Legislative Reporter | Feb. 12

Page 1

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter This was the fifth week of the legislative session. Lawmakers are heading into the second half of the 2024 session on a little bit lighter pace than in some recent years, with both chambers having passed just 12 bills. About half of those are the technical statutory revision bills required each year to make updates and delete provisions superseded by new law and the bill allowing a Joint Session for the governor’s annual State of the State address. By comparison, lawmakers had passed 19 bills through the first half of last year’s session.

At the 30-day mark, approximately 711 general bills not yet heard in committee.

The latest Bill Tracking Report as of the morning of Feb. 9 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 Development Permits and Orders: CS/HB 791 (Sen. Esposito and Sen. Overdorf) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Commerce Committee on Feb. 8 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

The bill amends ss.125.022 and 166.033 to make changes to the process of issuing development permits and orders to applicants for counties and municipalities, respectively. It requires municipalities and counties to specify in writing the minimum information that must be submitted in an application for a zoning approval, rezoning approval, subdivision approval, certification, special exception, or variance. A municipality or county must make the minimum information available for inspection and copying at the location where the local government receives applications for development permits and orders, and provide the information to the applicant at a pre-application meeting or post it on the local government’s website.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 2

Within five business days after receiving an application for approval of a development permit or development order, the county or municipality must confirm receipt of the application.

The bill provides that, for applications that do not require final action through a quasi-judicial hearing or a public hearing, the local government must act on an application for a development permit or development order within 120 days after the application is considered complete.

It specifies that all timeframes related to issuing development permits and orders restart if an applicant makes a “substantive change” to the application, defined in the bill as “an applicant-initiated change of 15 percent or more in the proposed density, intensity, or square footage of a parcel.” (Note the committee included the definition in the above sections whereas it was previously proposed to be included in the definitions of s.163.3164).

The bill also provides that a municipality or county must issue a refund to an applicant equal to: • 10 percent of the application fee if the county or municipality fails to issue written notification of completeness or written specification of areas of deficiency within 30 days after receiving the application; • 10 percent of the application fee if the county or municipality fails to issue written notification of completeness or written specification of areas of deficiency within 30 days after receiving the additional information upon an initial request; • 20 percent of the application fee if the county or municipality fails to issue written notification of completeness or written specification of areas of deficiency within 10 days after receiving the additional information upon a second request; • 50 percent of the application fee if the county or municipality fails to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application within 30 days after conclusion of the 120-day or 180-day application completion timeline; and • 100 percent of the application fee if the county or municipality fails to approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application 31 days or more after conclusion of the 120-day or 180-day application completion timeline.

Refunds are not required to be issued if the applicant and the local government agree to an extension of time, the delay is caused by the applicant or a third party, or the delay is attributable to a force majeure or other extraordinary circumstance.

A similar bill, SB 1150 (Sen. Perry) is in the Senate Judiciary Committee, its second of three committees of reference.

Everglades Protection Area: CS/SB 1364 (Sen. Calatayud) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Agriculture Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

SB 1364 amends s.163.3184 to require that any proposed comprehensive plan or plan amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1) or any municipality located therein which apply to land within, or within two miles of, the Everglades Protection Area as defined in s.373.4592(2), must be reviewed pursuant to the State Coordinated Review Process. (Note that the committee deleted language which provided examples of counties that this requirement might apply to.)

The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is tasked with determining whether the plan or plan amendment, or any portion thereof, will adversely impact the Everglades Protection Area or Everglades restoration and protection objectives in state law. It has 30 days after receipt of the plan or plan amendment to issue a written determination identifying any adverse impacts. Before adoption, DEP must coordinate with the Department of Commerce and the local government to identify any planning strategies or measures that the local government could include in the proposed plan or plan amendment to eliminate or mitigate any adverse impacts. If any portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment will result in adverse impacts, then the local government must either include planning strategies or measures to eliminate or mitigate the adverse impacts, or not adopt that portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment.

The bill also provides that comprehensive plan amendments that apply to any land within, or within two miles of, the Everglades Protection Area must be transmitted within 10 working days after the second hearing to DEP. The bill provides that the act may not be construed to limit the Right to Farm Act. The bill also amends s.163.3187 to: Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 3

• •

•

clarify that site-specific text changes relating directly to, and adopted simultaneously with, a small-scale future land use map amendment are permissible under that section; provide that a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment is not permitted for property that is located in Miami-Dade, Broward, or Monroe County, which is the subject of a proposed amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1) (i.e., Miami-Dade County) or any municipality within, or within two miles of, the Everglades Protection Area as defined under state law; and provide that within 10 days after the adoption of a small-scale development amendment, a county whose boundaries include any portion of the Everglades Protection Area as defined under state law, and the municipalities within the county, must transmit a copy of the amendment to the Department of Commerce for recordkeeping purposes.

A similar bill, HB 723 (Rep. Busatta Cabrera), is in the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.

Expedited Approval of Residential Building Permits: CS/CS/SB 812 (Sen. Ingoglia), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Regulated Industries Committee on Feb. 5 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference.

The amended bill creates s.177.073 relating to the expedited approval of residential building permits before a final plat is recorded.

By Oct. 1, 2024, the bill requires a governing body of a county that has 75,000 residents or more and a governing body of a municipality that has 30,000 residents or more to each create a program to expedite the process for issuing building permits for residential subdivisions or planned communities before a final plat is recorded with the clerk of the circuit court. The expedited process must include an application for an applicant to identify up to 50 percent of planned homes, or the number of building permits, that the governing body must issue for the residential subdivision or planned community. However, such a local government may issue building permits that exceed 50 percent of the residential subdivision or planned community.

