Laserfiche WebLink
Perlini, who is willing for his piece to be included in the <br />State program also. This would tie all the above into one <br />cluster or complex. <br />Mr. Challacombe continued that the next complex to be <br />submitted is made up of Number 11 Corporation and the east <br />portion of the Sirk property; they are submitting the <br />northern portion and western portion of the Golden Sands <br />parcel to make that an additional complex; and lastly, they <br />are including the Pfeiffer Tract, which is somewhat to the <br />south. <br />Mr. Thomas reported that these parcels would add up to <br />a total of $8,318,000, and he felt our match would be more <br />than adequate without including the Stanny property. He <br />also felt the prices are favorable and may be subject to <br />negotiation. He explained that for each parcel submitted, <br />we must have a conceptual design as well as a proposed <br />management and development program, and staff can have these <br />ready to submit by tomorrow afternoon. Mr. Thomas further <br />noted that the State also would like an updated resolution <br />as we originally agreed to match money, and now we are <br />matching land. <br />Commissioner Scurlock asked if this means the <br />title of these properties we have already acquired will <br />remain with the state.. <br />Attorney Brandenburg explained that if you pledge <br />property, you will retain a percentage undivided interest in <br />the parcel, i.e., if we pledge 5 million and the state <br />pledges 10 million, then we will have a 1/3 ownership, which <br />would be the original 5 million. We could not sell our <br />property without state approval, and they would be giving us <br />a management lease to their percentage. He did not believe <br />they have a set format for the management interest. He <br />confirmed that the State would like a new Resolution laying <br />F <br />Boa ?AGE 871 <br />