Title: Memorandum to Governing Board from Office of Counsel re: Five Year Plan for expenditure of documentary stamp tax monies. September 10, 1981. 5p.
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00052604/00001
 Material Information
Title: Memorandum to Governing Board from Office of Counsel re: Five Year Plan for expenditure of documentary stamp tax monies. September 10, 1981. 5p.
Physical Description: Book
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00052604
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text


TO: Governing Board

FROM: Office of Counsel

SUBJECT: Five Year Plan for expenditure of documentary stamp .tax monies.

In the recently enacted "Save Our Rivers" bill, there is a provision which

requires each of the WMDs to file a 5 year plan for acquisition with the legis-

lature and the Secretary of DER by January 15, 1982.

Annually thereafter the District must file a report of acquisition activity

along'with modifications or additions to the 5 year plan.

The purpose of this memorandum, which emanates from staff meetings composed

of P.K. Sharma, Walter Dineen, Jack Braun, Hans Ihle, Richard Rogers, Tom Schwartz

and the writer, is to provide information and suggestions to the Governing Board

for the 5 year plan.

It must be recognized initially that there are some unknowns:

1. Amount of money available from the documentary utamp tax funds over

the 5 year period. It is assumed $40,000,000. will be available;

the bill provides that the District must match these funds on a 4 to

1 basis, but the first 2 million annually does not have to be matched.

Therefore in the 5 year period $30,000,000. must be matched, which re-

quires $7,500,000. of District funds. Total sum available then would

be $40,000,00( plus $7,500,000. = $47,500,000. for the 5 year period.

2. There are no appraisals at this time of the land and land interests that

need to be acquired, and are suggested'herein.

3. The bill provides that "Water Management land acquisition costs shall

include payments to owners, and costs and fees associated with such

acquisition." Clearly, this allows use of the monies to pay attorney

fees and costs of the landowners from whom the land is acquired. Not

known at this time is whether it includes payment of District costs and

fees. It is our position that it does, but DER (and perhaps the legis-

Iture) must nakle this decision with our assistance.

Upon careful review of the bill, the following has been extracted as suggested

guidelines for consideration of lands and land interests for purchase.

A. Fee title and other interests in lands shall be acquired to:

(1) Protect, preserve or enhance the quantity of fresh water available

for all uses.

(2) Protect, preserve or enhance the quality of fresh water available

Sfor all uses.


page 2 ,

(3) Provide the ability to manage the fresh water resources of the


B. Upon acquisition of lands for the purpose of (A) above, they shall be


(1) For the purposes acquired and in an environmentally compatible and

acceptable manner.

(2) Where practical and compatible with the purpose for which acquired,

in such a way as to restore and protect their natural state and con-


(3) For use for general recreational purposes not inconsistent with (1)

and (2) above.

The suggested acquisitions are not intended to be on a priority basis in the

order in which they are listed. Rather, it is important to maintain flexibility in

priority so as not to influence land values and to be able to move quickly on pur-

chases which can be made at the District appraised price. This latter point is parti-

cularly important as the District does not (in my opinion) have the legal authority to

condemn these lands unless they are necessary for flood control or water storage; the

District is limited by law to acquisition by eminent domain of property rights for

the purposes of flood control and water storage. The estate it can acquire for flood

control and water storage by eminent domain is limited to the quality of title (fee

title, easement) which is necessary for the purpose. In most cases that would be an


The su gested list:


(a), -Ratner 13,000 acres fee title, when litigation is completed;

(b) .Kanter 20,000 acres fee title, when Ratner litigation is completed;

(c)l Everglades Assets, when pending zoning litigation is completed,

mineral rights in 14,700 acres;

(d), Avant 1/2 interest in minerals in 22,000 acres;

(e) Hillsboro-Shawano- 100% mineral rights in 22,000 acres;

(f) Lykes, LeBlond, Graham 1/2 interest in minerals in 44,000 acres;

S(g) Andrus 100% interest in minerals in 2600 acres;

(h) Sanderson- 1/2 interest in minerals in 2600 acres;

(i) Southern States Land & Timber 1/2 interest in minerals in 17,900


(j) Model Land Co. 1/2 interest in minerals in 16,600 acres;

(k) Belcher 1/2 interest in minerals in 1300 acres;

page 3 ^l ._/

(1) Dawley 1/4 interest in minerals in 3800 acres; and

(m) Lott 1/4 interest in minerals in 1300 acres.

