Legislative Reporter | Feb. 26

Feb. 26, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

There are two weeks left in session. Bills that have not been heard in committee are likely not to pass. Governor DeSantis has begun to receive bills for his action. Pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of the Florida Constitution, “Every bill passed by the legislature shall be presented to the governor for approval and shall become 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 shall have fifteen consecutive days from the date of presentation to act on the bill.”

To follow the governor’s actions, go to flgov.com and click on the “2024 Bill Actions” icon on the right side of the home page.

The latest Bill Tracking Report as of the morning of Feb. 24 can be viewed here. Please review it to see the bills filed that APA Florida is tracking. Note that if you click on the bill number, you will be 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

The following bills of particular interest had action this past week.

Please note: These summaries are based on a review of the bill language and legislative staff analysis. You are encouraged to read the actual bill language of bills that interest you. For brevity, bills impacting the Florida Statutes will look like s.XXX.XXX(x). We will note the chapter when required.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT

Attorney Fees and Costs in Property Rights Disputes: CS/HB 1167 (Rep. Yarkosky) was reported favorably by the House Judiciary Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill creates s.57.106 to provide that, in a civil action brought against the owner of a parcel of real property to resolve a property rights dispute, the court may award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the prevailing defendant if the improvements made to the property by the defendant property owner were made in substantial compliance

with, or in reliance on, environmental or regulatory approvals or permits issued by a political subdivision of the state or a state agency. Under the bill:

• “improvement” means an act done to increase the value or benefit of real property; and

• “property rights” means zoning, future land use designations, easement rights, ingress and egress rights, environmental resource and impact permits, and those rights incident to land bordering on navigable waters. However, the bill provides that attorney fees and costs may not be so awarded where the environmental or regulatory approval or permit was issued due to a material mistake of fact or law or was not issued in compliance with law.

A similar bill, SB 702 (Sen. Martin), was passed by the Senate on Feb. 1 and is in Messages to the House.

Land Development: CS/CS/CS/HB 1177 (Rep. Duggan) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill does the following:

• amend s.125.01 to provide that county commissions have the power to hear appeals of final orders and decisions of municipal historic preservations boards;

• creates s.163.046 to provide that a local government may not require a notice, application, approval, permit, fee, or mitigation for the pruning, trimming, or removal of a tree on property being used for the construction or development of a veterans healthcare facility, as approved by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Additionally, a local government may not require a property owner to replant a tree that was pruned, trimmed, or removed in accordance with this section;

• amends s.163.3180 to provide that local governments have exclusive powers to evaluate transportation impacts, apply concurrency, or assess any fee related to transportation improvements. (Previously the bill amended s.163.3167 to provide this);

• amends s.163.3180(5)(h)1 to:

o provide that a local government that continues to implement a transportation concurrency system must comply with existing statutory requirements notwithstanding any provision in a development order, an agreement, a local comprehensive plan, or a local land development regulation;

o require local governments that implement a transportation concurrency system to credit the fair market value of any land dedicated to a governmental entity for transportation facilities against the total proportionate share payments computed pursuant to general law; and

o provide that proportionate-share fees of an applicant for a land use development permit may be based on a cumulative analysis of trips from a previous stage or phase that were not previously analyzed (committee addition)

• amends s.163.31801 to:

o clarify that a special district may only levy impact fees if authorized to do so by special act; and

o require local governments to provide credit against the collection of the impact fee for any contributions related to public facilities or infrastructure, notwithstanding the provisions of any agreement.

• creates s.166.04152 to provide that:

o any final order or decision made by an historic preservation board established pursuant to municipal charter or ordinance may be appealed to the board of county commissioners of the county in which the municipality is located;

o the board of county commissioners shall hold a public hearing on the appeal within 30 days of receipt of the appeal;

o the board of county commissioners, after the public hearing, may approve or reject the final order or decision and the determination of the board of county commissioners is final; and

o this section is supplemental to all other remedies available under law.

• amends s.380.06(5) to revise the exception for when credits against local impact fees must be maintained when an amendment is made to a development order for an approved DRI to apply to:

o internal, private facilities required by local regulations; or

o offsite facilities necessary to provide safe and adequate services solely to the development and not the general public

• amends s.380.06(7) to:

o remove the requirement that a local government review a proposed change to a DRI based on the local comprehensive plan at the time the development was originally approved;

o provide that a change to DRI that has the effect of reducing the originally approved height, density, or intensity of the development or that changes only the location, types, or acreage of uses and infrastructure or exchanges permitted uses must be administratively approved and is not subject to review by the local government;

o provide that any local government review of any proposed change to a DRI and of any development order required to construct the development in the DRI must abide by any prior agreements or other actions vesting the laws and policies governing the development;

o remove the requirement that any new condition in an amendment to a development order approving or denying an application for a proposed change to a DRI must be consistent with the local government’s comprehensive plan and land development regulations;

o require any proposed change to a DRI that includes a dedicated multimodal pathway suitable for bicycles, pedestrians, and low-speed vehicles along any internal roadway must be approved if the rightof-way remains sufficient for the ultimate number of lanes of the internal roadway;

o require the approval of any proposed DRI change substituting a multimodal pathway suitable for bicycles, pedestrians, and low-speed vehicles in lieu of an internal road if the change does not result in any road within or adjacent to the DRI falling below the local government’s adopted level of service and does not increase the original distribution of trips on any road analyzed as part of the DRI by more than 20 percent; and

o require local governments to return any interest it may have in the right-of-way to the developer if the developer has already dedicated the right-of-way to the local government for proposed internal road ways as part of the approval process for the proposed change.

• amends s.380.06(8) to:

o provide that comprehensive plans and land development regulations adopted after a DRI has vested do not apply to proposed changes to an approved DRI or to development approvals required to implement the DRI; and

o provide that the conveyance of property or compensation, or the agreement to convey property or compensation, to the state or local government is an act of reliance to vest rights, removing the requirement that the conveyance be part of a zoning change.

A similar bill, SB 1110 (Sen. DiCeglie), has been referred to three committees but has yet to be heard.

Local Government Actions: CS/HB 1547 (Rep. McClure) was reported favorably by the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and is on the House Calendar on Second Reading. Note that the previous references to the House Appropriations Committee and the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee were removed on Feb. 8 and the reference to the House State Committee was added.

The bill revises exemptions to the requirement that counties and municipality must produce or have produced a business impact estimate prior to passing an ordinance. Whereas current law exempts the entirety of growth policy, county and municipal planning, and land development regulations under Part II of Chapter 163 the bill limits this exemption to development orders, permits, and agreements.

It also revises exemptions to provisions that require suspension of a county or municipality ordinance pending a legal challenge on the grounds the ordinance is expressly preempted, arbitrary, or unreasonable. Whereas current law exempts the entirety of growth policy, county and municipal planning, and land development regulations under Part II of Chapter 163 the bill limits this exemption to development orders, permits, and agreements.

CS/CS/SB 1628 (Sen. Collins) was previously identical to CS/HB 1547. However, this bill was amended by the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee on Feb. 22 to expand the exemptions to also include comprehensive plan amendments and land development regulation amendments initiated by an application by a private party other than the county or municipality. The Senate Fiscal Policy Committee was the last committee of reference for this bill.

Public Works Projects: CS/SB 742 (Sen. Grall) was reported favorably by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill amends s.255.0992 to revise the definition of “public works project” to include all projects paid for with local or state funds, rather than just projects that include state funding. This change prevents the state or political subdivision from imposing the prohibited governmental actions for public works projects paid for with any amount of local funds.

The bill does, however, maintain the ability for municipalities and counties to preclude certain contractors from bidding on a public works project based on the geographic location of the contractor’s headquarters or offices, for such public works projects paid solely with local funds.

Additionally, it specifies that the term “public works project” does not include the provision of goods, services, or work incidental to the public works project, such as the provision of security services, janitorial services, landscaping services, maintenance services, transportation services, or other services that do not require a construction contracting license or do not involve supplying or carrying construction materials for a public works project.

CS/HB 705 (Rep. Shoaf), which also amends s.255.0992 to revise the definition of “public works project” to include all projects paid for with local funds in addition to state funds, is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Residential Building Permits: CS/CS/SB 684 (Sen. DiCeglie) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee on Feb. 22 and is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb.26.

Thebillcreatess.177.073relatedtothe expeditedapprovalofresidentialbuildingpermitsbeforeafinalplatisrecorded.

It provides definitions for the following terms: final plat, local building official, plans, and preliminary plat.

By Aug. 15, 2024, the bill requires a governing body of a county or municipality with 30,000 residents or more to create a program to expedite the process for issuing building permits for residential subdivisions before a final plat is recorded with the clerk of the circuit court.

If a governing body had a program in place before July 1, 2024, to expedite the building permit process, the bill requires such governing body to only update their program to approve an applicant’s written application to issue up to 50 percent of the building permits for the residential subdivision.

A governing body is required to create:

• a two-step application process for the adoption of a preliminary plat and for a final plat in order to expedite the issuance of building permits related to such plats; and

• a master building permit process consistent with existing master building permit application requirements for applicants seeking multiple building permits for planned residential subdivisions.

The bill allows an applicant to use a private provider to review a preliminary plat and to obtain a building permit for each residential building or structure.

It also allows a governing body to work with appropriate local government agencies to issue an address and a temporary parcel identification number for lot lines and lot sizes based on the metes and bounds of the plat contained in an application.

