March 10, 2023 | Legislative Reporter
The 2023 Legislative Session began on March 7 and is scheduled to end on May 5. Governor Ron DeSantis delivered his State of the State Address on March 7 which can be found here
The Bill Tracking Report, as of March 10, can be viewed here. Please review it to see the bills filed that APA Florida is tracking. Note that these tracking reports contain a new feature; if you click on the bill number, you are linked to more information about the bill.
If you would like any bills added to this report or would like more information about a specific bill, please contact Stefanie Svisco at ssvisco@floridaplanning.org.
Please note: Not all bills are covered in all legislative reports. If a bill was covered in a previous reporter, and no action has taken place since that reporter, the bill will not be discussed until further action has occurred. Thank you.
Since the last update, the following bills of interest have been filed that would do the following:
• Create s.373.027, F.S., that would prohibit counties and municipalities from adopting laws, regulations, rules, or policies relating to water quality or quantity, pollution control, pollutant discharge prevention, or removal of wetlands. Preempts regulation to the state, providing applicability and construction and requiring the Department of Environmental Projection to notify the Chief Financial Officer of certain violations. Also requires the Chief Financial Officer to withhold state funds to which the county or municipality may be entitled. (HB 1197, Rep. Maggard. NOTE: This is identical to SB 1240, previously filed.)
• Require the Department of Transportation to conduct a study regarding the potential merger or dissolution of the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority and the Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority. The department report detailing the study results shall be submitted to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives by Jan. 1, 2024. This act shall take effect on July 1, 2023. (HB 1397, Rep. McClure and SB 1532, Sen. Burgess and Collimo)
• Create ss.403.7032(6), F.S., to require the Department of Environmental Protection to develop a comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan for Florida by July 1, 2024, based on recommendations from the department’s Florida and the 2020 75% Recycling Goal Final Report. (HB 1427, Rep. Casello and SB 506, Sen. Stewart)
• Create s.166.0452, F.S., to authorize municipalities to create community land bank programs to sell eligible real property by private sale for the purpose of affordable housing development. Requires those municipalities to create a community land bank plan and provides the requirements for such a plan. (HB 1499, Rep. Skidmore)
• Create s.163.3203, F.S., to define the term “agricultural-related facility” and provide that these uses shall be permitted use in all agricultural land use categories in a local government comprehensive plan and all agricultural zoning districts within an unincorporated area. Also amends ss.163.3248(1), F.S., to identify types of uses considered to be traditional rural land uses for the purpose of rural land stewardship areas. (HB 1529, Rep. Roth).
• Amend s.215.971, F.S., related to rural areas of opportunity, to add a provision that an agency agreement that provides state or federal financial assistance to a county or municipal entity within a rural area of opportunity may not require the county or municipal entity to expend funds to be reimbursed. (SB 1628, Sen. Simon, and HB 413, Rep. Abbott)
• Amend s.163.3177, F.S., to:
o include that, where applicable, the capital improvement schedule must include a list of projects necessary to achieve the pollutant load reduction attributable to the local government, as established in a basin management action plan pursuant to s.403.067(7).
o Require that in the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and natural groundwater aquifer recharge element addresses upgrade of treatment of facilities and prioritizing advanced waste treatment.
o Requite that in the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and natural groundwater aquifer recharge element, for any development of more than 50 residential lots, built or unbuilt, with more than 1 onsite sewage treatment and disposal system per 1 acre; the element must include a plan to provide sanitary sewer services within a 10- year planning horizon. Each comprehensive plan must be updated to include this element by July 1, 2024. This does not apply to a local government designated as a rural area of opportunity. (SB 1632, Sen. Brodeur)
The following bills of interest had action this 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.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Local Ordinances: SB 170 E1 (Sen. Trumbull and Sen. Perry) was passed by the Senate on March 8 and is Messages to the House. The bill does the following:
• Amends s.57.112, F.S., to provide that when an ordinance is successfully challenged in court as arbitrary or unreasonable, the court may, but is not required to, award up to $50,000 in attorney fees and costs to the prevailing plaintiff. These fees are not applicable where the plaintiff prevails on a separate claim regarding the same ordinance, or for fees and costs associated with litigating over attorney fees. This section applies prospectively to ordinances adopted on or after Oct. 1, 2023.
