Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Plats topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County attorney warns new plat rule removes commission from final approvals; commissioners table decision
Summary
Attorney Wade told Union County commissioners Fla. Stat. 177.071 now shifts final plat approval to an administrative officer; commissioners debated whether to name the building inspector or county coordinator, raised ethical and practical concerns, and tabled a resolution for two weeks to gather input from the building inspector and staff.
County Attorney Wade briefed the board on changes under Florida Statute 177.071 that move final plat and replat administrative approvals away from county commission votes and instead require an administrative officer or department to sign final approvals.
Wade said the statute’s language presumes counties with planning departments and lists county administrators and city managers as examples but also includes a catch-all for “other high-ranking county or city department or division director.” In Union County’s structure, Wade explained, that catch-all likely points to either the building department director (Mr. Whitten) or the county coordinator (Jimmy) as the only local officials who could meet the statutory definition.
Commissioners raised a series of practical concerns: (1) whether anyone on staff has the time and technological capacity to meet the statute’s tight review timelines (Wade referenced a seven-day response requirement for an initial completeness letter), (2) whether prior board decisions that limited supervisory authority for certain employees (cited by commissioners) would be contradicted by appointing those same employees to the administrative role, and (3) whether delegating the function to one person is appropriate versus using a checklist and multi‑step review that involves Clerk’s Office staff and other departments.
Wade noted the county already participates in the plat-review process via required transmittals to health and water-management offices and that the county attorney currently has an advisory signature block on plats; but he advised that making the county attorney the final administrative approver would create a conflict if the attorney must later defend that denial in court. He recommended appointing either the building inspector or the county coordinator and suggested formalizing a checklist process for initial completeness checks.
After extended discussion that included references to past ethics reviews and how to preserve board oversight of comprehensive-plan and LDR (land development code) decisions, the commission voted to table a resolution that would formally designate the administrative approver. Attorney Wade said the resolution can be picked up at a later date and does not require newspaper pre‑publication as it is a resolution, not an ordinance.