By Dec. 31, 2027, the bill requires such a governing body to update its expedited process to contain an application that allows an applicant to request an increased percentage of up to 75 percent of building permits for planned homes that the local governing body must issue for the residential subdivision or planned community. However, such a local government may issue building permits that exceed 75 percent of the residential subdivision or planned community.

The bill exempts Monroe County from the provisions which require the governing body to create a program to expedite the issuance of building permits. The Senate Regulated Industries Committee also added language that would also exempt a municipality with 25 acres or less of contiguous land zoned for residential development or agricultural purposes from the Oct. 1, 2024 requirement and exempts a municipality with 25 acres or less of land zoned for residential development or agricultural purposes from the Dec. 31, 2027 requirement.

If a governing body had a program in place before July 1, 2023, 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 or planned community. However, such a local government may issue building permits that exceed 50 percent of the residential subdivision or planned community.

The bill requires a governing body to create: • a two-step application process for the adoption of a preliminary plat, inclusive of any plans, in order to expedite the issuance of building permits related to such plats. The application must allow an applicant to identify the percentage of planned homes, or the number of building permits, that the governing body must issue for the residential subdivision or planned community indicated in the preliminary plat; • a master building permit process consistent with existing master building permit application requirements for applicants seeking multiple building permits for residential subdivisions or planned communities:

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 4

o provides that a master building permit issued pursuant to this requirement is valid for 3 consecutive years after its issuance or until the adoption of a new Florida Building Code, whichever is earlier; and o after a new Building Code is adopted, the applicant may apply for a new master building permit, which, upon approval, is valid for three consecutive years.

In accordance with the timelines above, the bill 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 planned community; • •

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, gas, water, and wastewater utilities; and the applicant holds a valid performance bond for up to 130 percent of the necessary improvements that have not been completed upon submission of the application under this section. For purposes of a master planned community, a valid performance bond is required on a phase-by-phase basis.

The bill allows an applicant to use a private provider to expedite the application process. 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. Applicants are allowed to contract to sell, but not transfer ownership of, a residential structure or building located in the residential subdivision or planned community 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 prohibits an applicant from obtaining a temporary or 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. Note that the committee amended this provision to add in the reference to temporary certificates of occupancy.

The bill provides that an applicant has a vested right in a preliminary plat that has been approved by a governing body if all of the following conditions are met: • the applicant relies in good faith on the approved preliminary plat or any amendments thereto; and • the applicant incurs obligations and expenses, commences construction of the residential subdivision or planned community, and is continuing in good faith with the development of the property.

The bill provides that upon the establishment of an applicant’s vested rights, a governing body may not make substantive changes to the preliminary plat without the applicant’s written consent.

The bill also requires an applicant to indemnify and hold harmless the local government, its governing body, its agents, and its employees from: • liability or damages resulting from the issuance of a building permit or the construction, reconstruction, or improvement or repair of a residential building or structure, including any associated utilities, located in the residential subdivision or planned community • liability or disputes resulting from the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a residential building or structure that is constructed, reconstructed, improved, or repaired before the approval and recordation of the final plat of the qualified project.

This indemnification includes, but is not limited to, any liability and damage resulting from wind, fire, flood, construction defects, bodily injury, and any actions, issues, or disputes arising out of a contract or other agreement between the developer and a utility operating in the residential subdivision or planned community. However, this indemnification does not extend to governmental actions that infringe on the applicant’s vested rights.

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

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 5

A similar bill, CS/HB 665 (Rep. McClain), was reported favorably, as amended, by the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 8.

Governing Bodies: CS/SB 894 (Sen. Bradley) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Government Oversight and Accountability Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

The bill amends s.166.0213 to allow the governing body of a municipality to convene meetings and conduct official business via teleconferencing or other technological means, as long as such meetings: • do not exceed two times per year; • meet all of the requirements for public notice, public access, and public participation; • do not include formal action on ordinances; and • are not a quasi-judicial hearing.

The bill allows the governor to waive the above limitations, except for the requirement to provide public notice, access, and participation, by issuance of a declaration of a state of emergency, pursuant to Chapter 252 the State Emergency Act, that affects the municipality in which the meeting would occur. The waiver of the requirements cannot extend for more than the first 60 days of the state of emergency. (Note this provision was amended by the committee to provide more specific guidance.)

A similar bill, HB 157 (Rep. Caruso), is in the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee, its first of three committees of reference.

Land Use and Development Regulations: CS/CS/HB 1221 (Rep. McClain) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference on Feb. 8.

The bill does the following: • creates s.83.8085 to provide that the expansion of a self-storage facility that is adjacent to and abutting an existing self-storage facility, and that is owned and managed by the same person or entity, may not be considered or deemed a new storage facility and is considered to be an integral part of the existing facility for the purposes of satisfying any minimum distance requirements established by a local authority; • amends the definitions in s.163.3164 to: o amend the definition for “density” to reflect dwelling units per acre, rather than the current residents or employees/acre; o provide a definition for “infill residential development” as the expansion of an existing residential development on a contiguous vacant parcel of no more than 20 acres in size within a residential future land use category and a residential zoning district that is contiguous on the majority of all sides by residential development. For the purposes of this definition, “contiguous” is defined as the touching, bordering, or adjoining along a boundary. Properties separated by a roadway, railroad, canal, or other public easement are considered contiguous if they would be contiguous but for the easement; o revise the definition of “intensity” to provide that the term shall be expressed in square feet per unit of land; o amend the definition of “urban service area,” to mean areas where public facilities and services, including, but not limited to, central water and sewer capacity and roads, are already in place or may be expanded through investment by the local government or the private sector as evidenced by an executed agreement with the local government to provide urban services within the local government’s 20-year planning period; and o amend the definition of “urban sprawl,” to mean an unplanned or uncontrolled development pattern.

