|
|
|
T H E C A B I N E T
S T A T E O F F L O R I D A
_____________________________________________________
Representing:
DIVISION OF BOND FINANCE
FLORIDA LAND AND WATER ADJUDICATORY COMMISSION
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
STATE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION
The above agencies came to be heard before
THE FLORIDA CABINET, Honorable Governor Bush presiding,
in the Cabinet Meeting Room, LL-03, The Capitol,
Tallahassee, Florida, on Thursday, March 13, 2003
commencing at approximately 9:35 a.m.
Reported by:
SANDRA L. NARGIZ
Registered Professional Reporter
Registered Merit Reporter
Certified Realtime Reporter
ACCURATE STENOTYPE REPORTERS, INC.
100 SALEM COURT
TALLAHASSEE, FL 32301 (850)878-2221
2
APPEARANCES:
Representing the Florida Cabinet:
JEB BUSH
Governor
CHARLES H. BRONSON
Commissioner of Agriculture
CHARLIE CRIST
Attorney General
TOM GALLAGHER
Chief Financial Officer
* * *
3
I N D E X
DIVISION OF BOND FINANCE
(presented by Ben Watkins, Jr.)
ITEM ACTION PAGE
1 Approved 4
2 Approved 4
FLORIDA LAND & WATER ADJUDICATORY COMMISSION
(presented by Teresa Tinker )
ITEM ACTION PAGE
1 Approved 5
2 Approved 5
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
(Presented by David Struhs)
ITEM ACTION PAGE
1 Approved 12
2 Approved 15
3 Approved 28
4 Approved 33
5 Deferred 45
6 Withdrawn 78
7 Withdrawn 78
8 Deferred 78
9 Withdrawn 78
STATE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION
(Presented by Coleman Stipanovich)
ITEM ACTION PAGE
1 Approved 79
2 Discussion only 79
3 Approved 79
4 Approved 80
CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER 81
4
1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 (The agenda items commenced at 9:40 a.m.)
3 GOVERNOR BUSH: Division of Bond Finance.
4 The next Cabinet meeting is March 25, 2003, by the
5 way, here in the Cabinet room.
6 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion on the minutes.
7 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Without
8 objection, the item passes.
9 Item 2.
10 MR. WATKINS: Item 2 is a resolution
11 authorizing the issuance and competitive sale of
12 up to $455 million in PECO refunding bonds.
13 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion.
14 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
15 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Without
16 objection, the item passes.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: Florida Land and Water
2 Adjudicatory Commission, commonly known as FLAWAC.
3 MS. TINKER: Item number 1, recommend
4 approval of the minutes of the October 22, 2002,
5 meeting.
6 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is there a motion on item 1?
7 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Motion.
8 CFO GALLAGHER: Second.
9 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Without
10 objection, the item passes.
11 Item 2.
12 MS. TINKER: Item 2, recommend approval of
13 the minutes of the November 26, 2002, meeting.
14 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion on 2.
15 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
16 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Without
17 objection, the item passes.
18 MS. TINKER: Item 3, recommend approval of
19 the draft final order denying petitioner's
20 application for a notice of proposed change.
21 We have two speakers here on this issue,
22 Governor and Cabinet. The first speaker is
23 Andrew Byrne, representing the petitioner, Bay
24 Point Club, Incorporated.
25 MR. BYRNE: Thank you. Members of the
6
1 Commission, my name Andrew Byrne, I represent the
2 Bay Point Club, Inc. I am here to urge you to
3 reject the proposed recommended order.
4 We have filed exceptions in the case and,
5 of course, I am relying on every one of them;
6 but the most important one is the existence of
7 the Edgewater Beach case which is now the law
8 in Florida.
9 That law is controlling authority in the
10 State of Florida and it's based on sound legal
11 principles.
12 Edgewater stands for the proposition that
13 once a developer goes through the onerous
14 process of getting a DRI development order,
15 that he is vested. And as long as any change
16 he makes to his DRI does not substantially
17 deviate from the DRI development order, he can
18 build his project.
19 Well, that law is based on sound legal
20 principles and it's good for Florida.
21 I submit to you that if Edgewater is not
22 the law, then we are going to have a real risk
23 that any developer, any investor, any lender is
24 not going to want to finance a project that the
25 rules could change midstream on.
7
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: Can I ask you a question?
2 MR. BYRNE: Yes, sir.
3 GOVERNOR BUSH: Standard deviation, didn't
4 you all have a height limit that you're deviating
5 from by five stories or six stories? I am trying
6 to remember, I think that was -- so doesn't --
7 isn't that beyond the standard? Isn't that what
8 the Administrative Law Judge suggested?
9 MR. BYRNE: Governor, the Administrative Law
10 Judge found that we did not substantially deviate,
11 that our height increase -- and yes, sir, we are
12 increasing the height -- did not substantially
13 deviate.
14 Because what the law provides, sir, is
15 that as long as any change you make doesn't
16 constitute a substantial deviation under the
17 law, because there are lots of changes that go
18 on with developments. That's exactly what
19 happened in Edgewater, the developer increased
20 the height requirement, but it wasn't a
21 substantial deviation. Just like in our case.
22 And the first DCA said, look, it's not
23 fair to change the rules in midstream or after
24 the fact. As long as he doesn't legally
25 substantially deviate, then he doesn't have to
8
1 go through any more review, including any
2 changes from the comp plan.
3 That's exactly what we have. I submit to
4 the members that it is the law in Florida and
5 it's fair. And the proposed recommended order
6 is in direct conflict with that. It will not
7 withstand First DCA review, and I urge the
8 Commission to reject the recommended order.
9 Thank you, sir.
10 GOVERNOR BUSH: Thank you.
11 MS. TINKER: The next speaker is Mr. Bob
12 Apgar.
13 Mr. Apgar is representing today Bay Point
14 Community Association and several other
15 intervenors that are property owners within the
16 development.
17 MR. APGAR: Good morning, Governor, Members
18 of the Cabinet. I am Bob Apgar. I represent, as
19 Teresa said, several of the intervenors. Mr.
20 Richard Moore is here, he represents the
21 association and my co-council is Ms. Sherry
22 Spires.
23 We are here, Governor, to ask you and
24 Members of the Cabinet to approve the final
25 order prepared by your staff which adopts the
9
1 recommended order reached by the administrative
2 law judge. We think the records speaks for
3 itself in this case, and we think your draft
4 final order reaches the correct conclusion
5 about the Edgewater case.
6 The draft order says, The Edgewater court
7 determined that only the original development
8 rights approved under a 1982 DRI were vested
9 from the requirements of the comprehensive
10 plan.
11 In this case, Governor, the original
12 approved development on this property was 70
13 units. My clients have never quarreled with
14 the developer's right to develop what was
15 originally vested, 70 units and buildings up to
16 five stories.
17 Where we differ with Mr. Byrne is that we
18 say the people who are trying to change the
19 rules in this case is the developer, because
20 they are trying to come in and get buildings
21 approved up to 12 stories for 136 units. And
22 that's far beyond what was vested in the
23 original development order. So your draft
24 order reaches the correct result.
25 Edgewater doesn't apply here because the
10
1 developer is seeking to exceed the original
2 development rights by almost double.
3 I will be happy to answer any questions
4 about any other aspect of the case.
5 CFO GALLAGHER: The opposing counsel said
6 that the District Court of Appeals, you are going
7 to lose. What's your counter to that?
8 MR. APGAR: Mr. Gallagher, we believe that
9 the distinction that your final order makes is the
10 correct distinction, and we believe the First
11 District Court of Appeal will recognize that.
12 The Edgewater was a vested rights case.
13 This case isn't about vested rights. This case
14 is about exceeding the original development
15 approval.
16 The Edgewater case allowed the developer
17 to return to what was originally approved.
18 That's the big difference between these two
19 cases.
20 We believe the First District will
21 recognize that distinction and that we will
22 prevail.
23 CFO GALLAGHER: I move approval.
24 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
25 GOVERNOR BUSH: General?
11
1 GENERAL CRIST: Our office has looked at this
2 a little bit and Jon Glogau is with us. I think
3 we are good shape, though, if you have any
4 questions.
5 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is there any other
6 discussion? There is a motion to approve the
7 FLAWAC recommendation and a second.
8 All in favor say aye.
9 THE CABINET: Aye.
10 GOVERNOR BUSH: All opposed? The motion
11 passes.
12 MS. TINKER: Thank you, sir.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: Board of Trustees.
2 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion on the minutes.
3 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
4 CFO GALLAGHER: November 26 and December 11.
5 GOVERNOR BUSH: There are motions on items 1
6 and 2? No?
7 CFO GALLAGHER: Item 1 is November 22 and
8 December 11.
9 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion on item 1
10 to approve the minutes for November 26 and
11 December 11 of last year, and a second. The item
12 passes without objection.
13 Item 2.
14 MR. STRUHS: Governor, if I might, before we
15 get into the published agenda here, share with you
16 some of the results from the roundtable that you
17 all participated in just last week.
18 And, first of all, I wanted to publicly
19 thank you on the record because it was a great
20 opportunity for us and we appreciate the fact
21 that Mr. Crist had the idea and that you all
22 participated.
23 CFO GALLAGHER: Would you put mike more
24 towards your mouth?
