Since 2018, the League of Women Boters of Florida and the League of women Boters of Orange County have objected to the transfer of split Oak Forest conservation land based on the fact that it is counter to Florida’s Constitution and Orange a county’s Charter. Conservation land, purchased with tax dollars and to be held in perpetuity, can not be transferred unless it has been determined to no longer have conservation value. This has not been determined. There are several items on a list of FTC requirements that have not been met. The public has been crying out in support of the Forest consistently but yet our government agencies continue to favor CFX and their desire to take the least expensive land acquisition option - taking public property. It does not matter to us the your staff says it’s okay to swap one parcel of land for another. The Florida Constitution says otherwise. Be the agency that says “NO” to the taking of Florida’s precious conservation land. As we oppose items number 15 and 16 of your agenda, we thank you for supporting our wild places.
I vehemently oppose agenda items 15 and 16. I request that the board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for State road 534. Come up with a better solution and stop chipping away and the last pieces of real Florida we have remaining. That property is beautiful and I have visited several times and hope others in the future will be as lucky.
As a taxpayer, constituent, and resident near the area affected, I strongly oppose Agenda items 15 and 16 and request the Board to deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534. Replacing acreage will not help the existing habitat and wildlife corridor that will be destroyed. Protected lands should be protected forever and alternatives that protect Split Oak Forest and not destroy it should be actively explored. Furthermore, releasing conservation easements sets a dangerous precedent for ALL protected lands.
• 86% of voters chose to protect Split Oak in 2020.
• This toll road will encroach on wildlife habitats, including the Gopher Tortoise and the Scrub Jay.
• This does nothing to alleviate urban sprawl.
• This land is protected.
I am writing to express my strong opposition to agenda items 15 and 16. The proposed granting of SFWMD easements for the SR 534 project through Split Oak Forest and surrounding conservation lands.
The maps provided in the agenda materials (Exhibits A and B) clearly illustrate the alarming extent to which this proposed infrastructure project encroaches upon protected environmental areas. Split Oak Forest is a vital ecological resource, and the path of the SR 534 Preferred Alternative represents an unacceptable destruction of conservation land that is essential for local biodiversity, wildlife habitat, and the overall hydrological health of the region.
The proposed easements—which traverse critical wetland and swamp areas—are not merely minor adjustments; they facilitate a project that prioritizes road infrastructure over the long-term protection of public conservation land. Once this infrastructure is placed, the damage to these ecosystems will be irreversible.
It is deeply concerning that public land, once set aside for protection and restoration, is being considered for release to facilitate development that primarily serves private interests at the expense of our natural heritage. Conservation lands are meant to be shielded from exactly this type of industrial and infrastructural exploitation.
I urge the Governing Board to prioritize its mandate to protect these environmental assets and deny the requests for these easements. We must stop treating conservation land as a reserve for future development corridors.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 for the following reasons:
- we should be finding better alternatives to toll roads. We deserve better public transportation.
- Toll roads contribute to urban sprawl and encroach on wildlife habitats
- Protected land should not be given to private entities
I strongly oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16. The reversion and substitution of conservation easements is a dangerous precedent that will lead to the continual degradation of our state’s ecosystems at the expediency of financial and development interests. Floridians back easements as a means of maintaining our states natural beauty and wildlife corridors. You cannot substitute or replace the wildlife or ecosystems lost. I request the board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534. Keep good faith with Floridians by demonstrating that our institutions respect and protect conservation lands in all their forms.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 for the following reasons:
- Conservation easements were intended to provide lasting protection.
- Protected lands should not be sacrificed for a toll road when alternatives exist.
- Replacement acreage is not the same as replacing existing habitat and wildlife corridors.
- Releasing conservation easements sets a dangerous precedent for protected lands across Florida.
- The public deserves stronger justification before permanent conservation protections are removed.
As a Florida resident, American citizen and constituent I STRONGLY oppose I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16. Once a habitat is developed, it cannot be “put back”- efforts to foster growth after habitat has been destroyed can take hundreds of years. Replacement acreage is not the same as replacing existing habitat and wildlife corridors. You have the power to have a protective and positive impact on the earth your children, grandchildren or other future relative have- please vote no!