• Amends s.125.66 and s.166.041, F.S., to require counties and cities, respectively, to prepare or cause to prepare a “business impact estimate” prior to enacting an ordinance; but specifies that this requirement should not be construed to require a county or city to hire an accountant or other financial consultant in preparing the estimate. The estimate must be posted on the government’s website no later than the date the notice of proposed enactment is published. The business impact estimate must include the following:
o a summary of the proposed ordinance, including a statement of the public purpose to be served by the proposed ordinance, such as public health, safety, morals, and welfare;
o an estimate of the direct economic impact of the proposed ordinance on private, for-profit businesses in the county or city, including an estimate of direct compliance costs for businesses; an identification of new charges and fees for which businesses will be financially responsible; and an estimate of the county’s or city’s regulatory costs;
o a good faith estimate of the number of businesses likely impacted; and
o any additional information deemed useful.
• Provides that a business impact estimate is not required for the following:
o emergency ordinances;
o ordinances related to Part II of chapter 163, relating to growth policy, county and municipal planning, and land development regulation, including zoning, development orders, development agreements and development permits;
o building code ordinances under s.553.73, F.S.;
o fire prevention code ordinances under s.633.202, F.S.;
o ordinances establishing or terminating Community Development Districts under ss.190.005 and 190.046, F.S.;
o ordinances required to comply with federal or state law or regulation;
o ordinances relating issuance or refinancing of debt;
o ordinances related to the adoption of county or municipal budgets or budget amendments, including revenue sources necessary to fund the budget;
o ordinances required to implement a contract or agreement, including but not limited to federal, state, local, or private grants or other financial assistance accepted by a county or municipality; and
o ordinances related to procurement.
• Creates ss.125.675 and 166.0411, F.S. to set conditions on lawsuits brought by any party to challenge local ordinances as preempted by the State Constitution or by state law, or is arbitrary, or unreasonable. The bill requires the local government to suspend enforcement of an ordinance subject to such an action if:
o the action was filed with the court no later than 90 days after the adoption date of the ordinance;
o the plaintiff or petitioner requests suspension in the initial complaint or petition; and
o the county or city has been served with a copy of the complaint or petition.
In filing an action, a party certifies that they do not file such a suit for frivolous or improper purposes, and may be subject to sanctions and fees if they are found to have done so. Unless the plaintiff obtains a stay of the lower court’s order finding the ordinance is valid and enforceable pending appeal, the local government may enforce the ordinance 45 days after the entry of the lower court’s order. The court must give those cases in which enforcement of the ordinance is suspended priority over other pending cases and render a preliminary or final decision as expeditiously as possible. The provisions regarding an ordinance’s stay and priority docketing do not apply to the same ordinances as listed above for the business impact estimates.
• Creates new provisions in s.125.66 and s.166.041, F.S. to provide that consideration of a proposed ordinance at a meeting properly noticed may be continued to a subsequent meeting if, at the meeting, the date, time, and place of the subsequent meeting are publicly stated. No further publication, mailing, or posted notice is required except that the continued consideration must be listed in an agenda or similar communication produced for the subsequent meeting. The bill further provides that this provision is remedial in nature, is intended to clarify existing law, and shall apply retroactively. The Senate amended this language on the floor to state that the provision shall apply retroactively except as to a court challenge under this section that was filed by Jan. 1, 2023.
HB 1515 (Rep. Brackett), a similar bill to SB 170E1, was filed on March 6 and is in the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee, its first of three committees of reference.
Land Use And Development Regulations: PCS HB 439 (Rep. McClain) was reported favorably by the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs a& Special Districts Subcommittee on March 10 and moves to the House Commerce Committee, its second of three committees of reference. The bill does the following:
• Revises s.70.51 F.S. ,the Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act, to allow a negotiated settlement between a property owner and a local government to include the same types of relief that could be ordered by the special magistrate and provides that a special magistrate’s recommendation or a negotiated settlement between the property owner and the local government may contain relief that would otherwise be inconsistent with the local government’s comprehensive plan if the local government finds the relief protects the public interest served by the comprehensive plan provisions with which it is inconsistent. Also clarifies that any recommendation of the special magistrate with respect to a rezoning is not considered contract zoning.