25 MR. STRUHS: One of the things I promised to
13
1 you at the end of the roundtable discussion is
2 that we would try to summarize all the new ideas
3 that were surfaced during that meeting.
4 We have done that. We have done that in a
5 draft format. What I would like to be able to
6 do is offer this to you and to all the Cabinet
7 aides, ask for you to review this, compare it
8 to your own recollections of the ideas that
9 were surfaced during that roundtable and -- can
10 you hear me or not?
11 GOVERNOR BUSH: Yes, we can hear you. We are
12 just talking.
13 (Short pause.)
14 We were just talking about the lights and
15 they just went on.
16 CFO GALLAGHER: We were happy they weren't
17 on.
18 GENERAL CRIST: I would like to thank
19 Secretary Struhs and his staff for helping us out
20 last week and presenting these suggestions to us.
21 I know it's a lot of work, we really appreciate
22 it.
23 MR. STRUHS: It was very worthwhile, though,
24 and what I ask all you to do, both the principals
25 and the Cabinet aides, is to review the list. If
14
1 you think we missed anything, get back to us and
2 let us know. We are going to make a concerted
3 effort to try to develop and pursue some of these
4 ideas.
5 One of the ideas that came out of that
6 discussion that I think everybody warmed up to
7 was the idea of creating more private/public
8 partnerships. And to that end, what I would
9 like to do, with your permission, is to take
10 our director of the Division of State Lands,
11 Eva Armstrong, put her on a short-term
12 executive loan program where she will actually
13 spend several weeks working with the Trust for
14 Public Lands in their office learning some of
15 the techniques that they use on the private
16 sector side to make these things go more
17 efficiently and some of the strategies they
18 use.
19 Is Eva here? Because Eva works not only
20 for me, but because she works also for you, I
21 would like to get your okay to work out these
22 arrangements for that kind of executive
23 exchange program, because I think it will
24 really build on the momentum coming out of the
25 discussion to forge these stronger
15
1 private/public partnerships.
2 GOVERNOR BUSH: Anybody have any objection to
3 that?
4 MR. STRUHS: Thank you.
5 Item 2 is an option agreement for the
6 Rieli property in the Florida Keys Ecosystem,
7 Florida Forever Project. Recommend approval of
8 the item.
9 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion on 2.
10 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
11 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Without
12 objection, the item passes.
13 MR. STRUHS: Item 3 is the Nature
14 Conservancy's charitable trust assignment of an
15 option agreement for Lake Wales Ridge Ecosystem
16 Project. This is known as Mountain Lake Cutoff
17 Property. Recommend approval of this.
18 And there are a number of individuals who
19 I think would like to speak to this item. We
20 might actually have I believe -- is this the
21 one we have the video presentation on?
22 We have a short video presentation, so if
23 you would turn your attention to the screen,
24 please.
25 (Playing video.)
16
1 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Governor, I think that
2 this is the piece that the Game Commission will be
3 in charge of managing; is that correct?
4 GOVERNOR BUSH: Downtown Lake Wales, why
5 would the Game Commission --
6 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Unless I am mistaken,
7 I think they are supposed to be the managing
8 agency, and I am trying to figure out why maybe it
9 wasn't delegated to Parks and Recreations or
10 something where it might be used in such a way in
11 a more populated area.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: I hope there is no hunting
13 going on in this thing.
14 CFO GALLAGHER: Forestry could do it except
15 there is no forest, right?
16 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: If there is, I am sure
17 the group that you just saw would be wanting to
18 change your mind.
19 GOVERNOR BUSH: Where did the presenter go?
20 CFO GALLAGHER: He is passing out papers.
21 MR. STRUHS: I am making the coffee, I'm
22 pouring the coffee.
23 CFO GALLAGHER: Are you little short of
24 personnel over at that place?
25 MR. STRUHS: Trying to do more with less,
17
1 sir.
2 CFO GALLAGHER: Maybe privatized the paper
3 passing and the guy didn't show up?
4 GOVERNOR BUSH: Yes, sir, Secretary Struhs,
5 can you answer the question of Commissioner
6 Bronson?
7 MR. STRUHS: Yes, sir, the question was, I am
8 sorry?
9 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: If I am not mistaken,
10 isn't this the piece that was going to be managed
11 by the Game and Fish Commission?
12 MR. STRUHS: Yes, sir.
13 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: And I was tying to
14 figure out, since it's in a fairly populated area,
15 why maybe Parks and Recreation or someone isn't
16 doing the program so people are going to have a
17 chance to go through this area and use it as
18 teaching and other issues.
19 MS. ARMSTRONG: Good morning, Eva Armstrong
20 with State Lands.
21 Fish and Wildlife is going to manage it
22 because of the resources on the property, it
23 won't be actively managed as a park by
24 Recreation and Parks.
25 MR. STRUHS: He is asking why not?
18
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: These are wardens, aren't
2 they? These are people that are after poachers.
3 MS. ARMSTRONG: You have threatened and
4 endangered species, and Fish and Wildlife manage
5 for the wildlife attributes at the site. That's
6 why.
7 CFO GALLAGHER: Let me ask you a question.
8 We have got Florida bonamia, britton's beargrass,
9 scrub bay, hairy jointweed, paper-like nailwart,
10 three variations of scrub oak and a Florida scrub
11 lizard.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: One?
13 CFO GALLAGHER: There is probably more than
14 one. I hope there is at least two, or there won't
15 be any. Are these endangered?
16 MS. ARMSTRONG: Some of those are, or
17 threatened.
18 CFO GALLAGHER: How do you -- I thought we
19 don't let people build on areas where you got
20 these endangered creatures. So how is somebody
21 going to do all this stuff that they are planning
22 to do if we don't buy it?
23 MS. ARMSTRONG: It's called mitigation. All
24 they have to do is mitigate enough, and they can
25 destroy wetlands. Think of all the gopher
19
1 tortoises that are moved.
2 CFO GALLAGHER: So the blue area, the
3 conservation area, is the mitigation for this?
4 MS. ARMSTRONG: No, sir. They are just -- we
5 are buying the property so they won't have to
6 move. You see what I am saying?
7 CFO GALLAGHER: I am saying if we don't buy
8 the property, my question is how do they build all
9 this stuff they got it zoned for if we don't buy
10 the property and you got all these things there
11 that are protected?
12 MS. ARMSTRONG: They would have to mitigate
13 for it, and I don't know what the mitigation plan
14 would be.
15 CFO GALLAGHER: It would cost money.
16 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes.
17 CFO GALLAGHER: Is that figured in the price
18 here?
19 MS. ARMSTRONG: No -- it is figured in the
20 price -- mitigation for the development, yes --
21 because it would be reduced from the developed --
22 added to the cost of the development of the site.
23 GOVERNOR BUSH: Why isn't this a community
24 trust property, out of curiosity? It's in the
25 middle of downtown. It would be a smaller
20
1 community.
2 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes, sir. I think it's
3 because if you remember the Lake Wales Ridge
4 Project, it covers a large area, but it's small
5 parcels within those areas. It's because of the
6 resources that are on it. It could certainly be
7 valued as a Florida Communities Trust Project, but
8 it was on our list, so we negotiated it.
9 GOVERNOR BUSH: When was the property
10 rezoned?
11 MS. ARMSTRONG: It has had a development plan
12 on it for --
13 MR. FOUNTAIN: Part of the property has
14 been --
15 MS. ARMSTRONG: This is Keith Fountain with
16 Nature Conservancy.
17 GOVERNOR BUSH: Welcome. This is a
18 continuation of our workshop.
19 MR. FOUNTAIN: Yes, it is. Okay. Good
20 morning, Governor, Cabinet members. I would like
21 to try to touch on all the questions that have
22 been raised so far, if I can remember them.
23 The Lake Wales Ecosystem Project, as to
24 management, Fish and Wildlife Commission is the
25 primary manager. There is one site that is
21
1 managed by Rec and Parks in the project. It's
2 down in Highlands County, and the Division of
3 Forestry manages several other sites.
4 On Commissioner Gallagher's question to do
5 with the set aside. The future land use
6 designation that this property had a couple of
7 years ago of conservation required that
8 specifically two natural communities be
9 protected, scrub and wetlands. But the other
10 communities and other communities that are
11 valuable to you were opened for development
12 such as Sand Hill and other communities.
13 So what the landowner did is they went
14 through a -- and I believe, Governor, this will
15 address your question -- this property in 19 --
16 excuse me, 2001, the east side of the property,
17 east of U.S. 27, was zoned for planned
18 development and the uses that you see there in
19 front of East Bay.
20 GOVERNOR BUSH: Where most of the land is?
21 MR. FOUNTAIN: Right, the bulk of the
22 property, 165 acres was already zoned for
23 commercial/residential mixed residential uses.
24 The west side of 27, 15 acres, was zoned
25 rural residential and it was in Polk County, it
22
1 was not annexed into the city. What happened
2 in 2001 is two things.
3 The property east of the road had its
4 future land use changed as was dictated by that
5 conservation label, so that the future land
6 uses matched the underlying zoning. In other
7 words, what they did, the landowner came in
8 with a develop plan, protected the scrub and
9 wetlands, but not other communities such as
10 Sand Hill and targeted those for development.
11 West of the road you did have three things
12 happen. The property was annexed into the
13 city, the property was zoned planned
14 development like the portion east of the road,
15 and the comprehensive plan was changed
16 accordingly.
