Comments & Responses
from Public Information Meetings

---

December 13, 2011, Citrus County Government Center

Concerns that surplusing lands next to private properties that were bought because of adjacent conservation lands will devalue those properties.

While the District cannot ensure that all District-owned lands will be held in public ownership in perpetuity, the potential effects that land surplus activities may have on adjacent privately held properties will be considered as part of the SLA evaluation efforts.

Is the classification of CLIP data the same as when it was first used for the statewide Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP) effort?

The District’s CLIP-based decision support system includes all of the data used for the statewide CLIP model plus a variety of additional water resources and ecological data.

Is there a specific quota of lands to be identified as part of this effort?

No quota has been established nor is one contemplated as part of the SLA project. All land surplus recommendations will be made based on results of the evaluations.

How would changes in land uses around District lands affect the conservation value of those lands? Noted need for buffers.

The influences of surrounding land uses and the potential effects of proposed District land dispositions will both be part of the SLA process. Maintenance of adequate buffering for continuance of land management operations will be one of the evaluation criteria.

If you dispose of land by sale or swap will the land be used for land development, cattle or agri-business? These are the major factors contributing to poor water quality in the Everglades.

Specific uses of such properties will be addressed through the land use and zoning requirements of the local government within which the property is located. It is anticipated that any surplus lands would ultimately be used for activities that are in keeping with surrounding land uses. In certain instances, the type of uses allowed on a property identified for surplus may be restricted by the District through conservation easements to provide additional resource protection assurances.

The land was different five years ago when Critical Lands and Waters CLIP was developed. District lands haven’t changed much, but there’s been dramatic change to the input area. Can you chart the changes to District lands?

The District and other agencies maintain a variety of resource monitoring initiatives that track water resource, ecological and land use trends. District staff will utilize this data as part of its evaluation process to assess how such changes, if any, would be affected by disposition of candidate properties.

How can we influence the Governing Board’s decision?

Members of the public and interested stakeholders are encouraged to provide their input on the SLA process and specific surplus recommendations by attending the SLA Subcommittee and Governing Board meetings.

Can we discuss with staff prior to board meetings?

District staff is available to discuss the SLA process or recommendations. Alternatively, please feel free to submit any concerns online via the District’s Surplus Lands Assessment website.

This is a layered program. Can you simulate what-if scenarios?

The CLIP model does not allow for simulation, however, other evaluation tools related to water quality and economics may be used to conduct such analysis for those specific topics.

Where are the Governing Board members from and what are their attitudes? Currently there is no representation from Citrus or Marion counties and without Basin Boards our local representation is gone. The last appointee to the Governing Board was a rancher. What is the background/expertise of the Governing Board members?

The background of all 13 Governing Board members is available on the District’s website at http://www.swfwmd.state.fl.us/about/governingboard/ .

What will be done with the money derived from surplus land sales?

The specific disposition of proceeds from the sale of any surplus properties would depend on the original funding source of the subject property. The original funding sources for each of the District properties under evaluation, as well as a matrix noting the process followed for disposition of proceeds, are posted on the District’s SLA webpage at WaterMatters.org//projects/surplus-lands/docs.php .

Once we decide to divest of property will it have to be subdivided?

In some instances, lands identified for potential surplus may be required to undergo a parcel split from their larger parent parcel for sale or exchange purposes.

Understand surplusing occasional small parcels with little to no conservation value, as long as revenues from the sale are used to buy land with a greater conservation value.

The disposition of proceeds from the sale of any identified surplus property will be in accordance with the prescribed guidelines under which the lands were originally purchased. In some instances, these guidelines direct the District to acquire other lands with such proceeds. District staff will certainly consider such options as part of its evaluation process.

Support selling orphan parcels and use revenues to “fill in the blanks.” Exchanges could make good conservation sense. Aside from the process we’ve seen, there’s concern that behind the scenes special interests would contact Governing Board members to craft a deal. A Governing Board member could go to the Executive Director who could pressure staff to tilt the scale in favor of a special interest. Suggest the District adopt a policy that staff or Board members would post on the District’s website any contacts made to them relative to surplusing land. The SWFWMD’s process, on paper, is the best of all five water management districts. The question is will it function as a genuine process? You can ensure the public’s trust if a public record is made any time a potential buyer contacts staff or a Board member.