Additionally, it requires the governing body to issue the number or percentage of building permits requested by an applicant, provided the residential buildings or structures are unoccupied and all of the following conditions are met:

• the governing body has approved a preliminary plat for each residential subdivision or structure;

• the applicant provides proof to the governing body that the applicant has provided a copy of the approved preliminary plat, along with the approved plans, to the relevant electric, water, and wastewater utilities; and

• the applicant holds avalid performance bondforup to120 percent ofthe necessary utilities,roads, and stormwater improvements that have not beencompleted uponsubmissionof the application under this section.

Applicants are permitted to contract to sell, but not transfer ownership of, a residential structure or building located in the residential subdivision until the final plat is approved by the governing body and recorded in the public records by the clerk of the circuit court.

However, applicants are prohibited from obtaining a final certificate of occupancy for each residential structure or building for which a building permit is issued until the final plat is approved by the governing body and recorded in the public records by the clerk of the circuit court.

The bill also requires an applicant to indemnify and hold harmless the governing body and its agents and employees from damages accruing and directly related to the issuance of a building permit for a residential building or structure located in the residential subdivision before the approval and recording of the final plat by the governing body.

An applicant has a vested right in a preliminary plat that has been approved by a governing entity, if all of the following conditions are met:

• the applicant relies in good faith on the approved preliminary plat;

• the applicant substantially changes his or her position, including making improvements pursuant to s.117.031(9) or incurs other obligations and expenses; and

• anychangeby thegoverningbodywouldconstituteaninequitableinterferencein theapprovedpreliminaryplat.

The building official of a governing body that creates an expedited program pursuant to this bill must send to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation a letter indicating the program has been established and must include a brief explanation of the program.

The bill amends s.553.73 to require the Florida Building Commission to modify Section 505 of the 8th Edition Building Code to state that sealed drawings by a design professional may not be required for the replacement of windows, doors, or garage doors.

Furthermore, the bill amends s.553.791 to require a local government to issue a permit or provide written notice of plan deficiencies within 12 business days after receipt of a permit application that is accompanied by the required affidavit in s.553.791(6) sealed by a private provider who is a licensed engineer or architect:

• the local building official must provide with specificity the plan’s deficiencies, the reasons the permit application failed, and the applicable codes being violated in such written notice;

• if the local building official does not provide specific written notice to the permit applicant within the 12-day period, the permit application is deemed approved as a matter of law, and the permit must be issued by the local building official on the next business day;

• defines the term “private provider firm” for purposes of allowing local governments to establish a registration system to verify private provider licensure requirements;

• prohibits the local building code enforcement agency from auditing the performance of building code inspection services by private providers operating within the local jurisdiction until the agency has created a manual for standard operating audit procedures for the agency’s internal inspection and review staff which includes, at a minimum, the audit purpose and scope, audit criteria, an explanation of audit processes and objectives, and detailed findings of areas of noncompliance:

o the manual must be publicly available online or the printed manual must be readily accessible in building department offices;

o the audit results of the staff for the prior two quarters must be publicly available;

o the agency’s private provider audit processes must adhere to the agency’s posted standard operating audit procedures; and

o the same private provider may not be audited more than four times in a year (previously stated four times in a month) unless the local building official determines a condition of a building constitutes an immediate threat to public safety and welfare, which must be communicated in writing to the private provider or private provider firm.

(provisions committee addition)

The bill also amends s.553.792 to modify the timeframes for which local governments must process building permit applications:

• requires a local government to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a building permit application after receipt of a completed and sufficient application within the following timeframes, unless the applicant waives such timeframes in writing within:

o 30 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits for structures less than 7,500 square feet: residential units including a single-family residential unit or a single-family residential dwelling, accessory structure, alarm, electrical, irrigation, landscaping, mechanical, plumbing, or roofing;

o 60 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits for structures of 7,500 square feet or greater: residential units including a single-family residential unit or a single-family residential dwelling, accessory structure, alarm, electrical, irrigation, landscaping, mechanical, plumbing, or roofing;

o 60 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits: signs or nonresidential buildings less than 25,000 square feet;

o 120 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits: multifamily residential not exceeding 50 units; site-plan approvals and subdivision plats not requiring public hearing or public notice; and lot grading and site alteration;

o 15 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a master building permit consistent with s.553.794 to obtain a site-specific building permit; and

o 10 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant for a single-family residential dwelling applied for by a contractor licensed in this state on behalf of a property owner who participates in a Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery program administered by the Department of Commerce, unless the permit application fails to satisfy the Florida Building Code or the enforcing agency’s laws or ordinances.

The local government may not require a waiver of these timeframes as a condition precedent to reviewing a building permit application. (committee addition.) Additionally, these timeframes do not apply if the timeframes set by a local ordinance are more stringent than the timeframes provided in the bill;

• requires a local government to provide written notice to a building permit applicant within five business days after receipt of the application advising the applicant what information, if any, is needed to deem or determine that the application is properly complete:

o if the local government does not provide timely written notice that the applicant has not submitted the properly completed application, the application is automatically deemed or determined to be property completed and accepted.

• provides that if a local government fails to meet a deadline provided in the bill, it must reduce the building permit fee by 10 percent, based on the original amount of the permit fee, for each business day that it fails to meet the deadline, unless:

o the parties agree in writing to a reasonable extension of time;

o the delay is caused by the applicant (committee addition);

o the delay is attributable to a force majeure or other extraordinary circumstance (committee addition)

• provides that a local government need not reduce building permit fees if the local government provides written notice to the applicant within the applicable timeframes specifically stating the reasons the permit

application is deficient. The notice must state that the applicant has 10 business days to submit revisions and that failure to do so will result in denial of the application:

o if the applicant submits revisions within 10 business days after receiving the written notice, the local government has 10 business days after receiving such revisions to approve or deny the permit unless the applicant agrees to a longer period in writing; and

o if the local government fails to issue or deny the permit within 10 business days after receiving revisions, it must reduce the building permit fee by 20 percent for each business day it fails to meet the deadline unless the applicant agrees to a longer period in writing. However, the local government need not reduce the permit fee if it provides written.

The bill amends s.553.80 to specify that local governments may use fees, and any related fines or investment earnings, they have collected for enforcing the Florida Building Code to upgrade hardware and software technology used to enforce the Florida Building Code.

CS/CS/HB 665 (Rep. McClain), which also addresses the expedited approval of residential building permits, is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Vacation Rentals: CS/CS/HB 1537 (Rep. Griffitts, Jr.) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22.

The bill does the following:

• adds to the scope of the state preemption of public lodging establishments and public food service establishments, by also preempting “licensing”;

• revises the scope of the express state preemption on vacation rentals to allow local jurisdictions to adopt local regulations:

o as long as the regulation is less restrictive; or

o to comply with local registration requirements.

• preempts the regulation of advertising platforms to the state;

• maintains the exemption to the preemption that allows only local ordinances adopted on or before June 1, 2011, to remain in effect but allows a local government to pass such regulations after June 1, 2011, if they are less restrictive than what was in effect on June 1, 2011;

• authorizes local laws, ordinances, or regulations to require the registration of vacation rentals with a local vacation rental registration program:

o authorizes local governments to implement such a program and impose a fine for failure to register under the program; and

o requires such programs to be administered by the tax collector.

• specifies that it does not prohibit a local government from establishing a local law, ordinance, or regulation if it is uniformly applied without regard to whether the residential property is used as a vacation rental;

• allowsalocalgovernmenttocharge afeeofnomorethan$150perunitforprocessingaregistrationapplication;

• allows a local law, ordinance, or regulation to:

o require annual renewal of a registration;

o charge a renewal fee of no more than $50 per unit for processing of a registration renewal;

o require, if there is a change in ownership, that the new ownersubmit a newapplication forregistration;and

o provides that subsequent to the registration of a vacation rental, a local government is authorized to charge a fee, not to exceed $150, for a person authorized by s.633.118 to inspect the vacation rental and enforce the laws and rules of the State Fire Marshall for issues pertaining to the uniform fire safety standards.

• provides that as a condition of registration or renewal of a vacation rental, a local law, ordinance, or regulation establishing a local vacation rental registration program may require the operator of a vacation rental to do only the following:

o submit identifying information about the owner and the owner’s operator, if applicable, and the subject vacation rental premises;

o provide proof of a license with the unique issued by the Division to operate as a vacation rental;

o obtain all required tax registrations, receipts, or certificates issued by the Department of Revenue (DOR), a county, or a municipality;

o update required information on a continuing basis to ensure it is current;

o designate and maintain at all times a responsible partywho is capable of responding to complaintsor emergencies related to the vacation rental, including being available by telephone at aprovidedcontact telephone number 24 hours aday, 7daysa week,and receiving legal notice of violations onbehalf ofthe operator;

o the responsible party has until 9 a.m. the next calendar day to respond to a complaint or emergency by telephone or otherwise;

o state the maximum occupancy of the vacation rental based on the number of sleeping accommodations for persons staying overnight in the vacation rental; and

o pay in full all recorded municipal or county code liens against the subject vacation rental premises.

• requires that within 15 business days after receiving an application for registration of a vacation rental, a local government must review the application for completeness and accept the registration of the vacation rental or issue a written notice of denial

o a vacation rental owner or operator and the local government may agree to a reasonable request to extend the timeframes, particularly in the event of a force majeure or other extraordinary circumstance;

o if the local government fails to accept the registration within the timeframes provided, the application is deemed accepted;

o if a local government denies a registration of a vacation rental, the local government must give written notice to the applicant. Such notice:

▪ may be provided by United States mail or electronically; and

▪ must specifywithparticularity the factual reasonsfor the denial and include a citation to the applicable portionsof the ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority forthe denial of the registration.

o local government may not prohibit an applicant from reapplying if the applicant cures the identified deficiencies.

