STUART — Martin County residents packed the commission chambers Feb. 24 to protest a proposed slaughterhouse planned for Chancey Ranch in western Martin County, voicing concerns about potential environmental impacts and water quality.
County officials told the crowd that the project is no longer under local development review after the state determined it qualifies as a bona fide agricultural operation.
Peter Walden, deputy growth management director for Martin County Board of County Commissioners, said the county received formal notice from the state earlier in the process.
“We got a letter from the General Council of Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, or FDACs, basically outlining the fact that the county would not be required to review the project, that it was considered bonafide ag,” Walden said. “Shortly after that, the application was withdrawn from our development review process. And that's pretty much where we stand now. We don't know what has been taking place since then out on the property.”
Walden said that because of the state’s position, the county has limited authority over the project.
Environmental advocates argued that the proposed facility’s location warrants scrutiny. Greg Braun, executive director of the Guardians of Martin County, pointed to its proximity to Lake Okeechobee and ongoing water quality challenges in the region.
“We know that there are algae blooms in Lake Okeechobee, and the problems are nutrient-related, and this project can do nothing but exacerbate those water quality problems,” Braun said.
The slaughterhouse is expected to use about 6.8 million gallons of water each year. Braun said he is concerned about how wastewater would be handled and whether monitoring would occur.
“We'd like to know how is that water going to be treated,” he said. “There's no information anywhere about how it's going to be treated, to what standards, or if there is any water quality monitoring that is to take place.”
Braun urged commissioners to explore possible legal avenues and read from a policy stating that agricultural purposes do not include the wholesaling, retailing or processing of farm products, such as by a canning factory.
County Attorney Elysse Elder said the statute Braun cited addresses property tax classifications and differs from the law governing agricultural protections in this case.
“And the statute that Mr. Braun discussed, which was Florida Statutes 193-461, is really the statutory criteria that the property appraiser needs to review to determine whether or not a piece of property has an ag exemption, and what she does is she looks at that statute, and that's where the definitions that Mr. Braun had read to the board,” Elder said. “They are completely different than the Right to Farm Act. So under the Right to Farm Act, non-residential farm buildings are exempt from permitting. And under that Right to Farm Act, the statutory definitions for farm, farm product, and farm operation are extremely broad.”
Elder cautioned that a legal challenge could be unsuccessful.
“It might not be a fight that the county would win based on the legislature, based on the definition of farm product,” she said. “And then if you have an existing farm, a non-residential farm building is completely exempt from permitting under the building code.”
Commissioners discussed next steps, including opening a dialogue with the property owners.
“If the final solution is that it's not environmentally questionable or it's not within your purview, did we damage something else that we are so desperately trying to do,” Commissioner Edward Ciampi said, referring to the county’s broader environmental efforts and relationship with the state.
County Administrator Don Donaldson said initiating communication would likely be the safest course.
“I think I would rather try to at least work with the property owners to start with,” Donaldson said. “I think some of the speakers earlier talked about that if there was a way to develop or work with the legislature in the future about maybe giving back some of these tools so that there won't be any more than this one is also a good direction.”
The board agreed to have county staff, lead by Environmental Resource Manager John Maehl, contact the ranch in the coming weeks to seek more information and explore potential options, while the county’s legal team continues researching the matter.
The Guardians of Martin County said they will keep open the possibility of legal counsel if environmental considerations aren't taken into account, but have made it clear they aren't inherently opposed to the facility.