• amends s.163.3177 to: o require comprehensive plan elements and amendments to be based on relevant data, removes the consideration of community goals and vision as a separate component of a local government’s analysis, and remove a provision that allows local governments to collect and use original data in their analysis;

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 6

• •

•

•

o prohibits a local government from mandating a particular professionally accepted methodology or reject a professionally accepted methodology utilized in support of a comprehensive plan amendment (language added in committee); o direct comprehensive plans to be based on the greater of the estimates and projections published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or those generated by the local government based on a professionally acceptable methodology; o prohibit optional elements of a comprehensive plan from containing policies that restrict the density or intensity established in the future land use element portion of a comprehensive plan; o require the future land use element to account for: ▪ the amount of land necessary to accommodate single-family, two-family, and fee simple townhome development; ▪ the amount of land outside of the urban service area (excluding lands designated for conservation, preservation, or other public use); and ▪ the encouragement for the location of schools proximate to urban service areas to the extent possible and in all areas necessary to provide adequate school capacity to serve residential development. amends s.163.3187 to increase the maximum size of a small-scale amendment from 50 acres to 150 acres; amends s.163.3202 to: o require local land development regulations to establish minimum lot sizes within single-family, twofamily and fee-simple, single-family townhouse zoning districts to accommodate the maximum density authorized in the comprehensive plan, net of the land area required for subdivision roads, sidewalks, stormwater ponds, open space, landscape buffers, and any other mandatory land development regulations that require land to be set aside that could otherwise be used for development of these types of residential use; and o require that applications for infill development must be administratively approved and no comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, or variance is required if the proposed infill development has the same or less gross density as the existing development and is generally consistent with the development standards, including lot size and setbacks, of existing development. Development orders issued pursuant to this provision are to be deemed consistent with all local comprehensive plans and land development regulations. This provision applies notwithstanding any ordinance existing on July 1, 2024. create s.166.04152 to allow a final order or decision regarding historically significant property made by a locally established historic preservation board or commission, 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 (language added by committee); and amend s.125.01 to add hearing such appeals to the powers and duties of county board of commissioners (language added by committee).

Finally, the amended bill includes a severability clause which provides that if any provision of the bill is held invalid with respect to any person or circumstances, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the bill which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

Local Government Actions: CS/HB 1547 (Rep. McClure), a proposed committee substitute, was reported favorably by the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee on Feb. 7 and moves to the House Appropriations Committee, its second of three committees of reference.

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.

The bill 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

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 7

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.

Note that the committee substitute deleted previously proposed language relating to state agency review of local government ordinances and charter provisions that impact food, energy, and supply chain security.

CS/SB 1628 (Sen. Collins), as amended by the Senate Community Affairs on Feb. 6, is consistent with CS/HB 1547 and now moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final of two committees of reference.

Millage Rates: CS/CS/HB 1195 (Rep. Garrison), was reported favorably, reflecting an amendment to correct a scrivener’s error, by the House State Affairs Committee on Feb. 7 and moves to the House Ways & Means Committee, its final committee of reference.

The bill provides that a two-thirds vote of the governing body of a county, municipality, or independent special district is required to pass any millage rate increase, other than a millage rate increase that already requires a threefourths, unanimous vote, or approval in a referendum under current law.

A similar bill, CS/SB 1322 (Sen. Ingoglia), was reported favorably by the Senate Finance and Tax Committee on Feb. 8 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference.

Municipal Water and Sewer Utility Rates: SB 104 (Sen. Jones) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Community Affairs Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

The bill amends s.180.191, which deals with limitations on rates charged consumers outside city limits. The bill now provides a municipality within this state which operates a water or sewer utility providing service to customers in another recipient municipality, which also has a facility in that recipient municipality, must charge consumers in the recipient municipality the same rates, fees, and charges as it does the consumers inside its own municipal boundaries. (Previously the bill referenced using a facility located in the recipient municipality versus having a facility in the recipient municipality.)

It was also amended to included definitions for facility, wastewater treatment facility, and water treatment facility.

A similar bill, CS/HB 47 (Rep. Robinson) is in the House Commerce Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

Public Meetings and Workshops for Regional Advisory Committees: CS/HB 413 (Rep. Altman) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee on Feb. 7 and moves to the House Ethics, Elections & Open Government Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.

The bill provides that, notwithstanding any law to the contrary, a regional advisory committee created to provide technical expertise and support to the National Estuary Program, whose membership is composed of representatives from four or more counties may conduct public meetings and workshops using communications media technology (CMT). (Note the limitation of the provisions to regional advisory committees that were created to provide technical expertise and support to the National Estuary Program was added by the committee.)

An advisory committee member who participates in the meeting or a workshop using CMT is considered present.

The CMT used for such a meeting must allow all persons attending to audibly communicate as if they were physically present.

The bill requires the public notice of the meeting state whether it will be conducted using CMT, how an interested person may participate, and the location of any facilities where CMT will be available.

A similar bill, CS/CS/SB 224 (Sen. Wright), is on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 8

Public Works Projects: CS/SB 742 (Sen. Grall) was reported favorably by the Senate Government Oversight and Accountability Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference.

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, maintains 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.

