The future of this forested land, pictured across the intracoastal waterway near Palm Valley in St. Johns County, is uncertain. County commissioners reached an impasse on whether to certify it as an agricultural enclave. | Noah Hertz, Jacksonville Today
Published on September 1, 2026 at 4:01 pm
Free local news and info, in your inbox at 6 a.m. M-F. Sign up for the Jacksonville Today newsletter.
The St. Johns County Commission may file a court challenge over a controversial state development law governing so-called agricultural enclaves.
The move comes after the county failed to reach a consensus on whether to certify more than 4,000 acres of farmland near Nocatee for development.
Jacksonville Today thanks our sponsors. Become one.
Without a vote to approve or deny the certification, the county now has 90 days to act before the land is automatically certified.
At the center of the drama is the state’s new agricultural enclave law. It allows developers with parcels of farmland to seek development approvals as if the land was already zoned for residential use. The law also fast-tracks the process, skipping public hearings that are required of most development applications.
Proponents of the law have argued that it allows the owners of farmland to catch up when they are already surrounded by residential and commercial development, while critics argue that the law will lead to the paving over of St. Johns’ remaining green space.
Jacksonville Today thanks our sponsors. Become one.
St. Johns County has received a number of applications under the law since it went into effect July 1.
With thousands of acres of farmland potentially up for development, County Commission Chair Clay Murphy said that he had heard residents’ calls loud and clear and that he wanted to see whether the county could challenge the law.
“I think sometimes we have to stand up and we have to take the lead in fighting this,” Murphy said.
Taking the enclave fight to Tallahassee
Murphy was ultimately joined Tuesday by Commissioners Joseph and Taylor in a motion directing the county’s legal counsel to look into ways to fight the enclave law.
Whether it be an injunction to halt the law’s enforcement or another tactic entirely, the county commissioners want a way to take on the law signed by Gov. DeSantis earlier this year — even if it means using taxpayer dollars to do so.
The move came after hours of debate over a request to certify more than 4,000 acres of farmland north of Nocatee as an agricultural enclave, opening it for future development.
The discussion on the proposal began last month when the County Commission approved two other requests under the law. Commissioners ultimately agreed that they needed more time and information from county staff on the proposal near Nocatee before they could make a decision.
That proposal comes courtesy of the family that founded Winn-Dixie, the Davises, and PARC Group, the developer behind the sprawling Nocatee community.
After hours of discussion and debate that included public commenters urging the county to take action, the board failed to reach a consensus on approving or denying the applicant’s requested certification.
It’s not often that the board cannot reach consensus on an item. According to Wayne Larson, the county’s director of public affairs, the county has until Sept. 28 to act before the enclave is automatically certified for future development.
Ellen Avery-Smith, the attorney representing the applicant, did not immediately respond to Jacksonville Today‘s request for comment.
The impasse came after failed motions to deny and to approve the application.
County Commissioners Krista Joseph and Anne Taylor voted to deny the certification request, while Murphy and County Commissioners Sarah Arnold and Christian Whitehurst voted against their motion.
Whitehurst said that his record for standing up against undue development in the county speaks for itself. He said he believes county staff when they say the proposal near Nocatee fits the legal requirements of certification as an agricultural enclave laid out by the state.
“It’s not even close if you’re just considering the facts,” Whitehurst said. “Now I understand if your goal here is to get a round of applause — that’s a different conclusion — but if you’re following the facts and the evidence to its conclusion, I’m going to vote to verify this application because that’s what the facts tell me to do.”
Murphy acknowledged that the applicant had done their due diligence, but his line of reasoning was different.
“I truly feel like the applicant, again, factually, according to the ag enclave law, has met their burden of proof,” he said, “but I don’t like the law.”
The move to approve the certification came from Arnold and Whitehurst, but they were outnumbered by Joseph, Murphy and Taylor, who voted against them.
