Committee directs staff to pursue further review of 44‑acre Buttonwood Preserve addition after close vote

The committee voted 5-4 to direct staff to pursue further review of nomination 672, a 44‑acre parcel offered as an addition to Buttonwood Preserve on Pine Island.

Mr. Clements, a staff member presenting the nomination, told the committee the seller raised the asking price to $60,000 per acre and that at that figure the parcel would total about $2.64 million. He said the parcel scored 27 points on the committee's evaluation matrix (rising to 31 points if treated as contiguous with the existing preserve) but that staff considered the current asking price above market and warned of maintenance and restoration issues, including removal of nonnative trees, leveling of planted rows, likely irrigation infrastructure and potential fertilizer-related contamination that would require phase I/II environmental audits.

"If the price is still high, staff would recommend not going forward with this," Mr. Clements said, adding that, "even if the price is lowered, we're still going to have a maintenance issue overall."

Barbara Manzo, who identified herself as representing the Eyes on Conservation 2020 Coalition, urged the committee to prioritize acquisition. "We've already lost another important property in this area because we took into consideration too much the restoration," she said, arguing that restoration is the point of conservation purchases and that large parcels do not come to market often.

A committee member identified in the record as Sandra moved that staff conduct further review for possible acquisition, including outreach to the owner about conditions and price. The motion was seconded; the record does not name the second. After debate, the committee voted 5 in favor and 4 opposed, and the motion carried.

The committee's direction asks staff to obtain more information and continue negotiations and due diligence rather than to acquire the property immediately. The decision leaves open the possibility that the committee could later decline to proceed if price, environmental, or maintenance concerns are not resolved.

The item had earlier been discussed in the context of a similar nomination (item 5AR/nomination 234-2), which the property owner withdrew from the agenda, and the committee noted it must honor voluntary withdrawals when requested by applicants.

Next steps: staff will pursue the further review and report back with additional information and any recommended purchase terms or conditions.