[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6513884,"mediaKeyId","5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89","parentId",5066277,"title","Taylor County economic development staff reports active business leads and site‑readiness work","audioSeconds",1008,"startMs",5070000,"endMs",6078000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89&start=5070&end=6078","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89/thumbnail_5070000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6513884/Taylor-County/Florida/Taylor-County-economic-development-staff-reports-active-business-leads-and-sitereadiness-work","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6513884-f1e8307f8c2088a37212d736a765fccb/orig.mp4?Expires=1775249097&Signature=aqoHEWqInB2C8KwscSgO9B~N33E1dRr3ImG-D6WXgRpXQ5m~r8HSBoq1qQ0E~uP7ssks5iIV4v7yV-H4478aCeShhJngXBLv-j-V~zJd7DqUqNKpVfZ~qua0Iej-GsIv5qLiKiR7ANNTdey2CY20uZ~ms6lFsEDlZZQUVoYUz6nTwRMZLA9rD27Qpv05bDsbQ-qMlh2BGrquRazyqdcHL8Tdtry7SO650iX9b~d2-MTSvX3qjlML7Kt-Xys8~9BoVcEW8BuvxpTPiYJgokwVANM1pV46d7aLzCTmqHsTlh8MRrGYVkstio0aSz6SVr7w1WjmeJTbVt~opezd5DQgsw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Taylor County","date","2025-06-24T19:03:07Z","article","Taylor County’s economic development representatives updated the board on ongoing recruitment, site readiness work and local outreach efforts aimed at attracting industrial investment.

Mark Cake (presenting as the county’s economic development lead) told commissioners the authority had added new active leads since the last update and retained several prior prospects. He said the authority had completed a site‑readiness assessment application for a 51‑acre property (the City of Perry property referenced in the presentation) and that a site‑readiness team will return June 25 with a final overview. He thanked partners including Duke Energy for grant support to develop site materials and said the county now has two “ready” industrial sites, including Graham’s Legacy.

Presenters said prospects ranged across several sectors — wood and timber products, light and heavy industry, aviation/aerospace and limited munitions or defense suppliers. Staff emphasized Taylor County’s existing workforce, natural‑gas infrastructure, rail access and available electric capacity as recruiting strengths. A consultant’s site‑readiness letter praised the county’s “story” and said the county’s properties were competitive for economic‑development outreach.

Presenters also briefed the board on the former Georgia Pacific property: decommissioning and demolition work is underway in defined phases, and one private buyer (a firm with experience rehabilitating former industrial sites) has acquired or is repurposing portions of mill property in similar transactions elsewhere; litigation related to wastewater pipeline usage was noted as active in media filings. Economic development staff said they were continuing outreach to targeted companies and updating marketing materials and the website to improve competitiveness.

Board members asked about recent prospects that chose other jurisdictions; staff said competitive decisions are often tight and referenced proximity to Jacksonville and neighborhood context as recurring factors in some prospects’ choices. Commissioners and presenters discussed how new industrial jobs could support more retail and services over time by increasing rooftops and household demand. Presenters said they would continue outreach, prepare updated marketing packets and provide additional briefings to the board on specific site readiness deliverables.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Taylor County Board of Coumty Commissioner","oneSentenceSummary","Taylor County economic development staff told commissioners the county has multiple active industrial leads, two site‑readiness properties in prospect and ongoing outreach to recruiters and potential investors.","taxTitle","Taylor County, Florida","taxId",28196,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6513894,"Taylor County commissioners approve two small road abandonments in Steinhatchee",504,3831000,4335000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89&start=3831&end=4335","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89/thumbnail_3831000.jpg","/articles/6513894/Taylor-County/Florida/Taylor-County-commissioners-approve-two-small-road-abandonments-in-Steinhatchee","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6513894-ccbf7edca305b285cc133b4405861e69/orig.mp4?Expires=1775249097&Signature=OF7ALyjonTn3Imj7~0h3yDAlh4XpgtacE0u~ayZL9E5JFbCkUV4bH~Urdykhm55Qsb39NM-z8YBbIOOvhxM0sjjLpe~fAieFP5P5zfuIg~mjJD37tn~8tqqwx9RkM9~E-4HAPfMXyQOgoARVTrbWohigAhftNu59lOa5pftKn6h6Jn9gAHp~j8rhreK1XdnW5DFaOg397dcZIUyh0W6q8WUctnrcl7u2sIZuTyBTAKjnbrvYSusqfgm0w597abkeGClgjjyEWyZ2TDRsoboh3x2c4QSJzOmfLp5Kp6IkG09pDbIHRvg8MW1MK~N22qTbOwl6qHiArxHKFCFXP7LQgw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Taylor County commissioners on June 17 held public hearings and approved two separate resolutions to vacate and abandon small sections of roadway in Steinhatchee.

The first resolution described and vacated a 0.14‑acre parcel located in Section 25, Township 9 South, Range 9 East — described in the packet as the portion of Fletcher Lane between Lots 4 and 5 of Block 23 of the Steinhatchee subdivision. The resolution states the board determined the closure “will not deprive any person of a reasonable means of ingress and egress” and that the county “renounces and disclaims any right ... in and to” the described parcel. The resolution stated the action will take effect when the adopted resolution and proof of publication are filed with the clerk of the circuit court.

