April 17, 2023 | Legislative Reporter
Three weeks remain in the legislative session. To date, 1,792 bills have been filed and 25 have passed both chambers. April 25 is the last day for regularly scheduled Senate committee meetings; bills that have not made progress in committee are likely not to pass before the session is scheduled to end on May 5.
Over the past week, the Governor signed the following bill of interest into law:
• CS/SB 106 – Florida Shared Use Nonmotorized Trail Network (See the April 7 Legislative Reporter for an overview of the bill). The effective date is July 1, 2023.
Every bill passed by the legislature is presented to the governor for approval and becomes a law if the governor approves and signs it, or fails to veto it within seven consecutive days after presentation. If during that period or on the seventh day the legislature adjourns sine die or takes a recess of more than thirty days, the governor has 15 consecutive days from the date of presentation to act on the bill. To track Governor DeSantis’s action on bills, go to flgov.com and click on “2023 Bill Actions” on the right side of the page.
The Bill Tracking Report, as of April 14, can be viewed here. Please review it to see the bills filed that APA Florida is tracking. Note that these tracking reports contain a new feature; if you click on the bill number, you are linked to more information about the bill.
If you would like any bills added to this report or would like more information about a specific bill, please contact Stefanie Svisco at ssvisco@floridaplanning.org.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Land Use and Development Regulations: CS/CS/HB 439 (Rep. McClain) was reported favorably, reflecting a committee amendment, by the House Commerce Committee on April 10 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference.
The amendment approved by the Senate Commerce Committee deleted previously proposed language that would have done the following:
• Amend s.163.3164, F.S., to change the definitions of density, intensity, urban service area, and urban sprawl;
• Amend ss.163.3177(6)(a)(9), F.S., to delete existing statutory language regarding indicators of urban sprawl and the test for determining if urban sprawl has been discouraged;
• Amend ss.163.3191(3), F.S., to add that optional elements may not be updated until the required elements have been updated unless otherwise required by general law; and
• Amend ss.163.3202(2), F.S., to state that levels of service established in a comprehensive plan solely for planning purposes may not be used as a basis for the denial of a development order or permit.
The amended bill now:
• Revises s.70.51, F.S., the Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act, to allow a negotiated settlement between a property owner and a local government to include the same types of relief that could be ordered by the special magistrate and provides that a special magistrate’s recommendation or a negotiated settlement between the property owner and the local government may contain relief that would otherwise be inconsistent with the local government’s comprehensive plan if the local government finds the relief protects the public interest served by the comprehensive plan provisions with which it is inconsistent. Also clarifies that any recommendation of the special magistrate with respect to a rezoning is not considered contract zoning;
• Amends ss. 163.3177(1)(f) to:
o delete existing language that identifies community goals and vision as a type of relevant data and analysis for required and optional comprehensive plan elements;
o add language to require support data or summaries be subject to the compliance review process; and
o require that support data or summaries be based on current data and analysis, which is relevant to and correlates to the proposed amendment (note this language was added by the committee);
• Amends ss.163.3177(1)(f)(2), F.S., to delete existing language that limits how methodology used in data collection may be evaluated and deletes language indicating local government may use original data if methodology is professionally accepted;
• Amends ss.163.3177(1)(f)(3), F.S., to require that the comprehensive plan population estimates (both permanent and seasonal) must be based on the greater of those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or those generated by the local government based on a professionally acceptable methodology;
• Amends ss. 163.3177(2), F.S., to provide that optional elements of a comprehensive plan may not contain policies that restrict the density or intensity established in the future land use element and require that when data is relevant to optional and required elements, consistent data must be used, including population estimates and projections;
• Amends ss. 163.3177(5)(a), F.S., to amend the planning periods for comprehensive plans from at least 5 and 10 years to at least 10 and 20 years;
• Amends ss.163.3177(6)(a) to:
o expand the data regarding the amount of land needed to accommodate anticipated growth, on which future land use plans and amendments must be based, to include the amount needed to accommodate single-family, two-family, and fee simple townhome development (note this language was added by the committee);
o expand the data on which future land use plans and amendments must be based to include the amount of land located outside the urban service area, excluding lands designated for conservation, preservation, or other public use (note this language was added by the committee); and
o encourage the location of schools proximate to urban service areas (current law says urban residential areas) and encourage the location of schools in all areas as necessary to provide adequate school capacity to serve residential development;
• Amends ss.163.3191(1), F.S., to specify that:
o the EAR evaluation must include a determining if plan amendments are necessary to reflect a minimum planning horizon of at least 10 years;
o the notification sent by a local government to DEO regarding an EAR determination must include a separate affidavit:
signed by the county governing body chair or the municipality mayor, attesting that all the elements of its comprehensive plan comply with this paragraph;
including a certification that the adopted plan contains a minimum planning period of 10 years; and
cite the source and date of the population projections utilized in establishing the 10-year planning period.
