​On Tuesday, October 24, the board rejected, by a 4-3 vote, a proposal to adopt a plan that would have allowed a developer, GL Homes, to build in an area of South County known as the Agricultural Reserve (Ag Reserve), in exchange for giving up land in the northwestern part of the county, in an area called Indian Trails Grove (ITG).  The vote from last week followed earlier votes to initiate and transmit, but since the majority of the board voted not to adopt, the proposal is now laid to rest.

In February 2022, I voted to initiate the proposal because I wanted county staff to be able to vet the application. Last May, I voted to transmit the proposal because I wanted to see if the plan could come together. In the end, I voted to reject it because there was too much uncertainty surrounding the benefits to our county.

I want to explain why I voted the way I did. For me this was a difficult vote because it was not a black and white issue. The “land swap” was a complicated proposal with ardent supporters on both sides. I’ve made clear from the beginning that I struggled with the plan because in my judgement, there were benefits to approving this, but there was also a downside.

It was complicated because it involved preserved land that is currently being farmed west of Boca Raton in the Ag Reserve. The Ag Reserve is a 22,000-acre area that was established decades ago and is subject to specific development principals that require builders to build no more than one unit per acre and set aside 60% of the land in order to be able to develop residences on 40% of it. The land that is set aside is required to be put under a conservation easement thus becoming a preserve allowing for farming and equestrian but not for residential or other uses.

Preserve areas can be developed but only if another area of the same size within the Ag Reserve is put into conservation. These preserve swaps have happened numerous times since the Ag Reserve was established. What made this proposal unusual was that it would have allowed the land swap to involve an area outside of the contours of the Ag Reserve to be preserved while allowing for development within the Ag Reserve boundaries. Allowing this to move forward would have been a deviation from long-standing Ag Reserve policy. Over the years, there have been several changes made to what is allowed within the Ag Reserve, and in some instances rightfully so. As the Ag Reserve has matured into a multitude of HOA communities with close to 10,000 single-family homes and 25,000 residents, needs and opportunities have changed.

The developer, GL Homes, wanted to build homes on a 582-acre parcel in the Ag Reserve that is in preservation and being farmed. For them, this made sense because people want to live in the Ag Reserve which is reflected by the prices of the homes which often exceed a million dollars. In exchange for allowing GL Homes to build 1,000 units down south, they would give the county 1,800 acres of land in ITG, and they would not build the 1,285 homes they were entitled to build in this area. Furthermore, under the proposal, GL Homes would have built 277 workforce homes in the Ag Reserve, an area that has no workforce housing, while not having to build 261 workforce homes in ITG, a net gain of 16 much-needed workforce homes. In essence, the proposal would have increased density in the Ag Reserve, but would have reduced density in ITG, and the overall number of units to be built would have been fewer, with more area in preservation. In addition, GL Homes promised to donate land in the Ag Reserve for a house of worship, a residential care facility for people with disabilities and a 25-acre parcel for a county park. It also agreed to build a 200-acre ATV park and most importantly to me, a 1,600-acre water impoundment and conveyance system on land located in the ITG area.

I care about water supply and water quality and I’m concerned about the impacts of climate change and sea level rise. That’s why I serve as chair of the Water Resources Taskforce and the Lake Worth Lagoon Initiative Steering Committee. This proposed water resource project would be able to hold several thousand acre-feet of water in times of flooding; it would have allowed for water releases in times of drought; it would have the potential to help clean water by letting plants absorb harmful nutrients before the water is pushed out to the Lake Worth Lagoon; and because of its strategic location, it would have allowed for water to be moved to the Loxahatchee River and Grassy Water’s Preserve which is part of West Palm Beach’s water supply. Because of these potential benefits to the Lake Worth Lagoon, the city of West Palm Beach, the Loxahatchee River and the Indian Trails area, I wanted to see if this could come together. The county had multiple meetings with the applicant, the city of West Palm Beach, Indian Trails Improvement District and other stakeholders to work out the details and operations.

At the end of the day, what was presented last week at the hearing had too many unresolved issues for me to give up on a longstanding Ag Reserve policy that people feel strongly about.

During this entire time, as I was weighing the pros and cons of this proposal, I engaged with experts and listened to members from the public who spoke directly with me, sent emails and called my office. I appreciate it when people take the time to express their opinion, and I think public participation generally makes for better decisions.

As I’ve mentioned, for me this was never a black and white issue. It was a complicated choice with pluses and minuses. For all of you who reached out and provided thoughtful input on either side of the issue, thank you!  

As your county commissioner, I’m not simply in favor of or opposed to development. Honestly, I try to listen and educate myself on the issues so that I can do what you elected me to do: cast votes that I believe are in the best interest of the county and the people I represent.

Gregg