BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

HB 117 (Fetterhoff) and SB 774 (Gruters) add COVID-19 and infectious diseases to the list of conditions that, if suffered by an emergency rescue or public safety worker, are presumed to have been contracted while at work for purposes of workers' compensation. Unlike similar presumptions in current law for hepatitis, meningococcal meningitis and tuberculosis, the bills do not require the public safety worker or emergency rescue worker to receive immunization against COVID-19 in order to receive the presumptive eligibility provisions afforded by workers' compensation coverage. (Cruz)

HB 233 (Willhite) and SB 408 (Jones) require businesses to accept cash payments for any good or service if the customer is physically present at the place of business. The bills exempt transactions above $5,000. Of interest to local governments, the bills exempt parking facilities owned by a municipality regardless of who operates the parking facility. (Taggart)

CS/CS/CS/SB 706 (Perry) and CS/CS/HB 851 (McClain) require developers to tender, rather than execute, a written, legally binding commitment to provide proportionate-share mitigation. The bills further require the local government to issue a final decision on the developer’s tendered commitment within 60 days from the date of receipt. If the local government fails to issue a final decision within 60 days, the tendered commitment will be deemed approved. Lastly, the bills require a school board to set aside and not spend any proportionate-share mitigation if there is no school capacity improvement identified in the five-year school board educational facilities plan until such time as such an improvement has been identified. (Cruz)

SB 1824 (Brodeur) and HB 1415 (Robinson, W.) revise the requirements and best practices for local governments applying mobility plans rather than impact fees. The bills require a local government adopting a mobility plan to evaluate appropriate levels of service and potential impacts of development by using the elements of its comprehensive plan. Local governments that adopt mobility plans must adopt the mobility plan and a mobility fee system into its comprehensive plan. (Cruz)

CS/HB 219 (Tuck) and CS/SB 1380 (Rodriguez, A.) revise that rights that are not affected or extinguished by Marketable Record Titles Act (MRTA) and require persons with certain interests in land that may be extinguished by this act to file a specified notice to preserve their interests. The bills establish a bright-line rule to clarify MRTA's operation in light of the 2016 court decision and clarify that a property conveyance subject to existing encumbrances identified in a muniment of title does not restart MRTA's 30-year marketability period on such encumbrances. The bills add covenants, restrictions, zoning requirements, and building or development permits to the list of encumbrances extinguished by MRTA but excepts them from extinguishment. Additionally, the bills authorize owners or operators of private property used for motor vehicle parking to establish rules, rates and fines governing private persons parking on the property. The bills prohibit counties and municipalities from enacting any ordinance or regulation attempting to restrict or prohibit the owner or operator from adopting such rules, rates or fines. CS/SB 1380 was amended to add a required notice to invoices for parking on private property. (Cruz)

CS/HB 739 (Borrero) and SB 1248 (Gruters) specify that a county or municipality must review applications for development permits or orders within 30 days of receiving the application and issue a letter indicating that all required information is submitted or specifying any areas that are deficient. In an attempt to make a more uniform process for future developments, the bills also require that each local government adopt residential infill development standards in its land use regulations by October 1, 2022. The legislation requires local governments to adopt certain guidelines when adopting its residential infill development standards that may preempt existing land use regulations. CS/HB 739 was amended to revise the requirement for local governments to adopt RID standards to only apply to local governments with $10 million or more in total revenue, provides safeguards for water quality standards, and replaces the checklist in the bill as filed with a series of statements that the developer must confirm. (Cruz)

HB 681 (Rodriguez) and SB 1030 (Taddeo) clarify that impact fee credits are assignable and transferable any time after establishment from one development or parcel to any other as long as it falls within the same impact fee zone or district, or that is within the same impact fee zone in the county or municipality. (Cruz)

CS/ 1338 (Diaz) and CS/HB 1411 (Avila) provide that a floating solar facility must be a permitted use in appropriate land use categories in each local government's comprehensive plan. The bills require each local government to amend its development regulations to promote the expanded use of floating solar facilities. Both bills were amended to allow for a municipality to adopt an ordinance regarding buffer and landscaping requirements for floating solar facilities. (Cruz)

