Does a Florida county need a supermajority vote to buy waterfront land over $500,000 through a state grant program?

Plain-English summary

Brevard County won a 2009 Florida Communities Trust grant to buy waterfront land under the Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Program. The Trust ran the acquisition, including negotiating a three-way purchase contract among the Trust, the county, and the landowner. The county attorney asked whether the county commission, when it approves a purchase over $500,000 in this program, has to do so by "extraordinary vote" (something more than a simple majority).

Attorney General Bill McCollum concluded that, to the extent the county must vote to approve the purchase, an extraordinary vote is required when the agreed price tops the average of the appraisals. Section 125.355, Florida Statutes, the general rule for county real-property purchases, requires two appraisals for a buy over $500,000 and an extraordinary vote if the agreed price exceeds the average appraised value. The waterfront program's own statute (Part III, Chapter 380) directs that its appraisal procedures be consistent with section 125.355(1)(a) and (b), so the two laws can be read together and the extraordinary-vote requirement carries over. The AG also flagged a gap: neither the statute nor the Trust's rules clearly spell out what "affirmative act" the county must take to approve a final purchase, and suggested the Legislature or the Trust clarify that point.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2010. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: What is an "extraordinary vote"?
A: The opinion noted that the term is not defined by statute, but by its plain meaning it is something greater than an ordinary simple-majority vote. The AG quoted a dictionary definition of "extraordinary" as relating to a proceeding "not normally required by law or not prescribed for the regular administration of the law."

Q: When does the extraordinary-vote requirement kick in?
A: Under section 125.355(1)(b), for a county purchase over $500,000, the county must get at least two appraisals from approved appraisers, and the purchase must be approved by extraordinary vote only if the agreed price exceeds the average of those two appraisals. If the price is at or below the average, the special vote requirement is not triggered.

Q: Why did the general county-purchase statute apply to a Trust-run program?
A: Because the program's statute incorporates it. The waterfront program directs the Florida Communities Trust to adopt acquisition rules with appraisal and confidentiality procedures "consistent with ss. 125.355(1)(a) and (b)." The AG applied the rule that a specific statute controls over a general one but that statutes should be harmonized where possible, and found both could be given effect here.

Q: Did the AG decide exactly what the county had to do to "approve" the purchase?
A: No. The opinion observed that the final purchase agreement is subject to an affirmative act by the county and the Trust, but that neither the statute nor the administrative rule specifies what that act must be. The AG recommended seeking clarification through the Legislature or the Trust's rulemaking rather than resolving it in the opinion.

Background and statutory framework

The Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Program, in Part III of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (the Florida Communities Trust Act), funds the acquisition of working waterfront property. Section 380.5105 puts administration in the hands of the Florida Communities Trust, which jointly develops application and ranking rules with the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Section 380.507(11) requires the Trust to adopt land-acquisition rules covering appraisals and confidentiality "consistent with ss. 125.355(1)(a) and (b)," a maximum-purchase-price method, and assurances that land is voluntarily acquired and properly conveyed. The Trust's rules appear in Chapter 9K-10, Florida Administrative Code.

Section 125.355 is the general statute governing a county's purchase of real property. For a buy over $500,000 it requires at least two appraisals and an extraordinary vote where the agreed price exceeds the average appraised price. Because the waterfront program's statute expressly ties its appraisal procedures back to section 125.355, the AG read the two together rather than treating the specific program statute as displacing the general vote rule. The opinion grounded that approach in the canons that the specific governs the general (City of St. Petersburg v. Carter; Board of Trustees v. Alvarez) but that related statutes should be construed in harmony (T.R. v. State; R.F.R. v. State).