• Amends s.163.3164 , F.S. to amend the definitions of density, intensity, urban service area, and urban sprawl to be as follows:
o density means an objective measurement of the number of residential units allowed per unit of land, such as dwelling units per acre;
o intensity means an objective measurement of the extent to which land may be developed or used expressed in square feet per unit of land, such as a maximum floor ratio per acre;
o urban service area means:
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 by the private sector; and
all lands located in any county or municipality that has been designated as a Dense Urban Land Area as defined in s.380.0651(3)(a);
o urban sprawl means an unplanned and uncontrolled development pattern.
• Amends ss.163.3177(1)(f) to:
o delete existing language that identifies community goals and vision as a type of relevant data and analysis for required and options comprehensive plan elements;
o add language to require support data or summaries be subject to the compliance review process; and
o delete existing language that says the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data.
• Amends ss.163.3177(1)(f)(2) F.S. to delete existing language that limits how methodology used in data collection may be evaluated and deletes language indicating local government may use original data if methodology is professionally accepted.
• Amends ss.163.3177(1)(f)(3) F.S. to require that the comprehensive plan population estimates (both permanent and seasonal) must be based on the greater of those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or those generated by the local government based on a professionally acceptable methodology.
• Amends ss.163.3177(2)F.S. to provide that optional elements of a comprehensive plan may not contain policies that restrict the density or intensity established in the future land use element and require that when data is relevant to optional and required elements, consistent data must be used, including population estimates and projections
• Amends ss.163.3177(5)(a) to amend the planning periods for comprehensive plans from at least 5 and 10 years to at least 10 and 20 years.
• Amends ss.163.3177(6)(a) to encourage the location of schools proximate to urban service areas (current law says urban residential areas) and encourage the location of schools in all areas as necessary to provide adequate school capacity to serve residential development.
• Amends ss.163.3177(6)(a)(9) F.S. to delete existing statutory language regarding indicators of urban sprawl and the test for determining if urban sprawl has been discouraged.
• Amends ss.163.3191(1) F.S. to specify that the notification sent by a local government to DEO regarding an EAR determination must include a separate affidavit:
o signed by the county governing body chair or the municipality mayor, attesting that all the elements of its comprehensive plan comply with this paragraph; and
o including a certification that the adopted plan contains the minimum planning period of 10 years and must cite the source and date of the population projections utilized in establishing the 10-year planning period.
• Amends ss.163.3191(3) to add that updates to the required elements must be processed in the same plan amendment cycle, and that optional elements may not be updated until the required elements have been updated unless otherwise required by general law.
• Amends ss.163.3191(4) and add a new ss.(5), F.S., to provide that if a local government fails to provide its EAR notification and affidavit or fails to update its plan within a year of transmitting the notification, it may not initiate or adopt any publicly initiated plan amendments until it complies, unless otherwise required by general law.
o this prohibition does not apply to privately initiated plan amendments;
o the failure of a local government to update its plan in a timely manner is not the basis for the denial of a privately initiated comprehensive plan amendment; and
o if a local government fails to update its comprehensive plan, the state land planning agency shall provide the required population projections to be used by the local government and the local government must initiate an update within 3 months of receipt and complete within 12 months. During this time the local government can provide alternative population projections but only if they exceed the ones provided by the state land planning agencies and only if the update is completed in the twelve month time period.
• Amends s.163.3202, F.S., to require that land development regulations must :
o establish minimum lot sizes within single-family, two-family, and fee-simple, single-family townhome zoning districts to accommodate the maximum density authorized in the comprehensive plan, net of the land area required to be set aside for subdivision roads, sidewalk, stormwater ponds, open space, landscape buffers and other mandatory land development regulations that require land to be set aside that could otherwise be utilized for the development of these types of housing; and
o establish infill development standards for single-family homes, two-family homes and fee-simple townhome dwelling units to allow for the administrative approval of these types of development.
