Flagler Beach commission restores itself as final arbiter on large annexations, passes ordinance 2025-02 4-1

The Flagler Beach City Commission voted 4‑1 to approve Ordinance 2025‑02, a measure that restores the commission's authority to decide certain voluntary annexations without requiring a referendum of the city's registered voters. The ordinance was approved after more than two hours of public comment and extended debate among commissioners.

Supporters said the change restores the city’s ability to consider annexations in a timely way and to control development in areas that lie in the city's service district. Commissioner Spradley, who described the issue as one of the most consequential he has seen since taking office, said he had weighed competing concerns about representation and local control before backing the measure. "My view has evolved over time to the point as today," Spradley said during debate.

Opponents and many members of the public urged the commission to restore the referendum requirement and keep the question with the full electorate. John Tanner, speaking for the nonprofit Preserve Flagler Beach and Beaulieu Creek, asked the commission to “return to the annexation vote by the people,” arguing the land in question is uniquely sensitive and permanent in its effect on the city.

Commissioner Cooley said he opposed the ordinance because it removes a direct voice from citizens: "I can't see taking the vote away from the people. It's the citizens that live here should have a say so," he said. Cooley cast the lone no vote on the final roll call.

City Attorney and staff briefed the commission on state law: the state does not require in‑city referendums for non‑voluntary annexations and leaves cities discretion to adopt referendum rules in their charters. The city attorney told commissioners that the ordinance under consideration is legally permissible but is a policy decision for the commission.

Public comment was lengthy and divided. Speakers who urged retaining citizen referendums included residents who described the water, habitat and traffic implications of potential development on the west side of the county. Speakers who urged commission control raised concerns about timing, infrastructure costs and the risk that neighboring jurisdictions could annex and leave Flagler Beach with service obligations but not the associated tax base.

The vote: Commissioners Spradley, Bellheimer, Cooley and Chair Sherman voted yes; Commissioner Cunningham voted no. The ordinance passed on a 4‑1 roll call. After the vote, commissioners and staff reiterated that any future annexation would return to the commission as a public process and that developers would still be required to submit full applications, entitlements and supporting studies.

What happens next: Approving the ordinance does not itself approve any annexation application. If a developer or property owner submits a voluntary annexation petition, the commission will consider it under the revised rules. Commissioners repeatedly said any annexation proposal would prompt separate, public hearings and staff analysis of traffic, utilities, stormwater and fiscal impacts.