The Flagler Beach City Commission Thursday evening is scheduled to consider annexing Veranda Bay, the 900-acre development along John Anderson Highway that would double the city’s population when built out in a few decades. It would be one of the most defining decisions in the commission’s history.
It’s been a struggle for both Veranda Bay and the city to get to this point, though a year ago both sides were eager to get here, especially the City Commission. Residents in and outside the city raised sharp objections to the number of housing units Veranda Bay wanted to build–more than 2,700. That turned into a significant obstacle until developer Ken Belshe agreed to lower the total to 2,400 units. That appeared to seal the deal for a majority of commissioners.
Now there’s a new wrinkle, if not an outright threat of a lawsuit that could derail Thursday’s action.
S. Brent Spain, the powerful and sharp Orlando-based land-use lawyer, issued a letter to the City Commission arguing that annexation would create a small county enclave, making the annexation illegal. He’s right about the enclave: Eight or so properties still in private hands, outside of Palm Coast Intracoastal (the corporate name of Veranda Bay), would form an irregular rectangle in the middle of Veranda Bay, along John Anderson Highway.
Spain is also right about the law: “Land shall not be annexed through voluntary annexation when such annexation results in the creation of enclaves,” it states.
Spain represents Preserve Flagler Beach and Bulow Creek, the non-profit, and Stephen Noble, a John Anderson Highway resident, both of whom have been relentless and often effective opponents, including in court, of Veranda Bay. Those eight properties are ow their Alamo, even though it appears none of the group’s members live there.
“The proposed annexation will result in the creation of an impermissible enclave (or, alternatively, pocket) of unincorporated property in violation of Florida’s annexation laws,” Spain wrote the mayor today, “and, thus, would be unlawful. Accordingly, our clients respectfully request that the City Commission deny the proposed voluntary annexation of the subject property and Ordinance 2024-17.”
Citing Preserve and Noble, Spain sais the development would have “an adverse impact” on numerous services and interfere with property owners’ enjoyment of their property, though it’s not clear how that relates to the enclave. Noble’s property is “immediately adjacent” to the enclave, the letter states. (The “immediately adjacent” suggests Noble’s property is next to, or contiguous with, the enclave. It is not. It is some 1,200 to 1,500 feet catty-corner from it, with the acreage in between belonging to Veranda Bay.)
Flagler County government, which now has jurisdiction over Veranda Bay and John Anderson Highway, has been asking Flagler Beach to take over ownership of John Anderson after annexation. The city has declined. County Commissioner Leann Pennington suggested in early October that the county could use the enclave issue as bargaining power to push the city to take ownership. That brought up the matter of the enclave, which the County Commission resolved in the city’s favor.
“There is an enclave that would be created by this annexation, and the enclave is forbidden by Florida Statute,” Assistant County Attorney Sean Moylan said. “That said, I would point out that there are many enclaves in Flagler County, and traditionally, they haven’t been much of a concern of us. There are many, for example, in the city of Bunnell. There is a hodgepodge of enclaves all over the place. The intent of that statute to prohibit enclaves is to make sure that the provision of services are not interrupted or are as efficient as they can be.”
Most of the properties in the potential enclave are receiving county trash services from Waste Pro, but that would continue even after annexation since Waste Pro trucks have to go south on John Anderson, past Veranda Bay, anyway. Moylan raised the question of law enforcement services. Would that be the Sheriff’s Office or Flagler Beach police for that enclave? What of fire services? Those issues,. Moylan said, could be resolved through a joint agreement with the city.
The County Commission was not inclined to press the issue when it discussed it in early October. “My initial thoughts were, I think there’s probably hundreds and hundreds of enclaves around the whole state,” then-Commissioner Donald O’Brien said, “so I didn’t have as much heartburn over the enclave issue,” nor was he interested in making the John Anderson Highway issue an obstacle to Flagler Beach’s annexation.
Commission Chair Andy Dance agreed, especially since the intent of the law is not violated by the enclave that would be created inside Veranda Bay, and won the commission’s consensus not to make the enclave an issue. The County Commission is more interested in using whatever leverage it has “to do everything possible to protect the Bulow [Creek] headwaters. We only get one shot at protecting the headwaters,” Dance said. That would be accomplished with “as much buffering as possible” between the waters and the development.
In an interview today, Moylan said the county could, through a joint agreement with Flagler Beach government (an “interlocal agreement”), also force annexation of that enclave. “They would just be annexed into the city, then they’d have to abide by the city code and city taxes,” Moylan said. “The county commission saw no merit or reason to do that.”
Thursday evening’s annexation proposal may be tabled, possibly even delayed significantly, though the city is not without means to respond, if by essentially strong-arming the enclave properties into the city–a prospect city commissioners would, like county commissioners, be hesitant to carry out, but probably not to the point of hesitating to take the Alamo.