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 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/SB 684 (Sen. DiCeglie) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Community Affairs Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Regulated Industries Committee, its second of three committees of reference.

The bill creates s.177.073 to require a governing body of a county or municipality 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 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 a valid performance bond for up to 120 percent of the necessary utilities, roads, and stormwater improvements that have not been completed upon submission of the application under this section.

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.

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.

An applicant would be 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.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 9

The bill prohibits an applicant 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.

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 or any amendments; • the applicant substantially changes his or her position, including making improvements pursuant to s.117.031(9) or incurs other obligations and expenses; and • any change by the governing body would constitute an inequitable interference in the approved preliminary plat.

The bill 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.

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

The bill also amends s.553.792 to modify the timeframes for which local governments must process building permit applications (Note the committee revised the bill provisions modifying time periods for local governments to approve building permit applications with a new scheme based on size and type of structures): • 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: o within 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 within 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 within 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 within 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 within 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 within 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.

These timeframes do not apply if the timeframes set by a local ordinance are more stringent than the timeframes provided in the bill: Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 10

•

• •

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. 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. 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. 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 notice to the applicant, within the specified timeframes for the respective type of permit for which the local government must approve, approve with conditions, or deny the permit, which specifically states 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; removes from current law the schedule for which local governments may make up to three requests for additional information from an applicant; and 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 the parties agree in writing to a reasonable extension of time.

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 Building Code to upgrade technology hardware and software systems used to enforce the Building Code.

It 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) prepared by a private provider who is a licensed engineer or architect. (Language added by the committee.)

• 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; and • defines the term “private provider firm” for purposes of allowing local governments to establish a registration system to verify private provider licensure requirements (language added by the committee).

It 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. (Note this language was added by the committee.)

Review of Advisory Bodies: HB 1211 (Rep. Botana) was reported favorably by the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 7 and is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill requires each executive agency with an adjunct advisory body to upload a report by August 15 of each year to the Florida Fiscal Portal website maintained by the Executive Office of the Governor. The report must include the following information: • the statutory authority pursuant to which each advisory body is created; • a brief description of the purpose or objective of each advisory body; • a list indicating the membership of the advisory body, the appointing authority for each member position, whether the member positions are filled or vacant, the term of each member position, and if vacant, when the vacancy occurred; • a list of the meeting dates and times of each advisory body for the preceding three fiscal years; Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 11

• • •

a brief summary of the work plan for each advisory body for the current fiscal year and the next two fiscal years; the amount of appropriated funds and staff time used in each fiscal year to support each advisory body; and a recommendation by the agency, with supporting rationale, to continue, terminate, or modify each advisory body.

The bill also requires any law creating or authorizing the creation of an advisory body to include the repeal of the advisory body on October 2 of the third year after enactment. The legislature may save the advisory body from repeal by reenactment of its authority before the date of repeal.

An identical bill, SB 276 (Sen. Avila), was passed by the Senate on Jan. 10 and is in the House in Messages.

Term Limits: CS/SB 438 (Sen. Ingoglia) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by Senate Community Affairs Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

The bill creates a term limit for county commissioners, providing that a county commissioner may not appear on a ballot for reelection if, by the end of his or her current term of office, the commissioner will have served, or would have served if not for resignation, in that office for eight consecutive years. In a county without imposed term limits, service of a term of office that began before Nov. 8, 2022 is not counted towards the new term limits. The bill specifies that the statutory term limits for county commissioners does not supersede any more restrictive term limits imposed by a county charter and does not authorize anyone subject to such term limits to serve an additional eight years.

The bill also provides that a county commissioner who completes eight consecutive years of service may not qualify for or appear on the ballot for a different district seat or at-large seat of the county commission until two years after the end date of his or her initial term.

The bill was amended in the Senate Community Affairs Committee to include language providing that the term limits imposed by this bill apply to counties in which term limits are not imposed by a county charter as of July 1, 2024. The committee also added a new provision to require a county whose charter authorizes county commissioners to serve longer than the limits impose in the bill to hold a referendum election that coincides with the 2024 general election to determine whether the limits imposed should apply to the county. In the event the county rejects the term limits imposed by this section, they do not apply. Language for the ballot title is also included in the bill.

CS/HB 57 (Rep. Salzman), similar to CS/SB 438 as original filed, is in the House State Affairs Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Regional Rural Development Grants Program: HB 141 (Rep. Abbott) was reported favorably by the House Regulatory Reform & Economic Development Subcommittee on Feb. 6 and moves to the House Ways & Means Committee, its second of three committees of reference.

The bill amends s.288.018 relating to the Regional Rural Development Grants Program. It does the following: • specifies that funding provided under the Regional Rural Development Grants Program are not matching grants; • 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 consider the demonstrated need of the applicant for assistance when approving participants for the program.

A similar bill, CS/SB 196 (Sen. Simon), is in the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

Unsolicited Proposals for Public-Private Partnerships: CS/SB 870 (Sen. Boyd) was reported favorably by the Senate Community Affairs Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 12

The bill amends s.255.065 to provide an alternative process by which local governments and other political subdivisions of the state may enter into a public-private partnership for a project offered by a private entity’s unsolicited proposal. The bill allows the governmental entity to hold public meetings at which the unsolicited proposal is presented for public comment. At a subsequent public meeting, the governmental entity must present its determination whether the unsolicited proposal is in the public’s interest, based on the: • benefits to the public; • financial structure of and any economic efficiencies that are achieved by the proposal; • submitting private entity’s qualifications and experience, and ability to perform the project; • project’s compatibility with regional infrastructure plans; and • public comments submitted at the meeting.

