Hardee County commissioners move to shrink phosphate overlay, add large no-mine area after public concern

Hardee County commissioners on Jan. 8 heard staff and regional planners present proposed amendments to the countys phosphate mining overlay, including a tightened definition of phosphate mining, removal of about 26,177 acres from the current overlay and establishment of a 196,109-acre "no phosphate mining" area.

The workshop, called to order by Chairman Flores, featured presentations from Todd Miller and Deborah Butler of county staff and Jennifer Cotto Salisbury and Jeff Schmucker of the Central Florida Regional Planning Council (CFRPC). CFRPC officials said the existing overlay covers 153,613 acres and the proposed boundary would reduce the overlay to 133,189 acres by removing parcels where data and analysis indicate mining is unlikely and by adding approximately 5,752 acres of other parcels identified through updated information. Jeff Schmucker said the proposed map would leave 127,436 acres of the existing overlay in place.

"The overlay simply tells people, 'hey, there's phosphate in the ground here, and therefore, there could potentially be mining there in the future,'" Russell Schweiss of Mosaic told the board, arguing the overlay is a tool that puts landowners and citizens on notice. Schweiss described Mosaics historic drilling records and GIS as key sources for the refinements staff proposed.

CFRPC staff also proposed explicit plan text defining "phosphate mining" to mean the extraction of phosphate ore from the earth by whatever process, including removal of overburden, transporting, washing, sizing, storage and other activities reasonably related thereto, but excluding chemical processing. Staff recommended deleting a sentence that would have required mapping of land-use features during mining in five-year intervals, saying detailed mining maps are maintained by the county mining department and the five-year requirement is difficult to implement in the future land-use map series.

Several commissioners and members of the public pushed for changes. One resident suggested the plans definition read "an environmentally sound process" rather than "whatever process," and multiple speakers urged clearer map symbology to show which parcels Mosaic currently owns and which are merely identified for potential impacts. Commissioners repeatedly emphasized that the overlay is informational and is not an automatic entitlement to mine.

Legal and staff comments flagged state-level constraints. A county attorney/staff member referenced the recently enacted Senate Bill 180, currently subject to legal challenge, as a factor that can limit local authority to impose certain burdens on property. Staff and counsel said comprehensive-plan or land-development regulation changes would still require planning-and-zoning review, public hearings and state transmittal when applicable.

Chairman Flores and a majority of commissioners signaled support for trimming the overlay where data indicate mining is unlikely, adopting the proposed no-mine area, clarifying the phosphate-mining definition (to reduce the ambiguity of the phrase "whatever process") and keeping additions to the overlay tied to an applicant-driven process where legally appropriate. Commissioners asked staff to research legal risks tied to changing overlay criteria from resource-based mapping to ownership-based mapping and to return with revised language and analyses at the Feb. 5, 2026 meeting.

Public commenters said the overlay raises property-rights concerns, potential liability for landowners, and uncertainty for residents planning homes. Harry Lewis, who identified himself as a landowner in Ona, said he opposed his parcel being added to the proposed overlay and worried it would create a new liability or the appearance his land could be rezoned for mining. Jeanie Lewis suggested adding a separate color or layer to the map showing which parcels Mosaic owns, which are permitted mines, and which are reclaimed areas to reduce confusion.

Staff committed to clarify language about who may request additions to the overlay, tighten the definition of phosphate mining for the boards review, and return with legal analysis and revised proposed language at the Feb. 5 meeting. No formal vote was taken at the workshop.

The board recessed briefly for informal discussion and then reconvened to hear public comment and provide direction to staff. Chairman Flores closed the workshop after summarizing the boards consensus and directing staff and CFRPC to prepare the requested revisions for the next meeting.