Citations and references

Statutes:

• s. 125.355 and s. 125.355(1)(b), Fla. Stat. (county real-property purchases; extraordinary vote)
• Part III, Ch. 380, Fla. Stat. (Florida Communities Trust Act)
• s. 380.5105 and s. 380.507(11), Fla. Stat. (administration and acquisition rules)

Cases:

• City of St. Petersburg v. Carter, 39 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 1949)
• Board of Trustees of the City Pension Fund for Firefighters and Police Officers in the City of Tampa v. Alvarez, 563 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
• T.R. v. State, 677 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 1996)
• R.F.R. v. State, 558 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)

Subject

County, extraordinary vote for waterfront acquisition

Source

• Landing page: https://www.myfloridalegal.com/ag-opinions/county-extraordinary-vote-for-waterfront-acquisition
• Original PDF: https://www.myfloridalegal.com/print/pdf/node/1722

Original opinion text

Mr. Scott L. Knox

Brevard County Attorney

Office of the County Attorney

2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way

Viera, Florida 32940

RE: COUNTIES – STAN MAYFIELD WORKING WATERFRONTS PROGRAM – REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION – FLORIDA COMMUNITIES TRUST – county’s approval of property purchase in excess of $500,000 under waterfronts acquisition program must be by extraordinary vote. s. 125.355 and Part III, Ch. 380, Fla. Stat.

Dear Mr. Knox:

On behalf of the Brevard County Commission, you ask substantially the following question:

Does section 125.355, Florida Statutes, require an extraordinary vote of the Brevard County Commission to approve the purchase of real property acquired through the Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Program?[1]

In sum:

To the extent the Brevard County Commission must vote to approve the purchase of real property acquired through the Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Program, the provisions of section 125.355, Florida Statutes, would require an extraordinary vote when the agreed purchase price exceeds the average appraised price of a purchase in excess of $500,000.

You state that in 2009, the Florida Communities Trust (FCT) awarded Brevard County a grant to purchase property pursuant to the Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Program (program), Part III, Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. The county initially was awarded an amount not to exceed the lesser of 65% of the project cost or $2,665,00.00. Under the grant contract, you state the FCT is responsible for "conducting all land acquisition activities and negotiating a tripartite purchase contract between FTC, the County, and the owner of the property identified in the grant application."[2]

Section 380.5105, Florida Statutes, provides for the administration of the program by the FCT. The section directs the FCT and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to jointly develop rules establishing an application process and a process for the evaluation, scoring, and ranking of waterfront projects.[3] As part of the general powers granted to the FCT, the trust is authorized to make rules necessary to carry out the purposes of the act.[4] The trust is required to adopt rules governing the acquisition of lands, with such rules including "procedures for appraisals and confidentiality consistent with ss. 125.355(1)(a) and (b) and 166.045(1)(a) and (b), a method of determining a maximum purchase price, and procedures to assure that the land is acquired in a voluntarily negotiated transaction, surveyed, conveyed with marketable title, and examined for hazardous materials contamination."[5]

Section 125.355, Florida Statutes, imposes conditions on the purchase of real property by a county. For a purchase in excess of $500,000, the governing body of the county must obtain at least two appraisals from approved appraisers, with the requirement that the purchase be approved by an extraordinary vote if the agreed purchase price exceeds the average appraised price of the two appraisals.[6]

Rule 9K-10, Florida Administrative Code, sets forth the procedures that must be followed for land acquisitions under the Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Program.[7] As noted above, all acquisition activities are to be completed by the FCT.[8] When a project site is estimated to be at a value of $500,000 or more, the rule states that the trust must obtain at least two appraisals by approved appraisers.[9] The rule further provides that the maximum approved purchase price when two appraisals are required is the higher of the two values indicated in the appraisals.[10]

You have not directed my attention to any statutory or rule requirement that the FCT approve the final purchase price through an extraordinary vote, nor will this office comment upon such a requirement. However, I would note that Rule 9K-10.006, Florida Administrative Code, indicates that terms of the final purchase agreement are subject to an affirmative act by the recipient, the county in this instance, and the FCT.[11] Neither the statute, nor the rule appears to contain specific language as to what affirmative act must be taken.[12] It may be advisable to seek clarification through the Legislature or the FCT’s rulemaking authority in this area as to what constitutes an affirmative act for purposes of approving the final purchase agreement.