• Amends ss.163.3191(3) to add that local governments:
o must, versus are encouraged to, evaluate changes in local conditions and, as necessary, update comprehensive plans to reflect these changes
o must process required and optional elements in the same plan amendment cycle
• Amends ss.163.3191(4) and add a new ss.(5), F.S., to provide that if a local government fails to provide its EAR notification and affidavit or fails to transmit a plan update within a year of transmitting the notification, it may not initiate or adopt any publicly initiated plan amendments until it complies, unless otherwise required by general law;
o this prohibition does not apply to privately initiated plan amendments;
o the failure of a local government to update its plan in a timely manner is not the basis for the denial of a privately initiated comprehensive plan amendment;
o if a local government fails to update its comprehensive plan, the state land planning agency shall provide the required population projections to be used by the local government and the local government must initiate an update within three months of receipt and transmit within 12 months. During the update process the local government can provide alternative population projections but only if they exceed the ones provided by the state land planning agencies and only if the update is completed in the time frame;
o if the update is found not to be in compliance, the state land planning agency must establish the timeline to address the deficiencies, not to exceed an additional 12-month period (note this language was added by the committee); and
o if the update is challenged by a third party, the local government may seek approval from the state land planning agency to process publicly initiated plan amendments that are necessary to accommodate the population growth during the pendency of the litigation (note this language was added by the committee);
• Amends s.163.3202, F.S., to require that land development regulations must:
o establish minimum lot sizes within single-family, two-family, and fee simple, single-family townhome zoning districts to accommodate the maximum density authorized in the comprehensive plan, net of the land area required to be set aside for subdivision roads, sidewalk, stormwater ponds, open space, landscape buffers and other mandatory land development regulations that require land to be set aside that could otherwise be utilized for the development of these types of housing; and
o establish infill development standards for single-family homes, two-family homes, and fee simple townhome dwelling units to allow for the administrative approval of these types of development;
• Amends ss.163.3202(5), F.S.to:
o delete existing language that allows the application of building design element regulations to singlefamily or two-family dwellings located in a planned unit development or a master-planned community;
o revise the provision regarding the application of building design regulations to single-family or twofamily dwellings within a local government that has a design review board or architectural review board to require that the board has to have been created before January 1, 2020; and
o delete the definition of planned unit development and master-planned community.
CS/SB 1604 (Sen. Ingoglia) is a similar bill but does not contain as extensive of amendments as does CS/CS/HB 439. Refer to the April 7 Legislative Reporter for a review of that bill. CS/SB 1604 is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 19.
Local Government Comprehensive Plans: CS/CS/SB 540 (Sen. DiCeglie) was reported favorably, reflecting committee amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee on April 11. This was the last committee of reference for the bill. The bill has been placed on the Senate Special Order Calendar for April 19.
The bill amends ss.163.3184(5) and ss.163.3187(5), F.S., to provide that the prevailing party in administrative challenges to a comprehensive plan or amendment, including small–scale amendments, is entitled to recover attorney fees and costs in challenging or defending the order, including reasonable appellate attorney fees and costs.
The bill also revises s.163.3202(6), F.S., regulating land development regulations, to provide that land development regulations relating to any characteristic of development other than use, or intensity or density of use, do not apply to Florida College System institutions.
Finally, the bill seeks to resolve a split among Florida district courts of appeal by clarifying that the scope of review for a challenge to a local government decision to grant or deny a development order is limited to whether the development order would materially alter the use, density, or intensity of use on a particular piece of property, rendering it not consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Note that the Senate Rules Committee deleted previously proposed language that would have amended s.163.3184(3) providing for an expedited state review process for adoption of comprehensive plan amendments by:
• Providing that if a comprehensive plan amendment is not adopted at the second public hearing, the amendment must be formally adopted by the local government within 180 days after the second public hearing, or the amendment is deemed withdrawn;
• Eliminating the exception to the 180-day limitation for amendments processed pursuant to the Development of Regional Impact statute; and
• Stating that these revisions are remedial in nature, are intended to clarify existing law, and apply retroactively to January 1, 2022.
CS/CS/HB 359 (Rep. Duggan), which was identical to the Senate CS/CS/SB 540 before the latest amendments, is currently on the House Calendar on Second Reading
Vacation Rentals: CS/HB 833 (Rep. Duggan) was reported favorably by the House Ways & Means Committee on April 12 and is scheduled to be heard in the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 17.
The bill amends s.509.032(7), F.S., to preempt the regulation of advertising platforms and the licensing of vacation rentals to the state. The bill amends s.509.013, F.S., to define the term “advertising platform”, transient and nontransient public lodging facilities, and amend other definitions. It amends s.212.03 and creates s. 509.243, F.S., both effective Jan. 1, 2024, to provide requirements, including tax collection and remittance requirements, for an advertising platform.
