Flagler County weighs legal risk and funding limits for Reach 2 beach renourishment as 15 property easements remain unresolved

Hamid Sebastian, Flagler County’s county engineer, told the joint Flagler County–Flagler Beach workshop that Reach 2 of the county’s beach-management plan covers about 5.5 miles north of the city project and could begin construction this November if commissioners award a contract at the Aug. 3 meeting. Sebastian said permits are in hand for most parcels but 15 private easements remain outstanding across the municipalities, and the lowest bid returned was roughly $39 million compared with a $34 million budget; the county plans to scale the design to fit the budget (about 1,500,000 cubic yards of sand) and to complete construction in about three to four months.

Why it matters: commissioners must balance a compressed cash-flow requirement—Flagler expects to front several invoices while seeking reimbursement—with the legal and operational risks of placing sand where owners have not granted easements. County staff said some funding is available immediately and that FDEP/FDOT reimbursements on a monthly schedule could arrive in two to four weeks, but FEMA reimbursements for long-term costs may take six months or longer.

Sebastian said the project’s bid and funding gap prompted a plan to reduce the planned sand quantity so the project fits the allocated $34 million. He described design flexibility by site: some areas need as little as 20 cubic yards per foot to be effective, while severely scarped locations require 50–80 cu yd/ft. He also outlined outreach and a pre-construction meeting to keep residents informed of daily contractor activity and progress reports on the county website.

Several commissioners proposed an aggressive approach for holdouts—notify owners formally, treat the work as an emergency public-safety project and proceed despite lack of a recorded easement—accepting that property owners could sue for trespass or for inverse-condemnation claims. Other commissioners and staff urged caution and requested written legal opinions from municipal and county attorneys about whether proceeding without a recorded easement would jeopardize state or federal reimbursements or invite larger liability.

County staff (legal) explained the legal tradeoffs: while emergency authority can permit some rapid public actions, owners can still bring trespass or inverse-condemnation suits; damages plus attorneys’ fees are possible and courts would examine whether the action met the degree of an imminent emergency. Staff also noted the erosion control line (ECL) is the legal dividing line: work seaward of the ECL is generally state-held public trust land and avoids private-property risk, but stopping at the ECL may leave visible gaps in the berm at holdout parcels.

Funding details: Sebastian said the county has several near-term funds and advances: approximately $4.2 million in local funds are available immediately, FDOT has advanced $1.6 million and another FDOT agreement of about $718,000 is available, and near-term FDEP/FDOT reimbursements are expected in two to four weeks after monthly submittals. He estimated about $10 million in near-term cash on hand but said FEMA reimbursements are part of the long-term picture and may take six months or longer to arrive, which influences whether the county would need short-term financing.

Engineering and safety concerns: staff and commissioners emphasized that placing sand up to the erosion control line is legally allowed and would protect most public shoreline, but skipping the area directly in front of some properties could create low spots that increase breaching risk during storms and create temporary hazards for beachgoers. Staff said the contract would include surveying and per-parcel adjustment of quantities just before construction to match current conditions.

Next steps: commissioners agreed to pursue legal and permitting clarifications with municipal attorneys and county counsel, request a cash-flow analysis for the Aug. 3 contract award, continue outreach to remaining property owners (including targeted door-knocking), and return with recommendations. The county plans to present the Reach 2 construction contract for approval at its Aug. 3 meeting; no final award was recorded at this workshop.

Ending: The board directed staff to gather written legal opinions about proceeding without recorded easements, to confirm whether litigation could affect reimbursements, and to bring a funding/cash-flow plan to the Aug. 3 meeting for the county’s decision.