A petitioner and several members of the public spoke in favor of the first closure, citing public‑use and local parking benefits for nearby businesses and a pharmacy rebuilt after storm damage. The petitioner told the board the closure would create roughly eight or nine parking spaces to help adjacent businesses.

After public comment, Commissioner Fige (motion) and a second were recorded. The clerk conducted a roll‑call vote; commissioners present voted to adopt the resolution (recorded roll call in the transcript showed unanimous “yes” responses from the commissioners present). The board recorded that the parcel is small (0.14 acre) and will be placed on the tax roll in the adjacent owner’s name after recording.

The second resolution concerned a separate closure described as a portion of the public alley (Eighth Street East Alley) in Block 61 of the Town of Steinhatchee plat (Section 25, Township 9 South, Range 9 East). The described parcel measured approximately 20 feet by 250 feet (about 0.11 acre). Public comment urged the board to show maps and visuals at the hearing; staff said a map was included in the posted packet and that the alleyway had been used for years but now would provide formal parking access for adjacent properties.

The petitioner for the alley closure told the board he owned the adjacent parcels on both sides and that the closure would formalize a parking area and reduce county maintenance. County staff and the county attorney explained the statutory process: when a county closes an alley or road as described in the resolution, title typically vests in adjacent property owners (the county does not “sell” the property but abandons county interest, and recorded deeds and proof of publication govern the process). The board noted this is a small remnant (0.11 acre) and that adjacent owner objections, if any, would be weighed in the public hearing process.

Commissioners moved, seconded and adopted the second resolution by roll call (all commissioners present voting “yes” in the recorded roll calls), with the resolution to take effect upon recordation with the clerk of the circuit court.

Both abandonments were presented as noticed public hearings; letters to adjoining landowners were included in the packet. Staff said the abandonments would go to the adjacent owners on the tax roll once recorded. No appeals or formal objections were sustained at the meeting.

The board completed both actions during the meeting and directed staff to record the adopted resolutions and associated proof of publication with the clerk of court.","Taylor County commissioners on June 17 approved two resolutions to vacate small portions of public rights‑of‑way in Steinhatchee — a 0.14‑acre segment near Fletcher Lane and a 0.11‑acre portion of an alley in Block 61.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6513899,"Taylor County begins RESTORE Act-funded feasibility study for Keaton Beach and Steinhatchee boat-ramps and bypass options",1528,193000,1721000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89&start=193&end=1721","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89/thumbnail_193000.jpg","/articles/6513899/Taylor-County/Florida/Taylor-County-begins-RESTORE-Act-funded-feasibility-study-for-Keaton-Beach-and-Steinhatchee-boat-ramps-and-bypass-options","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6513899-7bddc9dd9ae3e8a1d1778a5b276b241d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775249097&Signature=Xp3f4NCXChjNZdZWilZFqHCcuI5h8eNksRurxeNsCFB3BpSCGqRcmm4VHbE29x0ghj0lKHMTwX0djP0OASOsLimtaxyVxEJEh45iJqo2XVr5mXv7U33W1YSKdeJD6gtQyZFHWEntXiwSq6LesHhGFotrvSluggUFpJrvrvQcvUjiQvyTi7XmLLeaeShBbb5xf-94Cmt8O4~~KQgyN~JOJMjWyJ32eugs-PWkXPL85EkFYkf8AOlOoW9TMtVx1WPf4VIBpFzhNK3I23IFi6WkOESTjWZn~-C0jvBzEnDagahH3114rufKAIahjVygWWhR8XJJ-XyCNKRs2jNFULP-IQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Taylor County commissioners on Tuesday opened public input on a RESTORE Act-funded feasibility study to address traffic and boat‑ramp access at Keaton Beach and Steinhatchee.

The study, funded by RESTORE Act grant money and carried out by a competitively selected consultant, is intended to be a planning-level evaluation only and does not authorize construction, county staff and consultants said. The consultant said it will collect traffic counts (including peak July 4 counts), geotechnical and right‑of‑way data, and environmental information to develop multiple design options and a “no‑build” baseline.

The county is pursuing the study after a board‑directed grant application. County staff told the board the work is fully grant funded; consultants emphasized the study phase alone will not result in eminent‑domain acquisition.

John Combs, the project contact from the consultant team, said: “We're actually really excited about this project, the the Schenhatchy And Keaton Beach boat ramp feasibility study.” Clint Plesser, introduced as the consultant firm’s associate vice president for transportation, told the board the team had “no preconceived notions” and wanted local feedback to shape alternatives. The presentation noted special environmental sensitivity in the coastal wetlands around both sites and that the consultant will use a worst‑case holiday weekend traffic count (around the Fourth of July) as a design basis.

