Laserfiche WebLink
0 <br />people could purchase land that can only be owned by a public entity, therefore, it seemed to him <br />that the transaction should be null and void and this whole hearing was faulty as well. <br />Chairman Wheeler referred to a letter from Attorney Collins that stated, "private <br />entity could own conservation land", and asked if that was correct or incorrect. Attorney Collins <br />said a private entity does own conservation land right now unless and until the Board changes it. <br />Mr. Christopher disagreed with Attorney Collins, pointing out that our <br />Comprehensive Plan says only a public entity can own this land. He remarked that the Board <br />may be compelled to change the classification on the land but until the Court tells them to, he did <br />not think they should take that action. He felt the Board should find out what is Fellsmere's <br />growth management policy, and how could the County be assured. that significant development <br />in Fellsmere would not adversely affect the County. He thought the Board needed to seek legal <br />advice now. <br />Chairman Wheeler presented a hypothetical situation and asked what would stop <br />St. Johns from annexing that property into the City of Fellsmere, have the City of Fellsmere <br />change the designation of the land, and then they own it. <br />Mr. Christopher thought it was an excellent question but he did not know the <br />answer and reiterated his earlier suggestion for the Board to seek legal opinion immediately. <br />Attorney Collins interjected commenting on the idea of the conservation <br />designation precluding private ownership and did not think that was the case. He believed there <br />are private entities that purchase land for the express purpose of conserving it and did not think <br />that the fact that the land carries a certain conservation designation necessarily meant it has to be <br />in public ownership. He also thought the idea that private ownership could be precluded <br />probably runs in the face of constitutional restrictions against restraint on alienation of property. <br />March 6, 2007 33 <br />BK 13? 1✓, 1.368 <br />