• requires,uponanacceptedvacationrentalregistration,alocalgovernmenttoimmediately assignaunique registrationnumberto thevacationrentalunitandprovidetheregistrationnumberorother indiciaofregistration tothevacationrentaloperatorinwritingorelectronically.Thebillrequires avacationrentaloperatortoprovide thevacationrentalregistrationnumbertotheDivisionof HotelsandRestaurants(Division);

• outlines the process for a local government to fine a vacation rental operator up to $300 if he or she:

o fails to continue to meet the registration requirements; or

o is operating a vacation rental without registering with the local government as a vacation rental.

• provides that if a vacation rental owner is found by the code enforcement board or special magistrate to have materially violated a local law, ordinance, or regulation that does not solely apply to vacation rentals and the violation is directly related to the owner’s vacation rental premises:

o the local government must issue a written notice of such violation;

o the code enforcement board or special magistrate must make a recommendation to the local government as to whether an owner’s vacation rental registration should be suspended;

o the code enforcement board or special magistrate must recommend the suspension of the owner’s vacation rental registration if the owner is found to have one or more material violations, as follows:

▪ on 5 separate days during a 60-day period;

▪ on 5 separate days during a 30-day period; or

▪ after two prior suspensions of an owner’s vacation rental registration during a six-month period.

o if the code enforcement board or special magistrate recommends suspension of an owner’s vacation rental registration, the local government is authorized to suspend such registration for a period of:

▪ up to 15 days for one or more material violations on 5 separate days during a 60-day period;

▪ up to 30 days for one or more material violations on 5 separate days during a 30-day period; or

▪ up to 60 days for one or more material violations after two prior suspensions of an owner’s vacation rental registration during a six-month period.

• provides that a local government may not suspend an owner’s vacation rental registration for violations of a local law, ordinance, or regulation which are not directly related to the vacation rental premises;

• provides that a local government to provide notice of the suspension of avacation rental registration to the operator and theDivisionwithin five days after thesuspension. Thenotice must includethe start dateof the suspension, whichmust beat least 21days afterthe suspension notice is sent to the operator and theDivision;

• allows a local government to revoke or refuse to renew a vacation rental registration of a specific vacation rental, if:

o thecode enforcementboardorspecial magistratehasfoundthatthevacationrentalownerhashabitually committedmaterialviolationsunderthesuspensionviolationprovisionsandhas imposedthestrictestpenalty;

o there is an unsatisfied recorded municipal lien or county lien on the real property of the vacation rental, provided local governments give a vacation rental owner at least 60 days to satisfy a recorded municipal or county code lien before terminating a local registration because of the unsatisfied lien;

▪ the registration must immediately and automatically be reinstated or renewed upon satisfaction of such lien.

o the premises and its owner are the subject of a final order or judgment lawfully directing the termination of the premises’ use as a vacation rental.

• requires local governments to provide notice of a termination or nonrenewal to the operator of a vacation rental and the Division within five days after the termination or nonrenewal;

• authorizes a vacation rental owner to appeal a denial, suspension, termination, or nonrenewal of a vacation rental registration to the circuit court, as follows:

o the appeal must be filed within 30 days after the issuance of the denial, suspension, or termination; and

o the court may assess and awardreasonable attorney feesand costs anddamages to avacation rental owner.

• provides that a vacation rental owner is authorized toapply forregistration upon thesale of the vacation rental premises to anewownerorsix months afterrevocationor refusal to renew the vacation rental registration;

• effective Jan. 1, 2025, authorizes theDivision, upon receiving an application for a vacation rental license, to grant a temporary license to permit the operation ofthevacation rental while the license application is pending:

o the temporary license becomes permanent upon final agency action regarding the license application that grants the vacation rental license (committee addition)

• requires the Division to include a unique identifier expressed as a series of letters or numbers at the end of the vacation rental license number on each vacation rental license it issues which identifies each individual vacation rental dwelling or unit (committee added the reference to letters or numbers).

• authorizes the Division to revoke, refuse to issue or renew, or suspend for a period of not more than 30 days a vacation rental license when:

o the operation of the subject premises violates the terms of an applicable lease or property restriction, including any property restriction adopted pursuant to Chapters 718, 719, or 720 as determined by a final order of a court or an arbitrator’s written decision;

o the registration of the vacation rental is suspended or revoked by a local government as provided in s.509.032(8); and

o the premises and its owner are the subject of a final order or judgment lawfully directing the termination of the premises’ use as a vacation rental.

• provides requirements for an advertising platform, including tax collection and remittance requirements;

• requires advertising platforms to collect and remit taxes due under sections 125.0104, 125.0108, 205.044, 212.03, 212.0305, and 212.055 resulting from the reservation of a vacation rental property and payment therefor through an advertising platform;

• provides processes for the Division to issue a cease and desist order to any person who violates Chapter 509;

• authorizes the Division to seek an injunction or a writ of mandamus to enforce a cease and desist order;

• provides that, if the Division is required to seek enforcement of the notice for a penalty pursuant to s.120.69 it is entitled to collect its attorney fees and costs, together with any cost of collection;

• authorizes the Division to fine an advertising platform an amount not to exceed $1,000 per offense for a violation of the provisions in the bill or rules of the Division;

• provides that the advertising platform requirements in the bill do not create a private right of action against advertising platforms;

• requires the Division to create and maintain, by July 1, 2025, a vacation rental information system readily accessible through an application program interface to:

o facilitate prompt compliance with this chapter by a licensee or an advertising platform;

o provide a system interface to allow local governments to verify the status of a vacation rental, if applicable; and

o allow a registered user to subscribe to receive automated notifications of changes to the license and registration status of a vacation rental, including any license revocation, local registration termination, period of suspension imposed by the division or local government, or failure to renew a license or local registration licensees and advertising platforms to promptly comply with Chapter 509.

• provides that the application of vacation rental provisions created by the bill do not supersede any current or future declaration or declaration of condominium adopted pursuant to Chapter 718 cooperative documents adopted pursuant to Chapter 719 or declaration of covenants or declaration for a homeowners’ association adopted pursuant to Chapter 720.

A similar bill, CS/CS/SB 280E1 (Sen.DiCeglie),waspassed by the Senate on Feb. 1 and isin Messages to theHouse.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Broadband: HB 1147 (Rep. Tomkow), passed by the House on Feb. 15, was substituted for SB 1218 (Sen. Burgess), and passed by the Senate on Feb. 22. The bill is currently in Messages back to the House.

The bill amends s.288.9963(3) regarding a promotional pole attachment rate required to be offered by municipal utilities to broadband providers to provide broadband service to unserved or underserved areas. The bill provides that the promotional rate of $1 per wireline attachment per pole per year applies to all pole attachments made pursuant to this subsection until Dec. 31, 2028.

Economic Development: CS/HB 141 (Rep. Abbott) was reported favorably by the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill eliminates several requirements related to the Regional Rural Development Grants Program:

• removes the requirements for grant funds received by a regional development organization to be matched each year by nonstate resources in an amount equal to 25 percent of the state contributions;

• removes the requirement for local governments and private businesses to make financial or in-kind commitments to the regional organization; and

• removes the requirement that the Department of Commerce to consider the demonstrated need of the applicant for assistance when approving participants for the program.

The bill also allows Triumph Gulf Coast, Inc., to retain interest earned on the funds in its trust account rather than having those funds revert to the Triumph Gulf Coast Trust Fund. The funds held are required to be used to make awards or for administrative costs.

A similar bill, CS/SB 196 (Sen. Simon), is on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

Unsolicited Proposals for Public-Private Partnerships: CS/HB 781 (Rep. Clemons Sr.) was reported favorably by the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading. Note that the previous reference to the House Administration & Technology Appropriations Subcommittee was removed on Feb. 2.

A responsible public entity (RPE) is authorized to proceed with an unsolicited proposal for a qualifying project without engaging in a public bidding process. To do so, an RPE must hold an initial duly noticed public meeting at which the proposal is presented and affected public entities and members of the public are able to provide comment. The RPE then must hold a second duly noticed public meeting at which the RPE determines that the proposal is in the public’s interest based on specified factors.

An RPE is authorized, but no longer required, topublishnotice in the Florida Administrative Register(FAR) anda newspaper ofgeneral circulation and mail a copy to each affected local government in the affected area ifthe RPE intends to execute a comprehensive agreement fora project arising froman unsolicited proposal. If the RPE decides to proceed with anunsolicited proposal without engaging in the public bidding process, the RPE mustpublisha report that providesthe public interest determination, andspecifically detailed information, in the FAR forat least seven days.

The bill amends the comprehensive agreement approval process by no longer requiring the RPE to determine that an unsolicited proposed project will be owned by the RPE upon completion, expiration, or termination of the comprehensive agreement and upon payment of the amounts financed. If ownership will not be conveyed to the RPE within 10 years after the initial public operation begins, the public benefits apart from ownership must be identified and stated by the RPE. The RPE will only be required to determine the proposed project is in the public’s best interest if the proposal was solicited.

An identical bill, CS/SB 870 (Sen. Boyd), was reported favorably by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Energy Resources: CS/CS/SB 1624 (Sen. Collins) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government on Feb. 20 and is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Fiscal Committee on Feb. 27.

