## Facts

- Martin County adopted a comprehensive land-use plan pursuant to Florida’s growth-management planning statutes.
- Melvyn R. Yusem owned a 54-acre parcel within a larger tract designated “rural-density development,” permitting roughly one residential unit per two acres.
- Yusem sought an amendment to redesignate his property as “estate-density development,” permitting higher density (two units per acre).
- The Martin County Board of County Commissioners denied the requested comprehensive plan amendment.
- The dispute centered on the proper characterization and judicial review standard for denials of comprehensive plan amendments: quasi-judicial/strict scrutiny versus legislative/fairly debatable.

## Issues

1. Whether a local government decision denying an amendment to a comprehensive land-use plan adopted under chapter 163 is quasi-judicial (strict-scrutiny review) when the amendment has limited impact.
2. Whether such comprehensive plan amendment decisions are legislative acts reviewed under the deferential “fairly debatable” standard, notwithstanding prior case law applying stricter review to certain site-specific rezonings.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court answered the certified question in the negative.
- The Court held that amendments to a comprehensive land-use plan adopted under chapter 163 are legislative decisions subject to the “fairly debatable” standard of review.
- The Court quashed the lower court decision to the extent it treated comprehensive plan amendments as quasi-judicial and subject to strict scrutiny.
- The Court approved the portion allowing Yusem to file a new amendment application without prejudice.
- The case was remanded for consideration of any claims not previously addressed.

## Legal Principles

- Comprehensive plan amendments adopted under chapter 163, Florida Statutes, are legislative acts, even if they affect a limited number of parcels or owners.
- Legislative land-use decisions are reviewed under the “fairly debatable” standard: if reasonable persons could differ as to the propriety of the decision, the court must uphold it.
- Strict-scrutiny review applicable to certain quasi-judicial, site-specific rezoning decisions does not convert the comprehensive plan amendment process into a quasi-judicial proceeding.
- Courts should not substitute judicial judgment for the policy choices of elected local legislative bodies in comprehensive planning.

## Conclusion

The court classified chapter 163 comprehensive plan amendments as legislative actions and required courts to apply the deferential fairly debatable standard, limiting strict judicial review to qualifying quasi-judicial rezoning decisions and preserving the owner’s ability to reapply and pursue unresolved claims on remand.


Martin County v. Yusem, 690 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 1997)