HB 1089 (Woodson) and SB 1924 (Rodriguez, A.) – Affordable Housing

HB 6017 (Eskamani)and SB 580 (Torres) – Rent Control Measures

SB 1170 (Brandes) and HB 1553 (Plakon) create a State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Block Grant Program. Instead of entitlement municipalities receiving direct SHIP funding, the bills would distribute all the monies to counties. A county would not be required to share any of the funding with any of the municipalities within their boundaries. (Branch)

CS/SB 518 (Brodeur) and HB 1555 (McClain) amend current law provisions that prohibit local governments from requiring permits for the removal of "dangerous" trees on residential property. The bills clarify what constitutes residential property and increase the level of assessment and type of documentation that must be provided by an arborist or landscape architect under the law. As amended, CS/SB 518 defines residential property as a single-family detached building located on an existing lot, actively used for single-family residential purposes, and which is either an existing conforming use or a legally recognized nonconforming use following the local jurisdiction's applicable land development regulations. (Branch)

CS/CS/SB 962 (Bradley) and CS/CS/HB 981 (Payne) allow a municipality or county regardless of zoning or a comprehensive plan to approve mixed-use residential development projects if 10% of the units included in the project are used for affordable housing. (Branch)

SB 152 (Farmer) proposes an amendment to the Florida Constitution that would require any general law that preempts a subject of legislation to the state to pass by a two-thirds vote of each house of the legislature. (O'Hara)

HB 6113 (Eskamani) and SB 1900 (Torres) repeal numerous provisions of current law that operate as preemptions of municipal and county authority on a variety of subjects. (O'Hara)

CS/CS/SB 280 (Hutson) and CS/HB 403 (Giallombardo) impose new substantive requirements on municipalities for adopting and enforcing ordinances. First, the bills require a municipality to prepare a business impact estimate before adopting an ordinance and specifies the minimum content that must be included in the statement. The bills various ordinances from this requirement. The estimate must be posted on the municipality’s website no later than the date of publication of notice of the proposed ordinance. Second, the bills require a municipality to suspend enforcement of an ordinance that is the subject of a civil action challenging the ordinance’s validity on grounds that it is arbitrary or unreasonable or expressly preempted by state law. This requirement applies only if: the action was filed within 90 days of the ordinance’s effective date; suspension of the ordinance was requested in the complaint; and the municipality was served with a copy of the complaint. If the municipality prevails in the civil action and an appeal is taken, the bills authorize the court to consider continuing or lifting the stay of enforcement of the ordinance. Third, the bills authorize the award of attorney fees, costs and damages to a prevailing plaintiff in a civil action commenced after October 1, 2022, in which an ordinance is alleged to be arbitrary or unreasonable. The bills require courts to prioritize and expedite the disposition of cases in which enforcement of an ordinance is suspended. The bills exempt various ordinances from the stay of enforcement provision. (O’Hara)

CS/SB 620 (Hutson) and HB 569 (McClure) allow a business that has been engaged in a lawful business in a municipality for at least three years to claim business damages from the municipality if it enacts or amends an ordinance or charter provision that will cause a reduction of at least 15% of the business’ profit as applied on a per-location basis of a business operated within the jurisdiction. The bills provide three ways for a municipality to cure the business’ claim and avoid paying damages: repeal the ordinance or charter provision; amend the ordinance or charter provision; or grant a waiver to the business from enforcement of the ordinance or charter provision. The bills provide exemptions from business damages claims for various ordinances and charter provisions: ordinances required to comply with, or expressly authorized by, state or federal law; emergency ordinances, declarations or orders adopted pursuant to the state Emergency Management Act; a temporary emergency ordinance that remains in effect for no more than 90 days; ordinances or charter provisions enacted to implement: Part II of Chapter 163 (including zoning, development orders and development permits); the Florida Building Code; the Florida Fire Code; a contract or an agreement, including contracts or agreements relating to grants or other financial assistance; debt issuance or refinancing; procurement; budgets or budget amendments, including revenue sources necessary to fund the budget. The bills specify that in action to recover damages, the courts may award attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party.  The bills are prospective and apply to ordinances and charter provisions enacted or amended after the legislation becomes law.  (O’Hara)