• Amends s.163.3202(2)F.S. to state a local government may not issue a development order or permit that results in a reduction in the level of service below the adopted level of service provided in the comprehensive plan, and that levels of service established in a comprehensive plan solely for planning purposes may not be used as a basis for the denial of a development order or permit
• Amends ss.163.3202(5), F.S.to:
o delete existing language that allows the application of building design element regulations to singlefamily or two-family dwellings located in a planned unit development or a master planned community;
o revise the provision regarding the application of building design regulations to single family or twofamily dwellings within a local government that has a design review board or architectural review board to require that the board has to have been created before January 1, 2020; and
o delete the definition of planned unit development and master planned community.
A similar bill, SB 1604 (Sen. Ingoglia), is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its first of three committees of reference.
Local Government Comprehensive Plans: CS/HB 359 (Rep. Duggan), was reported favorably by the House Civil Justice Subcommittee on March 9 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference. Th bill does the following:
• Amends s.163.3184, F.S., to entitle the prevailing party in administrative challenges to a comprehensive plan or plan amendment to recover attorney fees and costs including reasonable appellate attorney fees and costs.
• Amends s.163.3187, F.S., to permit the prevailing party in small scale plan amendment challenge to recover attorney fees and costs including reasonable appellate attorney fees and costs.
• Amends s.163.3215, F.S., to clarify that the scope of review for a challenge to a local government decision to grant or deny a development order is limited to whether the development order would materially alter the use, density, or intensity of use on a property rendering it not consistent with the comprehensive plan (Note that according to the House committee staff report, this change resolves a current split in interpretation between the First and Second District Courts of Appeal).
A similar bill, SB 540 (Sen. DiCeglie) is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its first of three committees of reference.
Land Development Initiative and Referendum Processes: CS/HB 41 (Rep. Garcia) would amend ss.163.3167(8), F.S. to revise the current prohibition on initiative and referendum processes in regard to development orders and prohibit those processes from also being used for any amendment to land development regulations.
CS/HB 41 was reported favorably by the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs & Special Districts Subcommittee on March 10 and now moves to the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its second of three committees of reference. A similar bill, SB 856 (Sen. Rodriguez) is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its first of three committees of reference.
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Land Acquisition Trust Fund: SB 602 (Sen. Burton), was moved favorably by the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee, on March 6, and now moves to its second of three committees of reference, the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government Committee.
The bill appropriates $20 million from the Land Acquisition Trust Fund to the Department of Environmental Protection to implement the Heartland Headwaters Protection and Sustainability Act (Act). The funds must be used to enter into financial assistance agreements and distributed in accordance with the projects identified in the Heartland Headwaters Annual Report that protect, restore, or enhance the headwaters of the river systems located in the Heartland Region of Central Florida. The bill also contains legislative findings regarding the enactment and purposes of the Act, findings from the Central Florida Water Initiative and its Regional Water Supply Plan, and the need for consistent funding support to implement the Act.
HB 557 (Rep. Bell), a similar bill, is currently in the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee, its first of three committees of reference.
Everglades Protection Area: CS/SB 192 was reported favorably by the Senate Community Affairs Committee on March 7 and moves to the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee, its second of three committees of reference.
The bill amends s.163.3184 F.S. to require any proposed comprehensive plan or plan amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1), F.S. (i.e. Miami-Dade County), or any municipality located therein which apply to land within, or within 2 miles of, the Everglades Protection Area must follow the state coordinated review process.
The Department of Environmental Protection is tasked with determining whether the plan or plan amendment will adversely impact the Everglades Protection Area or the 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 Economic Opportunity, the local government, and the Indian tribes 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 DEO’s compliance determination must be limited to not only the objections raised in the objections, recommendations, and comments report (consistent with existing law), but also a review of planning strategies or measures adopted pursuant to DEP’s review and coordination.
The bill also amends s.163.3187, F.S., to:
• Clarify that site-specific text changes relating directly to, and adopted simultaneously with, a small scale future land use map amendment are permissible under that section.