As previously stated, District staff will consider exchanges and additional conservation acquisitions where such options are available. With respect to the SLA project, the District’s staff and Governing Board have made a concerted effort to make the process as transparent as possible for the public and stakeholders, and will give consideration to the recommendation presented to further these efforts.

Request the District post the sign-in sheets.

Sign-in sheets for the respective SLA Public Information meetings will be kept in the project file and hard copies will be available upon request.

How will the District measure if efficiency is gained by selling land?

One component of the SLA project is to evaluate the potential to increase efficiency of our land management program, and identify lands that no longer meet the original acquisition purpose or do not provide water resource benefits. Costs related to the evaluation process are anticipated to be more than offset by increased land operation and management efficiencies derived via the project. The District will carefully review and consider what level of land management and/or operational efficiencies would be gained, if any, through the disposition of those lands identified as surplus.

When and where will recommendations be made for the northern portion of the District?

The SLA Governing Board Subcommittee will be discussing recommendations for lands within the northern portion of the District (Evaluation Area 4) at a meeting to be held in Lecanto.

Will you earmark proceeds from the sale of surplus land to purchase more land?

The disposition of proceeds from the sale of any identified surplus property will be in accordance with the prescribed guidelines under which the lands were originally purchased. In some instances, these guidelines direct the District to acquire other additional conservation lands with such proceeds.

We’re discussing public land and none of it is excess. Comment acknowledged.

Surplus land evaluation may target drier portions of the property.

The District recognizes the significant role and value that uplands have in protecting and conserving water and related natural resources. Such considerations will be an integral part of the District’s evaluation process regarding identification and disposition of surplus lands.

Land acquisition was funded by documentary stamps and there has been very little in the Water Management Lands Trust Fund in the last few years. Is there a shortfall in bond repayment due to decline in documentary stamps?

The District has never pledged its portion of Water Management Lands Trust Fund monies for bond repayment and is unaware of any shortfalls in Water Management Lands Trust Fund bond repayments.

Understand selling, but maintain a no-net-loss of acreage. Anything sold can’t be made available for development, as we have an overburdened water supply.

Comment acknowledged.

If a piece of property is sold for agricultural use, what stops the owner from then selling to a developer in the future? Concerned with buying for agriculture then selling for development.

The District could restrict, as a condition of sale, the types of uses allowable on a property by retaining a conservation easement and/or development rights. Such provisions would allow for agricultural use of the land, but restrict future development of the property.

Would like surplus property to remain in its natural state. If sold, sell for agricultural use.

Comment acknowledged.

Placing restrictions on land would be perpetual and could run with the land.

The District can restrict as a condition of sale the types of uses allowable on a property through a conservation easement and/or retention of development rights. Such provisions would allow for agricultural use of the land, but restrict future development of the property.

Suggest the mission statement be changed to state that all proceeds from the sale of surplus land be spent on acquiring more land.

The disposition of proceeds from the sale of any identified surplus property will be in accordance with the prescribed guidelines under which the lands were originally purchased. In some instances, these guidelines direct the District to acquire other additional conservation lands with such proceeds.

How will the public know what property is for sale or being considered for sale?

Surplus recommendations for specific properties will be available on the District’s SLA webpage approximately two weeks in advance of the SLA Governing Board Subcommittee meeting at which they will be considered.

Will land be bid publicly or bid on the website? Concern that the public be able to bid on the land in an open process.

Subsequent to their determination as surplus, the Suwannee River Water Management District (SRWMD) posts such lands as available on their website. It is envisioned that the Southwest Florida Water Management District will follow a similar process for the posting of available surplus lands.

How many acres has the SRWMD sold?

It is our understanding that to date, the SRWMD has sold approximately 300-500 acres.

What is the economy of scale if you’re talking about surplusing only a small amount of acreage?

One component of the SLA project is to evaluate the potential to increase efficiency of its land management program, and identify lands that no longer meet the original acquisition purpose or do not provide water resource benefits. Costs associated with the current SLA project evaluation activities are part of the normal staff duties related to land resources management tasks. Any additional costs that may be incurred as part of the evaluation process are anticipated to be more than offset by increased operational and management efficiencies derived via the SLA project.