17 GOVERNOR BUSH: For my -- back to the
18 question of this issue of counties or
19 municipalities rezoning up, increasing development
20 rights, and then coming -- and the owner coming or
21 the property owner coming to us seeking our
22 purchase of the property, that's not the case in
23 this property because it already had embedded
24 development rights, those were modified when it
25 came for its development, came and submitted his
23
1 development plan.
2 MR. FOUNTAIN: That's exactly the case. This
3 property, the part east of U.S. 27, 10 years ago
4 when we first started working with this landowner,
5 had a zoning that permitted the use you see before
6 you today and had a future land use label that
7 literally said when you looked at it, go get your
8 future land use changed and protect the areas we
9 are saying protect, which I believe is the light
10 blue on your drawing, and change your future land
11 use so it matches your zoning on the remainder.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: Treasurer?
13 CFO GALLAGHER: What does the City of Lake
14 Wales -- what city is this?
15 MR. FOUNTAIN: Lake Wales.
16 CFO GALLAGHER: What is the City of Lake
17 Wales Commission, are they in favor of this?
18 MR. FOUNTAIN: Yes, I believe you got a
19 letter of support or DEP got a letter of support
20 from the city manager of the City of Lake Wales.
21 CFO GALLAGHER: This property is going to
22 come off their tax roll?
23 MR. FOUNTAIN: Yes, but they are very
24 supportive of this project. It fits into a
25 Greenway network that they have -- that the local
24
1 community has been working on for probably 15 to
2 20 years.
3 GOVERNOR BUSH: How? Where does it connect?
4 MR. FOUNTAIN: It connects with -- on the
5 eastern side of this site, you have an abandoned
6 CSX right-of-way that goes down alternate U.S. 27
7 and down through the City of Lake Wales.
8 Years ago they secured the donation of
9 actually I guess what was the old train station
10 in Lake Wales, CSX donated that. It's now the
11 Depot Museum. So they have done quite a bit of
12 work.
13 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is this like a bike trail
14 now?
15 MR. FOUNTAIN: I don't know if it's complete,
16 I think it's mostly foot path.
17 GOVERNOR BUSH: Why would this not be a
18 community trust, whatever it's called now?
19 MR. FOUNTAIN: We addressed that. About five
20 or six years ago we took a hard look at whether
21 Florida Communities Trust was available as the
22 funding mechanism for this site and ran into
23 basically two issues.
24 One, the City of Lake Wales was over the
25 10,000 population threshold that allowed them
25
1 to get a 100 percent grant, and they didn't
2 have money to contribute to the purchase of the
3 property.
4 CFO GALLAGHER: Are we allowed to do that?
5 Can we contribute? In other words, our part would
6 be the city's percentage and let the money come
7 from --
8 MR. FOUNTAIN: My understanding is that
9 Florida Communities Trust cannot use as matching
10 funds other bond derived dollars.
11 CFO GALLAGHER: Okay.
12 MR. STRUHS: Keith is absolutely right, but I
13 think there is another reason.
14 The Lake Wales Ridge project is actually a
15 collection of a lot of different parcels, it's
16 not just this one parcel.
17 The word that the experts use is mosaic,
18 mosaic meaning that there are pieces of this
19 remaining ecosystem that they are trying to
20 preserve. They can't get the large swat that
21 we would see in other areas, so they have this
22 mosaic approach. That's why it fell under this
23 project rather than Florida Communities Trust.
24 And I would also point out that this
25 project was approved and put on that plan
26
1 before the formula was changed and more of the
2 resources were channelled into the Florida
3 Communities Trust Program.
4 It's a close call, but we are comfortable
5 with this approach.
6 GOVERNOR BUSH: Can we talk about valuation?
7 Can you talk about valuation?
8 MR. FOUNTAIN: Yes. What the appraisers did,
9 just in a nutshell, is they looked at the
10 different uses that you see before you in the
11 development plan and they valued those uses. West
12 of U.S. 27 the appraiser, both appraisers decided
13 that -- and you can see it and you can see it from
14 the aerial photo, this is a very commercial area.
15 The property with U.S. 27 would sell immediately.
16 So the retail value of those parcels on the west
17 side -- or excuse me, it's just one parcel, the
18 one parcel west of 27 was valued accordingly.
19 East of U.S. 27 you had assemblage of
20 uses, some on U.S. 27, some with frontage not
21 on U.S. 27. And the appraiser came up with
22 retail value of those, discounted that value,
23 added it to the property west of 27.
24 GOVERNOR BUSH: Discounted it for?
25 MR. FOUNTAIN: Discounted for time, that it
27
1 would take a period of years to sell out and
2 develop all of the property west of U.S. 27.
3 Your purchase price that you got today is
4 82 percent of the appraised value on the
5 property east of 27 and it's 42 percent of the
6 value on the property west of 27. Excuse me,
7 the first number 85 percent.
8 CFO GALLAGHER: When you say 80 percent of
9 value, you are saying the reason for that is
10 because of the time to develop it?
11 MR. FOUNTAIN: No, that's just your purchase
12 price that's been negotiated. This is a bargain
13 negotiated purchase for the Trustees.
14 East of the 27, the appraisers, the value
15 you see before you is not a retail value. It
16 is a discounted value, acknowledging the fact
17 that to develop every portion of this site
18 would take a period of years.
19 GOVERNOR BUSH: What kind of absorption rate
20 for all this stuff going on in Lake Wales? I
21 haven't been there in a while.
22 MR. FOUNTAIN: I would have to pull the
23 appraisal. I think it was five-plus years.
24 GOVERNOR BUSH: Any other discussion?
25 MR. FOUNTAIN: Six years is what I am
28
1 hearing.
2 CFO GALLAGHER: Six plus?
3 GOVERNOR BUSH: Six?
4 CFO GALLAGHER: There is no way somebody is
5 going to build this out and get it --
6 MR. FOUNTAIN: Well, a couple of things just
7 happened recently. Two years ago you now have a
8 signalized intersection right there on the north
9 side of the site.
10 CFO GALLAGHER: That will make a difference.
11 MR. FOUNTAIN: The development in this area,
12 the north side of the site are car dealerships
13 that have been expanding; you see the Eagle Ridge
14 Mall the last five or six years; you now have Home
15 Depot that has come in; Wendy's, Denny's, they are
16 all piling in now. And this is the remaining
17 large piece within this very urban core.
18 GOVERNOR BUSH: Not very urban.
19 MR. FOUNTAIN: This is U.S. 27.
20 CFO GALLAGHER: For Lake Wales it's pretty
21 urban. For Polk it's urban.
22 I will move the issue, item 3.
23 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
24 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Any
25 other discussion? The item passes without
29
1 objection. Thank you.
2 MR. STRUHS: Item 4, we recommend approval.
3 This is acquisition of property from St. Joe
4 Timberland along the Wacissa River, and we
5 recommend approval and can answer any questions
6 you might have.
7 CFO GALLAGHER: Now you read the Auditor
8 General's report?
9 MR. STRUHS: I read it carefully, sir.
10 CFO GALLAGHER: And we have taken this into
11 account here, and we are not going to get spanked
12 again for overpaying?
13 MR. STRUHS: I think the Auditor General's
14 conclusions in the first instance were inaccurate
15 and our response to that report, which published
16 part of it I think explains why. But we are very
17 confident that these are appropriate values. It
18 does include appropriately the value of the timber
19 on the land because it is, after all, timberland.
20 So we are confident of that.
21 If you would like more detail, we actually
22 prepared something we can --
23 CFO GALLAGHER: I wanted to make sure you are
24 aware and took that and considered the report into
25 consideration when you --
30
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: General Crist.
2 GENERAL CRIST: The Treasurer brings up a
3 good point regarding the Auditor General. And it
4 sounds like you have a difference of opinion. Who
5 audits the Auditor General, if anyone?
6 GOVERNOR BUSH: Nobody.
7 GENERAL CRIST: Probably not.
8 GOVERNOR BUSH: What happens is they make
9 their report. This is a monitored Auditor
10 General?
11 MR. STRUHS: Auditor General.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: And then the entity that
13 looked at it answers it and the legislature then
14 either can change -- get involved, I guess, or
15 they don't.
16 GENERAL CRIST: Just so long as there is a
17 check and balance there.
18 CFO GALLAGHER: The idea is that the agency
19 that the Auditor General gives an answer to gives
20 a heads up that there may be something that you
21 are doing that is incorrect, and you get to look
22 at it. If you go through it and you say our side
23 thinks it's correct and we did these things we
24 make it that way, lawful, et cetera, that's what
25 your answer is and the legislature can make a
31
1 change to tell you to do that other way or change
2 to tell you to do it that way or they leave it the
3 way it is.
4 GOVERNOR BUSH: I think the issue here is
5 that the Auditor General used a concept called net
6 acreage, basically, usable acreage; they didn't
7 include the forced revalue of the property which
8 is foreign to -- I don't know who is telling the
9 Auditor General that timber doesn't count. Counts
10 all the time. Am I right, Commissioner?
11 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Trying to determine
12 who is right and who is wrong on these issues is a
13 little like -- that's why I was taken back as to
14 why this thing on the Lake Wales Ridge was going
15 to be by Game and Fish.
16 GOVERNOR BUSH: Because it's part of a
17 mosaic. I am sure the Game and Fish boys and
18 girls appreciate that.