• Provide that a small scale development amendment may not be adopted for a property that is located in whole or in part within, or within 2 miles of, the Everglades Protection Area as defined under state law.
• Provide that within 10 days after the adoption of a small-scale 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 DEO for recordkeeping purposes.
HB 175 (Rep. Busatta Cabrera), a similar bill, is in the House Agriculture, Conservation & Resiliency Subcommittee, its first of three committees of reference.
HOUSING
Housing: SB 102 E1 was passed by the Senate with amendments on March 8 and is in Messages to the House. Cited as the “Live Local Act”, SB 102 E1 makes various changes and additions to affordable housing-related programs and policies at both the state and local levels. Much of the bill involves the Florida Housing Finance Corporation, a public-private entity that administers the two largest statewide affordable housing programs: the State Apartment Incentive Loan (SAIL) program and the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) program. Among the changes, the bill provides up to $150 million annually to the SAIL program to be used for certain specified projects as identified in the newly created s.420.50871, F.S., This provision sunsets July 1, 2033. The bill also significantly amends the state housing strategy delineated in s.420.0003, F.S. The bill also creates s.420.50872, F.S., “Live Local Program”, a new tax donation program to allow taxpayers to direct certain tax payments, up to $100 million annually, to help fund the SAIL program.
However, the bill also includes several changes that impact local government. Specifically, the bill would do the following:
Rent Control
• Amend s.125.0103 and s.166.043, F.S., to remove the authority of local government to enact ordinances controlling the price of rents
Expedited Development Projects for Affordable Housing
• Amend s.125.01055(6), F.S., and 166.04151(6), F.S., to provide that a county or municipality may approve the development of affordable housing, including but not limited to a mixed-use development, on any parcel zoned for commercial or industrial use, so long as at least 10 percent of the housing units in the project are affordable. (This amended language deletes current statutory language which included parcels zoned for residential, and required that the developer of the project agree not to seek funding under the SAIL program.)
Comprehensive Plans/Zoning Regulations
• Create ss.125.01055(7) and ss.166.04151(7) F.S to :
o require counties and municipalities to authorize multifamily and mixed-use residential as allowable uses in any area zoned for commercial or mixed use if at least 40 percent of the residential units in a proposed multifamily rental development are, for a period of at least 30 years, affordable as defined in s.420.004, F.S.;
o prohibit a county or municipality from requiring the proposed multifamily development to get a zoning or land use change, special exception, conditional use approval, variance or comprehensive plan amendment for the building height, zoning, and densities ;
o require that at least 65 percent of the total square footage in a mixed-use residential project must be used for residential purposes;
o prohibit a county or municipality from restricting the density of a proposed development authorized under these subsections below the highest allowed density on county unincorporated land or land within the municipality respectively where residential development is allowed;
o prohibit a county or municipality from restricting the height of a proposed development authorized under these subsections below the highest currently allowed height for a commercial or residential development in its jurisdiction within 1 mile of the proposed development or three stories, whichever is higher;
o require that a proposed development authorized under these subsections must be administratively approved and no further action required if the development satisfies the local land development regulations (including but not limited to regulations relating to setbacks and parking requirements) for multifamily developments in areas zoned for such use and is otherwise consistent with the comprehensive plan, except for provisions establishing allowable densities, height and land use;
o require that counties and municipalities must consider reducing parking requirements if the proposed development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in the land development code, and the major transit stop is accessible from the development;
o specify that except as otherwise provided in these subsections, a development authorized under these provisions must comply with all applicable state and local laws and regulations;
o state that these subsections expire on October 1, 2033.
The bill was amended on the Senate floor to include an additional provision in ss.125.01055(7) F.S. to provide that for multifamily developments in an unincorporated area zoned for commercial or industrial use which is in the boundaries of a multicounty independent special district that was created to provide municipal services and is not authorized to levy ad valorem taxes, and less that 20 percent of the land within such district is designated for commercial or industrial use, a county must authorize such development only if the development is mixed-use residential.