The bill amends several sections of Florida law and creates new statutory provisions relating to energy resources. Among these amendments are the following which:

• creates s.163.3210 that provides that a resiliency facility is a permitted use in all commercial, industrial, and manufacturing land use categories in a local government comprehensive plan and all commercial, industrial, and manufacturing districts:

o such facilities must comply with setback and landscape criteria that would apply to other similar uses and local governments may adopt ordinances specifying such requirements;

o provides that, after July 1, 2024, local governments may not amend their comprehensive plans, land use maps, zoning districts, or land development regulations in a manner that would conflict with a resiliency facility’s classification as a permitted and allowable use;

o defines “resiliency facility” to mean a facility owned and operated by a public utility for the purposes of assembling, creating, holding, securing, or deploying natural gas reserves for temporary use during a system outage or natural disaster.

• adds “development districts” to s.366.032 that prohibits a municipality, county, special district, or other political subdivision of the state from enacting or enforcing a resolution, ordinance, rule, code, or policy or taking any action that restricts or prohibits or has the effect of restricting or prohibiting the types or fuel sources of energy production which may be used, delivered, converted, or supplied by utilities, gas districts, natural gas transmission companies, and certain liquefied petroleum gas dealers, dispensers, and cylinder exchange operators;

• adds “development districts” to a provision in 366.032 that prohibits a municipality, county, special district, or other political subdivision of the state from restricting or prohibiting the use of an appliance using the fuels or energy types supplied by the entities above; and

• prohibits the construction, operation, or expansion of offshore wind energy facilities and wind turbines located on real property within one mile of the state’s coastline or on waters of the state.

A similar bill, CS/CS/HB 1645 (Rep. Payne), is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Funding for Environmental Resource Management: CS/SB 1638E1 (Sen. Hutson) was passed unanimously by the Senate, reflecting floor amendments, on Feb. 22 and is in Messages to the House.

The amended bill creates s.380.095 related to dedicated funding for conservation lands, resiliency, and clean water infrastructure. It provides legislative intent and states that the legislature finds it is in the best interests of the

residents of the State of Florida to dedicated revenues from the gaming compact between the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the State of Florida to acquire and manage conservation lands, and to make significant investments in resiliency efforts and clean water infrastructure.

The bill requires the Department of Revenue to deposit 96 percent of any revenue share payment received under the compact into the Indian Gaming Revenue Clearing Trust Fund within the Department of Financial Service and distributed as follows (percentages below added on the floor):

• the lesser of 26.042 percent or $100 million each fiscal year to support the wildlife corridor as defined in s.259.1005, including the acquisition of lands or conservation easements with the wildlife corridor;

• the lesser of 26.042 percent or $100 million each fiscal year for the management of uplands and the removal of invasive species, applied as follows:

o the lesser of 36 percent or $36 million to the Department of Environmental Protection divided as follows:

▪ the lesser of 88.889 percent or $32 million to the State Park Trust Fund for land management activities within the state park system:

- land manager may not use more than 25 percent of the distribution for operation capital outlay or capital assets.

▪ the lesser of 11.111 percent or $4 million to the Internal Improvement Trust Fund for the purpose of implementing the Local Trail Management Grant Program established in s.260.0145.

o the lesser of 32 percent or $32 million to the Incidental Trust Fund within the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for land management acquisition. The land manager may not use more than 25 percent of the distribution for operation capital outlay or capital assets;

o the lesser of 32 percent or $32 million to the State Game Trust Fund with the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for land management activities, including management activities for gopher tortoises and Florida panthers. The land manager may not use more than 25 percent of the distribution for operation capital outlay or capital assets.

• the lesser of 26.042 percent or 100 million to the Resilient Florida Trust Fund within DEP for the Statewide Flooding and Sea Level Rise Resilience Plan;

• the remainder each fiscal year to go to the Water Protection and Sustainability Program Trust Fund with DEP for the Water Quality Improvement Grant Program.

It also creates s.260.0145 that establishes the Local Trail Management Grant Program, designed to assist local governments with costs associated with the operation and maintenance of trails within the Florida Greenways and Trails system. Priority is given to:

• a local government that provides cost share for the costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the trails, except for trails with fiscally constrained counties or rural areas of opportunity; and

• trails within the Florida wildlife corridor as defined in s.259.1055.

A local government may not use grant funds for the planning, design, or construction of trails. Grant funds may only be used for the operation and maintenance of trails, including, but not limited to:

• the purchase of equipment and capital assets;

• the funding of necessary repairs to ensure the safety of trail users; and

• other necessary maintenance, such as pressure washing, bush pruning, and clearing debris.

The Department of Environmental Protection is required to submit a report each January 15, beginning in 2025, to the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker. The report must list the grants awarded and provided specific information about each one.

The bill also amends s.259,1055 to add language regarding management techniques with the Florida Wildlife Corridor. It authorizes the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (Commission) to enter into voluntary agreements with private landowners for environmental services within the corridor. The agreements must require that the landowner:

• protect and restore water resources;

• improve the management of wildlife habitat, including the long-term conservation of forest and grassland soils and native plants;

• manage the land in a manner that keeps the desired ecosystem healthy for protected species, such as the gopher tortoise and the Florida panther; or

• provide other incentives to landowners to continue and improve land uses that are both economically sustainable and beneficial to the environment of this state.

Subjecttoappropriation,theCommissionmayuselandmanagementfundsreceivedpursuanttos.380.09forthispurpose.

The bill requires the Land Management Uniform Accounting Council (LMUAC) to recommend the most effective and efficient use of funds available to state agencies for land management activities pursuant to s.380.095. The initial recommendation must be adopted and submitted to the Executive Office of the Governor, the Senate President, and the House Speaker by Jan. 3, 2027. After that, LMUAC must update its recommendation in its biennial report developed pursuant to s.259.037.

Additionally, it amends s.407.0673 dealing with the water quality improvement grant program. It amends the list of projects that are to be prioritized and also requires the annual report that DEP is required to submit to include a list projects not receiving funding which were determined to be eligible by the department and were able to demonstrate project readiness. Moreover, the report must include the progress made in the implementation of multi-year projects.

The following distribution of funds fare set or the 2024-25 fiscal year: (previous language making these allocations contingent on sufficient funds being distributed was deleted on the floor)

• $2 million in recurring funds from the General Revenue Fund is appropriated to the University of Florida to continually update the Florida Wildlife Corridor plan and the Florida Ecological Greenways Network plan;

• $5 million in nonrecurring funds from the Water Protection and Sustainability Trust Fund within the Department of Environmental Protection is appropriated to the department to coordinate with the Water School at Florida Gulf Coast University to conduct a study to identify and analyze potential regional projects that meet the eligibility criteria set forth in s.403.0673:

o at a minimum, the study must include the collection and consolidation of data regarding water quality to identify potential regional projects, including stormwater, hydrologic improvements, and innovative technologies, which reduce nutrient loading to water bodies identified in s.403.0673(1); and

o the department shall submit the report to the Executive Office of the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives by Jan. 3, 2025.

• $100 million in nonrecurring funds from funds distributed to the Indian Gaming Revenue Clearing Trust Fund is appropriated to Administered Funds for land acquisition pursuant to s.380.095(2)(a);

• $4 million in nonrecurring funds from the Internal Improvement Trust Fund within the Department of Environmental Protection is appropriated for the purpose of implementing the Local Trail Management Grant Program;

• $32 million in nonrecurring funds from the State Park Trust Fund within the Department of Environmental Protection is appropriated for land management activities as specified in s.380.095(2)(b)1.a;

• $32 million in nonrecurring funds from the Incidental Trust Fund within the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services is appropriated for land management activities as specified in s.380.095(2)(b)2;

• $32 million in nonrecurring funds from the State Game Trust Fund within the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is appropriated for control of invasive species and upland land management activities pursuant to s.380.095(2)(b)3 or s.259.1055;

• $100 million in nonrecurring funds from the Resilient Florida Trust Fund within the Department of Environmental Protection is appropriated for the Statewide Flooding and Sea Level Rise Resilience Plan pursuant to s.380.093;

• $79 million in nonrecurring funds from the Water Protection and Sustainability Program Trust Fund within the Department of Environmental Protection is appropriated for the Water Quality Improvement Grant Program pursuant to s.403.0673;

• $150 million in nonrecurring funds from the General Revenue Fund is appropriated in the Aid to Local Governments – Grants and Aids – South Florida Water Management District – Operations appropriation category to the South Florida Water Management District for operations and maintenance responsibilities under the purview of the district.

o the funds must be placed in reserve;

o from the funds, the district shall enter into a contract with the Water School at Florida Gulf Coast University to conduct a study of the health and ecosystem of Lake Okeechobee;

o the study must consider the health of plant, fish, and wildlife to be used for future planning of invasive plant control, replanting of native vegetation, and fish and game management;

o a report must be submitted by Jan. 1, 2025, to the Executive Office of the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and

o the Department of Environmental Protection is authorized to submit budget amendments to request release of funds pursuant to Chapter 216. Release is contingent upon the submission of a spend plan and negotiated draft contract between the South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Gulf Coast University Water School.