People in Tampa want Citrus County’s water. If a portion of Potts Preserve or Flying Eagle were sold, would the District have any say into what is done with the property? Can you stipulate the future use of the land?

The District can restrict the types of uses on a property by retaining in a conservation easement and/or development rights. Such provisions restrict development of the property, but typically allow for use of the land for agricultural purposes.

Noted was economy of scale, in that the SRWMD only found 500 acres to surplus. If the District determines 1,000 acres can be sold, this will be an expensive effort. How can you justify the expense?

As noted, the District’s SLA project will evaluate the potential to increase efficiency of its land management program, and identify lands that no longer meet the original acquisition purpose or do not provide water resource benefits. Increased long-term land management and operational efficiencies derived via this project are anticipated to offset costs related to the current evaluation process.

The environment has been wiped out by transition. We thought the trees would be there forever. Global warming is real, temperatures are changing, sea levels are rising, vegetation is changing and migration patterns are changing. We need to hold the line for the future.

Comment acknowledged.

What did you (District staff) get out of the meeting?

Staff received a variety of comments and suggestions from attendees on the District’s Surplus Lands Assessment process and was also able to convey how the public and stakeholders can stay involved with the process. Feedback from the meeting attendees included: a consensus that they were not in support of the District selling lands; a number of suggestions on how to make the process more transparent; and some validation of the District’s process for evaluation.

Thanks for answering our questions and meeting in the format we wanted. People in this region have a passion for the area’s resources. Birders, hunters and airboaters love the water and land and worry about what will become of it.

The District understands the public’s concerns with respect to the region’s water and water-related natural resources. The SLA process was developed in a manner to ensure that the integrity of such resources is maintained.

Request you find out from your bosses if this is necessary.

District staff is performing the SLA evaluation at the direction of the Governing Board.

Is the SRWMD still evaluating its lands?

The SRWMD has an ongoing process for the evaluation of its land holdings.

The Governor and Cabinet recently voted to swap an isolated 80-acre tract severed from the John Bethea State Forest for two 40-acre inholdings within the State Forest. Audubon thought this was a logical exchange as it added to the State Forest and the state received more manageable land. An out-parcel in a preserve is a problem to manage. If you can trade or surplus to buy inholdings, it makes good conservation sense. Anywhere there is several thousand acres owned there must be some that can be sold. It wouldn’t make sense if the District bought land five years ago at $10,000/acre and sold it now for $3,000-$5,000/acre. This project may not be worth the effort if only a small amount of acreage is identified.

Where appropriate, the District will consider land exchanges as a disposition option. In some instances, such transactions could further the District’s resource management goals for the larger project by acquiring adjacent properties with greater conservation value. Land purchase values and existing market considerations will be other factors considered as part of the overall SLA evaluation effort.

No net loss of public-owned lands.

Comment acknowledged.

Generally agree with no net loss, but if ten acres of something that is not very valuable is swapped for something more valuable, that makes sense.

As previously noted, the District will consider land exchanges as a disposition option, especially in instances where the resource management goals for the larger project could be furthered through acquisition of adjacent properties with greater conservation value.

Can you swap land?

As previously noted, the District will consider land exchanges as one of a variety of disposition options.

The District is acting on policy of the Governor and Legislature. Vote your conviction if you want something.

(This was a comment from a member of the public directed to the meeting audience. No District response required.)

Public input has to be a big part of the evaluation process.

The District will continue to afford as many opportunities for public and stakeholder input into the SLA process as possible.

The evaluation process needs to consider that property is more valuable if left in its natural state versus potential future uses.

Comment acknowledged.

Keep politics out of the process.

Comment acknowledged.

Will consideration be given to all of the archaeological sites on some of the land, especially Flying Eagle?

Yes, the District will give due consideration to all known archaeological sites through the SLA evaluation.

Any and all public lands bought by a public/government agency for public conservation, floodplain and conservation use, with public funds, must be held in public trust regardless of size of acreage or inconvenience of land management. To sell these parcels, especially at this time – in the worst real estate market in decades – is an appalling and astounding decision, regardless of parcel size, particularly in light of Florida Forever Trust Funds used to purchase the acreage.