Residents and commissioners focused on three recurring questions: whether the study could recommend purchase or use of privately or county‑owned parcels (including one parcel purchased with an FCT grant and zoned conservation), how the consultant will treat seasonality in traffic (scallop season creates three months of high congestion, but speakers disputed whether that period is three months or shorter), and whether the study could recommend a “no‑build” outcome. The consultant said a no‑build option is a standard baseline: “The no build will will be compared to all the smart criteria,” the presenter said.

Public commenters suggested alternatives and raised concerns about timing and priorities: some argued that, after recent storm losses and lower rental inventories, current visitor numbers may be depressed and a study now might not reflect typical conditions; others said improving emergency response and safety justified exploring options. One commenter urged the county to consider dredging other access points or fund a new boat ramp instead of a bypass. Another asked whether the county could use county‑owned property; consultants said they would research zoning and permitting implications.

County staff said the grant application and selection process were complete and the consultant contract is in place. The consultant said the next major data step is July Fourth traffic counts and that environmental, geotechnical and right‑of‑way surveys are already underway. The consultant estimated the study contract in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars and participants in the public comment cited a figure around $300,000–$350,000 discussed at the meeting; county staff confirmed that the grant covers study costs and that later construction, if recommended, would require a separate funding phase and additional grant or application steps.

The consultant asked commissioners and residents to send specific property or access concerns to county staff so those locations can be incorporated into the alternatives analysis; county staff said they will hold additional stakeholder meetings and return with draft options for public review. No final decision on construction was made at the meeting, and consultants reiterated that the study will produce recommendations for the board to consider.

The board did not take a construction action at the meeting; commissioners approved no additional binding directive during the presentation.

Next steps: the consultant will complete data collection (including July 4 counts), produce alternative layouts for both sites, and return to the board and public with findings and recommendations. The county has identified class 3 funding that could be redirected if the board chooses a different coastal project instead of construction stemming from this study.","Taylor County commissioners on Tuesday opened public input on a RESTORE Act-funded feasibility study to address traffic and boat‑ramp access at Keaton Beach and Steinhatchee.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6513889,"County gives first reading to comprehensive‑plan update amendment; planning board recommended restricting floating solar to industrial retention ponds",155,3605000,3760000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89&start=3605&end=3760","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5066277-6b57139a6881882a1f39b8a4cf564e89/thumbnail_3605000.jpg","/articles/6513889/Taylor-County/Florida/County-gives-first-reading-to-comprehensiveplan-update-amendment-planning-board-recommended-restricting-floating-solar-to-industrial-retention-ponds","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6513889-46dcf64695eb7bd6681b8aecd4a52fb2/orig.mp4?Expires=1775249097&Signature=kAZv8wOL1QL-mnqDu4KSURyrzWZzN~xqaNlgosRrakdbHV5CmYUmoJpMcxcV3dOXiREC6pAfM9GMj6Qnr9-9MhGlcXDyZBupRU0D6Z2iF0e~8DT31Dkh~pLswwxEy0NCAEpMDQYa7i6CIKefUQE6JUsriszqxxUKSTzsDR3xLFDQI7R6wXoYaT-V3HZmf8hAcHMBsq35klBkP3riKvZUratwXyl2bKsw7L8vJDKVvkAl6Vxd61ntDvlWkZmlO9Fcf1yM1byWB0LpH~KJVXr0G8fUevg8WmVRuLo1OMkP26dj-fqWE1SZfAZn~ThmqJLGeJM0-21-Nez2W99n0fxZzw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Taylor County commissioners gave first reading to a county‑initiated comprehensive‑plan amendment (CPA 25‑02) and agreed to transmit the amendment to the regional planning council and state agencies for review.

The proposed ordinance would amend the comprehensive plan text and future‑land‑use map series to reflect changes required by state statutes (cited in the ordinance as sections 163.3161 through 163.3248, Florida Statutes) and other local updates. Staff told the board the amendment is an administrative update intended to align county planning documents with state requirements.

The regional planning council provided updated recommendations after reviewing the draft amendment. Staff said the planning board recommended one substantive change: the planning board asked that floating solar panels be restricted to industrial retention ponds rather than allowed more broadly. The proposed ordinance on first reading incorporated the planning‑board recommendation.

County staff said the amendment package will be sent to the regional planning council for distribution to state review agencies; the board will schedule final public hearings and a final vote after agency comments. Staff advised the board that the formal adoption timeline expects review comments from state agencies and a return to the board for final action in August.

Commissioners moved and approved the first reading by roll call; this first reading is not final adoption. The ordinance will be transmitted for the statutorily required review and the board will consider adoption after agency comments are received and any revisions are made.","On first reading the board accepted an amendment to the Taylor County comprehensive plan (CPA 25‑02) to update future land‑use text and maps per state procedural changes. The regional planning council advised a planning‑board modification restricting floating solar panels to industrial retention ponds; the ordinance will be transmitted to state","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Taylor County economic development staff reports active business leads and site‑readiness work

Taylor County commissioners approve two small road abandonments in Steinhatchee

Taylor County begins RESTORE Act-funded feasibility study for Keaton Beach and Steinhatchee boat-ramps and bypass options

County gives first reading to comprehensive‑plan update amendment; planning board recommended restricting floating solar to industrial retention ponds