19 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: It's hard sometimes to
20 make a determination when you are hearing
21 conflicting issues, but I guess that's why we are
22 here, we are elected to make -- be the referees of
23 this whole thing. So that's why I am trying to
24 take in as much and follow the right path here.
25 GOVERNOR BUSH: One of the questions, a
32
1 broader question concerns -- Treasurer Gallagher
2 asked about Lake Wales, whether they were
3 supportive of this.
4 Is Jefferson County supportive of this?
5 Are there other strategies that we can use to
6 keep some of this property on the tax rolls?
7 I don't know what Jefferson County's tax
8 rolls are. Do we have other options to keep
9 control over the property forever but allow
10 some, because of the ownership question, allow
11 some taxation to take place?
12 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Governor, if I could,
13 from the pieces that the Department of
14 Agriculture, Division of Forestry manage, where
15 there is state lands and there has to be timber
16 taken out for whatever reason -- disease
17 potential -- planted pines where they are so thick
18 they have to be thinned for the health of the rest
19 of the trees, and so forth; when that happens, on
20 those pieces, the counties get I think 15 percent
21 of the monies that are taken off of that property
22 that's been managed by the Division, goes back to
23 the counties to be used for their issues.
24 GOVERNOR BUSH: That's good.
25 MR. STRUHS: Governor, on this particular
33
1 item, early on in the negotiations with St. Joe
2 Timber, the department had proposed the idea of a
3 conservation easement which would have allowed the
4 property to stay on the tax rolls in Jefferson
5 County, essentially buying up just some of the
6 development rights, but allowing it to continue to
7 be used as timberland.
8 And in this instance, the seller was not
9 interested in pursuing that option. They
10 wanted to have a fee simple transaction, but we
11 did propose a conservation easement.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: Any other discussion? The
13 item is --
14 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion on 4.
15 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
16 GOVERNOR BUSH: -- moved and seconded without
17 objection. Item passes.
18 MR. STRUHS: Item 5, this item relates to
19 Southern Golden Gate Estates. It continues a
20 pattern of authorizing the department to take some
21 extraordinary measures to try to acquire these
22 parcels.
23 Item 5 is dealing only with undeveloped
24 parcels. These parcels range in acreage
25 between one and two and a half acres. They are
34
1 all in the Southern Golden Gate Estates
2 subdivision.
3 We recommend approval of this. It's
4 consistent with some of the items you approved
5 before.
6 Distinguishing it, I will point out, from
7 item 6 and 7, which are homesteaded properties
8 and obviously we would like to deal with
9 individually.
10 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is this the one where people
11 are buying tax deeds?
12 MR. STRUHS: I don't think so. It was? Yes,
13 it is. I am sorry.
14 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is this the property where
15 the county agreed to subdivide the properties?
16 MR. STRUHS: Yes.
17 GOVERNOR BUSH: So these are properties that
18 had been on our list to purchase for the last
19 umpteen years, a speculator comes in and buys on
20 the courthouse step properties, goes to Collier
21 County to get it subdivided and then we are now
22 going to purchase these properties at a higher
23 value because of that action; through eminent
24 domain? That was a rhetorical question. Maybe I
25 am wrong, but --
35
1 MR. STRUHS: No, I think you are correct.
2 GOVERNOR BUSH: So theoretically, if we are
3 buying property based on potential development
4 rights or the rights inherent on the property,
5 maybe I am misunderstanding it, but we have gone
6 from whatever it was per acre to four times more
7 per acre. Why doesn't Collier County pay for
8 three of those four?
9 MS. ARMSTRONG: We are offering 125 percent.
10 MR. STRUHS: In the past in Southern Golden
11 Gate Estates you have authorized us to offer in
12 excess of the 100 percent appraised value as a
13 means of clearing these things out.
14 GOVERNOR BUSH: I understand. That's not my
15 question.
16 My question is that we have an area of the
17 state that we believe is important to preserve,
18 it's actually tied to the largest, most
19 important restoration project in the country.
20 So no one is suggesting otherwise, that this is
21 not an important thing to do.
22 But that in anticipation of the eventual
23 purchase of this, some wildly entrepreneur has
24 gone and gotten these properties. Why didn't
25 we buy the tax liens?
36
1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Because tax deeds were not
2 the -- the price was higher than your delegation
3 does. When we did the emergency procedures
4 policy, we specifically --
5 GOVERNOR BUSH: The tax deeds were higher?
6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Higher than your delegation
7 to us.
8 GOVERNOR BUSH: Than 125 percent of the
9 appraised value?
10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes.
11 GOVERNOR BUSH: No, try that again.
12 CFO GALLAGHER: How long --
13 GOVERNOR BUSH: Why would someone do that?
14 MS. ARMSTRONG: This is the Judy Warwick, she
15 has managed the bulk of these acquisitions.
16 GOVERNOR BUSH: Come explain this to us.
17 It's a new concept.
18 MS. WARWICK: I know it is. I am just as
19 frustrated in understanding this.
20 Basically what -- we have been given the
21 authority to buy at 100 percent of the DSL
22 approved value.
23 GOVERNOR BUSH: English, what's DSL?
24 MS. WARWICK: Division of State Land value,
25 the approved value. When we go to the tax deed
37
1 sales, we have used the delegated authority that
2 you gave us to offer 5,000 or 125 percent above
3 that, just like we were treating any of the other
4 landowners.
5 So when we go to these tax deed sales,
6 then the maximum bid that we can offer would be
7 what has been delegated to us which is the
8 approved value plus the incentive. And what
9 has happened is we had people who have come and
10 outbid us because we don't have any additional
11 authority.
12 And then they would take their tax deed
13 that they receive at the sale. And we have
14 inquired to the property appraiser's office why
15 they are allowing this, and they said it's
16 because it's privately owned and, according to
17 their rules and regulations, anyone can
18 subdivide their 5-acre, whatever the property
19 is, based upon their rules that they have for
20 the county.
21 And then they took this 5 acres, and they
22 split it up into the 1.14, 1.25 parcels; so
23 what was once one parcel, now we have four.
24 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Governor, can I ask
25 this question then?
38
1 As I remember, and I think I saw quite a
2 bit of this while I was in the Senate, I think
3 over and over and over again, we saw some of
4 this, how long has the initial characterization
5 of the properties been in place? It's been
6 there a number of years. In other words, these
7 parcels have been out there for a number of
8 years and the authority to subdivide has been
9 there with it for a number of years; is that
10 correct?
11 MS. WARWICK: That's my understanding, yes,
12 sir.
13 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: That's why they were
14 come in and outbidding the state on this. Because
15 all those issues were already taken care of, all
16 they had to do was outbid the state.
17 GOVERNOR BUSH: From a marketplace point of
18 view, it sounds like they were buying based on the
19 automatic ability to subdivide. You were trying
20 to buy based on the appraisal as if it wasn't
21 subdivided.
22 MS. WARWICK: It's my understanding that as
23 they looked at it, they said this would be an
24 opportunity for me to get two or three times
25 because I --
39
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: Because they automatically
2 could subdivide it whereas you were trying to buy
3 it based on --
4 MS. WARWICK: -- current status. We were not
5 anticipating this. This is something that's come
6 up.
7 CFO GALLAGHER: Let me ask this. This would
8 be an obvious place for the Nature Conservancy to
9 come in and be able to bid. You got limited to
10 what you can bid, what is it 25,000 or something?
11 MR. STRUHS: 125 percent.
12 MS. WARWICK: We have 5,000 or 125 percent
13 above the value, is what our maximum bid.
14 CFO GALLAGHER: The value is based upon?
15 MS. WARWICK: The value is based upon per
16 acre value, depending on where it's located in the
17 project.
18 CFO GALLAGHER: Recognizing that we are a
19 buyer in this, why wouldn't the Nature Conservancy
20 come in and buy something like this, realizing it
21 can be subdivided, and run the guy off, so at
22 least we are paying ourselves instead of giving
23 somebody a bunch of property?
24 MS. WARWICK: Number one, I have not
25 anticipated this to be a problem. It's just
40
1 basically come up.
2 We have a representative from the
3 conservancy of Southwest Florida that does
4 attend the tax deeds for us, the sales for us,
5 and that would be something I could approach
6 them as an alternative.
7 CFO GALLAGHER: I would rather pay the Nature
8 Conservancy to do this than pay basically a
9 speculator; because these people are buying this
10 knowing they don't have to sell it to four
11 homeowners; they can dump it on us with nobody
12 building anything.
13 And the reason that the county is doing
14 the subdivision and approving them all is
15 because they are hoping somebody will build a
16 house there and pay taxes, I would guess.
17 MS. WARWICK: We can't second guess.
18 GOVERNOR BUSH: We need to start second
19 guessing Collier County. We are -- this is
20 incredible. We are taking action to purchase
21 under a power that makes me just get queazy,
22 property where the local government is -- I am not
23 sure -- if they are subdividing, I assume they do
24 want people to buy homes. Doesn't anybody see the
25 bizarre nature of this?
41
1 If Washington came down, parachuted down
2 here and sat in on these Cabinet meetings and
3 said, What is going on? Local government,
4 state government, all the rules, I mean
5 everybody can explain it, but it makes no
6 sense. In terms of real world common sense to
7 have our partner in this, a county government
8 going on one way, we are going on another, and
9 then we are using eminent domain powers which
10 is the part that just -- I don't know.