Comment acknowledged.

Who gets the money from lands sold?

The use of proceeds from the sale of surplus lands will depend on which land-buying program the lands were originally purchased through. The Disposition of Proceeds document on the District’s SLA website outlines the allowable uses of revenue received from surplus land sales.

These lands were purchased under the Florida Forever program with the purpose of protecting these lands forever. As open spaces, protection of habitat for animal and bird species in decline due to the loss of habitat, as filters for the aquifer, and recharge areas for our future or present drinking water and water that flows into our rivers, lakes and gulf, and protection for plant and tree species also in decline due to development. Even the sale of small parcels to developers where houses might be built has an impact on all of the above by taking down trees and plants, paving grounds that could filter water, adding lawns, which need pesticides and fertilizers, and septic systems that are not now monitored. Small or large parcels of land purchased under Florida Forever means protecting this forever.

Comment acknowledged.

We oppose any sales of surplus lands.

Comment acknowledged.

---

December 14, 2011, Bartow Service Office

Will build-out maps of regional planning councils and local governments be considered as part of the process?

Yes. District staff familiar with local and regional land use planning activities will be part of the evaluation teams for the SLA project. The potential effects that such plans will have on District-owned lands, as well as what effect land surplus activities may have on adjacent lands, will be considered at part of the SLA evaluation efforts.

Was part of Old Florida Plantation (OFP) identified as surplus pursuant to the original purchase?

The OFP property was originally acquired for Lake Hancock project-related needs. It was recognized at the outset that only a portion of the OFP lands would be required for the projects, hence concurrent with approving the acquisition, the Governing Board designated as surplus any OFP lands not needed for project purposes.

Is there a deadline for surplus of lands associated with OFP?

There is no deadline associated with disposition of the OFP lands.

Will the District maintain a mechanism for lands to be considered for exchange for other environmental lands?

Where appropriate, the District will consider land exchanges as a disposition option. In some instances, such transactions could further the resource management goals for the larger project by acquiring adjacent properties with greater conservation value.

Are any changes being considered to the Lake Hancock Land Use and Management Plan relative to OFP?

No changes are proposed relative to the OFP in the Lake Hancock Land Use and Management Plan as part of the SLA evaluation. Those portions of the OFP lands previously identified for surplus by the Governing Board will continue to be subject to disposition.

Is the schedule provided the only lands being considered as part of the process?

The District lands currently slated for evaluation are those for which the District has sole ownership and serves as lead land manager. Evaluations of remaining District lands are proposed to be undertaken after this initial series of evaluations are completed.

How can we access maps of OFP?

Maps of the OFP project are available as part of the Lake Hancock Land Use and Management Plan, which can be found on the District’s website .

Is there other property similar to OFP for potential surplus?

The OFP property is unique in that it was originally purchased for Lake Hancock project-related purposes, with portions designated for surplus at the time of acquisition. Portions of a few other substantially smaller tracts purchased for Lake Hancock project-related purposes have also been designated for surplus. The OFP property is also unique in that it is the only District property with an approved DRI on it.

Heard of a suggestion for an ecotourism lodge at the northern portion of Lake Hancock. Is this the District’s idea?

The District has not proposed an ecotourism lodge on Lake Hancock, nor is staff aware of any such proposal.

Will Evaluation Area 3 be covered as part of June 13 meeting in Bartow?

The SLA Governing Board Subcommittee will be discussing recommendations for lands within Evaluation Area 3 at its meeting to be held at the District’s Tampa Service Office, tentatively scheduled for June 13, 2012.

Will the public have an opportunity to address recommendations at Governing Board meetings?

Yes. Members of the public and interested stakeholders are encouraged to provide their input on the SLA process and specific surplus recommendations by attending the SLA Subcommittee and Governing Board meetings.

If leases are considered, would there be those other than cattle? Suggest no tomatoes.

Leases would be considered for agricultural purposes that are consistent with the water resources protection, conservation and management objectives of the District.

Could land swap considerations include high recharge lands?

