Dear Governor DeSantis,
Florida is growing in population faster than it’s ever grown in its history This rapid growth is causing tremendous strain on our infrastructure, requiring thoughtful planning to ensure continued quality of life, economic prosperity, and resilience. In that context, removing long-standing planning provisions to guide orderly growth in our state is unconscionable Importantly, this bill runs counter to your Executive Order 23-06 that sought “to improve local government long-term comprehensive planning that ensures sustainable growth while protecting our natural resources.”
OnbehalfoftheFloridaChapteroftheAmericanPlanningAssociation(APAFlorida),anassociationofcommunityplannerswitha statewidemembershipofapproximately3,000professionals,werespectfullysubmitthisrequestforyoutovetoSB540/HB369. Theseamendmentsdismantletheeffectivenessoflocalcommunitycomprehensiveplanstothesubstantialdetrimentofimportantstate andlocalresources,includingcoastalandotherenvironmentalresources,affordablehousinginitiatives,andothercommunityneeds.
One of the hallmarks of the Community PlanningAct and its predecessor statute since 1985 has been the ability of third parties to challenge the inconsistency of local development decisions in the local court system through a “consistency challenge.” This has been very effective in ensuring the integrity of the local comprehensive plan, which has been described for almost 40 years as the “constitution for local development.” It narrows the scope of the challenge that can be brought to very few aspects of the comprehensive plan: use, density, and intensity.All of the other legislatively required elements of the comprehensive plan, including such matters as coastal resiliency, natural resource protection, and availability of workforce housing – to name only a few – will no longer be held up to the light of a consistency challenge.
It also requires a court to award prevailing parties attorney fees. By significantly raising the risk of very high litigation costs to the losing party, including local governments, the bill will leave your constituents, the Florida taxpayer, with the burden for the developer’s attorney fees if the developer prevails in a challenge. Because comprehensive plans are typically amended to pave the way for new development, SB 540/HB 359 would eliminate a crucial check and balance on growth in Florida’s comprehensive planning process, dealing a devastating blow to effective citizen engagement.
The bill also seeks to settle a conflict between the First and Second DCA that will result in a narrower basis for comprehensive plan amendment challenges. The court in Heine v. Lee County, 221 So.3d 1254 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) limited the scope of challenges to use, density, and intensity only. By comparison, the court in Imhof v. Walton County, 328 So.3d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021), held that challenges can include other aspects of development that render the development order inconsistent with a comprehensive plan. The bill settles this DCA conflict by resolving in favor of the more limited scope set forth in the Heine decision, which we do not support.
For these reasons, this change in law essentially makes that element and much of the rest of every comprehensive plan goals, objectives, and policies just words on paper. When Florida is experiencing rapid growth, rising sea levels, natural resource vulnerability, and a workforce housing crisis, these amendments are counterproductive and seriously damaging to our communities’abilities to meet these challenges. Please veto this bill.Thank you,
Whit Blanton, FAICP President APA Florida