11 The only good news about this is it's not
12 a lot of money. If you added three zeros to
13 this, I can assure you that I would not be -- I
14 wouldn't be supporting this. I don't support
15 it now.
16 Can't we talk to the county, David, about
17 this?
18 MR. STRUHS: Yes, sir.
19 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is there someone from the
20 county here?
21 MR. STRUHS: No, I don't believe so.
22 GOVERNOR BUSH: You were smart to leave
23 because it was not your fault and --
24 CFO GALLAGHER: You are catching the heat,
25 it's not your fault.
42
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: Very good instincts. Get
2 Struhs back up there.
3 CFO GALLAGHER: That's the man that takes the
4 heat.
5 MR. STRUHS: I think you hear in our own
6 voices that frustration that --
7 GOVERNOR BUSH: I did, I heard it. It
8 mirrors mine.
9 MR. STRUHS: I think had we done a better job
10 of anticipating this phenomenon, we would have
11 done something differently.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: How many properties are there
13 in this universe that --
14 MR. STRUHS: I can't remember, many.
15 GOVERNOR BUSH: 600s?
16 MR. STRUHS: I mean, in the entire Southern
17 Golden Gate Estates district --
18 GOVERNOR BUSH: That we have committed to
19 purchase over a period of time, how many are left?
20 MS. WARWICK: 342 left.
21 GOVERNOR BUSH: Oh, God.
22 MS. ARMSTRONG: 19,000 lots.
23 MR. STRUHS: 19,000 lots, approximately 340
24 more to go.
25 GOVERNOR BUSH: 340 what?
43
1 MR. STRUHS: 340 lots to go, starting with
2 the universe of 19,000 approximately.
3 GOVERNOR BUSH: Treasurer?
4 CFO GALLAGHER: This drives me just as crazy
5 as it does you.
6 We need to have a Capital For Day down
7 there in Collier County.
8 GOVERNOR BUSH: I am not sure you want to be
9 with all the property rights people down there.
10 We are not the most popular people in the world in
11 Golden Glades except the people that voluntarily
12 sold their lots. The ones that would come would
13 be the ones that didn't.
14 CFO GALLAGHER: I am sure they would.
15 MR. STRUHS: I will make a point of
16 communicating to the county commissioners.
17 GOVERNOR BUSH: Collier County has got a
18 Preservation Conservation Program, don't they have
19 local funds to purchase property?
20 MR. STRUHS: They do.
21 GOVERNOR BUSH: They have got a pretty good
22 record on this stuff; we worked with them on
23 growth management issues related to eastern
24 Collier County about trying to create a better
25 plan of action. This is all in this area, and yet
44
1 they just -- everybody just -- you know, we have
2 been doing it this way, so we'll just keeping
3 doing it.
4 MR. STRUHS: It's not one of the stronger
5 counties. There are other counties that have
6 better, deeper programs than Collier.
7 GOVERNOR BUSH: Anyway --
8 CFO GALLAGHER: For a little history, this
9 item has been deferred January 28, was deferred on
10 February 11.
11 GOVERNOR BUSH: At least we are expanding
12 cercarian costs for this.
13 CFO GALLAGHER: -- March 13.
14 GOVERNOR BUSH: Making less money when each
15 month passes by.
16 CFO GALLAGHER: Pay his share of the taxes,
17 right?
18 MR. STRUHS: We can defer it again if you
19 want to send a message.
20 CFO GALLAGHER: Third message, more to come.
21 MR. STRUHS: Sure.
22 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is there a motion?
23 CFO GALLAGHER: It may get deferred by no
24 motion.
25 GOVERNOR BUSH: Does that mean it can come
45
1 back?
2 MR. STRUHS: Yes.
3 CFO GALLAGHER: Move item 7.
4 MR. STRUHS: Item 6.
5 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is no motion.
6 No motion. David, when it comes back, if
7 you could at least discuss with the county, try
8 to get them to understand the dilemma. This is
9 not lot of money. We are committed to this.
10 It cries out for a different way of doing
11 things.
12 MR. STRUHS: I understand. Perhaps what we
13 might do is have some private communications with
14 the commissioners and we may even attend one of
15 the commission meetings in Collier County.
16 GOVERNOR BUSH: Sure.
17 CFO GALLAGHER: If I could revert back to 5.
18 No motion is denial, so I will defer it.
19 GOVERNOR BUSH: Deferred.
20 CFO GALLAGHER: Defer the item, until the
21 staff wants to bring it up again.
22 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion to defer
23 until staff wants to bring it up again.
24 CFO GALLAGHER: That's sometime.
25 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Second.
46
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: And a second. Any other
2 discussion? Without objection, the item is
3 deferred. Thank you.
4 MR. STRUHS: Thank you for your understanding
5 on this. We'll communicate with the county.
6 I would like, if I might, gentlemen, speak
7 globally about item 6 and 7 because they are
8 related. They are similar.
9 I would suggest that these two items, 6
10 and 7, are probably among the most difficult
11 items that we have ever brought to you for your
12 consideration. And the reason they are
13 difficult is because we have two unwilling
14 property owners that are in the pathway of a
15 major public infrastructure project.
16 I want to let you know we do this very
17 reluctantly and we do this obviously as a last
18 resort.
19 My job, for better or worse, is to lay out
20 the argument as to why we have reached that
21 point of last resort. So if you could just
22 give me a couple of minutes, I will lay out
23 what I believe are the best arguments as to why
24 we reached that point, recognizing that in the
25 end, you face a very difficult choice.
47
1 These two items, number 6 and 7, are not
2 about making a park bigger. These items are
3 not about simply moving people to create more
4 habitat for wildlife. These items are not
5 about wetlands mitigation for development
6 because if that was the sole purpose for these
7 projects, we wouldn't be here before you today,
8 it just wouldn't be worth it.
9 The reason we are here is because this
10 project is about providing flood control and
11 additional water supply needed for the
12 southwest Florida economy.
13 In fact, this is a critical element of
14 what will be the largest single contribution to
15 new water supply for what is probably the
16 nation's fastest growing metropolitan region
17 and that is, in fact, Collier County.
18 Clearly these projects offer some
19 important environmental benefits along the way,
20 but apart from the environmental benefits, this
21 really is the only way we know how to
22 recapture, hold, and move billions of gallons
23 of water.
24 I would ask if you would just for a moment
25 imagine this project is probably more like a
48
1 large highway infrastructure project than it is
2 an environmental project; that the corridor has
3 been selected, the money has been appropriated,
4 99 percent of the needed land has been
5 acquired. So we are ready to proceed.
6 But I would suggest that there are three
7 important differences that make this project
8 different than a highway infrastructure
9 project.
10 The first is this project is actually
11 harder. With the highway project, we often
12 find that the public interest is best served
13 when we can build expressways as straight as
14 possible.
15 We don't want the complications of having
16 to jog millions of vehicles around a single
17 parcel of land because it's challenging to
18 build curves and bridges into a project.
19 And yet nonetheless, we do that. We do
20 that on occasion. It is significantly harder,
21 indeed it's in many cases probably impossible
22 to actually take billions or trillions of
23 gallons of water and make them go around
24 anything.
25 If they are in that flow way, you can't
49
1 maneuver the water around a parcel.
2 In the event that you could do that
3 effectively, what you have effectively done is
4 you have created an inaccessible island.
5 The second difference I think is one of
6 context. I think this is an important
7 conversation to have.
8 We called the Department of Transportation
9 and asked them how many homesteaded parcels
10 have you taken by eminent domain over the last
11 couple of years? And the answer was several
12 thousand.
13 And the response was several thousand, you
14 can be more specific? And the answer that we
15 got back was, well, there are so many, we never
16 actually counted them before.
17 So one of the things we have to do here
18 today is to remind ourselves that we have
19 already spent $92 million to lock in on this
20 particular water conveyance corridor. And we
21 have done that by and large through artful
22 negotiations, turning hundreds of landowners,
23 in fact, thousands of landowners into willing
24 sellers. What we now face are two homesteaded
25 parcels remaining.
50
1 It's not the Department of Transportation
2 where they do two a day. In our case we are
3 doing two in four years.
4 And the third difference, which is obvious
5 to all of us, is because of the unique
6 characteristics of the Cabinet, these decisions
7 have to be made by elected officials, and they
8 have to be made in public; whereas the
9 thousands of similar decisions that are made by
10 the Department of Transportation for similar
11 infrastructure projects are done by appointed
12 officials and they are not done in a public
13 meeting like this.
14 Now there is probably one critical
15 argument, one compelling argument perhaps as to
16 why we don't have to do this now.
17 And that is that this project has not yet
18 been authorized by the Congress. And that is
19 true.
20 I believe there are two answers to that
21 observation.
22 The first one is if you want Congress to
23 authorize the project, do you believe it will
24 be easier or harder to make the case in
25 Washington for that authorization if the needed
51
1 property is already in public ownership?
2 I believe that the case is easier made in
3 Washington if it's already in public ownership.
4 If you want that authorization, this advances
5 that cause.
6 More important, though, more important is
7 that even if this project were to never be
8 authorized by Congress, are we not going to
9 move forward with this project anyway?
10 The reason we are looking for the federal
11 authorization is because it allows us to lay
12 claim to federal dollars because the project
13 has benefits to the environment, benefits to
14 the birds and the bunnies. That's why there is
15 a federal contribution to it.