The bill amends ss.509.032(7), F.S., to allow any “grandfathered” local law, ordinance, or regulation adopted on or before June 1, 2011, to be amended to be less restrictive or to comply with local registration requirements.
Additionally, a local government with such a grandfathered regulation on June 1, 2011, may pass a new, less restrictive ordinance. (The bill maintains the exemption to the preemption for areas of critical state concern.)
The bill provides that a local government may adopt a local vacation rental registration program. The registration fee may not exceed $50 for an individual or $100 for a collective vacation rental registration. A local government may impose a fine for failure to register a vacation rental. A local government registration program may only require the owner or operator of a vacation rental to:
• Register no more than once per year; however, a new owner may be required to submit a new application for registration;
• Submit identifying information about the owner or the owner’s agents and the subject vacation rental property;
• Obtain a license as a transient public lodging establishment issued by the state within 60 days after local registration;
• Obtain all required tax registrations, receipts, or certificates issued by the Department of Revenue, a county, or a municipal government;
• Update required information on a continuing basis to ensure it is current;
• Comply with parking standards and solid waste handling and containment requirements, so long as such standards and requirements are not imposed solely on vacation rentals;
• Designate and maintain at all times a responsible party who is capable of responding to complaints and other immediate problems related to the vacation rental, including being available by telephone at a listed phone number; and
• Pay in full all recorded municipal or county code liens against the subject property. The local government may withdraw its acceptance of a registration on the basis of an unsatisfied recorded municipal or county code lien.
Additionally, the bill requires local governments to review a registration application for completeness within 15 days of receipt of an application and accept it or issue a written notice specifying with particularity the deficiencies. The vacation rental owner or operator may agree to an extension of this time period. If an application is denied, the local government must provide written notice to the applicant and specify with particularity the factual reasons for denial, including a citation to the applicable portions of an ordinance or other legal authority for the denial. The local government may not deny an applicant from reapplying if the applicant cures the identified deficiencies. Failure to accept or deny the registration within the specified timeframes will result in the application being deemed accepted.
A local government may terminate or refuse to issue or renew a vacation rental registration when:
• The operation of the subject premises violates a registration requirement or a local law, ordinance, or regulation that does not apply solely to vacation rentals; or
• The premises and its owner are the subject of a final order or judgement lawfully directing the termination of the premises’ use as a vacation rental.
The bill amends ss.509.241, F.S., to require that all applications to the Division of Hotels and Restaurants (division) within the Department of Business and Professional Regulation for a vacation rental license must include the local registration number or other proof of registration required by local law, ordinance, or regulation. The division may grant a temporary license to permit the operation of the vacation rental while the license application is pending. The bill also amends s.509.261, F.S., to authorize the division to revoke, refuse to issue or renew, or suspend state vacation rental licenses for certain specified violations.
The bill also amends ss.775.21, F.S., to require that sexual offenders and sexual predators register with the local sheriff’s office if they stay in a vacation rental for 24 hours or more.
The bill provides that the application of vacation rental provisions created by the bill do not supersede any current or future declaration or declaration of condominium, cooperative documents, or declaration of covenants or declaration
for a homeowners’ association. The bill takes effect upon becoming law. However, the provisions relating to the regulation of advertising platforms take effect Jan. 1, 2024.
CS/SB 714 (Sen. DiCeglie), a similar bill, is scheduled to be heard on April 18 in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, its second of three committees of reference.
Agricultural Lands: CS/CS/SB 1184 (Sen. Collins) was reported favorably, reflecting committee amendments, by the Senate Finance and Tax Committee on April 12 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee, its last committee of reference. The bill includes a variety of provisions related to use of agricultural lands. Specifically, it does the following:
• Amends s.125.01, F.S., to provides that a county may not levy any special assessments on lands classified as agricultural lands under s.193.461 (this amendment was added by the committee);
• Amends ss.163.3162(2), F.S., to define “agricultural employee”;
• Creates ss.163.3162(5), F.S., Agricultural Employee Housing which:
o provides that the construction or installation of housing for agricultural employees is an authorized use on land zoned for agricultural use and operated as a bona fide farm;
o states that housing authorized under this section:
may not exceed 7,500 square feet per parcel of land;
must meet all local and state building standards for securing a residential certificate of occupancy; and
does not require approval by ordinance or resolution of the jurisdiction in which the land is located.
o provides that if agricultural operations are discontinued on the property for at least 3 years and the land is no longer classified as agricultural, housing established under this section is no longer eligible for residential use without further approval under the local jurisdiction’s zoning and land use regulations;
• Amends s.193.461, F.S., to preempt a local government from adopting land use or zoning restrictions, conditions, or regulations requiring the termination of an agricultural classification for any property or the surrender of an agricultural classification for any property by the property owner, if the property is used for bona fide agricultural purposes. Such restrictions, conditions, or regulations adopted before July 1, 2023, are invalid and unenforceable;
• Amends s. 381.0065, F.S., to provide that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection may review applications, perform site inspections, and issue permits for the use of holding tanks, privies, portable toilet services, or any other toilet facility intended for use on a permanent or nonpermanent basis placed on lands classified as agricultural.