The determination must also explain why the proposal should proceed and address any public comments. The government’s determination of public interest must be published in the Florida Administrative Register for at least seven days.

The bill continues to allow a governmental entity to proceed with competitive procurement in response to its receipt of an unsolicited proposal as currently provided in s.255.065 should it choose that process instead of the public meeting process provided in the bill.

An identical bill, CS/HB 781 (Rep. Clemons, Sr.), is in the House State Affairs Committee, its final of two committees of reference.

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES Comprehensive Waste and Recycling Plan: HB 455 (Rep. Casello) was reported favorably by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 8 and is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill amends s.403.7032 to require DEP, by July 1, 2025, to develop a comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan for the state based on recommendations from the 2020 report. DEP must convene a technical advisory group to help develop the plan. At a minimum, the bill requires the plan to identify recycling goals based on sustainable materials management and waste diversion and include a three-year plan to implement the following strategies: • • •

recycling education and outreach. DEP must propose statewide solutions to provide local recycling information and education throughout the state. local government recycling assistance. DEP is required to evaluate the benefits and challenges of the former state Recycling and Education Grant Program and provide recommendations for reinstating the program or considering other means of providing recycling assistance to local governments recycling materials market development. DEP must consider and recommend plans to develop and promote markets for recycling materials.

Upon completion of the plan, the bill requires DEP to provide a report to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The report must include an update on the status of the plan and any recommendations for statutory changes necessary to achieve the recycling goals or strategies identified in the plan.

An identical bill, SB 36 (Sen. Stewart), is in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, its second of three committees of reference.

Mitigation: CS/HB 1073 (Rep. Truenow) was reported favorably by the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee on Feb. 5 and moves to the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

The bill does the following: • for the purposes of Chapter 373, Part IV relating to management and storage of surface waters, defines “private-sector sponsor” as an individual or entity that establishes and operates a wetland mitigation bank Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 13

•

• • •

•

•

project and is responsible for compliance with any permit or authorization, including, but not limited to, funding and undertaking wetland enhancement, restoration or creation activities, and the provision of financial assurances, as well as any required monitoring, reporting, and maintenance of the mitigation bank; adds “applicants” as eligible entities that may purchase water quality enhancement areas (WQEA) credits and defines applicants to mean a governmental entity or private sector entity that wishes to purchase water quality enhancement credits to meet an assigned basin management action plan (BMAP) allocation or reasonable assurance plan (RAP) for the purpose of achieving the net improvement performance standard; directs DEP and the water management districts (WMDs) to encourage the establishment of private mitigation banks and offsite regional mitigation on private and public lands owned by a local government; removes the authorization for DEP and the WMDs to participate in the establishment of public mitigation banks; clarifies that, when a local government allows a public or private mitigation project to be created on land it has purchased for conservation purposes, the exception applies to instances when a local government has allowed a public or private mitigation project, including permittee-responsible mitigation, to be created on land it has purchased for conservation purposes; provides that a local government may, through a public procurement process, solicit proposals from privatesector sponsors for a mitigation bank on public lands purchased for conservation purposes: o if such a mitigation bank is to be established and operated on public land, the local government and private-sector sponsor must enter into an agreement requiring the private-sector sponsor to establish and operate the mitigation bank to conform to the mitigation banking permitting requirements; and o the agreement must require the private-sector sponsor to pay a usage fee to the local government which reflects the market value of the public land, as determined by a competitive process in accordance with state law or such other method of assuring that the cost of the use of the public land is fully accounted for in the pricing of mitigation credits. provides that, in determining the number of mitigation bank credits assigned to the mitigation bank, DEP or the WMD must reflect the conservation status of the land in the location factor set forth in the uniform mitigation assessment method, and provides that these requirements apply to drainage basins or corresponding hydrologic units if the private-sector sponsor demonstrates to DEP or the WMD that in-kind credits are not available

CS/CS/SB 1532 (Sen. Brodeur), which also deals with mitigation, was reported favorably by the Senate Community Affairs Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference.

This bill expands the water quality enhancement credit program to allow private entities to purchase credits.

Currently, only governmental entities may purchase water quality enhancement credits under the program.

Specifically, the bill provides that water quality enhancement credits may be sold to private and governmental entities seeking to meet an assigned basin management action plan allocation or reasonable assurance plan or for the purpose of achieving net improvement performance standards after reasonable assurances have been provided for the design and construction of all onsite stormwater management required by law.

Regarding mitigation banking, the bill allows limited use of local government land for private mitigation banks, provided that the private mitigation banks are located in credit-deficient basins and would produce certain habitat type credits that are unavailable or insufficient in such basins. A local government with land in a credit-deficient basin may consider a proposal from a private entity 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. The bill provides that 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 certain requirements.

The bill also provides 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.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 14

HOUSING Affordable Housing: SB 328E1 (Sen. Calatayud) was passed unanimously by the Senate, reflecting floor amendments, on Feb. 7 and is in Messages to the House.

