According to the article, the land owner's position is that his property is not suitable for agriculture. This may be true. Over 45 percent of the state’s lands are in the state agricultural district; however, experts have said that a much smaller portion is actually commercially viable agricultural land. So if the agricultural land that the land owners have is not viable agriculture land, it's in the wrong district and potentially requires rezoning, community plan amendment, and/or state land use district boundary amendment.
It's troubling to see that land owners would rather endure the cost and uncertainty of litigation over following the regulatory process. Ultimately, the answer for all potential TVR owners may be a legislative fix, which the county's past administration resisted.