A similar bill, CS/CS/HB 1417 (Rep. Buchanan) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 20 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Mitigation: CS/CS/HB 1073 (Rep. Truenow), a delete-all amendment, was reported favorably by the Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22. The amendment makes this bill consistent with CS/CS/CS/SB 1532 (Sen. Brodeur) which is on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

CS/CS/HB 1073 amends s.373.4134 regarding water quality enhancement areas (WQEAs) to:

• allow water quality enhancement credits to be sold to “applicants” for the purpose of achieving net improvement or in meeting environmental resource permit performance standards. The bill defines “applicants” as:

o a governmental entity that seeks to purchase water quality enhancement credits to meet an assigned basin management action plan (BMAP) allocation or reasonable assurance plan (RAP); or

o a private sector entity that seeks to purchase water quality enhancement credits for the purpose of:

▪ achieving net improvement under s.373.414(1)(b)3; or

▪ satisfying environmental resource permit performance standards.

• allow WQEAs to be used to address contributions of pollutants that do not meet environmental resource permit performance standards;

• provides that WQEAs are a valuable tool to assist an applicant in providing a net improvement of the water quality in a receiving waterbody that does not meet standards or in satisfying the environmental resource permit performance standards; and

• provide that this section applies applicants seeking permits under s.373.403-373.443.

The bill also amends s.373.4135 regarding mitigation banks and offsite regional mitigation, to:

• direct the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and water management districts (WMDs) to encourage the establishment of private mitigation banks and offsite regional mitigation on lands owned by a local government, when such lands are located in a credit-deficient basin and the proposed mitigation bank or offsite regional mitigation would provide one or more of the identified deficient habitat type credits;

• provide that it is the intent of the legislature to allow limited use of local government land, including lands acquired for conservation, for private sector mitigation banks, provided that the private mitigation banks are located in credit-deficient basins and would produce the habitat type credits that are unavailable or insufficient in such basins:

o states that “local government” includes a county, municipality, or special district as those terms are defined in s.165.031.

• provides that this section does not apply to lands owned by the state or a water management district;

• provide that a basin is considered to be a credit-deficient basin if it is a drainage basin or a corresponding hydrologic unit code, and has all of the following features:

o at least one mitigation bank has been permitted and established on lands not owned by a governmental entity, and that mitigation bank no longer has one of the habitat type credits listed below available for purchase;

o there is a documented shortage of either forested freshwater, non-forested freshwater, forested saltwater, or non-forested saltwater habitat type credits; and

o pending mitigation bank applications on private land or pending credit releases from mitigation banks on nongovernmental land are unlikely to alleviate the credit shortage.

• provide that a local government with land in a credit-deficient basin may, through the public procurement processes identified in chapter 287 or other established competitive procurement processes, consider a proposal from a private entity applicant for the right to establish a mitigation bank on the local government land, including such lands purchased for conservation purposes, provided acquisition encumbrances do not exist to the contrary;

• if such a mitigation bank is to be established and operated on local government land, the local government and private applicant must enter into a use agreement that meets the requirements of this bill and that requires the private applicant to establish and operate the mitigation bank in conformance with the permitting requirements of s.373.4136 regarding the establishment and operation of mitigation banks, and the rules adopted thereunder;

• provide requirements for what a use agreement must include;

• provide that public funds may not be used to fund thefinancial assurances forconstruction and implementation of the mitigation bankor for the establishment of thelong-term management financial assurances;

• provide that, in determining the number of mitigation bank credits to be awarded to a mitigation bank established pursuant to this subsection, the proposed mitigation bank’s location in or adjacent to the local government conservation lands may not increase the uniform mitigation assessment method location factor assessment and scoring value, even if the conservation status of the mitigation bank land is improved due to such location;

• provides that credit deficiency is confirmed at the time the use agreement is executed by the parties. Once confirmed, the mitigation bank application may proceed, even if the deficiency is relieved; and

• allow DEP, in coordination with WMDs, to adopt rules to implement this subsection

Lastly, the bill reenacts s.403.9332(1)(a) and (c) regarding mitigation and enforcement, for the purpose of incorporating the amendment the bill makes to s.373.4135.

HOUSING

Affordable Housing: CS/CS/HB 1239 (Rep. Lopez) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 20 and placed on the House Special Order Calendar for Feb. 27.

The bill amends various provisionsof the Live LocalAct (act), passed during the 2023 Regular Session, whichmade substantial changes andadditionsto affordable housingrelated programs and policies at both thestate and local level.

As it pertains to the act’s preemption of certain local zoning and land use regulations to expedite development of affordable housing, the bill:

• requires a county or municipality to authorize multifamily and mixed-use residential as allowable uses on any site owned by a county or municipality, and in an area zoned for commercial, industrial or mixed use, or any zoning district permitting commercial, industrial, or mixed uses, if certain conditions are met (language amended by the committee);

• clarifies that qualifying affordable units must be rental units prohibits local government from restricting the density of a proposed development authorized under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7) below the highest currently allowed density on land where residential development is allowed under the land development regulations:

o the term “highest currently allowed density” does not include the density of any development that met the requirements of this subsection or the density of any development which has received any bonus, variance, or other special exception for density provided in the land development regulations as an incentive for development.

• prohibits local government from restricting the floor area ratio of a proposed development authorized under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7) below 150 percent of the highest currently allowed floor area ratio on land where development is allowed under the land development regulations:

o the term “highest currently allowed floor area ratio” does not include the floor area ratio of any development that met the requirements of this subsection or the floor area ratio of any development which has received any bonus, variance, or other special exception for floor area ratio provided in the land development regulations as an incentive for development. For purposes of this subsection, the term floor area ratio includes floor lot ratio.

• clarifies that the term “highest currently allowed height” does not include the height of any development that met the requirements of this subsection or the height of any development which has received any bonus, variance, or other special exception for height provided in land development regulations as an incentive for development;

• provides that if the proposed development is adjacent to, on two or more sides, a parcel zoned for singlefamily residential use that is within a single-family residential development with at least 25 contiguous single-family homes, the local government may restrict the height of the proposed development to 150 percent of the tallest building on adjacent property, the highest currently allowed height for the property allowed in the land development regulations or 3 stories, whichever is higher:

o the term “adjacent to” means those properties sharing more than one point of a property line, but does not include properties separated by a public road.

• provides that administrative approval of a proposed development does not require a public hearing or any other action by a quasi-judicial board or reviewing body (committee addition);

• provides that a county or municipality may not restrict the maximum lot size of a proposed development below the highest currently allowed maximum lot size where multifamily or mixed-use residential development is allowed under land development regulations;

• precludes a proposed development located within one-quarter mile of a military installation from being approved administratively;

• modifies the parking reduction requirements for qualifying developments by requiring local governments to:

o reduce parking requirements by at least 20 percent for developments located within one-quarter mile of a transit stop as defined in the local government’s land development code, and the transit stop is accessible from the development (committee addition);

o reduce parkingrequirementsby at least20 percent for developments located withinone-half mile of a “major transportationhub” accessible from the proposeddevelopment bysafe, pedestrian-friendly means:

▪ major transportation hub means any transit station, whether bus, train, or light rail, which is served by public transit with a mix of other transportation options.

o reduce parking requirements by at least 20 percent if the development has alternative parking available within 600 feet. A local government may not require that the available parking be sufficient to compensate for the reduction in parking requirement.

• require the elimination of parking requirements for mixed developments within a transit-oriented development or area, as recognized by the local government. The proposed development must be mixed-use residential and otherwise comply with the local government’s regulations concerning transit-oriented development, except for use, height, density, FAR, and parking provided by this exception or otherwise agreed to by the local government and the developer;

• clarifies that these provisions do not limit a local government’s ability to grant a bonus, variance, or other special exception for height, density, or FAR in addition to the required entitlements. The bill does not preclude a proposed development from receiving a bonus for height, density, or FAR pursuant to a local government’s ordinance or regulation, provided the development meets the conditions to receive the bonus

except for any conditions that conflict with this provision. If a proposed development qualifies for such bonus, the bonus must be administratively approved by the local government and no further action by the local governing body is required;

• provides that “commercial use” means activities associated with the sale, rental, or distribution of products or the sale or performance of services. This includes, but is not limited to, retail, office, entertainment, and other for-profit business activities (committee addition);

• provides that qualifying developments must be treated as a conforming use after expiration of the development’s affordability period of at least 30 years and after the sunset of s.125.01055(7) and 166.04151(7) on Oct. 1, 2033. However, if at any point during the development’s affordability period the development violates the affordability requirement, the development must be allowed a reasonable time to cure such violation. If the violation is not cured within a reasonable time, the development must be treated as a nonconforming use;

• provides that a county or municipality may not condition the consideration or approval of a development permit or development order application on the waiver, forbearance, or abandonment of any development right granted by this section. Any such waiver, forbearance, or abandonment is invalid; and

• provides that an applicant for a proposed development who applied, gave written request, or notice of intent to utilize such provisions to the county or municipality and which has been received by the county or municipality before the effective date of the bill may notify the county or municipality by July 1, 2024, of its intent to proceed under the provisions of s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7), as they existed at the time of submittal. A county or municipality must allow an applicant who submitted an application, written request, or notice of intent before the effective date of the bill the opportunity to submit a revised application, written request, or notice of intent to account for the changes made by the bill.

The bill amends s.333.03 to provide that sections 125.01055(7) and 166.04151(7) do not apply to a proposed development:

• near a commercial service airport, as defined in s.332.0075(1) runway within one-quarter of a mile laterally from the runway edge and within the area that is the width of one-quarter of a mile extending at right angles from the end of the runway for a distance of 10,000 feet of any existing runway or planned runway identified in the local government’s airport master plan (committee addition);

• in any airport noise zone identified in a federal land use compatibility table or currently in a land-use zoning or airport noise regulation adopted by the local government;

• that exceeds the maximum height restrictions identified in a local government’s airport zoning regulation.

