Putnam commissioners direct staff to craft options to restore Fort Gates Ferry after residents and operator offer to run service

Putnam County commissioners gave staff direction March 10 to develop legal and administrative options for reopening the Fort Gates Ferry after residents and the ferry’s operator urged the board to restore service.

Travis Roberts, who identified himself as a co‑owner and operator of the Fort Gates Ferry business, told the commissioners he and partner Dale Jones own the barge and the named business and said they are willing to rebuild landings, maintain the facility and run the ferry if the county can resolve legal ownership and lease issues. "We own the barge," Roberts said, adding that the boat and barge insurance and the captain’s licenses are current. He urged commissioners to avoid a large FDOT plan that he said ballooned costs and instead support community fundraising and local repairs.

Roberts and other residents described the ferry as both a historic landmark and a daily lifeline for about 25 regular users who rely on it to reach jobs, medical care and emergency services. "If the people get cut off from 19, unless they have a boat, they've got to jump in the river," Roberts told the board, and he cited a recent plane recovery operation the ferry helped complete.

Why it matters: County staff and counsel told commissioners that several legal and technical hurdles must be addressed before operations can resume. County legal counsel said the county’s submerged‑land management agreement with state lands had expired and that reestablishing a lease or similar instrument with state agencies will require showing sufficient upland interest and negotiating terms with state regulators. "Reestablishing those leases is more than a formality," the county’s legal representative said, noting conversations with the Department of Environmental Protection and other state entities would be required.

What was asked and what the county will do: Roberts asked that the county repair the west (Ocala) landing or allow his group to raise funds and take responsibility for that side; he proposed a lease through 2044 for upland use and asked the county to cover half of the landing insurance if the county retained ownership. Commissioners and staff clarified there are three separate legal layers to resolve: the dry upland parcels, the wooden landings/dock structures, and the submerged land lease held by the state. County engineering staff said DOT‑funded design work had been completed in a prior project but that bids exceeded available grant funds and the county later used local dollars to finish the Willaca/east landing.

Public input: More than a dozen residents and volunteers spoke in favor of restoring the ferry. Angie Wright, a long‑time community member, said residents feel unheard and offered community help to maintain and operate the ferry. Judith York, who said she had helped write grant applications in earlier years, recounted federal and FDOT grant history and warned that DOT processes push projects toward bridge standards and higher costs.

Staff direction, not a vote: Because the meeting was a workshop, the commission did not take a formal vote to transfer property or approve a contract. Instead, several commissioners proposed — and the board agreed to give staff direction — to prepare clear options for the board’s consideration. Commissioner Alexander asked staff to prepare contract/MOU/lease language that could be used if the board decides to authorize a private operator, and other commissioners said staff should list requirements including insurance, procurement rules, and the state’s upland/submerged lease requirements. "If a private company is willing to step up and do something, this commissioner is all about supporting that," Commissioner Harvey told the room.

Next steps: County counsel said staff will research ownership records, confirm the exact legal status of upland parcels and the expired submerged‑land management agreement, and return to the board with concrete paths (for example, a deed with reverter, a lease, or an MOU and the procurement steps required). The commission discussed returning the matter to a future regular meeting for possible action once staff presents options.

No formal votes were recorded at the workshop. The meeting ended with the chair thanking residents and staff and with a commitment that staff will return with legal and procedural recommendations.

Sources and attribution: Quotes and factual attributions in this article come from speakers who appeared on the record at the March 10 Putnam County Board of County Commissioners workshop (Travis Roberts; Angie Wright; Sherry Augustine; Judith York; Commissioners Palacio, Harvey, Alexander, Newbold; county legal counsel and county engineering staff).