10/9/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Figure 1: Clontz Property Location Map According to Mr. Clontz, a combination of many factors has made it difficult to profitably operate a citrus grove on the site. Included among those factors is the recent commercial and residential growth in the area of the SR 60/58` Avenue intersection. Because of the site's proximity to urban development, Mr. Clontz has not been able to aerial spray his grove. In fact, Mr. Clontz's representative, at the July 11, 2000, public hearing, stated that recently a Sheriff s deputy stopped Mr. Clontz from using a tractor to pull a pesticide sprayer through his grove. For those reasons, Mr. Clontz contends that he cannot maintain his grove operation and therefore should be given a land use designation that would allow him to develop his property. Since the July 11 a' meeting, staff has coordinated with Mr Clontz's representative to determine when that incident occurred, and who the officer was. Because the incident occurred several years ago, however, that information could not be obtained. Without that information, the Sheriffs staff indicated that the incident could not be confirmed Since this incident could not be confirmed, staff asked the Sheriffs office how agricultural activity complaints are handled in general. According to the head of the Sheriff's Ranch and Grove Unit, officers within that unit often cite Section 823.14 of the Florida Statutes, the Florida Right to Farm Act (see Attachment 2), when dealing with complaints about agricultural activities. In general, that law allows farm operations to continue as long as they conform to generally accepted agricultural and management practices. The head of the Sheriffs Ranch and Grove Unit indicated that no law enforcement action would be taken on property, such as the Clontz property, subject to the Right to Farm Act. October 9, 2000 3 BK 115 PG35E