The bill makes the following changes to the ad valorem tax exemption for newly constructed developments:

• requires fewer units in developments located in the Florida Keys to be set aside for income limited persons and families (10 instead of 70). This acknowledges the stricter land development regulations for that area as compared to the rest of the state;

• clarifies that the Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (FHFC) duties are ministerial while property appraisers maintain the ultimate authority to grant exemptions; and

• outlines the method for property appraisers to determine values of exempted units in a manner that is similar to other exemptions in statute.

The bill also clarifies that the local option ad valorem exemption applies to 100 percent of the assessed value of each residential unit used to provide affordable housing and requires the property appraiser to include the preparation share of residential common areas, including land, to each unit when determining the value of the exemption. The bill also clarifies the duties of the property appraiser in determining when a property is eligible for the exemption. It also provides that the changes to the tax exemptions are intended to be remedial and clarifying in nature and apply retroactively to January 1, 2024.

The FHFC may not require that low-income housing tax credits under s.42 of the Internal Revenue Code or taxexempt bond financing be a part of the funding structure for a Live Local Program project. (committee addition.)

Additionally, the bill also provides the term “urban infill” has the same meaning as in s.163.3164 and includes the development or redevelopment of mobile home parks and manufactured home communities that meet the urban infill criteria. (committee addition)

It removes the requirement for borrowers to provide documentation to FHFC to prove their fulltime employment or self-employment status equates to 35 hours or more per week. The bill also appropriates $100 million in nonrecurring funds from the General Revenue Fund to FHFC to implement the Florida Hometown Hero Program.

Finally, it authorizes FHFC to preclude sponsors and affiliates of sponsors from participating in programs for certain violations. The bill expands the list of violations to include:

• being debarred from participation in federal housing programs by HUD;

• being excluded from any federal procurement programs; and

• materially or repeatedly violating any condition imposed by FHFC in connection with the administration of its programs, including a land use restriction agreement, an extended use agreement, or any other financing or regulatory agreement with FHFC.

A similar bill, CS/CS/SB 328E1 (Sen. Calatayud) was passed by the Senate on Feb. 7 and isin the Housein Messages.

Affordable Housing in Counties Designated as Areas of Critical State Concern: CS/CS/CS/HB 1297 (Rep. Mooney, Jr.) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill does the following:

• exempts the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern from the provision in current law that allows the governing body of a county or municipality to approve the development of affordable housing where state or local law or regulation would otherwise preclude such development;

• expands the local option affordable housing ad valorem tax exemption by allowing a county or municipality located in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern or the Key West Area of Critical State Concern to provide an ad valorem property tax exemption up to 100 percent of the assessed value for single-family residential units or residential duplexes used to provide affordable housing;

• provides that a county or municipality located in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern or the Key West Area of Critical State Concern may provide an affordable housing tax exemption under the existing provisions of s.196.1978 even if the property does not have more than 50 units, at least 20 percent of which are used for affordable housing. This provision would apply starting with the 2025 tax roll;

• for the purposes of hurricane evacuation clearance time modeling, provides that mobile home residents are not considered permanent residents for purposes of the 24-hour evacuation requirement in s.380.0552(9)(a) 2, and clarifies that the Key West Area of Critical State Concern:

o will be included in the hurricane evaluation study; and

o is subject to the evacuation requirements (committee addition)

• authorizes land authorities to require compliance with income limitations on land conveyed for affordable housing by memorializing the original land authority funding or donation in a recordable perpetual deed restriction;

• provides that if a purchase receives state or federal funding that requires a priority lien position over the land authority deed restriction, the land authority funding or contribution may be subordinate to a first purchase money mortgage and the state or federal funding lien;

• provides that a county or municipality that includes, or has included within the previous five years, an area of critical state concern designated by the Legislature for which the Legislature has declared its intent to provide affordable housing is exempt from the following requirements for awards made under SHIP:

o at least 30 percent of the funds deposited into the local housing assistance trust fund must be reserved for awards to very-low-income persons or eligible sponsors who will serve very-low income persons; and

o at least an additional 30 percent of the funds deposited into the local housing assistance trust fund must be reserved for awards to low-income persons or eligible sponsors who will serve low-income persons.

This provision expires on July 1, 2029, and applies retroactively

• for a county that has been designated as an area of critical state concern that levies a tourist development tax and a tourist impact tax, allows such county to use its accumulated surplus from those taxes collected through Sept. 30, 2024, for the purpose of providing affordable housing for employees of tourism related businesses in the county. Any housing financed with funds from this surplus must be used as affordable housing for a minimum of 99 years.

A similar bill, CS/CS/1456 (Sen. Rodriguez) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Finance and Tax Committee, its second of three committees of reference on Feb. 20 and is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 27.

Housing for Agricultural Workers: CS/CS/HB 1051 (Rep. Tuck), a delete-all amendment, was reported favorably by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22.

The bill amends s.163.3162 to define “legally verified agricultural worker” as a person who:

• is lawfully present in the United States;

• has been verified through the process provided in s.488.095 and is authorized to work at the time of employment;

• is seasonally or annually employed in bona fide agricultural production; and

• remains lawfully present and authorized to work throughout the duration of that employment, (The committee amended this definition, including changing the term from “agricultural worker”).

This term includes a migrant farmworker as defined in s.381.008 and a worker with an H2A visa.

A “housing site” is defined as the totality of development supporting authorized housing, including buildings, mobile homes, barracks, dormitories used as living quarters, parking areas, common areas such as athletic fields or playgrounds, storage structures, and other related structures.

A governmental entity may not adopt or enforce any legislation which inhibits the construction or installation of housing for legally verified agricultural employees on land zoned for agricultural use and operated as a bona fide farm, except as provided in the bill. However, a local government may adopt land use regulations that are less restrictive. (last sentence committee addition.)

The bill requires that a housing site authorized under this section:

• must meet all local and state building standards, including standards regulated by the Department of Health and federal standards for H-2A visa housing (a reference to migrant farmworker housing was deleted by the committee):

o if written notice of intent is required to be submitted to the Department of Health, the appropriate governmental entity with jurisdiction over the agricultural lands may also require submittal of a copy of the written notice.

• must be maintained in a neat, orderly, and safe manner;

• must have structures containing dwelling units placed a minimum of 10 feet apart;

• may not exceed square footage of 1.5 percent of the property’s area or 35,000 square feet, whichever is less, for the square footage of the housing site’s climate-controlled facilities;

• must provide 50-foot setbacks on all sides:

o an internal project driveway may be located in the required yard space if the yard is adjacent to a public roadway or to property that is under common ownership with the housing site.

• may not be located less than 250 feet from a property line adjacent to property zoned for residential use: o if located less than 500 feet of a property line, must provide screening, consisting of tree, wall, berm or fence coverage of specified sizes and opacity, between the housing site and any residentially developed adjacent parcels under different ownership.

• must cover access drives with dust-free material such as packed shell or gravel or similar material.

A local ordinance adopted pursuant to this section must comply with state and federal regulations for migrant farmworker housing.

The bill further provides that, beginning July 1, 2024, a property owner must maintain records of all permits for such housing for three years, and make the records available for inspection within 14 days.

If, for any reason, a housing site is not used for agricultural workers for longer than 365 days, structures used as dwelling units must be removed within 180 days after notice from the local government unless the property owner demonstrates that its intended use will resume within 90 days. If the property ceases to be 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. Additionally, if Department of Health permits for agricultural housing uses are revoked, structures must be removed within 180 days of notice from the local government unless the permit is reinstated.

Additionally, it provides that, notwithstanding the provisions herein, the construction or installation of housing for legal agricultural employees in the Florida Keys and City of Key West Areas of Critical State Concern is subject to the permit allocation systems of those areas.

Finally, the bill provides that a housing site constructed and in use before July 1, 2024, may continue to be used, and the property owner may not be required to make changes to meet the requirements in this bill, unless the housing site will be enlarged, remodeled, renovated, or rehabilitated. The property owner of a housing site must provide regular maintenance and repair, including compliance with health and safety regulations and maintenance standards, for such housing site to ensure the health, safety, and habitability of the housing site.

A similar bill, CS/SB 1082 (Sen. Collins) was passed by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 21 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

TRANSPORTATION

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services: CS/CS/HB 1071 (Rep. Alvarez), reflecting amendments, was reported favorably by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22. The bill contains modifications to several agricultural, consumer services, and licensure activities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Among the changes, it amends s.366.94 to preempt the regulation of electric vehicle charging stations to the state and prohibits local governmental entities from enacting or enforcing such regulations.

CS/CS/SB 1084 (Sen. Collins), which also contains modifications to several agricultural, consumer services, and licensure activities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, including the one identified above, was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22.

Department of Transportation: CS/CS/SB 1226 (Sen. DiCeglie), a delete-all amendment, was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development on Feb. 20 and is scheduled to be heard on Feb. 27 in the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference.

