Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation Collier topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission narrowly greenlights appraisals and Phase I study for contested Sable Palm (Smith) property
Summary
Following extended public testimony and debate over restoration costs and conservation value, the board voted 3–2 to advance a contested 166.63‑acre Smith property from staff's C ranking toward an A‑list acquisition by funding appraisals and a Phase I environmental assessment using Conservation Collier funds.
After hours of testimony from conservation groups, residents and commissioners, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners voted 3–2 to authorize preliminary appraisal work and a Phase I environmental assessment for the 166.63‑acre Smith property near Sable Palm Road so the parcel can be further considered for Conservation Collier acquisition.
Jamie Cook, Division Director of Development Review, briefed the board on staff’s analysis: staff recommended the property remain on the C list (do not acquire) because the parcel has a high percentage of exotic vegetation, only about three acres meeting the code definition of native vegetation, and likely soil remediation needs that make full site restoration costly. In contrast, the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Committee (CLAC) recommended A‑list ranking, citing ecological connectivity to adjacent conservation lands including Picayune Strand State Forest and habitat for listed species such as Florida panther and black bear.
Commissioners weighed competing views. Commissioner Hall and Commissioner Saunders voiced concerns about potential taxpayer burden and the risk of overpaying; Commissioner Locastro and Commissioner McDaniel argued that the county should spend a modest amount (appraisals and Phase I) to obtain hard data before deciding. Public commenters representing the Conservancy of Southwest Florida and Audubon Western Everglades urged the board to pursue the parcel given its adjacency to protected lands; other speakers urged caution and questioned using public funds to subsidize private owners.
Commissioner Locastro moved to accept the recommendation to advance the parcel for appraisal and environmental assessment and to pursue Conservation Collier funding for that work; the motion carried 3–2. Staff estimated appraisals would be roughly $2,200–$2,500 each (two appraisals required if value exceeds $500,000) and Phase I costs would be a few thousand dollars. Cook noted remediation, if required, would typically fall to the seller prior to a final purchase agreement.
Why it matters: the board’s vote allows staff to spend limited Conservation Collier funds on due diligence (appraisals and Phase I) so the county can make a data‑driven decision on whether to proceed to acquisition; it does not obligate the county to buy the property. The item revealed sharp differences among commissioners about stewardship priorities, taxpayer risk and how to weigh CLAC recommendations against staff analyses.
Next steps: staff will proceed with appraisals and environmental assessment if funding is available; the results will be returned to the board for further ranking and decision on acquisition or not.