16 But even without that federal support, we,
17 as a state, are still going to have to manage
18 south Florida's future water supply. And
19 indeed, contingency planning is already
20 underway to make sure that we are already
21 coordinated with the Corps of Engineers so that
22 in the event this project is never authorized
23 by the Congress, the state is prepared to move
24 forward without them.
25 Another argument that you will hear as to
52
1 why we should act now is the cost will only go
2 up. And that's sort of a weak argument because
3 that's a truism. Everything always goes up if
4 you wait long enough.
5 But this case is really different. It's
6 different specifically in the case of
7 Mr. Hardy's property because the increase in
8 cost to the taxpayers would be more immediate
9 and more measurable than average.
10 If we acquire the land now, we can
11 purchase it as a residential homestead. If we
12 wait nine more months, given the federal rules,
13 Mr. Hardy will make the legal claim that his is
14 a commercial property under the federal rules,
15 so his compensation should be substantially
16 higher.
17 And in this example, the taxpayers will
18 actually be able to see the effect of the
19 increased costs of even a very short delay.
20 And part of our frustration on this one is
21 that people say they want their government to
22 run more like a business. In this case, we are
23 trying to operate more like a business and we
24 recognize that by moving now we can avoid that
25 increased cost.
53
1 Clearly that does not mean that we have to
2 move Mr. Hardy and Mr. Miller off of these
3 parcels prematurely, because under the federal
4 rules we can, and with your permission
5 obviously would, offer post-acquisition use
6 agreements to these two gentlemen, allowing
7 them to stay on these parcels up until the
8 point that rising water levels would either
9 make the land uninhabitable or inaccessible,
10 whichever comes first.
11 The expectations are that water elevations
12 in this area could rise by at least 2 feet and
13 perhaps more.
14 In closing, I need to remind you as to
15 where we actually are right now. We have
16 offered both of these gentleman 150 percent of
17 their property's appraised value, plus
18 100 percent of their relocation costs. And
19 they have chosen to decline that offer.
20 What we are actually proposing with these
21 two agenda items I believe is fair and simple.
22 And that is that we allow their peers, we allow
23 a jury of their peers -- not government
24 bureaucrats, not private sector appraisers --
25 but allow their peers to determine what is
54
1 ultimately fair.
2 It's hard to imagine any other alternative
3 that is fairer to Mr. Miller and Mr. Hardy than
4 allowing their peers to determine what's fair.
5 And I think it's also the fairest thing to do
6 for the Florida residents, farmers, businesses
7 who invested now over $90 million in this
8 project, to move the thing forward.
9 What these two agenda items do, number 6
10 and number 7, is really attempts to create the
11 fairest pathway to determine how best to
12 balance the interests of two private landowners
13 with the interests of millions of Floridians
14 who are depending on this as their future water
15 supply.
16 CFO GALLAGHER: May I ask you a question?
17 MR. STRUHS: Yes, sir.
18 CFO GALLAGHER: There is another alternative.
19 It's probably not good one, but they don't sell,
20 we don't use eminent domain; they are still
21 sitting there and the water rises. We gave them
22 an offer, we said, look, the water is going to
23 rise, you want to sell it or not? I don't know
24 what it's worth after you flood it. And I don't
25 know what -- I don't know where they stand on
55
1 stopping it from flooding or what.
2 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: That would be a little
3 bit like a taking, I think.
4 CFO GALLAGHER: They want to keep it, they
5 keep it. But they got to know there is going to
6 be 2 feet of water on it.
7 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: I got a question too,
8 Governor, if I may.
9 Now, David, I think I heard you say
10 something about if we wait, then Mr. Hardy will
11 be able to claim a commercial status. But
12 isn't Mr. Hardy already raising catfish as a
13 commercial agriculture endeavor on that
14 property?
15 MR. STRUHS: The way the federal rules work
16 is you fall into the commercial status if you can
17 demonstrate that it has been an ongoing concern
18 for three years or more.
19 That's why I referenced, I believe it's
20 probably nine or ten months. That operation
21 has been in existence for a little over two
22 years. So in nine or ten months time, indeed
23 Mr. Hardy would make the claim that he's got a
24 commercial operation.
25 GOVERNOR BUSH: Do you have to get a permit
56
1 to have a catfish farm? Where do you get your
2 permit for a catfish farm?
3 MR. STRUHS: It would be the same county we
4 discussed earlier.
5 GOVERNOR BUSH: And the right to mine as they
6 also gave Mr. Hardy?
7 MR. STRUHS: Yes.
8 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is three topics of
9 conversation.
10 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Governor, there is
11 also, since we are joining 6 and 7 together --
12 MR. STRUHS: I am sorry, Commissioner, but I
13 tried to do this for purposes of efficiency. You
14 clearly have two votes here. They have to be
15 dealt with separately.
16 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: I understand. They
17 both, except for, I don't think Mr. Miller has a
18 catfish farm, but he does have a house there.
19 The point here is, and my understanding is
20 you do not have to have all of the properties
21 bought, even though we may have 99 percent of
22 them bought, for authorization. But before the
23 project gets started, which means you are going
24 to start moving water, then you need to buy all
25 of the properties. And it's my understanding
57
1 that this has been delayed until 2006.
2 Now according to what I have seen,
3 Mr. Miller has got some serious health
4 problems, and I am not sure whether Mr. Miller
5 will be living there in 2006. But Mr. Hardy
6 will have to be dealt in one way or another. I
7 don't think his catfish farm is going to change
8 between now and 2006. And we may have to buy
9 his catfish farm.
10 GOVERNOR BUSH: If we can get to it.
11 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: I don't believe there
12 is going to be any water moved through there,
13 Governor, until this project gets underway.
14 That's what I am saying, it's 2006 before the
15 project gets started; so there won't really be any
16 water moved through there in this project in that
17 period of time. We have a little time, and this
18 is only two parcels that actually have homes on
19 them, is that correct, the rest of them are not
20 developed; is that correct?
21 MR. STRUHS: These are the two parcels that
22 are homesteaded, yes.
23 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Right. So to do this
24 now, I understand where you are coming from, but
25 you see, I have a difference of opinion just
58
1 because the guy hasn't met the three years yet,
2 doesn't mean he doesn't have a catfish farm, it
3 doesn't mean he is not selling catfish in a
4 commercial business out there.
5 I think that's a technicality to say
6 whether or not the man can claim -- I see where
7 you are coming from, you are trying to save
8 money. I guess maybe my heart is a little bit
9 bigger on this issue to say the man is already
10 in business, it's not like he can put catfish
11 there, he already has them there. I want to do
12 the right and fair thing if we have to acquire
13 this property --
14 MR. STRUHS: Commissioner, if I can respond
15 to that. There is no doubt your heart is bigger
16 than mine. One of the -- and I appreciate that,
17 sir.
18 I am just trying to do the best job we can
19 as staff in terms of trying to let you know
20 what the rules are and how they would be
21 applied in a straightforward way.
22 One of the things we could possibly
23 consider, sir, is if you would like, if it's
24 the sentiment of the entire board that you
25 don't want to rest on the technicality that it
59
1 doesn't become commercial until after three
2 years, and you would like to recognize that it
3 has that value in effect for Mr. Hardy today,
4 we could defer this item, and we can go back to
5 Mr. Hardy and we can figure out what the delta
6 is between the existing offer and what the
7 offer might be as a commercial property and try
8 it again.
9 If that's something that the board like us
10 to do.
11 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Also there is a
12 homestead there, Governor. It's not like he
13 doesn't live there and it's just some catfish
14 farms. We are talking about two homesteads here
15 where there are substantial houses there.
16 These people moved there for a reason to
17 start with, that was to get out of the town,
18 out in the woods, and it's a little tough on
19 them. I know we are going to have to do this
20 to move this project, and I believe that can be
21 accomplished.
22 It may cost us a little bit more money
23 than we thought to do this with these two
24 homesteads, but I think we need to be as fair
25 about it, acquire all the other properties that
60
1 we can acquire that aren't developed, but deal
2 with these two gentlemen fairly on this issue.
3 MR. STRUHS: Yes, sir, I would just point out
4 I mean, the activities on Mr. Hardy's property now
5 are essentially rock mining, providing rock
6 products. There are no fish farming operations
7 there currently. Mr. Hardy's plan would be to use
8 the pits that were created as a result of the
9 mining as future fish farming or agricultural
10 operation.
11 GOVERNOR BUSH: He doesn't have a catfish
12 farm right now?
13 MR. STRUHS: We have holes in the ground
14 because of the rock mining.
15 GOVERNOR BUSH: That Collier County granted.
16 MR. STRUHS: Yes, sir, and Mr. Hardy
17 represented that he will use --
18 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Governor, I am
19 confused. I am almost sure that I was told the
20 man does have catfish already in those original
21 holes that he had rock mined out. I would like to
22 move to deny this until further word comes in.
23 GOVERNOR BUSH: Deny it or defer it?
24 MR. STRUHS: Gentlemen, if I might, before
25 you take --
61
1 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: I say deny and then
2 defer --
3 MR. STRUHS: Before you take final action on
4 this item, I would ask that we recognize Mr. Ricks
5 who is here representing Mr. Hardy so you can hear
6 from him directly.
7 GOVERNOR BUSH: Before we do that, General
8 Crist had a question.
9 First of all, where are these young people
10 from that came in?