The District would consider land exchanges as a disposition option, especially if such transactions provide a positive net benefit to the District’s management goals by acquiring properties with greater resource value.

Does CLIP GIS tool include recharge as a data layer?

Yes. The District’s CLIP-based decision support system includes a variety of water resources and ecological data developed between 2005 and 2008, including addressing groundwater recharge.

Is there a targeted lead time for posting recommendations to webpage in advance of meetings?

Surplus recommendations for specific properties will be available on the District’s SLA webpage approximately two weeks in advance of the SLA Governing Board Subcommittee meeting at which they will be considered.

Is there a minimum threshold below which staff would not consider disposition?

No minimum acreage thresholds have been discussed with respect to disposition.

Would the District approach Polk County prior to surplusing to the public (Green Swamp Area)?

The District will consider surplus or exchanges with local governments and other agencies where applicable. In some instances, such considerations are statutorily required pursuant to the provisions of the funding source by which the lands were originally acquired.

Will decisions be made after newer hydrologic studies are completed?

Evaluations conducted as part of the SLA project will incorporate consideration of the latest available water resources data.

Will current land prices have an effect on surplus options?

Land purchase prices and existing market considerations will be factors that are considered as part of the disposition process within the overall SLA evaluation effort.

Will land be swapped within the same region?

In some instances, land exchanges may occur between two Evaluation Areas if such exchanges further the overall water resource conservation and management objectives of the District.

Will information provided to the Governing Board Subcommittee be made available on the website?

All information provided to the SLA Governing Board Subcommittee will be available on the SLA webpage prior to the meeting.

Will the “optimal project boundary” that can be found in land management plans be considered?

The Land Use and Management Plans for District-owned lands are typically completed subsequent to acquisition of a majority of the “core” project. Historically, the District’s land use and management plans address uses and management of the existing project lands and do not address an “optimal project boundary.”

Why is the District doing this project? To increase revenue?

The SLA project was initiated to evaluate the efficiency of our land management program, and identify lands that no longer meet the original acquisition purpose or do not provide water resource benefits. Revenue generation is not a goal of the SLA project; however, it is anticipated that increased operational and management efficiencies will be achieved as one of its results.

Would a majority of the issues be included in land management plan reviews?

Land management plan reviews may address some of the same issues evaluated through the SLA process.

Purchase and protect more high recharge areas.

Comment acknowledged.

---

January 10, 2012, Tampa Service Office

How soon in advance will staff recommendations to the Governing Board Surplus Lands Assessment (SLA) Subcommittee be posted to the District’s website?

Staff recommendations will be posted two weeks in advance of each Governing Board Subcommittee meeting.

How will proceeds from surplus lands be used, especially for lands not purchased with bond funds?

The specific disposition of proceeds from the sale of any surplus properties would depend on the original funding source of the subject property. The original funding sources for each of the District properties under evaluation, as well as a matrix noting the process followed for disposition of proceeds, are posted on the District’s SLA webpage .

Will lands be open for the public to review the properties proposed for surplus? The Florida Native Plant Society would like to identify native/sensitive plants on properties identified for potential surplus.

Yes. The public will be invited to accompany staff on site visits to properties identified for potential surplus.

Will tonight’s presentation be posted to the District’s website?

Yes. It will be posted under the heading “View Previous Meeting Info.”

Why will staff be reviewing comprehensive plans/local development codes?

Reasons include determining whether a county identifies SWFWMD lands as open space comprehensive plan; see if zoning has changed since the time of acquisition as zoning classifications may have an impact on disposition options such as selling the underlying fee simple ownership and retaining a conservation easement.

Why would the District want to maintain the existing zoning on its lands (i.e., why wouldn’t the District allow down-zoning to “conservation”)?

The prices paid for District land acquisitions reflect the highest and best use of the property based on the underlying zoning at the time of purchase. The District generally does not seek rezoning of its properties in order to preserve the value of such lands and to retire in-place the underlying development potential of the property.

Is the District referring to uplands when considering natural systems value?

Yes. As part of the SLA evaluation process, the District is taking uplands into consideration relative to their role in overall ecosystem function.

Is the District considering surplusing portions of larger tracts?

This will be looked at on a case-by-case basis, and if it makes sense, yes.