The bill amends various provisions of the Live Local Act (act), passed during the 2023 Regular Session, which made substantial changes and additions to affordable housing related programs and policies at both the state 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: • deletes previously proposed language that would have eliminated the directive for local governments to approve qualifying developments in industrial areas; • 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 (note the 150 percent was added on the floor): 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; • removes previously proposed language that would have changed height restriction from currently allowed heights within one mile to those within one-quarter mile; • 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 that 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 three stories, whichever is higher (note that, before a floor amendment, the bill referenced 150 percent of the tallest building on property within one-quarter mile of the proposed development or three stories, whichever was higher); • prohibits qualifying developments within one-quarter mile of a military installation from utilizing the act’s administrative approval process; • exempts certain airport impacted areas from the act’s provisions; • requires developments authorized under the act be treated as a conforming use even after expiration of the development’s affordability period and after the expiration of the applicable statutes; • modifies parking reduction requirements for qualifying developments located near certain transportation facilities; • requires local governments to publish on its website a policy containing procedures and expectations for the administrative approval of qualifying developments; • clarifies that only the affordable units in a qualifying development must be rental units; • requires a qualifying development within a transit-oriented development or area to be mixed-use residential; and • allows applicants for a proposed development authorized under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7), who submitted an application, written request or notice to utilize these provisions and the request was received by Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 15

the local government before the effective date of the bill, can notify the local government by July 1, 2024 that they want to proceed under the provisions as they existed at the time of submittal. Local government must also give the applicant an opportunity to submit a revised application etc. to account for the changes in the bill (this language was added on the floor).

As it pertains to the act’s ad valorem tax exemption for newly constructed multifamily developments, the bill makes the following changes: • deletes previously proposed language that provided that “substantially renovated” units may qualify for the exemption, and provided a definition; • requires more than 10 units, rather than 70 units, to be set aside for income-limited persons and families in Florida Keys to qualify for the exemption; • clarifies that the Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (FHFC) duties are ministerial in certifying eligibility for exemption, while local property appraisers maintain authority to grant tax exemptions; and • outlines the method for property appraisers to determine values of tax-exempt units and deletes previously proposed language which identified criteria for a required market value analysis.

The bill also appropriates, for the 2024-25 fiscal year, $100 million in non-recurring funds from the state’s allocation from the federal Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund in the General Revenue Fund to the FHFC to implement the Florida Hometown Hero Program and makes one programmatic change, and expands the authority for the FHFC to preclude developers from participating in its programs for certain violations.

CS/HB 1239 (Rep. Lopez) was amended by the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 7 to be virtually identical to SB 328E1.

Affordable Housing in Counties Designated as Areas of Critical State Concern: CS/SB 1456 (Sen. Rodriguez) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Community Affairs Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Finance and Tax Committee, its second of three committees of reference.

CS/SB 1456 makes the following changes: • amends s.380.0552 to provide that, as it pertains to hurricane evacuation clearance time modeling, mobile home residents are not considered permanent residents, and that the Key West Area of Critical State Concern will be included in Commerce’s hurricane evacuation modeling; • amends s.380.0666 to authorize 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; • amends s.420.9075 exempts a county or municipality whose land has been designated by the legislature as an area of critical state concern within the past five years, and for which the legislature has declared an intent to provide affordable housing, from a requirement to specified portions of the local housing assistance trust fund to provide assistance to very-low-income and low-income persons; this provision expires on July 1, 2029 and applies retroactively; and • allows 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 to transfer its cumulative surplus from those taxes incurred through September 30, 2024, for the purpose of providing affordable housing for employees whose housing opportunities are impacted by the operation of tourist-related businesses in the county. Any housing financed with funds from this surplus will maintain its status as affordable housing for a minimum of 99 years.

Note that the amended bill removed provisions of the bill which exempt the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concerns from the provision which 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. It also removed provisions of the bill modifying provisions of the local option ad valorem property tax exemption for affordable housing developments.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 16

CS/CS/HB 1297 (Rep.Mooney), a similar bill, was reported favorably by the House Ways & Means Committee on Feb. 8 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

Housing for Agricultural Workers: CS/HB 1051 (Rep. Tuck) was reported favorably by the House State Affairs Committee on Feb. 7 and moves to the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference.

The bill amends s.163.3162 to define “agricultural worker” as a person who: • is seasonally or annually employed in bona fide agricultural production • is lawfully present in the United States; • is authorized, and remains allowed, to work; and • has been verified according to the state’s employment eligibility verification requirements.

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

The bill defines “housing site” 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.

The bill provides that a governmental entity may not adopt or enforce any legislation which inhibits the construction or installation of housing for agricultural employees on land zoned for agricultural use and operated as a bona fide farm, except as provided by law. The bill requires that a housing site authorized under this section: • must meet all local and state building standards, including migrant farmworker housing standards regulated by the Department of Health and federal standards for H-2A visa housing • must be maintained in a neat, orderly, and safe manner; • must have structures 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 housing site’s climate-controlled facilities; • must provide 50-foot setbacks on all sides; • may not be located less than 250 feet from a property line adjacent to property zoned for residential use; • if within 500 feet of a property line adjacent to property zoned for residential use, must contain screening consisting of tree, wall, berm or fence coverage at least six feet in height; and • must cover access drives with dust-free material such as packed shell or gravel.

The bill also provides that a local ordinance adopted pursuant to this section must comply with state and federal regulations for migrant farmworker housing, and that a local government may validly adopt less restrictive land use regulations.

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 used as living quarters must be removed within 180 days of notice from the local government unless the permit is reinstated.

The bill provides that, notwithstanding the provisions herein, the construction or installation of housing for seasonal 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 of this section, unless the housing site will be enlarged, remodeled, renovated, or rehabilitated.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 17

A similar bill, SB 1082 (Sen. Collins), was to be heard in the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 8 but was temporarily postponed.

TRANSPORTATION Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services: CS/SB 1084 (Sen. Collins), a delete-all amendment, was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment and General Government on Feb. 8 and moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

CS/SB 1084 makes a number of changes to regulation of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.

Among the changes, the bill 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.