11 A VOICE FROM AUDIENCE: Cornerstone Learning
12 Community here in Tallahassee.
13 GOVERNOR BUSH: Welcome. We are happy you
14 are here. General.
15 GENERAL CRIST: I was just curious, is the
16 federal government even ready at this point in
17 time to move on this project, this property?
18 MR. STRUHS: That's sort of the $64,000
19 question, or more. I am dating myself.
20 The question is what's the likelihood of
21 Congress passing a Water Resource Development
22 Act in the year 2003. And the answer is nobody
23 really knows.
24 My best professional judgment is probably
25 20, maybe 25 percent likelihood that there will
62
1 be a water bill.
2 GOVERNOR BUSH: They generally do this during
3 election years. Good deed.
4 MR. STRUHS: So given everything else going
5 on in the country, given the election cycle, there
6 is probably a 20, 25 percent chance there will be
7 a water bill.
8 The question is if there is going to be a
9 water bill, are you in a stronger or weaker
10 position if you can demonstrate the land is
11 already acquired?
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: On that point, which is a
13 good point, whether or not we have shown good
14 faith as it relates to this project, this map that
15 I have, the green part is the part that we have
16 already purchased.
17 MR. STRUHS: That's correct.
18 GOVERNOR BUSH: The red part, there is a
19 purple part which is Miccosukee, and then the blue
20 is what is yet to be done. The great majority of
21 this property has been purchased. We have shown
22 good faith.
23 This is a question of two -- of all of
24 these thousands of lots, two people that have
25 homestead rights, which is a distinguishing
63
1 feature in my opinion, particularly since one
2 of them is ill, has cancer, and the other
3 guy -- some people just don't like living with
4 the rest of us. And I think that's okay,
5 nothing wrong with that. I am about ready to
6 get that way. Ask me two months after the
7 budget is done.
8 CFO GALLAGHER: We didn't think you liked
9 living with us now. David, let me ask you a
10 question.
11 How about if we go along and defer this,
12 and we talk to these gentlemen about the best
13 deal in the world for them because you see, we
14 are not going to back off on this, it's pretty
15 obvious; you look at the green and blue, we are
16 going to move forward.
17 But how about throwing into the mix that
18 they get to stay there, and they don't have to
19 pay any taxes on it, until a short period of
20 time before it gets flooded. That's the best
21 thing you can do short or eminent domain,
22 that's a heck of a deal.
23 I would like to authorize you to put that
24 on the table, if my colleagues agree, so what
25 you are saying to these guys is, look, one, we
64
1 buy it, we don't eminent domain it; we are
2 already offering you 100 percent above what we
3 are appraising it at; we are still going to pay
4 for you to move down the road when you have to
5 move, and you can stay there until it gets
6 flooded.
7 This might be a great deal because they
8 may be staying there until 2006, who knows,
9 2010, the way things go. It might be the best
10 deal in the world because they got paid for the
11 property, they get to live in it and they don't
12 pay taxes.
13 MR. STRUHS: Commissioner, that's a very good
14 idea. And if those are our instructions --
15 GOVERNOR BUSH: Why don't we ask the property
16 owners what their thoughts are.
17 MR. STRUHS: What I would like to do to
18 respond to Treasurer Gallagher. It's a very
19 attractive idea. There is one element to it that
20 we should share with you that might be
21 problematic.
22 And that is if we were to offer those
23 considerations to these two property owners,
24 there are probably as many as 60 other property
25 owners in Southern Golden Gate Estates who
65
1 might then seek the same benefits for
2 nonhomesteaded properties.
3 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: No, if they are not
4 living there, forget it, that's not part of the
5 deal. We can make that motion here. We are not
6 doing it for people who don't live there.
7 This is for people, all of us up here I
8 feel, having been here with this group for
9 quite a while, are very uncomfortable using
10 eminent domain to take a person's homestead.
11 When it's somebody's property sitting out
12 there, we need to put a road through, I don't
13 have a problem with that, but somebody's
14 homestead is a different deal, and I look at it
15 as different property rights.
16 I am very uncomfortable taking it. We
17 know we are going to flood the thing, we need
18 to take it. But I think that's the kind of
19 deal that I would like to offer and if at this
20 point let's -- if anybody has a complaint with
21 that, let's talk.
22 I would like to do this, to withdraw this
23 at this time to give you time to do what you
24 want to do which means you can bring it back
25 when you need. So I move to withdraw.
66
1 MR. STRUHS: Before you vote on that motion,
2 would you like to hear from --
3 CFO GALLAGHER: It's coming back, but sure,
4 if he wants to speak, he can.
5 GOVERNOR BUSH: There are two.
6 MR. STRUHS: There are two speakers on item
7 6.
8 GOVERNOR BUSH: Before that, homesteads are
9 created when people have their -- their property
10 is their primary residence, correct?
11 MR. STRUHS: That's correct.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: I am curious. You have
13 hundreds of other people who have properties out
14 there that go out on the weekends, they go around
15 in their four-wheel drive, whatever those are.
16 MR. STRUHS: ATVs.
17 GOVERNOR BUSH: Can you create a homestead?
18 Can someone, looking forward --
19 CFO GALLAGHER: Yes, you could. Let me say
20 this. I guess it depends on Collier County.
21 But this motion here is you've got to have
22 homestead exemption on your property now.
23 GOVERNOR BUSH: That's why I brought it up.
24 CFO GALLAGHER: Thank you for bringing it up
25 because they can say, you know, this might be a
67
1 good deal.
2 GOVERNOR BUSH: How people game the system
3 down in Collier County. Have you heard about
4 Collier County?
5 CFO GALLAGHER: To game in Collier County.
6 GOVERNOR BUSH: All right.
7 MR. STRUHS: Let me introduce to you
8 Mr. Ricks, who is representing Mr. Hardy, and Eric
9 Draper from the Florida Audubon Society.
10 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion.
11 GENERAL CRIST: I second.
12 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: I need to withdraw my
13 motion to defer.
14 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion, express
15 the motion one more time.
16 CFO GALLAGHER: A motion to withdraw this
17 item at this time.
18 GENERAL CRIST: Second.
19 GOVERNOR BUSH: Motion to withdraw and
20 second.
21 MR. STRUHS: Given the nature of the motion,
22 I would suggest that our speakers would be very
23 brief because obviously a decision on this is not
24 going to be made today.
25 GOVERNOR BUSH: Welcome.
68
1 MR. RICKS: I am Greg Ricks, I am here on
2 behalf of Jesse Hardy and I will be brief. Just
3 to point out as a point of reference --
4 GOVERNOR BUSH: Is that our map?
5 MR. RICKS: I think it's the same map you are
6 looking at. What I will do is circle Mr. Hardy's
7 property.
8 GOVERNOR BUSH: It's red.
9 MR. RICKS: It's the big red one. That's the
10 reason they are here and why we are here. They do
11 want to stay. It's not a matter of the valuation
12 or compensation issue.
13 I think Commissioner Bronson mentioned
14 that right now the commercial potential is
15 recognized, or should be recognized in the
16 valuation. But the main point is it's their
17 homestead, that's where they would like to stay
18 and we appreciate the Cabinet's additional
19 consideration.
20 COMMISSIONER BRONSON: Could I make mention,
21 Governor, that if this gets down to the final cuts
22 here and something is going to have to happen, I
23 would like to recommend to you and to the Hardys,
24 if it comes down to that, that state eminent
25 domain is a whole lot more friendly than federal
69
1 eminent domain, should the federal government
2 decide they are going to go through eminent
3 domain.
4 And I would like for you to keep that in
5 mind because in federal eminent domain, you are
6 not going to get near the personalized effects
7 of what the state can do in eminent domain.
8 It's very harsh when it comes to federal
9 eminent domain.
10 MR. RICKS: That's recognized, thank you.
11 CFO GALLAGHER: Let me ask you a question, if
12 I could. Is your client totally aware of why we
13 need to buy this property and what is planned for
14 it?
15 MR. RICKS: I don't think the state is
16 totally aware, to be quite frank. If you recall
17 the earlier presentation, this property, this
18 project was described as flood control and
19 additional water supply.
20 If I can move to the drawing, this is
21 titled Save Our Everglades and Florida Forever
22 2000. The current plan that's gone to
23 Washington by the Corps of Engineers shows the
24 first flood control device, flood spreader
25 device south of the Hardy property. This is
70
1 all flowing north to south. So if this is to
2 provide better water supply south, conceivably
3 the water is moving faster away, perhaps not
4 even ever flooding the Hardy property. But
5 this plan has been changed.
6 The new plan before the Corps of Engineers
7 in Washington hasn't been released to the
8 public and access to it has been specifically
9 denied. We tried to find out exactly what's
10 happening to fully inform Mr. Hardy, but that
11 information is really not available.
12 He understands the overall potential,
13 what's being designed or what's being planned,
14 but specifics aren't available.
15 CFO GALLAGHER: I think you have an
16 open-ended opportunity to get the best of all
17 worlds that's ever going to happen from the State
18 of Florida. I would -- if I can get that on my
19 house, I would probably do it; live in it until
20 whenever, if they figure out to flood it, then you
21 watched it hold off as much as I have, and it's
22 about the best deal that's going to come down
23 besides the Feds eminent domain it and that's not
24 going to be pretty.