HB 85 (Eskamani) and SB 246 (Book) – Tax Exemption for Diapers and Incontinence Products

HB 201 (Daley) and SB 356 (Jones) – Sales Tax Holiday for ENERGY STAR & WaterSense Products

SB 234 (Jones) and HB 613 (Robinson, F.) – Working Floridians Tax Rebate Program

HB 439 (Smith, C.) and SB 712 (Taddeo) – Small Business Saturday Sales Tax Holiday 

SB 500 (Perry) – Back-to-school Sales Tax Holiday

HB 509 (Yarborough) and SB 830 (Hooper) – Sales Tax on Mobile Homes

HB 589 (Harding) and SB 930 (Hooper) – Sales Tax Exemptions for Public Works

HB 673 (Shoaf) SB 1542 (Gainer) – Tourist development Taxes

HB 763 (Casello) and SB 1146 (Rodriguez) – Tax Exemption for Charges for Private Investigations

SB 808 (Gruters) – Sales Tax Holiday for Disaster Preparedness Supplies

HB 863 (DiCeglie) and SB 1250 (Gruters) – Sales Tax Refunds for Building Mitigation Retrofit Improvements

SB 952 (Gruters) and HB 1293 (Gregory) – Taxation 

HB 959 (LaMarca) and SB 1874 (Boyd) – Department of Financial Services

SB 1130 (Brodeur) and HB 1375 (Goff-Marcil) – Tax Collector Budgets

SB 1132 (Gruters) and HB 801 (Fine) – Valuation of Timeshare Real Property

HB 1163 (Overdorf) – Sales Tax Exemptions for Hydrogen Products

SB 1256 (Gruters) and HB 977 (Caruso) – Sales of Tax Certificates

SB 1382 (Gruters) and HB 1041 (Stevenson) – Tax Administration

HB 1387 (Gregory) and SB 1840 (Gruters) – Determinations for Tax Exemptions

SB 1470 (Stewart) – Taxation of Fees for the Use of Real Property

SB 1610 (Rodriguez) – Ad Valorem Tax Abatement

SB 1698 (Farmer) – Taxes/Marijuana 

SB 1886 (Powell) – Taxes and Fees

HB 5001 (Appropriations) – General Appropriations Act

HB 5003 (Appropriations) –  Implementing the 2022-2023 General Appropriations Act

SB 7046 (Government Oversight & Accountability) – Public Employment 

HB 6051 (Overdorf) and SB 786 (Hutson) – Aircraft Sales and Lease Tax

HB 6075 (Eskamani) and SB 1898 (Farmer) – Tourist Development Taxes

HB 975 (Borrero) and SB 1280 (Diaz) create an additional assessment limitation for certain low-income seniors if HJR 973, SJR 1278 or a similar constitutional amendment is approved by the voters at the 2022 general election. This additional assessment limitation applies to assessed values of homestead properties with a just value of $300,000 or less owned by a person at least 65 years old whose annual household income does not exceed $20,000. The assessment limitation carries over to a surviving spouse who uses the property as a homestead, who has attained age 65 and meets the household income limitations. The bills also modify the current local option low-income senior property tax exemption to increase the just value requirement from $250,000 to $300,000. (Hughes)

HJR 973 (Borrero) and SJR 1278 (Diaz) propose amendments to the Florida Constitution to authorize the legislature to prohibit increases in the assessed value of homestead property owned by low-income seniors. (Hughes)

CS/HB 149 (Tuck) and CS/SB 404 (Rodriguez) specify the methodology for the property tax assessment of the structures and equipment used in aquaculture. (Hughes)