(NOTE the pending Ratner litigation could have a significant bearing on the
value of the above mineral rights and that factor should be consider-
ed in approaching such acquisitions).
(NOTE There will remain approximately 51,000 acres of land interests to be
acquired in the Water Conservation Areas. The majority of those in-
terests are in smaller ownerships and should be worked into the land
acquisition process).

(NOTE All ownership information, except Ratner, Kanter and Everglades Assets,
is quite old and probably does not represent current ownerships).


(a) Nicodemus Slough (Lykes) fee title to 2,000 acres;

(b) Land North of Levee 59, West of Kissimmee River 1200 acres

(ownership not known)


Purchase of those parcels not yet acquired by Dh'NR in its plan of purchase,

as shown in the report of Lt. R. E. Roberts based on his August 12, 1980

inspection of the Savannahs. The report indicates 34 parcels not acquired,

plus numerous small ownerships, all of which comprise approximately 850



Purchase of water storage areas behind the existing structures 18,000



The Trust for Public Land has arranged to acquire 50,000 acres of East

verglades wetland from Aerojet-General. Of this amount 32,800 are a

gift and 17,200 require payment at a price now being determined. The

Trust for Public Land only acquires title for reconveyance to public

entities. It is presumed that the price to be paid by the District

o Trust for Public Lands would be exactly what is paid for the 17,200



n area approximately 2 miles long and about 1/4 mile wide from Indian-

town Road to Jonathan Dickinson State Park. Also an area south of Indian-

town Road. Both areas are about 3500 acres. They would protect the canopy

area of the river.


(1) 6 mile Cypress Strand in Lee County according to information received

Page 4 -/

the people of Lee County approved a bond issue for this acquisition.

County officials estimate it will take approximately $1,500,000.

more than bond funds to complete acquisition. Although this is not

included, the District might, in the future, desire to assist when

local funds are depleted.

(2) Golden Gate the problems in this area are complex and huge in scope.

Any attempted acquisition would require a large portion of the funds

available in the 5 year period. The lands south of Stewart Road are

considered to have 1st priority as they are flooded the most and the

longest. Land prices would be very high as the lands were sold out

in small acreage parcels and for that same reason the acquisition

procedure would take all of the District physical resources for some

period of time.


Request was made to buy lands around Lhe lakes in the Kissimmlee area.

At this time very little is known about the extent of private owner-

ship that would be involved in such an acquisition. As the areas

that might be affected by raising the water levels in these lakes be-

come more apparent, then further consideration could be given to this



At the present time we hope to involve the Corps of Engineers in a com-

bined land regulation structural approach to a project in this area.

Both Osceola and Orange Counties have indicated an interest in flood

plain zoning and active interest in land acquisition at this time could

i lead the Counties to the conclusion that regulatory control is unneces-


Levee 31 North and Levee 67 Extension

SThe Corps of Engineers.is studying means to take water into Everglades

National Park in a historic manner. It would mean a floodway over

privately owned lands. This plan could be an ideal vehicle for the

I Corps of Engineers to become involved in land acquisition in lieu of

structural approach (a canal) in view of the direct Federal benefit

i (ENP). Any indication of District land acquisition at this point

could chill the opportunity for Federal involvement in purchase.

Another problem arose during our consideration of further acquisition in the

Water Conservation Area. The Jetport planning that has been underway for some time

t i --

, -" page 5'

includes use of substantial lands in Water Conservation Area 3. If we are to pro-

ceed to protect the Water Conservation Areas by acquisition, it now appears perti-

nent to make a strong statement concerning Jetport's use of those lands. At this

point the District position has not been clearly and publicly enunciated, but pro-

ponents of the Jetport have claimed (by newspaper accounts) that the District has

no objection to the Jetport at the location presently planned. If this be true

then the staff needs to know this and proceed accordingly; and if not true, then

the people in South Florida need this information.

Robert Grafton
District Counsel .
September 30, 1981/lsp

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs