Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Transactions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Citrus County reaffirms Betts Farm sale after weeks of dispute and legal warnings
Summary
After extensive public testimony and letters from the buyer and counsel, the board voted 3-2 to withdraw its April 17 termination notice and keep the sale contract in effect; attorneys warned of potential damages and litigation risk.
The board reconsidered and then withdrew an April 17 notice of termination for the county-held sale of Betts Farm after a prolonged hearing with attorneys and many public speakers.
Attorney Rob Batzel, representing Bravo Land Group (the buyer), told the board that canceling the contract could trigger litigation and that his client had been working on the land-use process; he urged the commission to honor the existing sale. He said in public remarks that his firm had submitted letters and a timeline and urged careful consideration of contractual obligations.
Other residents and conservation advocates urged the county to keep the land in public ownership or protected conservation, citing aquifer vulnerability and calls to conserve the site for public recreation and environmental value. Several speakers described the property as important to local springs and wildlife and urged commissioners to preserve it.
Commissioners and staff debated the legal exposure and risk. The county attorney advised that while attorney's fees could be limited to a smaller figure for certain coverage, the potential damages and litigation costs could be materially larger and were uncertain. Commissioners who favored rescinding the termination cited public interest in conserving land and concerns about developer performance; those opposing rescission cited the county's legal exposure and possible damages.
Ultimately the board voted 3-2 to withdraw the April 17 notice of termination and to reaffirm that the contract for sale (as amended) remains in effect, directing staff to resume ordinary processing under the purchase contract.
The vote closes the immediate administrative path the board had used to return the property to county ownership. Both sides signaled they might continue to pursue remedies available in contract or through negotiation.
The attorney for Bravo Land Group told the board he preferred to resolve matters without aggressive litigation but said his client would press its legal rights if the county withheld contract performance.