It is generally a rule of statutory construction that a specific statute governing a certain subject will control over a general statute relating to the same matter.[13] It is fundamental, however, that statutes are to be read in harmony whenever possible.[14] In this instance, while the provisions in Part III, Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, are specific to acquisitions of real property under the Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Program, the statutory provisions state that the procedures for appraisals under the program must be consistent with the general provisions for purchase of real property by a county under section 125.355(1)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes. Thus, effect may be given to both section 125.355(1), Florida Statutes, and Part III, Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, without apparent harm to the purpose of either act.

Accordingly, it is my opinion that to the extent a county must approve the purchase of real property with a value in excess of $500,000 under the Stan Mayfield Waterfronts Property Program, such approval must be by an extraordinary vote.

Sincerely,

Bill McCollum

Attorney General

BM/tals

[1] Part III, Ch. 380, Fla. Stat., and, as you have provided, Rules 9K-9 and 9K-10, Fla. Admin. Code (applicable to the procurement of real property under the program).

                                                                                                                                                                                             [2]  Rule 9K-9.003(8), Fla. Admin. Code, states that:  "The Trust shall be responsible for the Acquisition activities."  See also Rule 9K-9.011, Fla. Admin. Code, stating:  "This rule chapter and Chapter 9K-10, F.A.C., shall govern in all matters of title, acquisition procedures, lease agreements and transfer of title for lands acquired pursuant to this rule chapter."

[3] Section 380.5105(2), Fla. Stat.

[4] Section 380.501, Fla. Stat., sets forth the title for Part III, Ch. 380, Fla. Stat., as the "Florida Communities Trust Act."

[5] Section 380.507(11), Fla. Stat.

[6] Section 125.355(1)(b), Fla. Stat. "Extraordinary vote" is not defined by law, but by its plain definition would appear to mean something greater than an ordinary vote by simple majority. "Extraordinary" is defined as "of, relating to, or having the nature of a proceeding or action not normally required by law or not prescribed for the regular administration of the law." Webster's Third New International Dictionary (1981), p. 807.

[7] Rule 9K-10.001, Fla. Admin. Code.

[8] Rule 9K-10.003 (5), Fla. Admin. Code.

[9] Rule 9K-10.004(4), Fla. Admin. Code.

[10] Rule 9K-10.004(5)(c), Fla. Admin. Code. Should the two appraisals differ significantly (if the higher of the two values exceeds 120 percent of the lower value), there are further steps which must be taken to derive a maximum approved purchase price pursuant to Rule 9K-10.004(5)(e), Fla. Admin. Code.

[11] Rule 9K-10.006(5), Fla. Admin. Code. See also Rule 9K-10.007(1), Fla. Admin. Code, stating that the form of the final negotiated purchase shall be a written purchase agreement "signed by the Owner(s), the Recipient and the Trust."

[12] Cf. Op. Att'y Gen. Fla. 78-141 (1978) in which this office addressed a situation where the governing statute did not state whether the action of the governing body of a municipality in regulating traffic should be in the form of an ordinance rather than a resolution. The opinion cites to s. 166.041(1)(a), Fla. Stat., defining "ordinance" as "an official legislative action of a governing body, which action is a regulation of a general and permanent nature and enforceable as a local laws," (e.s.) while s. 166.041(1)(b), Fla. Stat., defines "resolution" as "an expression of a governing body concerning matters of administration, an expression of temporary character, or a provision for the disposition of a particular item of the administrative business of the governing body." (e.s.)

[13] See City of St. Petersburg v. Carter, 39 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 1949); Board of Trustees of the City Pension Fund for Firefighters and Police Officers in the City of Tampa v. Alvarez, 563 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (the more specific statute covering a particular subject is controlling over one covering the same subject in general terms).

[14] See generally T.R. v. State, 677 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 1996) (whenever possible courts must give effect to all statutory provisions and construe related statutory provisions in harmony with one another); R.F.R. v. State, 558 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (laws applying to same general field are presumed to be harmonious).