The bill was also amended on the floor to add a provision to ss.166.04151(7) F.S which states a municipality that designates less than 20 percent of the land area within its jurisdiction for commercial or industrial use must authorize a proposed multifamily development in areas zoned for commercial or industrial use only if the proposed multifamily development is mixed-use residential.
The bill was also amended on the floor to include language which provides that the provisions of ss.125.01055(7) and ss.166.04151(7) F.S do not apply to property defined as recreational and commercial working waterfront in s.342.201(2)(b) in any area zoned as industrial.
Building Permits
• Amend ss.553.792(1)(a) F.S. to require that a local government must maintain on its website a policy containing the procedures and expectations for expedited processing of those building permits and development orders required by law to be expedited.
Local Government Owned Property
• Amend s.125.379 and s.166.0451, F.S. to:
o provide that counties and cities must produce their real property inventory list identifying property that is appropriate for affordable housing by October 1, 2023 and every three years after;
o require that the list be made publicly available on the applicable county or city website;
o require that counties and cities must include real property owned by dependent special districts within their boundaries on the inventory lists;
o provide that acceptable uses of property identified as appropriate for affordable housing includes utilization through a long-term land lease requiring the development and maintenance of affordable housing; and
o encourage counties and cities to adopt best practices for surplus land programs, with the bill providing examples.
Ad Valorem Tax Exemptions
• Amend s.196.1978, F.S. to provide two new property tax exemptions:
o nonprofit land lease exemption for land that is owned entirely by a nonprofit entity that is a corporation not for profit that meets other specified conditions – first applies to the 2024 tax roll and is repealed on Dec. 31, 2059; and
o exemption for units in a newly constructed multifamily project containing more than 70 units dedicated to housing natural persons or families below certain income limitations and meeting other specified conditions. First applies to the 2024 tax roll and is repealed on Dec. 31, 2059.
• Create s.196.1979, F.S., to authorize a county or municipality to adopt a local ordinance to exempt those portions of property used to provide affordable housing meeting certain requirements. First applies to the 2024 tax roll and expires the fourth January 1 after adoption; however governing body may adopt a new ordinance to renew the exemption
Keys Workforce Housing Initiative
• Provide that the Department of Economic Opportunity’s Key Workforce Housing Initiative, approved by the Administration Commission on June 13, 2018, is considered an exception to the evacuation time constraints of s.380.0552(9)(a)2, F.S., by requiring deed-restrictive affordable workforce housing properties to agree to evacuate at least 48 hours in advance of hurricane landfall. A comprehensive plan amendment approved by the Department of Economic Opportunity to implement the initiative is considered valid and the respective local governments may adopt local ordinances or regulations to implement such plan amendment
A similar bill, CS/HB 627 (Rep. Busatta Cabrera and Rep V. Lopez) was reported favorably by the House State Affairs Committee on March 8 and now moves to the House Ways & Means Committee, its second of three committees of reference.
TRANSPORTATION
Florida Shared-Use Nonmotorized Trail Network: CS/SB 106 (Sen. Brodeur) was passed by the Senate on March 8 and is in Messages to the House.
CS/SB 106 expands the existing Shared-Use Nonmotorized (SUN) Trail Network and enhances coordination of the state’s trail system with the Florida Wildlife Corridor. Specifically, the bill:
• Prioritizes the development of “regionally significant trails” that are defined as trails crossing multiple counties; serving economic and ecotourism development; showcasing the state’s wildlife areas, ecology, and natural resources; and serving as main corridors for trail connectedness across the state.
• Enhances the planning, coordination, and marketing of the state’s bicycle and pedestrian trail system and the Wildlife Corridor.
• Stipulates that trails developed within the Wildlife Corridor maximize the use of previously disturbed lands, such as abandoned roads and railroads, canal corridors, and drainage berms, and be compatible with applicable land use provisions.
• Requires the FDOT to erect uniform signage identifying trails that are part of the SUN Trail Network and to submit a periodic report on the status of the SUN Trail Network.
• Authorizes the FDOT and local governments to enter into sponsorship agreements for trails and to use associated revenues for maintenance, signage, and related amenities.