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and urge the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board to deny the proposed conservation easement releases associated with the SR 534 toll road project. Taxpayer dollars should not be used to destroy taxpayer funded conservation easements. This toll road is purely for the convenience of connecting LDS church properties and future planned developments. Floridians support these conservation programs because natural land is protected in perpetuity, not because the land is temporarily protected until wealthy private interests ask the state to overturn protections. Then what is the point? These types of actions only serve to undermine Floridians’ faith in our institutions.
I respectfully oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and urge the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board to deny the proposed conservation easement releases associated with the SR 534 toll road project.
Conservation easements exist to provide long-term protection for environmentally sensitive lands and wildlife habitat. Releasing these easements for roadway construction undermines the purpose of those protections and weakens public confidence in conservation commitments made to Florida taxpayers.
Split Oak Forest serves as an important wildlife corridor and natural resource for Central Florida. While replacement acreage may be offered, newly protected lands cannot fully replace the ecological value, habitat connectivity, and mature ecosystems that already exist within protected areas. Once these habitats are fragmented, the impacts are often permanent.
Approving these easement releases would also establish a concerning precedent that protected conservation lands can be reduced or exchanged when development pressures arise. Such actions should require an extraordinary public benefit and a clear demonstration that no reasonable alternatives exist.
I respectfully request that the Governing Board uphold the intent of the conservation easements, protect Split Oak Forest, and deny Agenda Items 15 and 16.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and request the Board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534.
This is very dangerous, conservations were made to remain untouched, protected lands should not be sacrificed under any condition. And replacing the acreage is not at all the same.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and request the Board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534.
Replacement acreage is not the same as replacing existing habitat and wildlife corridors.
• Releasing conservation easements sets a dangerous precedent for protected lands across Florida.
• The public deserves stronger justification before permanent conservation protections are removed
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 And request the Board deny the proposed easement
Since 2018, the League of Women Boters of Florida and the League of women Boters of Orange County have objected to the transfer of split Oak Forest conservation land based on the fact that it is counter to Florida’s Constitution and Orange a county’s Charter. Conservation land, purchased with tax dollars and to be held in perpetuity, can not be transferred unless it has been determined to no longer have conservation value. This has not been determined. There are several items on a list of FTC requirements that have not been met. The public has been crying out in support of the Forest consistently but yet our government agencies continue to favor CFX and their desire to take the least expensive land acquisition option - taking public property. It does not matter to us the your staff says it’s okay to swap one parcel of land for another. The Florida Constitution says otherwise. Be the agency that says “NO” to the taking of Florida’s precious conservation land. As we oppose items number 15 and 16 of your agenda, we thank you for supporting our wild places.
I vehemently oppose agenda items 15 and 16. I request that the board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for State road 534. Come up with a better solution and stop chipping away and the last pieces of real Florida we have remaining. That property is beautiful and I have visited several times and hope others in the future will be as lucky.
As a taxpayer, constituent, and resident near the area affected, I strongly oppose Agenda items 15 and 16 and request the Board to deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534. Replacing acreage will not help the existing habitat and wildlife corridor that will be destroyed. Protected lands should be protected forever and alternatives that protect Split Oak Forest and not destroy it should be actively explored. Furthermore, releasing conservation easements sets a dangerous precedent for ALL protected lands.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 becauseL
• 86% of voters chose to protect Split Oak in 2020.
• This toll road will encroach on wildlife habitats, including the Gopher Tortoise and the Scrub Jay.
• This does nothing to alleviate urban sprawl.
• This land is protected.
To the Governing Board,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to agenda items 15 and 16. The proposed granting of SFWMD easements for the SR 534 project through Split Oak Forest and surrounding conservation lands.
The maps provided in the agenda materials (Exhibits A and B) clearly illustrate the alarming extent to which this proposed infrastructure project encroaches upon protected environmental areas. Split Oak Forest is a vital ecological resource, and the path of the SR 534 Preferred Alternative represents an unacceptable destruction of conservation land that is essential for local biodiversity, wildlife habitat, and the overall hydrological health of the region.