Note that Senate and Finance Committee also deleted previously proposed language in the bill that would have amended s.212.096, F.S., which would have provided a credit against sales tax paid on the rental or purchase of housing for legal migrant farmworkers.
CS/CS/HB 1343 (Rep. Tuck) is a similar bill but does not contain all the provisions included in CS/CS/SB 1184. This bill:
• Amends s.125.01, F.S., to provides that a county may not levy any special assessments on lands classified as agricultural lands under s.193.461 unless the revenue from such special assessments has been pledged for debt service and is necessary to meet obligations of bonds or certificates issued by the county;
• Contains similar provisions relating to migrant farmworker housing as those in CS/CS/SB 1184 relating to agricultural employee housing; and
• Amends s.193.461, F.S., to prohibit a county or municipality from requiring the removal or relinquishment of an agricultural classification for land that is subject to a contract for sale that requires a development permit as a condition precedent of sale if the landowner notifies the county or municipality that the reclassification is requested as a condition precedent for a pending sale of the land. The agricultural
classification for the land may not be removed or relinquished until the landowner notifies the county or municipality that the contract has closed and the property has been conveyed to the contract purchaser.
CS/CS/HB 1343 was reported favorably by the House Ways & Means Committee on April 12 and is scheduled to be heard in the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 17.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Economic Development: CS/CS/HB 1209 (Rep. Shoaf) makes a number of changes to economic development programs.
Related to the Regional Rural Development Grants Program, the bill:
• Removes the match requirements; and
• Removes the requirement for local governments and private businesses to make financial or in-kind commitments to the regional organization.
Related to the Rural Infrastructure Fund, the bill:
• Allows DEO to award grants for up to 75 percent of the total infrastructure project cost, an increase from 50 percent;
• Allows DEO to award grants for up to 100 percent of the total infrastructure project cost for a project located in a rural community or a rural area of opportunity, if the county is also fiscally constrained; and
• Removes the requirement related to infrastructure feasibility studies and other infrastructure planning activities that grants awarded be limited to 30 percent of the total project cost.
Related to the Florida Development Finance Corporation, the bill:
• Removes the repeal of the corporation in current law; and
• Provides that after July 1, 2023, the corporation may not establish any new residential Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) agreements.
Related to Triumph Gulf Coast, Inc., the bill:
• Specifies that awards for public infrastructure projects may include projects for workforce housing. The recipient of an award for workforce housing must be a local government in a disproportionately affected county; and
• Defines workforce housing as housing that is affordable to natural persons or families whose total annual household income does not exceed 80 percent of the median annual adjusted gross income for households. Related to the Everglades Restoration Agricultural Community Employment Training Program, the bill:
• Specifies definitions and changes the phrase “areas of high agricultural unemployment” to “Everglades Agricultural Area and rural areas of opportunity”; and
Specifies that DEO, in cooperation with CareerSource Florida, Inc., must prioritize grants under the Everglades Restoration Agricultural Community Employment Training Program that assist training programs located in Rural Areas of Opportunity.
CS/CS/HB 1209 was reported favorably by the House Ways & Means Committee on April 12 and is scheduled to be heard in the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 17.
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Flooding and Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Studies: CS/HB 111 (Rep. Hunschofsky) was reported favorably by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its last committee of reference, on April 10 and placed on the House Special Order Calendar for April 18.
The bill expands the Resilient Florida Grant Program, in ss.380.093(3), F.S., to include funding to:
• Municipalities and counties for feasibility studies and permitting costs for nature-based solutions that reduce the impact of flooding and sea level rise; and
• Water management districts to support local government adaptation planning, which may be conducted by the water management district or by a third party on behalf of the water management district. These grants must be used for the express purpose of supporting the Flood Hub for Applied Research and Innovation and
DEP through data creation and collection, modeling, and the implementation of statewide standards. Priority must be given to filling critical data gaps identified by the Flood Hub.
The bill creates s.380.0937, F.S, to deal with the public financing of construction projects within areas at risk due to sea level rise. Beginning July 1, 2024, a state-financed constructor may not commence construction of a potentiallyat-risk structure or infrastructure without:
• Conducting a SLIP Study that meets DEP requirements;
• Submitting the study to DEP; and
• Receiving notification from DEP that the study was received and published on the department’s website for at least 30 days.
The bill defines a number of terms, including:
• “Potentially at-risk structure or infrastructure” means any of the following when within an area at risk due to sea level rise:
o a critical asset as defined in 380.93(2)(a)1-3; and
o a historical or cultural asset;
• “Area at risk due to sea level rise” means any location that is projected to be below the threshold for tidal flooding within the next 50 years by adding sea level rise using the highest of the sea level rise projections required by s. 380.093(3)(d)3. b, F.S.; with the threshold for tidal flooding being 2 feet above mean high water;
• “State-financed constructor” means a public entity that commissions or manages a construction project using funds appropriated from the state; and
• “Public entity” means the state or any of its political subdivision, or any municipality, county, agency, special district, authority, or other public body corporation of the state which is demonstrated to perform a public function or to serve a governmental purpose that could properly be performed or served by an appropriate governmental unit.