HB 1071 (Rep. Alvarez), identical to CS/SB 1084 as originally filed, is scheduled to be heard in the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference, on Feb. 12.

Department of Transportation: CS/CS/HB 1301 (Rep. Abbott and Rep. Berfield) was reported, reflecting amendments, by the House Infrastructure & Tourism Subcommittee on Feb. 5 and moves to the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

The bill addresses matters related to transportation. Specifically, the bill: • removes obsolete language that requires the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Secretary to appoint FDOT’s inspector general; • expressly authorizes FDOT to procure and establish contracts with one or more financial institutions, credit card companies, or other entities for the acceptance and processing of credit cards, charge cards, debit cards, electronic funds transfers, or any other means of electronic payment for the collection of amounts to which the turnpike enterprise is entitled; • changes the time period a prepaid toll account can remain dormant from three years to 10; • provides that FDOT may not expend any state funds to support a project or program of a public transit provider, authority, public-use airport, or a port which: o violates s.381.00316; o is found advertising, enforcing, promoting or displaying a recommendation, requirement or mandate relating to COVID-19 or any variant thereof which is produced, recommended, or enacted by: ▪ the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; ▪ the U.S. Department of Health; ▪ the Transportation Security Administration; ▪ the U.S. Department of Transportation and any operating administration thereof; and ▪ any other governmental entity.

State funds will be withheld until the entity is in compliance with s.380.00316 and the recommendation, requirement or mandate is no longer being advertised, enforced, promoted or displayed.

• provides that the remainder of the revenues deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund (STTF) derived from the registration of motor vehicles must first be available for appropriation for payments under a service contract entered into with the Florida Department of Transportation Financing Corporation to fund arterial highway projects; • allows FDOT to enter into a service contract with the Florida Department of Transportation Financing Corporation to finance projects identified in the Moving Florida Forward Infrastructure Initiative in the work program; • creates s.339.155 which provides that when developing transportation plans, FDOT, and Metropolitan Planning Organizations may not consider any nonpecuniary social, political, or ideological factor: o “nonpecuniary factor” means: ▪ environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) interests;

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 18

▪

• • • •

•

social governance standards, benchmarks and requirements, including, but not limited to, environmental or social justice; ▪ any initiative, action, framework, or target that advances or implements the goals of the Paris Agreement, defined as the resolution adopted by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s 21st Conference of Parties in Paris France; and ▪ any similar initiative adopted by the Federal Government or any agency thereof to achieve net zero emissions of carbon dioxide. creates s.339.652 to establish a Supply Chain Innovation Grant Program within the Department of Commerce to fund proposed projects that support supply change innovation; provides that if no funds are allocated to projects that qualify for the New Starts Transit Program by June 30 of the current fiscal year, then such funds must revert and are appropriated to the STTF; provides that each public transit provider, during a publicly noticed meeting, must annually certify that its budgeted and actual administrative costs are not greater than 10 percent above the annual state average of administrative costs; provides that a public transit provider may not expend state funds directly, indirectly, or through a grant or agreement, for: o a marketing or public awareness campaign in support of any social, political, or ideological interest, whether through a digital or print medium, including the use of any wrap, tinting, or paint on a bus, commercial motor vehicle or motor vehicle; o the use of an asset owned or funded by a public transit provider, including an existing or future asset, which displays, contains, or markets, whether through digital or print medium, any social, political, or ideological interest; and o prohibited activities include the promotion of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) interests or any campaign related to environmental or social justice causes. This does not apply to the acknowledgment of recognized holidays under s.110.117; and provides that any new wrap, tinting, paint, medium, or advertisement on the passenger windows of a vehicle used by a public transit provider may not be darker than the legally allowed window tinting requirements.

Note that the committee removed previously proposed language that would have created flexibility for FDOT by including the use of a tiered system that correlates with the cost of the construction project to meet the required percentage threshold for funding the purchase of plant materials.

CS/SB 1266 (Sen. DiCeglie), a delete-all amendment which also revises provisions related to the Department of Transportation, was reported favorably by the Senate Transportation Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism and Economic Development, its second of three committees of reference. Note that, among the changes, this bill was amended to include the tiered system that was just deleted from CS/CS/HB 1301.

Transportation: CS/SB 1032 (Sen. Gruters), a delete-all amendment, was reported favorably by the Senate Transportation Committee on Feb. 6 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism and Economic Development, its second of three committees of reference.

CS/SB 1032 amends various provisions relating to transportation. Specifically, the bill: • deletes an obsolete effective date regarding the compensation of the Secretary of Transportation and his or her assistant secretaries; • revises the membership of the Center for Urban Transportation Research’s advisory board (added by the committee); • makes a technical change to the Implementing Solutions from Transportation Research and Evaluating Emerging Technologies (I-STREET) Living Lab’s advisory board (added by the committee); • amends legislative intent regarding metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to emphasize: developing multimodal transportation systems, instead of surface transportation systems; and serving the mobility needs Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 19