• Recognizes “trail town” communities and directs specified entities to promote the use of trails as economic assets, including the promotion of trail-based tourism.
• Increases recurring funding for the SUN Trail Network from $25 million to $50 million and provides a nonrecurring appropriation of $200 million to plan, design, and construct the SUN Trail Network.
CS/HB 915 (Rep. Botana), reflecting amendments by the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee to keep the bill identical to CS/SB 106, was reported favorably by that House committee on March 8 and moves to the House Appropriations Committee, its final of two committees of reference
Tampa Bay Regional Transit Authority: CS/HB 155 (Rep. Holcomb), was moved favorably by its third of three committees of reference, the House Infrastructure Strategies Committee, and has been placed on the House Calendar on the second reading as of March 8.
The bill repeals Chapter 343, Part III, F.S., relating to TBARTA. The bill dissolves TBARTA effective June 30, 2024. TBARTA must:
• Provide for the discharge of its liabilities. Any liabilities in excess of its assets will be assumed by each county represented on TBARTA’s board in proportion to what each county contributed to TBARTA in the 2021-2022 fiscal year
• Settle and close its affairs, and transfer any pending activities, including, but not limited to, the administration of its vanpool program
• Close and appropriately dispense any applicable federal or state grants or funds
• Provide for distribution of any remaining assets such that each county represented on TBARTA’s board receives an amount in proportion to what each county contributed to TBARTA in the 2021-2022 fiscal year
• Provide written notice of final dissolution to the Department of Economic Opportunity and each entity represented on TBARTA’s board.
• Forward its records to the Department of State upon final dissolution. The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2023
CS/SB 198 (Sen. DiCeglie), a similar bill, was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development on March 8 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final of three committees of reference.
Transportation: CS/CS/HB 425 (Rep. Esposito and Rep. Andrade) was reported favorably by the House Infrastructure & Tourism Appropriations Subcommittee on March 9 and moves to the Infrastructure Strategies Committee, its last of three committees of reference.
The bill addresses matters related to transportation. Specifically, it does the following:
• Requires the FDOT to coordinate with certain entities to establish standards by which the State Highway System will be graded according to their compatibility with the operation of autonomous vehicles.
• Codifies the Implementing Solutions from Transportation Research and Evaluating Emerging Technologies (ISTREET) Living Lab within the University of Florida and provides for its duties relating to transportation research, education, workforce development, and related issues.
• Provides that a producer of construction aggregates (gravel, sand, etc.) may not represent that an aggregate is certified for use unless such aggregate complies with FDOT rules.
• Provides that a local governmental entity must accept an electronic proof of delivery for construction materials.
• Requires FDOT contracts for bridge work over navigable waters to require a marine general liability insurance provision in an amount determined by FDOT.
• Requires FDOT to implement strategies to reduce project costs while still meeting applicable federal and state standards.
• Authorizes FDOT to share up to 10 percent of construction cost savings with design and engineering consultants whose input was involved in realizing the cost savings.
• Provides that stipends paid by FDOT to non-selected design-build firms that have submitted responsive proposals for construction contracts, which stipends are contained in FDOT’s legislatively-approved work program, are not subject to specified documentation and notification requirements.
• Authorizes a contractor who desires to bid exclusively on construction contracts with proposed budget estimates of $2 million or less (increased from $1 million) to submit reviewed, rather than audited, annual or interim financial statements.
• Authorizes an applicant for a contractor certificate of qualification to submit a request to keep an existing certificate, with the current maximum capacity rating, in place until the expiration date of the existing certificate.
• Repeals a public records exemption for documents that reveal the identity of a person who has requested or obtained a bid package, plan, or specifications pertaining to any project to be let by FDOT.
• Authorizes FDOT to request legislative approval of a proposed turnpike project regardless of how complete the project’s design phase is.
• Authorizes FDOT to use existing resources for workforce development and promoting career paths in Florida’s road and bridge industry.
CS/CS/SB 64 (Sen. Hooper), a similar bill, was reported favorably by the Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism and Economic Development on March 8 and moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final of three committees of reference.