Suggest the District develop a companion list of properties needed to add to existing preserves/ landholdings that could be considered at the time the surplus recommendations are made to the Governing Board SLA Subcommittee.

Comment acknowledged.

Suggest that when the staff analysis leads to a proposal to surplus a “significant” piece of property (300-500 acres), the District hold a separate public meeting to allow public comment on that particular tract prior to presentation to the Governing Board SLA Subcommittee.

Comment acknowledged.

How will tracts acquired/used for mitigation purposes be handled relative to potential surplus?

Lands acquired/used for mitigation will not be considered during the surplus evaluation.

Will all individuals who signed up to be notified of the surplus lands evaluation be notified of all upcoming meetings?

Yes.

---

January 11, 2012, Sarasota Service Office

Who initiated the Surplus Lands Assessment and what is the impetus? These lands serve as buffers for the environment and selling them would provide little financial benefit.

The District’s Governing Board has directed staff to look at whether there is the potential to surplus any of our lands to increase the efficiency of our land resources program. This is one of several efforts currently underway to increase the operational efficiency of the water management district.

Economics of proposal: first rule of prudent business people is not to spend capital – our conservation areas are Florida’s capital.

Comment acknowledged.

How many members are on the District Governing Board and who appointed them? How many members are on the SLA Subcommittee and who appointed them? Does each water management district have these entities and are they paid.

All five water management districts have Governing Board members who are unpaid citizen volunteers appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Florida Senate. The background of all 13 SWFWMD Governing Board members is available on the District’s website. The SLA Subcommittee is comprised of five Governing Board members appointed by the Governing Board Chair.

Weighting should be afforded on contiguous protected lands.

Contiguity to adjacent conservation lands is included in the decision support system, Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP).

To what extent is the new conservation effort of Senator Bob Graham involved in this? We need to coalesce concerns.

There has been no involvement by this organization in the District’s SLA evaluation efforts.

How many acres are under consideration? What percent of this amount will be sold? Is there a buyer(s) waiting in the wings?

Approximately 261,300 acres are under consideration for the initial analysis. No quota has been established nor is one contemplated as part of the SLA project. All land surplus recommendations will be made based on results of evaluations. The District is not coordinating this process with any individual buyers and there are no “buyers waiting in the wings.”

Request SWFWMD keep all of their parcels.

Comment acknowledged.

Will there be a way for citizens to vote on a parcel before the Board receives the recommendation?

Members of the public and interested stakeholders are encouraged to provide their input on the SLA process and specific surplus recommendations by attending the SLA Subcommittee and Governing Board meetings.

Would it be feasible to construct buffers that can be used for conservation/water management purposes for land adjacent to parcels considered for surplus?

Any lands proposed for surplus would be assessed for the provision of adequate buffering to ensure the integrity of remaining District lands.

The Schewe Ranch is integral to habitat, watershed (Deer Prairie Creek) and water quality protection and must not be surplused.

Comment acknowledged.

Do the funds from the sale of surplus land go to a restoration fund?

The disposition of proceeds from the sale of any identified surplus property will be in accordance with the prescribed guidelines under which the lands were originally purchased. In some instances, these guidelines direct the District to acquire other conservation lands with such proceeds.

What decision-making methodology was used for the analysis and are the results available for public review? What GIS software was used?

The project will utilize Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data analysis in combination with reviews by multi-disciplinary teams of subject matter experts to evaluate potential surplus opportunities of District-owned lands. The District’s GIS Decision Support System, based on the statewide Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP), will be used in assessing the water resource and ecological values of District lands as one component in the parcel evaluation process. These evaluations will also be conducted with respect to those criteria of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection that must be met for conservation properties being identified for surplus or exchange.

Please consider holding on to all SWFWMD land for future generations to enjoy. Please keep Sarasota County’s good record on conserving land going.

Comment acknowledged.

Reasons not to surplus any of SWFWMD lands: the lands were acquired through an extensive review process which substantiated their public value; financially poor decision to sell when land prices are at one of the lowest points in decades; politically the people of the State of Florida have consistently supported, by majority, land protection; each of the parcels has high ecological significance; ethically the government presented these land acquisitions as permanent protection for future generations, selling the parcels would violate that commitment.