The bill requires DEP to develop by rule the standard by which the SLIP studies must be conducted and may require that a professional engineer sign off on the study. The bill states that this rule would only apply to projects not yet commenced as of the date the rule is finalized, and may not apply retroactively. It also provides that a single SLIP study may be provided if multiple potentially at-risk structures or infrastructure are to be built concurrently within one project.
The bill requires, at a minimum, a SLIP study to:
• Use a systematic, interdisciplinary, and scientifically accepted approach in the natural sciences and construction design;
• Assess the flooding, inundation, and wave action damage risks relating to the potentially at-risk structure or infrastructure over its expected life or 50 years, whichever is less;
• Provide alternatives for the design and siting of the potentially at-risk structure or infrastructure and analyze how such alternatives would impact the risks, as well as the risk and cost associated with maintaining, repairing, and constructing the potentially at-risk structure or infrastructure; and
• Provide a list of flood mitigation strategies evaluated as part of the design of the structure or infrastructure, and to identify appropriate flood mitigation strategies for consideration as part of the structure or infrastructure design.
If a state-financed constructor commences construction of a potentially at-risk structure or infrastructure without complying with the SLIP study requirement, the FDEP can bring a civil action to:
• Seek injunctive relief to cease further construction or to enforce compliance with this requirement or rules adopted pursuant to this section; and
• Seek recovery of all or a portion of the state funds expended if the potentially at-risk structure or infrastructure has been completed or substantially completed.
The bill states that this section does not create a cause of action for damages or otherwise authorize the imposition of penalties by a public entity for failure to implement what is contained in the SLIP study. It also sunsets, as of July 1, 2024, the provisions of s.161.551, F.S., which requires SLIP studies for state financed structures within the coastal building zone, as these structures will be subject to the requirements of this bill.
SB 1170 (Sen. Calatayud), a similar bill, was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment and General Government, its second committee of reference, on April 12 and moves to the Senate Fiscal Committee, its final committee of reference.
Everglades Protection Area: CS/CS/SB 192 (Sen. Avila) was passed unanimously by the Senate on April 11 and is in Messages to the House.
The bill amends s.163.3184, F.S., to require any proposed plan or plan amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1), F.S., (i.e., Miami-Dade County) or any municipality located therein, applying to land within, or within two miles of, the Everglades Protection Area as defined in state law, to be reviewed pursuant to the state coordinated review process.
For these plans or plan amendments, the review process is also amended to:
• Provide that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) must review the plan or plan amendment, in consultation with all federally recognized Indian tribes in the state, to determine whether the proposed plan or plan amendment, or any portion thereof, will adversely impact the Everglades Protection Area or the Everglades restoration and protection objectives identified in s.373.4592, F.S.;
• Require DEP to issue a written determination to the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), the local government, and all federally recognized Indian tribes in the state within 30 days after receipt of the proposed plan or plan amendment. The determination must identify any adverse impacts and may be provided as part of DEP’s reviewing comments;
• Require that before adoption of the proposed plan or plan amendment, DEP must coordinate with DEO, the local government, and all federally recognized Indian tribes in the state to identify any planning strategies or measures that the local government could include in the proposed plan or plan amendment to eliminate or mitigate any adverse impacts to the Everglades Protection Area or the Everglades restoration and protection objectives identified in s.373.4592;
• Provide that if DEP determines that any portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment will adversely impact the Everglades Protection Area or the Everglades restoration and protection objectives identified in s.373.4592 the local government must modify that portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment to include planning strategies or measures to eliminate or mitigate such adverse impacts before adopting the proposed plan or plan amendment, or that portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment may not be adopted;
• Allow a local government, during the review process, to consider an application for a development permit or development order that is contingent upon adoption of the plan amendment;
• Requires that the comprehensive plan amendments must be transmitted within 10 working days after the second public hearing to DEP; and
• Provides that DEO’s compliance determination limitations are expanded to include not only to the objections raised in the objections, recommendations, and comments report (consistent with existing law), but also a review of the planning strategies or measures adopted pursuant to these new provisions.
The bill also amends s.163.3187, F.S., to:
• Clarify that site-specific text changes relating directly to, and adopted simultaneously with, a small-scale future land use map amendment are permissible under that section;
• Provide that a small-scale development amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1), F.S., or any municipality located therein may not be adopted for a property that is located in whole or in part within, or within two miles of, the Everglades Protection Area; and
• Provide that within 10 days after the adoption of any small-scale development amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1) (i.e., Miami-Dade County) or any municipality located therein, a county whose boundaries include any portion of the Everglades Protection Area as defined under state law, and the municipalities within the county, must transmit a copy of the amendment to DEO for recordkeeping purposes.
