The Marion County Land Development Regulation Commission voted to send proposed amendments to section 4.3.12 of the Land Development Code — the county’s rules governing temporary roadside vendors — back to a committee workshop after more than an hour of public comment raised practical and legal concerns.

The commission’s motion to table the item and return it to a workshop passed on a voice vote. The draft language would define where and how temporary roadside vendors may operate, limit the number of vendors on a single parcel, and restrict utility hookups on vacant land. Commission members and staff said they want clearer language on what “temporary” means and on whether tents, tables and overnight parking are allowed.

Why it matters: The proposed changes affect mobile food vendors, small-business owners and property owners across Marion County and will next go to the Board of County Commissioners for two required public hearings currently scheduled for Nov. 4, 2025, at 10 a.m. and Dec. 2, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. That board makes the final decision; the LDRC acts in an advisory role.

What the draft would do: Staff and commissioners described several features in the proposed text: it would prohibit centralized electric, water and sewer hookups on vacant parcels used solely for temporary vendors; bar permanent structures such as sheds and modular buildings in that context; and require vendors to remove portable equipment at the end of each operating day. The draft also adds a provision that operation of more than two temporary roadside vendors, mobile food-dispensing vehicles or similar uses on a single parcel would require a minor or major site plan and zoning consistency with the property’s land-use designation. The draft requires on-site temporary restroom facilities when more than two employees are present.

Public concerns: Dozens of residents and food-truck operators told the commission they learned of the revisions only after seeing a newspaper notice and asked for more time to read and comment on the proposed language. Speakers described three recurring worries: 1) uncertainty over whether small, everyday tents or tables would be allowed; 2) how the daily removal requirement would affect vendors who lease private property and cannot easily cart heavy equipment back and forth; and 3) whether the new rules would prohibit long-running, semi‑permanent food‑truck parks that vendors and some property owners say they planned and invested in.

Several vendors, including Wesley Valentine and Eileen Kinanalaje, said moving trailers and equipment daily imposes heavy logistical and financial burdens, reduces customer access during bad weather, and threatens the viability of nascent small businesses that saw food trucks as a pathway to brick-and-mortar restaurants. Other speakers, including Kevin Hudson and Leonie Garcia, described having obtained permits or otherwise dealt with zoning staff and said they need clarity about whether they must seek special-use permits or site-plan approval for more-permanent operations.

Staff responses and outstanding questions: Chris Rising of Growth Services explained the intent of the draft was to preserve the “roadside vendor” concept for truly temporary operations — for example, a vendor invited to a commercial parking lot for a day — and to distinguish those from food‑truck parks, which staff said require zoning approval and a site plan. Matt Aloni of Growth Services clarified that under current practice a single vendor may park in the right of way during the day but typically must remove vehicles and clear trash by day’s end; two or more trucks on a site often triggers a different regulatory path.

Staff and several commissioners said the draft does not eliminate vendors’ ability to operate on commercially developed sites (for example, in a plaza parking lot) but does limit the number of trucks and requires compliance with site‑specific zoning and safety criteria. Commissioners asked staff to clarify: (a) a working definition of “temporary” (hour, day, week); (b) whether ordinary beach‑style tents and folding tables must be removed daily or can be stored on site; and (c) how the code will treat vendors operating on privately owned parcels versus public rights of way.

Next steps: The commission voted to table the item and discuss it at a dedicated LDRC workshop so staff can redraft portions addressing tents, the temporal limit for “temporary,” and the distinction between a roadside vendor and a food‑truck park. Commissioners encouraged vendors and property owners to read the draft text on the Marion County website, prepare proposed language, and attend the workshop or the BOCC hearings. The committee repeatedly emphasized its stated intent to be “pro-business” while ensuring appropriate public-safety and land-use standards.

Provenance: The LDRC opened the 2.4 item at the meeting and received extensive public comment before tabling the item for workshop reconsideration.