The amended bill now does the following:

• expands the areas of the Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT) program responsibilities to also include:

o modal planning (replacing public transportation);

o transportation technology;

o work program development and budget (replacing management and budget);

o statewide corridors;

o forecasting and performance;

o emergency management; and

o safety

(committee addition)

• repeals obsolete requirements language;

• provides that, beginning in 2024-25 fiscal year through the 2029-30 fiscal year, $15 million in recurring revenue must be made available from the State Transportation Trust Fund for the Intermodal Logistics Center Infrastructure Support Program. FDOT must include projects proposed to be funded in its tentative work program;

• creates s.334.61 related to traffic lane repurposing (committee addition), which provides that:

o whenever a governmental entity proposes any project that will repurpose one or more existing traffic lanes, the governmental entity shall include a traffic study to address any potential adverse impacts of the project, including, but not limited to, changes in traffic congestion and impacts on safety;

o if, following the study, the governmental entity elects to continue with the design of the project, it must notify all affected property owners, impacted municipalities, and the counties in which the project is located at least 180 days before the design phase of the project is completed:

▪ the notice must provide a written explanation regarding the need for the project, information on how to review the traffic study and indicate that all affected parties will be given an opportunity to provide comments to the proposing entity regarding potential impacts of the change.

o requires the governmental entity to hold at least one public meeting, with at least 30 days prior notice, before completing the design phase of the project in the jurisdiction where the project is located:

▪ at the public meeting, the governmental entity shall explain the purpose of the project and receive public input, including possible alternatives, to determine the manner in which the project will affect the community.

o requires the governmental entity to review all comments from the public meeting and take the comments and any alternatives presented during the meeting into consideration in the final design of the project.

• increases from three years to 10 years the length of time that a prepaid toll account must be inactive prior to it becoming unclaimed property;

• prohibits FDOT from expending any state funds to support a project or program of any of the following entities which is found to be in violation of s.381.00316 (related to discrimination by governmental and business entities based on health care choices):

o a public transit provider s defined in s.341.031;

o an authority created pursuant to Chapters 343, 348, or 349;

o a public use airport as defined in s.332.004; and

o a port listed in s.311.09(1).

Funds will be withheld until the entity complies (section added by committee)

• provides that remainder of the motor vehicle fee revenues deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund pursuant to s.320.20(5)(a), must first be available for appropriation for payments under a service contract entered into with the FDOT Financing Corporation to fund arterial highway projects. For the corporation’s bonding purposes, two or more of such projects in the FDOT’s approved work program may be treated as a single project;

• provides that funds appropriated for payment under a service contract are available after funds pledged for payment on bonds, but before other statutorily required distributions;

• provides that subject to specific appropriation, in addition to funds appropriated for the Small County Outreach Program (SCOP), a local government located either wholly or partially within the Everglades Agricultural Area, the Peace River Basin, or the Suwanee River Basin may compete for additional funding using the SCOP criteria, at up to 100 percent of the project costs for state or county roads used primarily as farm-to-market connections between rural agricultural areas and market distribution centers, excluding capacity improvement projects;

• provides that unallocated New Starts Transit Program funds remaining as of July 1, 2024, must be allocated for the purpose of the Strategic Intermodal System within the State Transportation Trust Fund; this expires June 30, 2026 (committee addition);

• amends s.341.071 related to transit productivity and performance measures, as follows:

o provides definitions for administrative costs, public transit provider, Tier 1 provider, Tier 2 provider (last two definitions committee addition)

o beginning Nov. 1, 2024 (committee addition) and annually thereafter, each public transit provider shall, during a publicly noticed meeting, annually certify that its budgeted and actual administrative costs are not greater than 20 percent above the annual state average of administrative costs for its tier:

▪ the provider shall also disclose all employees’ compensation and benefits, ridership performance and metrics, and any gifts as defined in s.112.312 accepted in exchange for contracts;

▪ the information must be posted on the provider’s website (committee addition)

o requires FDOT to determine, by tier, the percentage of each provider’s total operating budget spent on administrative costs annually by March 31 to inform the provider’s following fiscal year budget (committee addition).

• creates s.341.072 relating to public transit provider marketing and advertising standards (committee addition) which provides that:

o a public transit providermay not expend department funds for marketing or advertising activities, including any wrap, tinting, or paint ona bus, commercial motor vehicle, or motor vehicle, as those terms are defined in s.316.003except those that are limited to displaying abrand or logoof the public transit provider,the official seal of the jurisdictional governmental entity, ora state agency publicservice announcement;

o guidelines for allowed marketing or advertising activities must be incorporated in the public transportation grant agreement entered with each public transit provider by FDOT; and

o anynewwrap,tinting,paint,medium,oradvertisementonthepassengerwindowsofavehicleusedbyapublic transitprovidermaynotbedarkerthanthelegallyallowedwindowtintingrequirementsformotorvehicles.

• grants the Florida Rail Enterprise the power and duty to preserve future rail corridors and rights of way in coordination with FDOT’s planning of the State Highway System.

Note that the committee also deleted previously proposed language that would have provided a tiered amount of appropriated funds which are to be allocated for the purchase of plant materials.

CS/CS/CS/HB 1301 (Rep. Abbott), which also deals with the Department of Transportation, is on the House Special Order Calendar for Feb. 27.

Transportation: CS/CS/CS/HB 287 (Rep. Esposito) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22.

The bill address matters related to transportation. Specifically, the bill:

• provides that the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) may not annually commit more than 20 percent of the revenue derived from state fuel taxes and motor vehicle license-related fees deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund for public transit projects, with the exception of the following public transit projects:

o a project that uses revenues to match funds made available by the Federal Government;

o a project included in an MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program adopted pursuant to s.339.175(8) and approved by a supermajority vote of the board of county commissioners where the project is located, or a supermajority vote of the governing board of a consolidated county and city government where the project is located (last phrase committee addition); and

o a bus rapid transit or rail project that would result in maintaining or enhancing the level of service of the state highway system along the corridor of the project, provided that state funds do not exceed 50 percent of the non-federal share of the costs and the percent of the local share (committee addition).

• amends s.288.9606 dealing with issue of revenue bonds, to replace the term “public-private partnership agreement” with “comprehensive agreement” (added by committee);

• amends statutory requirements for vehicles equipped with teleoperation systems;

• increases from five to eight the number of Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV)approved Basic Driver Improvement course elections that are allowed in a lifetime for a person without a commercial driver license or commercial learner’s permit who is cited for a noncriminal moving violation while driving a noncommercial motor vehicle;

• requires the DHSMV to annually review changes made to major traffic laws of this state and to require course content for certain driving courses to be modified accordingly;

• amends s.334.30 relating to public-private transportation facilities and partnerships by:

o replacing the term “public-private partnership agreement” with the term “comprehensive agreement”;

o requiring a private entity, as part of the private entity proposal, to provide an independent traffic and revenue study prepared by a traffic and revenue expert, rather than an investment grade traffic and revenue study prepared by an internationally recognized traffic and revenue expert. The independent traffic and revenue study must be accepted by national bond rating agencies before closing on financing that supports the comprehensive agreement for the public-private partnership project;

o adding a minimum timeframe of 30 days for FDOT to accept other proposals on a project where FDOT has received an unsolicited proposal and providing FDOT discretion for how many days to accept other proposals based on the complexity of the project;

o authorizing FDOT before or in connection with the negotiation of a comprehensive agreement, to enter into an interim agreement with the private entity proposing the development or operation of a qualifying project. An interim agreement does not obligate FDOT to enter into a comprehensive agreement. The interim agreement is discretionary with the parties and is not required on a project for which the parties may proceed directly to a comprehensive agreement without the need for an interim agreement. An interim agreement must be limited to any of the following provisions that:

▪ authorize the private entity to commence activities for which it may be compensated related to the proposed qualifying project, including, but not limited to, project planning and development, design, environmental analysis and mitigation, surveying, other activities concerning any part of the proposed qualifying project, and ascertaining the availability of financing for the proposed facility or facilities;

▪ establish the process and timing for the negotiation of the comprehensive agreement; and

▪ contain such other provisions related to an aspect of the development or operation of a qualifying project which FDOT and the private entity deem appropriate.

o providing that a comprehensive agreement with a term of more than 50 and no more than 75 years may only be authorized for projects that are partially or completely funded from project user fees; and

o require FDOT to notify the Division of Bond Finance prior to entering into an interim or comprehensive agreement, in addition to the already required consultation (committee addition).

• provides that a local government may not adopt standards or specifications that deem reclaimed asphalt material as solid waste (committee addition);

• adds design-build and phased design-build contracts to the requirements that FDOT receive at least three letters of interest in order to proceed with a request for proposals and that FDOT request proposals from no fewer than three of the firms submitting letters of interest;

• provides in law, rather than as a requirement in an FDOT contract, that a motor vehicle used for the performance of road or bridge construction or maintenance work on an FDOT project must be registered in compliance with Chapter 320;

• allows FDOT, with respect to phased design-build construction contracts under s.337.11(7)(b) to allow the issuance of multiple contract performance and payment bonds is succession to align with each phase of the contract to meet the bonding requirements (committee addition);

• shortens the deadline for a claimant to institute an action, except an action for recovery of retainage, against the contractor or surety to within 365 days after performance of the labor or completion of delivery of the materials or supplies, rather than within 365 days after the final acceptance of the contract work by FDOT;

• provides that if within 10 years of FDOT’s acquisition of property, that it now determines it does not need, the previous owner notifies the department that he is interested in reacquiring the property, the right to receive the right of first refusal vests with the previous owner. The department must acknowledge receipt of this notice within 60 days of receiving it. (committee addition);

• amends the reimbursement amount that a local government entity can be reimbursed for the direct actual costs of operating the fire station at mile marker 63 on Alligator Alley (committee addition);

• codifies the Local Agency Program (LAP) within FDOT; and

• amends provisions relating to the limitation on liability of FDOT and its contractors.