25 MR. RICKS: Given the property owner's goal
71
1 of staying there, we are certainly appreciative of
2 this creative thinking.
3 CFO GALLAGHER: Thank you.
4 GOVERNOR BUSH: Thank you. Any other
5 speakers? Mr. Draper.
6 MR. DRAPER: Thank you. Eric Draper, Audubon
7 of Florida.
8 I just wanted to make or reconfirm a
9 couple of points here.
10 First of all, I think the agency has done
11 a great job of moving this project forward.
12 This acquisition has been going on for as long
13 as I can remember, maybe 15 years the project
14 has been coming to you. It's remarkable that
15 of 19,000 projects, you are down to such a few
16 number.
17 The thing that we have been encouraging
18 you on this is just give the agencies the tools
19 that they need to finish the job. And I want
20 to make one point on the money, and on
21 Congress.
22 I have a slightly higher optimism about
23 WRDA being done this year in Washington. We
24 are working on it, lots of local governments
25 endorsed it down there. I think there is a
72
1 chance that Congress may pick it up.
2 There is pent-up projects that need to get
3 done over country. We may see federal action
4 this year. We want to get this project tee'd
5 up.
6 Another point is that you don't
7 necessarily just have to do this restoration
8 through the federal government, you can do it
9 as a state project also. You would probably
10 ending up saving some state money doing it as a
11 state project.
12 We should be in a position to move this as
13 quickly as we can, recognizing that $92 million
14 in the ground -- compare this to a commercial
15 project; it is a construction project --
16 compare this to a construction with $92 million
17 in the grounds and just being on halt, think
18 about that in terms of interest payments on the
19 bonds that bought this land, think about that
20 as being four and a half million dollars a
21 year, a third of a million dollars a month,
22 $10,000 a day of land that's just sitting there
23 waiting for the benefits to accrue.
24 So I would encourage you to give direction
25 to the agency, to move forward with all speed,
73
1 get this things resolved and get the project
2 underway. Thank you very much.
3 GOVERNOR BUSH: Thank you, Eric.
4 CFO GALLAGHER: Let my motion reflect that,
5 and if Charlie agrees to second, this is for
6 item 6 and 7.
7 GENERAL CRIST: Sure.
8 MR. STRUHS: Thank for you that
9 clarification.
10 GOVERNOR BUSH: Would you like to speak?
11 MR. STRUHS: On Item 7 we have, Governor, Bob
12 Brantley.
13 MR. BRANTLEY: Governor, Cabinet, I am Bobby
14 Brantley, this is Eric Thorn who works with me.
15 We are representing Mr. George Miller.
16 And I am really pleased to hear the
17 comments that are coming out of this body, and
18 I believe that based on the information that we
19 are receiving, I have to talk with our client,
20 but I believe Mr. Miller would probably gladly
21 accept your offer, Mr. Gallagher.
22 One of the things that I would like to
23 show on the overhead here, if we can.
24 GOVERNOR BUSH: You got to turn on the TV, I
25 think.
74
1 MR. BRANTLEY: I would like to show where
2 Mr. Miller's property is and it's the small
3 slender red area right at the southern end of the
4 property. Just below that, there is a penciled-in
5 white area that is a sewer treatment plant that
6 has -- that originally was part of this
7 reclamation also, but has been cut out of the
8 project and will be burned in to protect it.
9 One of the things that we have been trying
10 to pursue, because I understood several weeks
11 ago the charge from you gentlemen to all of us
12 were to look at all alternatives to
13 condemnation of homestead.
14 And so we have been trying to look at that
15 and have had talks with water management and
16 DEP and others pursuing that route, that is
17 there something else that can be done in lieu
18 of this outright condemnation of this property?
19 I would submit to you that, in my opinion,
20 there is.
21 This property could be bermed exactly the
22 same as they are berming the water treatment
23 plant that they already, for many obvious
24 reasons, had decided that they would exclude
25 from the project because it services a lot of
75
1 homeowners around there plus environmental
2 concerns of flooding an area that is a water
3 treatment plant.
4 But also, if you look at the maps that we
5 have been provided from the state about the
6 amount of water that is actually going to be
7 present near this property. Using the scale
8 that they have, it's plus or minus 3 inches of
9 water.
10 Originally when I got involved in this, I
11 heard many of the same things you are hearing.
12 I envisioned like a tidal wave of water coming
13 towards Mr. Miller's property, and that is not
14 the case. Literally I think he can buy a new
15 pair of duck shoes, and it would be fine on
16 this property.
17 I don't believe that his homestead will
18 ever be torn down, just as we have been told by
19 water management and by others with the state,
20 many of the homesteads that the state is taking
21 right now within the Everglades project are
22 going to remain intact and will be used by the
23 state, so I don't believe that this property is
24 ever going to be torn down.
25 So we would like to have further
76
1 clarification, and I think that we pretty much
2 heard it this morning, that you are interested
3 in pursuing other things other than essentially
4 condemning the homestead.
5 And if that is the case, I would submit to
6 you that if we were to take a hard look at
7 berming this property, and since it is so far
8 to the southern end, and since just below this
9 property there is already going to be berming
10 on the water treatment or sewage treatment
11 plant, that it would not be a major thing to
12 berm this.
13 By the way, using the flow maps that the
14 state has, this property, the flow that is
15 going to come through there splits just above
16 his property and does not go directly at him.
17 And Mr. Miller would be willing to negotiate
18 with the state to give up a portion of his land
19 if he could keep his homestead.
20 So if there were a need for that, then
21 that could be worked out.
22 CFO GALLAGHER: Let me just -- the estimate I
23 have seen for the berm is $2,491,000.
24 MR. BRANTLEY: I saw that. For 3-inches of
25 water, Treasurer Gallagher --
77
1 CFO GALLAGHER: I'll tell you what, I
2 wouldn't be living in my house with 3 inches of
3 water around it. It's not too convenient. I can
4 just can tell you from my point of view, I am not
5 voting for $2,491,000 to build a berm around
6 somebody's house. I am just not going to do it.
7 I will do eminent domain before I do that. That
8 would make no sense to me whatsoever.
9 MR. BRANTLEY: I agree with you. And
10 Mr. Gallagher, they are talking about a berm that
11 is 6 feet high, 16 feet wide to hold back a
12 maximum of 3 inches of water. Now I would
13 submit -- and keep in mind --
14 GOVERNOR BUSH: It's not going to happen.
15 MR. BRANTLEY: -- it's plus or minus 3 inches
16 of water. So in all likelihood the way his
17 property is situated, it would not be any wetter
18 than it is today.
19 CFO GALLAGHER: Luckily you have got another
20 opportunity to come back, so let's move on.
21 MR. BRANTLEY: We thank you.
22 GOVERNOR BUSH: Thank you. Any other
23 discussion?
24 There is a motion to withdraw and a
25 second. Without objection, the item passes.
78
1 CFO GALLAGHER: I would like to move to defer
2 item 8.
3 GENERAL CRIST: Second.
4 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion a defer and
5 a second on item 8. The item passes.
6 CFO GALLAGHER: And I move to withdraw
7 item 9.
8 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion to withdraw
9 item 9 and a second. Without objection.
10 (Commission Bronson leaves.)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
1 GOVERNOR BUSH: Item 1.
2 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion on the minutes.
3 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion.
4 GENERAL CRIST: Second.
5 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Without
6 objection, item 1 passes.
7 MR. STAPANOVICH: Item 2, Florida Retirement
8 System's Actuary Report, it's a July 2002 actuary
9 report that's been reviewed by SBA staff. It's an
10 annual procedure. We have no recommendations or
11 comments. It's information only.
12 GOVERNOR BUSH: A motion?
13 CFO GALLAGHER: It's for discussion only.
14 GOVERNOR BUSH: We don't need to pass
15 anything. Item 3.
16 MR. STAPANOVICH: Item 3, appointment of two
17 members to the Investment Advisory Council by the
18 board. Governor, these are two of your
19 appointments that need to be approved by the
20 entire board, that will go to the Senate for
21 confirmation.
22 GOVERNOR BUSH: There is a motion and a
23 second. Without objection, the item passes.
24 MR. STAPANOVICH: Item number 4, approval of
25 fiscal sufficiency of an amount not exceeding
80
1 455 million, State of Florida bonds.
2 CFO GALLAGHER: Motion on 4.
3 GENERAL CRIST: Second.
4 GOVERNOR BUSH: Moved and seconded. Without
5 objection, the item passes.
6 CFO GALLAGHER: Thank you.
7 (The proceedings concluded at 10:56 a.m.)
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
81
1
2 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
3
4
5
6 STATE OF FLORIDA )
7 COUNTY OF LEON )
8
9 I, SANDRA L. NARGIZ, RMR, CRR, certify that I
10 was authorized to and did stenographically report the
11 proceedings herein, and that the transcript is a true
12 and complete record of my stenographic notes.
13 I further certify that I am not a relative,
14 employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties,
15 nor am I a relative or employee of any of the parties'
16 attorney or counsel connected with the action, nor am I
17 financially interested in the action.
18 WITNESS my hand and official seal this 18th
19 day of March, 2003.
20
21
22 ______________________________
23 SANDRA L. NARGIZ, RMR, CRR
100 SALEM COURT
24 TALLAHASSEE, FL 32301
850-878-2221
25
|
Cabinet
Affairs