Comment acknowledged.

Any parcels with low hydrological or ecological value should be held for public infrastructure (e.g., camping, parking). Critical parcels generally have insufficient upland buffers against agricultural runoff, buffers are needed. A need for further wildlife corridors in Florida has been noted as critical for long-term viability of our wildlife; therefore small pieces should be considered as building blocks for future corridors.

Comment acknowledged.

The citizens of Florida authorized and pushed for the purchase of these lands and their purchase was not frivolous. Do not sell.

Comment acknowledged.

Will a list of lands recommended for surplus be available prior to March 7th?

Yes, the District will post staff recommendations two weeks prior to each SLA Governing Board Subcommittee meeting.

After analysis, can staff substantiate few lands will be surplused?

Completion of the property evaluation activities proposed as part of the SLA process will determine the actual amount of potential surplus lands.

Is evaluation data available on website?

All of the data considered as part of the SLA evaluation process cannot be readily made available on the District’s webpage. The evaluation of District lands involves review and consideration of a variety of data by multidisciplinary teams of District staff familiar the lands and water resource issues of the evaluation area.

Would like to have access to CLIP in advance of meetings.

The Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP) data can be viewed on the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) website. District staff is also available to answer any question regarding the use of this data in the SLA evaluation process.

Will background information on parcels (funding source, acquisition purpose, etc.) be available?

Yes, the District will post staff recommendations, including background information two weeks prior to each SLA Governing Board Subcommittee meeting.

The public is very unhappy about the effort and proposed dispositions.

Comment acknowledged.

What are Messrs. Joerger and Mazur background?

Mr. Joerger’s background can be found on the District’s website. Mr. Mazur is a licensed profession engineer and certified planner with 20 years of water resource management experience.

Sarasota and the District have had an excellent partnership in protecting public lands.

Comment acknowledged.

The District’s conservation lands make a significant contribution to nature-based/ecotourism, need other non-conservation lands to support ecotourism.

Comment acknowledged.

Small areas provide significant value; as hard as it is to acquire land, the District should not be looking at disposition.

Comment acknowledged.

The GIS tool used in the SLA evaluation should include review of habitat values (e.g., plants, wildlife).

Habitat values are included in the GIS decision support system as part of the Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP) data.

Pursuant to the Governor’s direction, what are the other water management districts and state agencies doing relative to surplus lands evaluations?

The District’s SLA effort is being performed at the direction of the District’s Governing Board. Similar evaluations are being conducted by at least two of the other four water management districts. Contacting the other water management districts and state agencies directly would be the best way to find out about their processes.

What are the benefits of surplusing lands (i.e., revenue generation, debt reduction, etc.)?

The District’s Governing Board has directed staff to look at whether there is the potential to surplus any of our lands to increase the efficiency of our land resources program. This is one of several efforts currently underway to increase the operational efficiency of the District.

Are there opportunities for direct input to the evaluation and decision-making process from the local, ecological and conservation stakeholder community?

The SLA evaluation process has been developed in a transparent and collaborative manner to allow for input by and interaction with stakeholders and other interested parties to the greatest extent possible. A variety of opportunities have been afforded for stakeholder input including direct engagement and four regional public information meetings held to receive input on the SLA process. Other opportunities include provision of a webpage to solicit comments, provide information and update stakeholders on ongoing SLA project activities; establishment of a Governing Board SLA Subcommittee to oversee the process and hold public meetings to consider surplus recommendations; and Governing Board consideration of SLA Subcommittee recommendations at their regularly scheduled meetings.

There is concern that there may be inconsistencies between the assessment methods being utilized by the various agencies and water management districts evaluating surplus lands.

While the processes are not identical, Southwest Florida, Suwannee River and St. Johns River Water Management Districts staff have been coordinating assessment methods throughout the process.

Will the District land managers be part of the evaluation process?

Yes, the District land managers are integral to the process.

Are there dollar or acre targets?

No targets or quotas have been established nor contemplated as part of the SLA project. All land surplus recommendations will be made based on results of the evaluations pursuant to the SLA process.

Would potential exchanges be subject to the same criteria (i.e., evaluated for surplus in the future)?