Note that the committee also deleted previously proposed provisions that would have created a working group for the purpose of streamlining the process of developing, executing, and revising utility relocation agreements to facilitate timely relocation of utilities that are in conflict with the FDOT’s construction projects.

CS/CS/CS/SB 266 (Sen. Hooper) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments which make it similar to the above bill, by the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22.

Transportation: CS/HB 7049 (Rep. McFarland) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 22.

The bill addresses mattersrelated to transportation, including metropolitan planning districts (MPOs). Specifically, it:

• requires the FDOT secretary to establish annual performance and production measures, establish a minimum standard for such measures, and publish a report on actual performance. Such measures shall be developed by a working group comprised of transportation industry leaders and stakeholders and must include specified minimum requirements (committee addition);

• expands the responsibilities of the Florida Transportation Commission to add that the commission must monitor the efficiency, productivity and management of:

o any public transit provider as defined in s.341.031(1); and

o any community transportation coordinator as defined in s.427,011(5) (committee addition).

• provides that for agencies or authorities that do not meet minimum performance standards, the Florida Transportation Commission must make recommendations to FDOT, the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker regarding any leadership, process, management, or legislative changes needed to improve performance (committee addition);

• amends existing law related to obeying traffic control at railway crossings (committee addition);

• increases penalties for certain traffic infractions (committee addition);

• provides that, with respect to department allocation for the purchase of plant material under s.334.044(26) a project with a total contracted construction cost greater than $500 million shall have 0.5 percent of the total construction cost expended in the fiscal year the project is planned for construction, and the remaining 1 percent may be planned and expended over four fiscal years (committee addition);

• revises the membership of the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) advisory board and expands the required expertise of members (last clause committee addition);

• requires CUTR,byJan. 1,2025, to deliver areport toFDOT on model policies and proceduresor best practices for paratransit providers tocomplete tripswithin an acceptable time from pickup (committee addition);

• requiresCUTR,byDec.1,2025,todeliverareportto FDOT,the Governor,SenatePresidentandHouseSpeaker thatexamines alternativerevenuesourcesfortheStateTransportationsTrustFund (committee addition);

• makes a technical change to the name of a member of the Implementing Solutions from Transportation Research and Evaluating Emerging Technologies Living Lab (I-STREET) advisory board and expands the required expertise of the members (last clause committee addition);

• requires I-STREET, by Jan. 1, 2025, to deliver a comprehensive report on technology and training improvements to better support people with disabilities utilizing paratransit services to FDOT, the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker (committee addition);

• requires I-STREET, by Dec. 1, 2025 to deliver a report examining methods of taxation or usage fees for residential charging of electric vehicles to the FDOT, Governor, Senate President and House Speaker (committee addition);

• deletes ability of FDOT and an MPO to cooperatively agree to vary the submittal date of the MPO project priorities due by August 1 of each year;

• makes the following changes to laws that govern MPOS: o codifies the legislative intent of MPOs to emphasize:

▪ the development of multimodal transportation systems, instead of surface transportation systems; and

▪ serving the mobility needs of people and freight and fostering economic growth and development within and through urbanized areas of this state while balancing conservation of natural resources.

o deletes from the intent existing language related to minimizing transportation-related fuel consumption, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions;

o provides that when two or more MPOs merge to form a regional MPO, the voting membership of the regional MPO may consist of up to 35 apportioned members for equitable geographic-population representation, subject to review by FDOT and approval by the Governor (committee addition);

o provides that an MPO be involved in the planning and prioritization of transportation facilities, vs the current language referencing planning and programming (committee addition);

o requires each MPO to timely amend its Long Range Transportation Plan, Transportation Improvement Program, and Unified Planning Work Program (committee addition);

o revises the itemsthat each MPOmust considerwhendeveloping its Long RangeTransportation Plan (LRTP) andTransportation Improvement Program (TIP) to delete energy consumption and include projects andstrategies thatwill conserve natural resources and reduce traffic and congestion where feasible;

o deletes the requirement that minorities, the elderly and the handicapped must be adequately represented on the MPO citizen advisory committee (committee addition);

o repeals the MPO Advisory Council (MPOAC);

o revises the minimum requirements that each MPO must include in its long-range plan by:

▪ eliminating the requirement that strategies to integrate transportation and land use planning should provide for sustainable development and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (committee addition);

▪ providing that MPOs within the same urbanized area shall develop a regional long-range transportation plan and pool resources for regionally significant transportation infrastructure projects (committee addition);

▪ eliminating the provision that requires the MPOAC to review the plans;

▪ allowing, in the financial plan requirement, public-private partnerships to be included as an innovative financing technique to be used to fund needed projects and programs; and

▪ revising the list of proposed transportation enhancement activities that an MPO must indicate, as appropriate, to include integration of advanced air mobility, and integration of autonomous and electric vehicles, electric bicycles, and motorized scooters used for freight, commuter, or micromobility purposes. The list of activities no longer is required to indicate historic preservation, mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff, and control of outdoor advertising.

• provides that, with respect to a TIP, it is the MPO’s responsibility, in cooperation with FDOT, to identify, prioritize, and present a complete list of multimodal transportation projects consistent with the needs of the metropolitan planning area, and it is FDOT’s responsibility to program projects in the state transportation improvement program (committee addition);

• expands what an MPO’s annual list of project priorities must consider to include essential projects to update the state’s transportation network, address congestion, enhance safety, ensure resiliency and facilitate supply chain needs (committee addition);

• requires the MPO’s TIP to be consistent, to the maximum extent feasible with the Strategic Intermodal System Plan (committee addition);

• provides that, when a project is removed from or rescheduled in a subsequent transportation improvement program, funding for the previously committed phases shall be reprogrammed for other projects within the list of project priorities (committee addition);

• requires the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to, at least annually, convene MPOs of similar size for the purpose of exchanging best practices and allows MPOs to develop committees or working groups as needed to accomplish such purpose;

• provides that training for new MPO governing board members must be provided by FDOT and by either the Florida CUTR, or by the I-STREET Living Lab;

• requires, by Feb. 28, 2025, the MPOs serving Lee and Collier counties to submit a report considering the feasibility of consolidation into a single MPO and eliminates the obsolete provision that required Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas counties to do so by Dec. 31, 2023

• creates the following MPO accountability and transparency provisions (this section was significantly amended by the committee):

o allows an MPO to execute a written agreement with FDOT which formulizes the roles, responsibilities and expectations for accomplishing consistency with federal and state requirements. Priorities must be described. The agreement is reviewed every five years and updated as necessary;

o requires FDOT, in cooperation with MPOs, to create quality performance metrics, such as safety, infrastructure condition, congestion relief, and mobility;

o requires each MPO, as part of its long-range transportation plan, to develop targets for such performance measures within its boundaries, and the targets must support efficient and safe movement of people and goods within the MPO and between regions;

o requires each MPO to annually report progress towards establishing performance targets for each measure in the transportation improvement plan; and

o requires FDOT to evaluate and post on its website whether each MPO has made singinficant progress towards its target for the applicable reporting period.

• requires, by Oct. 31, 2024, FDOT to submit a report to the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker, that provides a comprehensive review of the boundaries of each of FDOT’s districts and whether any district boundaries should be redrawn as a result of population growth and increased urban density;

• requires, by Oct. 1, 2024, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to begin implementation of a redesigned registration license plate;

• amends s.316.20655 relating to electric bicycles to provide that a local government may:

o adopt an ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements for the operation of electric bicycles and may adopt an ordinance requiring an operator of an electric bicycle to possess a government-issued photographic identification; and

o provide training on safe operation of electric bicycles and compliance with the traffic laws of this state which are applicable to electric bicycles

(provisions committee addition)

• amends s.316.2128 relating to micromobility devices, motorized scooters, and miniature motorcycles, to provide that a local government may:

o adopt an ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements for the operation of motorized scooters or micromobility devices and may adopt an ordinance requiring an operator of a motorized scooter or micromobility device to possess a government-issued photographic identification; and

o provide trainingonsafe operationof motorized scootersor micromobility devices and compliance withthe traffic lawsof thisstate which are 31applicable to motorized scooters or micromobility devices (provisions committee addition)

Note that the committee appears to have also deleted previously proposed language that:

• created a moratorium on new MPOs by requiring that after July 1, 2024, no additional MPOs be designated in this state except in urbanized areas, as defined by the United States Bureau of the Census, where the urbanized area boundary is not contiguous to an urbanized area designated before the 2020 census; and

• required an MPO long-range transportation plan to be approved by FDOT.

CS/CS/SB 1032 (Sen. Gruters), similar to HB 7049 before its recent amendment, was reported favorably by the Appropriations’ Committee on Transportation, Tourism and Economic Development on Feb. 20 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference.

LEGISLATIVE NEWS

A bill targeting left lane drivers has passed the Florida Legislature WFSU | Feb. 23

Social media bill passes amid DeSantis concerns News Service of Florida | Feb. 23

Seminoles gambling deal expected to bring $4.43 billion to Florida, report says South Florida Sun Sentinel | Feb. 23

This year’s version of a short-term vacation rental bill now goes to the full House Mitch Perry | Florida Phoenix | Feb. 22

My Safe Florida Home bill adds $100 million in funding, prioritizes low-income homeowners C.A.Bridges |Daytona Beach News-Journal | Feb. 20