HB 175 (Rep. Busatta Cabrera), a similar bill, is in the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.
State Land Acquisition: HB 7047 (Rep. Buchanan) was reported favorably by the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee on April 12 and is scheduled to be heard in the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final of two committees of reference, on April 17.
The bill makes various changes to the Florida Forever Program and the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program (RFLPP). Specifically, with respect to the Florida Forever Program, the bill:
• Dedicates $100 million annually to the program from the Land Acquisition Trust Fund;
• Increases the contract price for a land acquisition agreement that requires approval by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund (Board) from $1 million to $5 million;
• Revises appraisal requirements to increase the appraisal amount that requires a second appraisal to be conducted from $1 million to $5 million;
• Requires the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to disclose appraisals to private landowners or their representatives during negotiations for acquisition;
• Clarifies that the Board or, when applicable, DEP may acquire parcels of land for the full value of that parcel as determined by the highest approved appraisal; and
• Requires the Acquisition and Restoration Council (ARC) to give increased priority to projects within the Florida Wildlife Corridor and projects in imminent danger of development, loss of significant natural attributes or recreational open space, or subdivision.
In addition, for RFLPP, the bill requires the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to:
• Update the RFLPP priority list and submit it to ARC by Dec. 1, 2023;
• Give priority to lands in imminent danger of development or degradation as well as lands within the Florida Wildlife Corridor; and
• Disclose appraisal reports to private landowners or their representatives during negotiations for acquisition.
Lastly, the bill requires land managers to review state-owned lands at least every five years, rather than ten years, to determine whether the lands should be retained in public ownership or disposed of by the board.
Environmental Protection: CS/HB 1379 (Rep. Overdorf and Rep. Steele) was reported favorably by the Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee on April 12 and is scheduled to be heard in the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 17.
This bill is related to environmental protection. The major topics in this bill include wastewater treatment, onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems (OSTDSs), sanitary sewer services, basin management action plans (BMAPs), the wastewater grant program, the Indian River Lagoon (IRL), and the acquisition of state lands. (Read the legislative staff report for an overview of the whole bill.) However, it does have provisions that impact local government comprehensive plans as follows:
• Amends ss.163.3177(3)(a), F.S., to include that, where applicable, the capital improvement schedule must include a list of projects necessary to achieve the pollutant load reduction attributable to the local government, as established in a basin management action plan pursuant to s.403.067(7);
• Amends ss.163.3177(6)(c), F.S., to require that the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and natural groundwater aquifer recharge element address upgrades in treatment of facilities to meet future needs, and prioritize advanced waste treatment for increased capacity;
• Creates ss.163.3177(6)(c)(3) to require that in the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and natural groundwater aquifer recharge element, for any development of more than 50 residential lots, built or unbuilt, with more than 1 onsite sewage treatment and disposal system per 1 acre, the element must:
o consider the feasibility of providing sanitary sewer services within a 10- year planning horizon;
o an onsite sewage treatment and disposal system is presumed to exist on a parcel if sanitary sewer services are not available at or adjacent to the parcel boundary;
o must identify the name and location of the intended wastewater facility to receive sanitary sewer flows after connection; the capacity of the facility and any associated transmission facilities; the projected wastewater flow at that facility for the next 20 years, inclusive of expected future new construction and connections of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems to sanitary sewer; and a timeline for the construction of the sanitary sewer system; and
o be updated in the comprehensive plan to include this information by July 1, 2024. This does not apply to a local government designated as a rural area of opportunity.
CS/SB 1632 (Sen. Brodeur), a similar bill, is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, its second of three committees of reference, on April 18.
HOUSING
Disposal of Department of Transportation Property: SB 678 (Sen. Powell) was passed unanimously by the Senate on April 11 and is in Messages to the House. The bill amends ss.337.25(4)b, F.S., to provide that the Florida Department of Transportation may convey property to other governmental entities without consideration if such property is used for a public purpose, including, but not limited to, affordable housing as provided in ss.125.379 and 166.0451, F.S.
An identical bill, HB 763 (Rep. Edmonds), was reported favorably by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its last committee of reference, on April 10 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.
TRANSPORTATION
Regional Transportation Planning: CS/HB 1397 (Rep. McClure) provides legislative intent to explore the dissolution or transfer of the governance, staff, operations, funding, and facilities of the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) with the goal of enhancing regional transit service and connectivity in the Tampa Bay Area. The legislature finds that the coordination of transportation planning, especially regional, is critical to the safe and efficient management, operation, and development of public transit systems considering Florida’s rapid population growth.