The proposed easements—which traverse critical wetland and swamp areas—are not merely minor adjustments; they facilitate a project that prioritizes road infrastructure over the long-term protection of public conservation land. Once this infrastructure is placed, the damage to these ecosystems will be irreversible.
It is deeply concerning that public land, once set aside for protection and restoration, is being considered for release to facilitate development that primarily serves private interests at the expense of our natural heritage. Conservation lands are meant to be shielded from exactly this type of industrial and infrastructural exploitation.
I urge the Governing Board to prioritize its mandate to protect these environmental assets and deny the requests for these easements. We must stop treating conservation land as a reserve for future development corridors.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 for the following reasons:
- we should be finding better alternatives to toll roads. We deserve better public transportation.
- Toll roads contribute to urban sprawl and encroach on wildlife habitats
- Protected land should not be given to private entities
I strongly oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16. The reversion and substitution of conservation easements is a dangerous precedent that will lead to the continual degradation of our state’s ecosystems at the expediency of financial and development interests. Floridians back easements as a means of maintaining our states natural beauty and wildlife corridors. You cannot substitute or replace the wildlife or ecosystems lost. I request the board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534. Keep good faith with Floridians by demonstrating that our institutions respect and protect conservation lands in all their forms.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 for the following reasons:
- Conservation easements were intended to provide lasting protection.
- Protected lands should not be sacrificed for a toll road when alternatives exist.
- Replacement acreage is not the same as replacing existing habitat and wildlife corridors.
- Releasing conservation easements sets a dangerous precedent for protected lands across Florida.
- The public deserves stronger justification before permanent conservation protections are removed.
As a Florida resident, American citizen and constituent I STRONGLY oppose I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16. Once a habitat is developed, it cannot be “put back”- efforts to foster growth after habitat has been destroyed can take hundreds of years. Replacement acreage is not the same as replacing existing habitat and wildlife corridors. You have the power to have a protective and positive impact on the earth your children, grandchildren or other future relative have- please vote no!
I strongly oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and request the Board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and urge the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board to deny the proposed conservation easement releases associated with the SR 534 toll road project. Taxpayer dollars should not be used to destroy taxpayer funded conservation easements. This toll road is purely for the convenience of connecting LDS church properties and future planned developments. Floridians support these conservation programs because natural land is protected in perpetuity, not because the land is temporarily protected until wealthy private interests ask the state to overturn protections. Then what is the point? These types of actions only serve to undermine Floridians’ faith in our institutions.
I respectfully oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and urge the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board to deny the proposed conservation easement releases associated with the SR 534 toll road project.
Conservation easements exist to provide long-term protection for environmentally sensitive lands and wildlife habitat. Releasing these easements for roadway construction undermines the purpose of those protections and weakens public confidence in conservation commitments made to Florida taxpayers.
Split Oak Forest serves as an important wildlife corridor and natural resource for Central Florida. While replacement acreage may be offered, newly protected lands cannot fully replace the ecological value, habitat connectivity, and mature ecosystems that already exist within protected areas. Once these habitats are fragmented, the impacts are often permanent.
Approving these easement releases would also establish a concerning precedent that protected conservation lands can be reduced or exchanged when development pressures arise. Such actions should require an extraordinary public benefit and a clear demonstration that no reasonable alternatives exist.
I respectfully request that the Governing Board uphold the intent of the conservation easements, protect Split Oak Forest, and deny Agenda Items 15 and 16.
Thank you for your consideration.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and request the Board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534.
This is very dangerous, conservations were made to remain untouched, protected lands should not be sacrificed under any condition. And replacing the acreage is not at all the same.
I oppose Agenda Items 15 and 16 and request the Board deny the proposed conservation easement releases for SR 534.
Replacement acreage is not the same as replacing existing habitat and wildlife corridors.
• Releasing conservation easements sets a dangerous precedent for protected lands across Florida.
• The public deserves stronger justification before permanent conservation protections are removed