The Martin County Conservation Fund Committee voted to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners negotiate purchases or conservation or agricultural easements on a ranked list of 16 properties, the committee said at a meeting where it also reviewed how the conservation fund finances and transfers land.

The recommendation to the county commission covers a ranked slate led by Whitworth Farms, followed by Elise Jay, the Thall Partnership and Perry Beach Addition, with the remaining 12 parcels ranked behind them. Committee member discussion and a single motion to forward the entire list passed by voice vote; the motion was carried and will be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for negotiation.

Committee members and staff discussed how the conservation fund acquires and holds land to “bridge” transactions until a long-term steward can take ownership. A representative for the conservation fund said the organization often raises private funds outside its revolving funds to buy properties, then transfers them to a public steward with conditions intended to preserve conservation values. “Our specialty is putting acreage into conservation,” the representative said, explaining that sales to long-term managers are typically contingent on an easement and priced to recover acquisition costs plus a cost of capital and transaction expenses.

The committee heard that the fund currently estimates its cost of capital at about 5% annually, and that sale prices to end buyers routinely include appraisal, due diligence and incidental transaction costs. “I think it’s attractive, the 5%,” a real estate broker on the call said, describing that financing level as affordable for buyers in the market.

Committee members also described a conservation loan program used to move quickly when sellers are ready and to keep properties from transferring to owners without conservation intentions. The fund said it frequently works with federal, state and county partners and that those partners usually become the long-term managers of conserved properties to ensure continued protection.

The committee reviewed a parcel-by-parcel ranking and agreed to present the entire group to the Board of County Commissioners in that order rather than take separate motions for each parcel. Committee staff said the top four projects are notably separated from the rest in scoring, but that the motion to forward all 16 reflected the committee’s unanimous recommendation to begin negotiations across the list.

Members asked for and were promised more detailed written materials on the fund’s finances and the ranking. The committee requested those materials at least two weeks before the next meeting; the presenter said he would email the ranking and backing materials and coordinate distribution through county staff.

The meeting included procedural notes that county counsel had been consulted in prior conversations about acquisition authority and that administrative staff would review minutes for accuracy. The group adjourned after the motion carried, and the recommendation will proceed to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration and potential negotiation.