Cabinet Affairs |
|
BOARD OF TRUSTEES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE & CONSUMER SERVICES AGENDA NOVEMBER 12, 2003
________________________________________________________
******************************************************************************* Item
1
Minutes Submittal of the Minutes from the June 26, 2003 Cabinet
Meeting. (See
Attachment 1, Pages 1-3) RECOMMEND
APPROVAL ******************************************************************************* Item 2
Rosanne Malone Aquculture Lease REQUEST: Consideration
of 1) authorization to issue one ten-year sovereignty submerged land
aquaculture lease of approximately two acres; and 2) a request to waive
the $200.00 aquaculture lease application
fee. COUNTY:
Levy APPLICANT: Rosanne
Malone LOCATION: A tract of
sovereignty submerged land in Township 15 South and Range 12 East,
commonly described as the expansion area of the Pelican Reef High-density
Lease Area located in the Gulf of Mexico, in the vicinity of Cedar Key,
Florida. CONSIDERATION: A base
annual lease fee of $31.90, representing a base annual fee of $15.95 per
acre or fraction thereof; plus an annual surcharge of $20.00, representing
$10.00 per acre or fraction thereof, for deposit in the General Inspection
Trust Fund pursuant to section 597.010, F.S. Pursuant to subsection
597.010(7)(a), F.S., lease fees shall be adjusted on January 1, 2005, and
every five years thereafter, based upon the five-year average change in
the Consumer Price Index. STAFF REMARKS: Ms.
Rosanne Malone has requested a two-acre aquaculture lease in the Pelican
Reef Expansion Area to conduct hard clam aquaculture. Ms. Malone is currently engaged in
clam aquaculture activities on Aquaculture Lease No. 38-AQ-507, but
possession of this lease has been disputed by Mr. Teofilio Perez. Mr. Perez was the original
leaseholder before transferring the lease to Nature Coast Industries, Inc.
(NCI). Subsequently, Mr.
Perez took legal action against NCI regarding possession of the
lease. The matter was further
complicated when NCI transferred the leasehold to Ms. Malone. The transfer by NCI to Ms. Malone
was approved subsequent to the date Mr. Perez filed his legal action
against NCI. The Levy County
Judge ordered a Final Judgment for Eviction in favor of Mr. Perez and
against NCI. The Department,
based on advice from general counsel, believes that this matter can be
resolved equitably by allowing Mr. Perez to retain possession of the
original lease and by offering an alternative lease parcel to Ms.
Malone. In order to
accommodate Ms. Malone, the Department seeks consideration of the Board to
authorize a two-acre lease parcel in the Pelican Reef expansion area, and
to waive the $200.00 aquaculture lease application
fee. The
following provides a summary of actions involving Aquaculture Lease No.
38-AQ-507. On June 16, 1992,
the Board of Trustees granted the Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) authority to issue 71 aquaculture leases in Levy County. In response to the successful clam
farming programs and a request from the Levy County Board of County
Commissioners, additional leases were made available for aquacultural
development on August 8, 1995, and on March 11, 1997. Authority was granted to issue 131
additional leases in Levy County,
Board of Trustees
Dept. of Agriculture & Consumer
Services
Agenda – November 12, 2003
Page Two ****************************************************************************** Item 2, cont. including 70 aquaculture leases authorized in the tract designated
as the Pelican Reef High-density Lease Area (Pelican Reef). Aquaculture Lease No. 38-AQ-507,
containing parcel number L-922, was originally granted to Mr. Teofilio N.
Perez on July 23, 1997. The
aquaculture lease was subsequently transferred to NCI following approval
by the Board of Trustees on May 11, 1999. This aquaculture lease was
included in a request by NCI to transfer or reassign 18 aquaculture leases
from individual leaseholders to the corporation. Each lease referenced in Nature
Coast Industries' request provided that it could be subleased, assigned or
otherwise transferred upon written consent of the Lessor. Due to the number of leases
involved in this transaction, the transfers and reassignments were brought
before the Board of Trustees for consideration. The transfer of 18 aquaculture
leases, accounting for 42 acres, represented a unique and unprecedented
request by a single corporate entity. On
March 27, 2001, Mr. Perez filed a law suit and lis pendens against NCI (Teofilio
N. Perez vs Nature Coast Industries, Inc.) in County Court in Levy County,
Florida. On June 25, 2001,
the transfer of Aquaculture Lease No. 38-AQ-507 from NCI to Ms. Rose
Malone was approved. On
October 7, 2002, Levy County Judge Joseph E. Smith ruled that Teofilio N.
Perez recover possession of the real property described as “Parcel Number
L-922” from NCI. The Court
entered a Final Judgment for Eviction, a Final Judgment of Damages, and a
Writ of Possession in favor of Mr. Perez. Neither the State nor the Board of
Trustees were parties to the litigation and were unaware of the litigation
until the judgment favoring Mr. Perez was rendered. Since the Department was unaware
of these legal proceedings, the transfer of Aquaculture Lease No.
38-AQ-507 by NCI to Ms. Malone was approved, and Ms. Malone is the current
leaseholder of record and is actively farming the
lease. Subsequent to the judgments, staff became aware of the situation,
and upon advice of the Office of General Counsel, a proposed settlement
between Teofilio Perez and Rose Malone was reached in an effort to avoid
further litigation. Both
parties agreed to a possible settlement, pending approval by the Board of
Trustees. On January 30,
2003, the parties documented their agreement contingent upon 1) Mr. Perez
retaining the original lease (38-AQ-507; L-922), and 2) Ms. Malone
obtaining a new lease in Pelican Reef Expansion
Area. A
lease parcel could be authorized in the Pelican Reef Expansion Area. On May 13, 2003, the Board of
Trustees granted the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(DACS) authority to issue 11 aquaculture leases on a tract of submerged
lands referred to as the Pelican Reef Expansion Area in the Gulf of
Mexico, in the vicinity of Cedar Key. This tract of submerged lands was
authorized for additional aquaculture use so lessees in the Big Reef
High-density Area (Big Reef) had an opportunity to re-locate their lease
parcels to the Pelican Reef
Expansion Area, which is considered to be more favorable for growing hard
clams. The Department had
previously completed resource surveys of the expansion area and determined
that it was suitable for growing hard clams and was large enough to
accommodate more than the initial eleven lease parcels. The tract of submerged lands that
was included in the Pelican Reef Expansion Area included more than fifty
acres, of which only about half was used for the initial re-location from
the Big Reef. Therefore,
about 25 acres remain available for leasing in the Pelican Reef Expansion
Area. Lease Parcel No. L-922 is located in the original Pelican Reef
High-density Lease Area. The proximity of the two parcels is expected to
provide similar culture conditions on both leases. The Department also proposes to
de-activate a previously authorized two-acre parcel, which is currently
vacant and has proven unusable for aquacultural production, so that the
authorization of the new lease parcel will not result in an increase in
the number of acres held under lease in Levy County.
Board of Trustees
Dept. of Agriculture & Consumer
Services
Agenda – November 12, 2003
Page Three ****************************************************************************** Item 2, cont. The applicant has submitted a new lease business development plan
for the term of the lease that conforms to minimum cultivation
requirements; is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the lease
agreement; and has no marine resource or public health violations related
to the performance of aquacultural
activities. The application was noticed pursuant to section 253.70, F.S., and
no objections were filed for the application. A
consideration of the status of any local government comprehensive plans
was not made for this item.
DACS has determined that the proposed action is not subject to the
local government planning process. (See
Attachment 2, Pages 1-19) RECOMMEND
APPROVAL | ||||||||||||
|