Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends removing two parcels from St. Cloud city limits to correct annexation error
Summary
The Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend approval of Ordinance 2025‑01, a contraction (de‑annexation) under Florida Statute 171.0501 that would remove two parcels inadvertently included in a prior annexation and return them to unincorporated Osceola County.
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The St. Cloud Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of Ordinance 2025‑01 to correct a scrivener's error that had included two parcels in a prior annexation. Under Florida Statute 171.0501, staff described the ordinance as a contraction of the municipality’s boundaries that would remove the two parcels and return them to unincorporated Osceola County.
Ralph Keith, associate planner with the City of St. Cloud Community Development Department, explained staff’s view that the two parcels were mistakenly included in Ordinance 2025‑252 (earlier annexation) by an incorrect legal description and that the affected property owners did not consent to voluntary annexation. "Per Florida State statute 171.0501, ordinance number 202501 will amend the municipality's boundaries to remove the index parcels from the city's jurisdiction and return them to unincorporated Osceola County," Keith said.
A representative for the property owners and the city attorney had been contacted, staff said, and one owner confirmed they did not consent; staff had attempted but not yet completed contact with the other owner. A commission member described the item as a routine corrective measure and noted similar events had been rare in the city’s nearly three decades of work with the consultant referenced in the meeting.
A commission member moved to recommend the staff proposal to contract the annexation; another member seconded. The motion passed with a recorded voice vote in favor (4-0). The commission noted that removal of the parcels is a boundary amendment and does not impose annexation on property owners; owners who wish to be annexed would need to apply voluntarily under state law.