The District will continue to look for operational efficiencies. If lands do not meet the original acquisition purpose, or provide water resource benefits, such as flood control, recharge, water storage, water management, conservation and protection of water resources, water resource and water supply development, or preservation of wetlands, streams and lakes, lands will be evaluated for potential surplus.

Was the “Bush Report” reviewed as part of this evaluation to determine what lands may have been previously identified?

What has been referred to as the “Bush report” was actually a request for information from the Florida Senate’s Committee on Environmental Preservation during the Bush administration. The information was compiled for the Committee’s mid-term progress report on the Florida Forever land acquisition program, which is available for review on the District’s Surplus Lands Assessment website. The report has been reviewed as part of the SLA evaluation process.

Will the District consider transferring lands to other public entities for conservation and management?

Yes, transferring lands to other land management entities will be considered as part of the SLA evaluation process.

Is there a level of shading with the CLIP tool that has greater value than others?

In general, darker shading for each of the data layers associated with the Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP) indicate a higher level of priority for conservation purposes.

What would be the cost of keeping all lands versus costs associated with management and other considerations?

The SLA evaluation process is structured to identify lands for potential surplus that no longer meet their original acquisition purpose or do not continue to provide water resource benefits. Analysis will be completed for properties identified for potential surplus to determine the cost-effectiveness of continued retention versus disposition.

Would this effort have been undertaken if the District’s budget had not been cut?

Yes. This evaluation is being performed at the direction of the Governing Board in order to increase operation efficiencies, focusing on lands that do not meet the original acquisition purpose, or provide water resource benefits, such as flood control, recharge, water storage, water management, conservation and protection of water resources, water resource and water supply development, or preservation of wetlands, streams and lakes.

Is there pressure on the staff to identify lands for surplus?

No, all land surplus recommendations will be made based on results of the evaluations.

The evaluation process should take existing and future corridors into account. Corridors and linkages are part of the evaluation process.

Which properties were acquired prior to conservation land acquisition programs? Which lands were acquired prior to 1978?

The funding sources for each District property being evaluated are available on our Surplus Lands Assessment website .

Please clarify the disposition proceeds flowchart, the first box is unclear.

The Surplus Lands Evaluation Disposition of Proceeds flowchart has been updated on our SLA webpage .

Did the District receive a legal opinion relative to surplusing lands that were purchased to be protected in perpetuity? If so, please post on the webpage.

The disposition of any surplus lands identified as part of the SLA evaluation will follow the requirements of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes.

Does the District have a budget for this process? How much has been spent?

No specific budget has been established for the SLA process. Evaluation efforts related to SLA process have been accommodated by involved staff as part of their normal work activities; therefore, staff time has been the largest expense to date. As of January 31, 2012, $83,493 has been spent on the evaluation efforts.

Will the effect of putting properties on the market be a consideration in the SLA process?

Yes.

Given the depressed market, now is the time to be acquiring land.

Comment acknowledged.

Is climate change being considered in the SLA evaluation process?

The effects of rising sea level are currently considered as part of other District water resources planning and management efforts and will be factored into the SLA evaluations where appropriate.

What is the process after the CLIP data has been collected?

The CLIP data is but one component of the SLA evaluation process, which also includes extensive review of each of the properties by multidisciplinary teams of District staff familiar with the properties and water resource issues of the evaluation region.

Is there a deadline for the SLA process with respect to the Florida Legislative Session?

There is no deadline relative to the Legislative Session; however staff anticipates wrapping up the project around October 2012.

There is concern that the proceeds will be used to pay debt on state bonds.

Florida Statutes allow proceeds from the sale of surplus lands to be used to pay debt service on revenue bonds.

If it is only anticipated that small parcels will be surplused, why are so many dollars and effort being put into the SLA project?

One component of the SLA project is to evaluate the potential to increase efficiency of its land management program, and identify lands that no longer meet the original acquisition purpose or do not provide water resource benefits. A majority of the costs associated with the current SLA project evaluation activities are part of the normal staff duties related to land resources management tasks. Any additional costs that may be incurred as part of the evaluation process are anticipated to be more than offset by increased operational and management efficiencies derived via the SLA project.