The bill requires FDOT, or its consultant, to conduct a study on the potential dissolution of HART. The study must address all of the following:
• The dissolution of the governance structure, including governing board membership, powers, and responsibilities;
• The drawdown or transfer of staff;
• The transfer of financial assets and obligations;
• The transfer of responsibilities and administered programs;
• The transfer of facilities and operations;
• Impacts to federal or state grants or funds;
• Any legal or financial impediments to or limitations on such dissolution;
• The advantages and disadvantages of dissolution or transfer; and
• Any other matters deemed necessary or appropriate by the department.
The bill requires FDOT to submit a report detailing the results of the study to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives by Jan. 1, 2024.
CS/HB 1397 was reported favorably by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 10 and placed on the House Special Order Calendar for April 20. A identical bill, CS/SB 1532 (Sen. Burgess) was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development on April 12 and moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final committee of reference.
Alternative Mobility Funding Systems: CS/CS/HB 235 (Rep. W. Robinson Jr.), reflecting committee amendments, was reported favorably by the House Ways & Means Committee on April 12 and now moves to the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference. The House Ways & Means reduced the scope of the bill by:
• Deleting changes previously proposed to s. 163.31801(6)(g), F.S., which would have revised the ability of local governments to increase impact fees based upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances; and
• Deleting previously proposed s.163.31803, F.S., which created a method for the adoption and implementation of mobility plans as an alternative to transportation concurrency.
As identified below, the committee also added some new provisions regarding who can charge for transportation impacts. The bill revises provisions concerning impact fees and concurrency and provides additional guidance concerning mobility fees. Specifically, it now does the following:
• Creates subsections 32 and 33 of s.163.3164, F.S., to include the following definitions:
o “Mobility fee” means a local government fee schedule established by ordinance and based on the projects included in the local government's adopted mobility plan; and
o “Mobility plan” means an integrated land use and alternative mobility transportation plan adopted into a local government comprehensive plan that promotes a compact, mixed use, and interconnected development served by a multimodal transportation system in an area that is urban in character as defined in s. 171.031.
• Amends s. 163.3180(5), F.S., to:
o require that a proportionate share agreement must provide that after an applicant makes its contribution or constructs its proportionate share, the project shall be considered to have mitigated its transportation impacts and be allowed to proceed;
o provide that a single applicant may not be prevented from proceeding after the applicant has satisfied its proportionate-share contribution;
o provide that only the local government issuing the building permit may charge for transportation impacts within its jurisdiction and must collect and account for any extra-jurisdictional impacts, pursuant to s.163.3177(6)(h), regardless of whether it implements a transportation concurrency system or an alternative system. Another local government may not charge new development or redevelopment for the same transportation impacts. (This language was added by the committee);
• Amends ss.163.31801, F.S., related to impact fees, to
o require that the calculation of an impact fee be based on the most recent and localized data available within the previous 12 months before adoption of the impact fee;
o provide that if a local government adopts an alternative funding system, the holder of any transportation or road impact fee credits granted under 163.3180, s. 380.06, or otherwise which were in existence before the adoption of the alternative funding system is entitled to the full benefit of the intensity and density prepaid by the credit balance as of the date the alternative funding system was first established. (This language was added by the committee).
SB 350 (Sen. Brodeur), a similar bill to HB 235 as it was originally filed, is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its first of four committees of reference.
Trees and Vegetation Within Rights-of-way of Certain Roads and Rail Corridors: CS/SB 108 (Sen. Rodriguez) was passed unanimously by the Senate on April 11 and is in Messages to the House. The bill amends s.337.405, F.S., revising the exceptions under which the removal, cutting, marring, defacing, or destruction of any trees or other
vegetation with the rights-of-way of roads on the state highway system or within publicly owned rail corridors. The prohibition applies unless:
• FDOT suspends the prohibition pursuant to a declaration of a state of emergency;
• FDOT grants written permission before the removal or cutting of such trees or other vegetation; or
• Normal tree trimming is required to ensure the safe operation of utility facilities and such tree trimming is performed in accordance with the provisions of the FDOT’s utility accommodations guide.
The bill also requires the FDOT to adopt informational guidelines related to the removal process for debris from an emergency that is subject to an emergency declaration, including, but not limited to, a hurricane or a tropical storm.
A similar bill, HB 55 (Rep. A .Garcia) is in the House Transportation & Modals Subcommittee, its first committee of reference.
