Bonita Springs council approves agreement to pursue Seminole Gulf rail-trail purchase, sets path to referendum

Bonita Springs City Council voted 6–1 to approve a purchase-and-sale agreement and authorize due diligence expenditures tied to a multi-party memorandum of agreement to acquire the Seminole Gulf Railroad corridor.

The decision, made after public comment from trail advocates and a presentation on financing options, clears a path for the city to place a general-obligation bond referendum before voters to fund the acquisition and related improvements. Consultants with PFM Financial Advisors told the council that illustrative bond scenarios of $30 million, $35 million and $45 million would produce estimated average annual homeowner impacts of roughly $49 to $88 depending on term and sizing.

Why it matters: The corridor covers roughly 180 contiguous acres the city and local partners aim to preserve as a linear park and active-transportation route. Supporters say the acquisition presents a "once-in-a-generation" chance to protect green space and expand safe walking and biking options; opponents or cautious members warned the timing and total costs require careful scrutiny.

Friends of Burt representatives urged passage at public comment. Deb Orton, president of Friends of Bonita Estero (Friends of Burt), thanked the council for its diligence in advancing the project. Beth Castro, vice president of Friends of Burt, told the council the corridor "represents 180 acres of continuous green space" and asked members to "vote yes today."

Council debate focused on two main disagreements: the schedule for putting a referendum before voters and the scope of costs and contingencies that would follow a purchase. A council member who identified herself as Laura questioned whether the vote was being rushed to meet a seller-imposed deadline and urged waiting for a general election to ensure broader turnout; she also said the total fiscal commitment felt larger than the advertised figure. City staff and other council members said the city's purchase price in the agreement is $28,565,000 (plus closing costs) and that a GO bond structure would help shield the city’s operating budget from immediate impact.

City Attorney (city attorney) told the council there are six critical due-diligence items during the inspection period: title, environmental studies, appraisal, financing, billboard/easement issues and the referendum process itself. Council members flagged specific implementation questions that must be resolved before closing, including the timing and cost of required "capping" (surface work over the rail bed), responsibility for removing sidetracks, insurance and signage needs during construction, and the scope and timing of environmental Phase I and Phase II work. Council member Jim asked that the city provide a public executive summary of environmental findings as soon as they are available.

Several council members said they supported referring the matter to voters rather than making a final acquisition decision at council level. "We're giving the citizens the ability to vote," one council member said in debate, urging outreach to ensure strong turnout and education before the referendum. Staff and consultants laid out a tentative schedule: adopt an authorizing ordinance in April, conduct educational outreach in April–July, hold the referendum on Aug. 18, 2026 if the council moves forward, and, if the referendum passes, finalize bond financing later in the fall.

Vote and next steps: The motion to proceed with the draft purchase agreement and related steps passed on a roll call vote: Fitzpatrick, Bogaz, Mayor Gibson, Deputy Mayor Purdon, Corey and Fullick voted "aye"; Council member Carr voted "no." The council directed staff to continue due diligence and to return with ordinances and documents necessary to place a GO bond referendum on the ballot. If the referendum is approved by voters, staff and bond counsel would finalize the bond structure and proceed to pricing and closing.

Authorities and constraints referenced in council discussion included Florida requirements for a citywide voter referendum to issue general-obligation bonds and the Lee County home-rule concerns raised about citizen-led initiatives for appropriations. Council members emphasized that contingencies in the agreement give the city options to renegotiate or withdraw depending on the results of title, appraisal and environmental reviews.

The council did not adopt a final financing resolution at the meeting; the approved motion authorized staff to continue work and bring ordinances and referendum language back to the council for formal adoption and public outreach.