St. Johns County intends to fight state’s new agricultural enclave law

St. Johns County officials are preparing a legal and legislative fight against Florida’s agricultural enclave law, SBS 686, arguing the state statute is undermining local efforts to manage growth and protect infrastructure capacity.

Read more Fed’s Goolsbee: Strong demand may be adding to US inflation, ‘no ambiguity’ how Fed would react

On Sept. 15, the St. Johns County Commission voted 3-2 to deny the Palm Valley Agricultural Enclave set to span more than 4,000 acres north of Nocatee and west of the Intercoastal Watery,

The bill, which was signed into law in April, is designed to convert agricultural parcels that are surrounded by development into development sites by sidestepping the traditional – and lengthy – comprehensive plan amendment process. Fourteen applications have been filed in St. Johns County since the bill became effective July 1.

In an interview with the St. Augustine Record, Board Chair Clay Murphy described the bill as “damaging.”

“I think it’s a bad law,” he said. “I think it’s bad for our community and I think it’s bad for our county. We are in growth fatigue. We need to take a pause and take a breath. We need to catch up with what we already have.”

Murphy interviewed with the Record after speaking to the Florida Association of Counties in Jacksonville and said that many county representatives were unaware of how the issue was affecting St. Johns County. He said that he planned to utilize a “two-prong approach” that challenges the law through Florida’s courts while lobbying state lawmakers to make legislative changes.

“As part of our two-track approach, we’re asking the Florida Association of Counties to help us with our legislative fight while we legally challenge in the courts,” he said.

Murphy said that he denied the Ponte Vedra agricultural enclave application, which is owned by the Davis family (the founders of Winn-Dixie), because of “the ambiguity in the acreage, and boundary calculations justified further legal review.”

“There were flaws and ambiguities in how certain measurements were calculated,” he said. “While the other enclave applications checked all the boxes, this request presented enough uncertainty to justify additional scrutiny.”

Murphy admitted that the applicants, the PARC Group, can challenge the denial and sue the county if the courts deem the application justified under SBS 686.

Murphy defended his vote on a separate agricultural enclave application near State Road 208, saying that the proposal met the legal requirements even after county staff excluded parcels they believed should not count toward eligibility calculations.

“They still met the requirement of at least 75%,” he said. “That’s why I voted for it.”

Citing continued development pressure, demand for housing and significant growth during the past 15 years, Murphy underscored the need to address roads, infrastructure and existing development before approving additional projects.

“We have been in an almost manic growth spurt for the last 15 years, and we’re in growth fatigue,” said. “We need to take our foot off the gas. We need to catch up on infrastructure.”

Read more EU to lift sanctions on Russia-linked Usmanov and Fridman, diplomats say

Despite opposing the law, he said commissioners are obligated to approve applications that clearly meet the statutory requirements.

“I am a law-and-order guy,” Murphy said. “If these applications check the boxes, we are bound, by law, to approve them.”

Following the meeting’s vote, Commissioner Christian Whitehurst, who voted to approve the enclave, requested to revisit two previously approved agricultural enclave applications, arguing that the commissioners evaluated the Palm Valley application differently than those approved Aug. 19.

Whitehurst told the St. Augustine Record that the county must apply a consistent standard to every application as it prepares for what he believes will likely be a court challenge over the denial of the Palm Valley enclave.

“I want to have a board discussion about the way we’re evaluating these applications to ensure that we defend county taxpayers from potential costly litigation,” he said. “SB 686 is crystal clear, if the application meets the criteria, we have no legal right to deny the application.”

Whitehurst said the county’s “expert” staff determined the applications met the statutory requirements. He warned that if a judge concludes the county failed to follow state law, the commission will deal with financial repercussions and a demand to approve the application.

“If the court determines we didn’t follow the law, the application goes back to the commission with a hefty fine and a mandate to approve,” he said.

Whitehurst also acknowledged that public debate surrounding growth and agricultural enclave applications has generated confusion.

“Of course there’s misinformation,” he said. “But misinformation isn’t new to St. Johns County growth-management items.”

He maintained that the county should apply the law consistently to ensure that every decision can withstand legal scrutiny if challenged.

A special hearing is scheduled for the end of September to review the approved enclave applications. If no action is taken within the law’s application statutory deadline, every unchallenged application becomes administratively approved.

This article originally appeared on St. Augustine Record: St. Johns County intends to fight state’s new agricultural enclave law

Read more Czech Republic approves Tesla’s FSD after earlier safety concerns

Reporting by Lucia Viti, St. Augustine Record / St. Augustine Record

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect

Copyright Reuters or USA Today Network via Reuters Connect

This story was originally published September 21, 2026 at 9:59 AM.