALL OF THEM. BUT AT SOME POINT I KNOW WE WERE GOING TO GIVE PRIORITY MAY BE THAT'S WHAT WE ARE SEEING BUT HONESTLY IF YOU HAVE YOUR CONSULTANTS GO OUT AND TAKE PICTURES AND PUT TOGETHER A PRESENTATION I'M FINE.
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. >> IF IT IS A UNIQUE PARCEL THAT WE HAVE TO CHECK THIS OUT IT IS $30 MILLION WE HAVE TO SEE WHY MAYBE BUT I THINK WE CAN DO IT WITH PICTURES AND GOOGLE EARTH
>> OKAY MAYBE IF THE PICTURES DON'T TELL THE STORY.
WE HAVE TO SEE THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE PROPERTY.
MAY BE. MAY BE A UNIFORM PROPERTY.
>> OKAY. I WILL SUPPORT WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. THAT IS EASIER THAN COORDINATING THE BUS AND EVERYBODY'S TIME ON A SATURDAY AND ALL OF THAT AND MAPPING OUT A ROUTE OF THE LOGISTICS THAT WE ALL KNOW CAN GET COMPLICATED. YES.
I AGREE. >> I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S COMING AT US. MAYBE AN ACRE.
I DON'T NEED TO SEE THAT. >> SO THAT TAKES US THROUGH OLD BUSINESS. DO WE HAVE OTHER THINGS?
>> NOT REALLY THE ONLY OTHER THING IS TO TELL YOU WHAT IS COMING AND WHERE IT STOOD AND @THAT IS COVERED.
>> WE A PUBLIC COMMENT SO I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY LAST COMMENTS OR ANYONE APPEAR? COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? THEN I THINK WE ARE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.