• • •

• • • •

• • • • •

of people and freight and fostering economic growth and development throughout the urbanized areas of this state while balancing conservation of natural resources; provides that after July 1, 2024, no additional MPOs may be designated in Florida except in urbanized areas where the urbanized area is not contiguous to an urbanized area designated before the 2020 census; repeals the requirement that when there is more than one MPO in an urbanized area, the MPOs must consult with every other MPO in the urbanized area and the state to coordinate plans and transportation improvement programs and to ensure consistency in of data used in the planning process; amends the considerations required by each MPO in developing its Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Transportation Improvement Program to include conserving natural resources, instead of promoting energy conservation. Additionally, MPOs must consider projects and strategies to reduce traffic and congestion.; requires the FDOT to annually convene MPOs of similar size to exchange best practices; requires FDOT to provide training for new MPO governing board members; requires, by Feb. 28, 2025, the MPOs serving Lee and Collier Counties to submit a feasibility report to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives exploring the benefits, costs, and process of consolidation into a single MPO serving the contiguous urbanized area; creates the following provisions regarding MPO accountability and transparency: o requires FDOT to review each MPO’s long-range transportation plan for certain things; o requires FDOT to create quality performance metrics to evaluate each MPO; o requires each MPO to annually report its score for each quality performance metric and publish its score and supporting data on its website; and o requires FDOT to validate each MPOs score and make needed adjustments. includes public-private partnerships in the list of innovative financing techniques that MPOs may consider; requires the integration of new technologies into MPO long-range transportation plans; repeals the Metropolitan Planning Organization Advisory Council (MPOAC); repeals Space Florida’s duty to partner with the MPOAC regarding how aerospace planning and programming with be part of Florida’s transportation planning process; and requires FDOT to submit, by Oct. 31, 2024, a comprehensive review of its district boundaries and whether any district boundaries should be redrawn as a result of population growth and increased urban density.

Note that the committee also amended the bill to: • remove the repeal of the Florida Transportation Commission along with various provisions in the bill conforming to its repeal; • remove changes to the schedule for FDOT to develop its tentative work program; • remove a provision requiring FDOT to assumption of control of MPOs under certain conditions; and • remove a provision awarding $5 million from the State Transportation Trust Fund to certain MPOs. A similar bill, HB 7049 (Rep. McFarland), is in the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final of two committees of reference.

Transportation: CS/CS/SB 266 (Sen. Hooper) was reported favorably, as amended, by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism and Economic Development on Feb. 8 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final of three committees of reference.

CS/CS/SB 266 contains various provisions relating to transportation. Specifically, the bill: • prohibits FDOT from annually committing more than 20 percent of the revenues derived from state motor fuel taxes and motor vehicle license-related fees to public transit projects, with the following exceptions: o a public transit project that uses revenues derived from state fuel taxes and motor vehicle license related fees to match funds made available by the federal government; and o a public transit project included in the transportation improvement program and approved by a supermajority vote of the board of county commissioners where the project is located.

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 20

•

• • • • • •

•

•

amends provisions relating to FDOT’s authority regarding public-private partnerships to: o replace the term “public-private partnership agreement” with the term “comprehensive agreement”; o require an “independent,” instead of an “investment grade,” traffic and revenue study prepared by a traffic and revenue expert; o revise the timeframe, based on the project’s complexity, during which FDOT will accept other proposals for the same project as it received an unsolicited P3 proposal; o authorize FDOT to enter into an interim agreement with a private entity proposing the development or operation of a qualifying project; o limit the FDOT secretary’s power, upon written findings that a comprehensive agreement requires a term in excess of 50 years, to authorize a term of up to 75 years to projects partially or completely funded from project user fees; o require FDOT to notify the Division of Bond Finance before entering into an interim agreement (language added by the committee); and o conform other statutory provisions referencing to public-private partnership agreements. amends s.366.044 to prohibit local government from adopting standards or specifications that deem reclaimed asphalt pavement material to be solid waste (language added by the committee); allows FDOT, for phased design-build construction contracts, to allow issuance of multiple contract performance and payment bonds in succession to align with each phase of the contract to meet bonding requirements (language added by the committee); provides that a claimant must institute an action against a contractor or surety within 365 days after the performance of the labor or completion of delivery of the materials or supplies; revises a presumption of sole proximate cause on the part of a driver of a vehicle involved in a crash within a construction zone to exclude low-THC cannabis; defines terms and expands contractor limits of liability for personal injury, property damage, or death arising from specified performance of work on a transportation facility or from specified acts or omissions of a third party; revises the application of immunity when the proximate cause of the injury, damage, or death is a latent condition, defect, error, or omission created by the contractor and in the contract documents, or when the proximate cause was the contractor’s failure to perform, update, or comply with the maintenance of traffic control plans, instead of with the traffic safety plan; removes current law providing that in any civil action against FDOT or its agents, consultants, engineers, or contractors for work performed, if FDOT and others specified are immune from liability or are not parties to the litigation, they may not be named on the verdict form or be found to be at fault or responsible for the personal injury, property damage, or death; and codifies FDOT’s existing local agency program into Florida law and provides statutory requirements for the program.

Note that the amended bill also deletes previously proposed changes to s.337.401 and 337.403 dealing with the use of right-of-way for utilities subject to regulation and interference caused by utilities.

CS/CS/HB 287 (Rep. Esposito), which deals with similar issues, is in the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its final committee of reference.

LEGISLATIVE NEWS Lawmakers look at potential tax breaks News Service of Florida | The Capitolist | Feb. 8 Budget, school deregulation loom as Florida lawmakers head to home stretch Jeffrey Solochek, Tampa Bay Times, Feb. 8 Midpoint of legislative session: Ethics overhaul, social media ban move as casino falters John Kennedy | Daytona Beach Journal | Feb. 7 Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA

Page 21

With Florida GOP leaders refusing Medicaid expansion, ballot effort launched John Kennedy | Daytona Beach Journal | Feb. 2 Doomsday scenario’: Legislative session could blast city of Tallahassee budget Arianna Otero | Tallahassee Democrat | Feb. 8

Feb. 12, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

APA FLORIDA