Department of Transportation: CS/CS/HB 1305 (Rep. Abbott) relates to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The bill does the following:
• Authorizes the Florida Development Finance Corporation to finance certain FDOT-related public-private partnership projects;
• Authorizes installation of automated license plate recognition systems within the rights-of-way of the State Highway System, at FDOT’s discretion, when installed at the request of a law enforcement agency for the purpose of collecting active criminal intelligence or investigative information;
• Provides that FDOT may not, when granting airport site approval, require a written memorandum of understanding or letter of agreement with other airport sites regarding air traffic pattern separation procedures unless it is required by the Federal Aviation Administration or is deemed necessary by FDOT;
• Authorizes DOT to acquire promotional items and materials to promote electric vehicle use and charging stations and autonomous vehicles;
• Authorizes FDOT, at its discretion, to expend funds for training, testing, and licensing for full-time FDOT employees who are required to have a valid Class A or Class B commercial driver license as a condition of employment with FDOT;
• Increases FDOT’s contracting cap where it is not required to receive competitive bids in certain circumstances from $250,000 to $500,000;
• Requires a public transit provider’s transportation development plan to be consistent, to the maximum extent feasible, with the long-range transportation plan of the local metropolitan planning organization;
• Removes the requirement that each public transit provider’s productivity and performance report specifically address potential enhancements to productivity and performance that would have the effect of increasing the farebox recovery ratio;
• Requires public transit providers to publish productivity and performance information on its website, instead of in the local newspaper;
• Transfers the Santa Rosa Bay Bridge Authority’s bridge system to FDOT and authorize FDOT to transfer it to the Florida Turnpike Enterprise; and
• Repeals the Santa Rosa Bay Bridge Authority in statute.
The House Infrastructure & Tourism Appropriations Subcommittee amended the bill to remove previously proposed language that would extend for one year a provision allowing the chair and vice chair of the Legislative Budget Commission to approve FDOT work program amendments if specified conditions were met. The bill was reported favorably by this subcommittee on April 11 and is scheduled to be heard in the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final of three committees of reference, on April 17.
CS/CS/SB 1250 (Sen. DiCeglie), was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development, reflecting committee amendments, on April 12 and moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy, its final committee of reference. This bill contains the Florida Department of Transportation’s 2023 legislative proposals and would:
• Provide that the prohibition against use of bond proceeds for acquisition of any building or facility that will be, during the pendency of financing, used by, occupied by, leased to, or paid for by any state, county or municipal agency or entity does not prohibit the use of proceeds from Florida Development Finance Corporation private activity bonds to finance acquisition or construction of a transportation facility under a public-private partnership;
• Authorize the Florida Development Finance Corporation to issue revenue bonds to finance the costs of acquisition or construction of a transportation facility by a private entity or a consortium of private entities under a specified public-private partnership;
• Authorize the FDOT to fund up to 100 percent of project costs for eligible intermodal logistics center projects in rural areas of opportunity;
• Authorize installation, as specified, of automated license plate recognition systems within the rights-of-way of the State Highway System at the discretion of the FDOT when installed at the request of a law enforcement agency for the purpose of collecting active criminal intelligence or investigative information;
• Prohibit the FDOT from requiring an applicant for airport site approval to provide a copy of a written memorandum of understanding or letter of agreement with other airport sites regarding air traffic pattern separation procedures unless such memorandum or letter is required by the Federal Aviation Administration or is deemed necessary by FDOT;
• Authorize the FDOT, subject to availability of appropriated funds, and unless otherwise provided in the General Appropriations Act or the Implementing bill, to fund 100 percent of eligible project costs of specified projects at a publicly owned, publicly operated airport located in a rural community which does not have any scheduled commercial service;
• Authorize the FDOT to purchase promotional items for the promotion of electric vehicle use and charging stations, autonomous vehicles, and context design for electric vehicles and autonomous vehicles;
• Authorize the FDOT to expend funds, within its discretion, for training, testing, and licensing for full-time employees of the FDOT who are required to have a valid Class A or Class B commercial driver license as a condition of employment with the FDOT;
• Increase from $250K to $500K the cap on entering into contracts for construction and maintenance without advertising and receiving competitive bids for reasons of public concern, economy, improved operations, or safety, and only when circumstances dictate rapid completion of the work;
• Remove the expiration date of a provision allowing the chair and vice chair of the Legislative Budget Commission to authorize an FDOT work program amendment if the Commission does not meet or consider the amendment within 30 days after its submittal;
• Abolish the Chairs Coordinating Committee and requires the metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) serving Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas counties to submit a feasibility report by Dec. 31, 2023, exploring the benefits, costs, and process of consolidation into a single MPO serving the contiguous urbanized area, with specified goals. (This language was added by the committee);
• Require that public transit development plans of eligible providers of public transit block grants be consistent, to the maximum extent feasible, with the long-range transportation plans of the metropolitan planning organization in which the provider is located;
• Remove from annual public transit provider reports a requirement to specifically address potential enhancements to productivity and performance that would have the effect of increasing farebox recovery ratio; and requires each public transit provider to publish on its website, rather than in the local newspaper, the productivity and performance measures established for the year and a report on attainment of such measures; and
• Repeal part IV of Chapter 348, F.S., relating to the creation and operation of the Santa Rosa Bay Bridge Authority; transfers governance and control of the Authority and its bridge system and any remaining assets and rights to the FDOT; authorizes the FDOT to assume legal liability for contractual obligations determined to be necessary and authorizes transfer of the bridge system to the Turnpike.