BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

HB 45 (Killebrew) and SB 1138 (Brodeur) prohibit a for-profit business from selling domestic cats and dogs. The bills do not prohibit a city or county from adopting an ordinance on the sale of animals that is more stringent than the bill. (Taggart)

CS/SB 62 (Bradley) eliminates the role of regional planning councils in the state. This bill will authorize local governments to recommend areas of critical state concern to the state land planning agency. The bill allows local governments to enter into agreements to create regional planning entities pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, to replace current regional planning councils. (Cruz)

CS/SB 268 (Perry) and HB 735 (Harding) expressly preempt the licensing of occupations to the state. The bills define occupation to include a paid job, work, trade, employment or profession and define licensing to include any training, education, test, certification, registration, procedure or license that are required for a person to perform an occupation. The bills provide limited exceptions for specified local licenses and any local government licensing of occupations that was expressly authorized by general law. The bills will prohibit a local government from requiring a person to obtain a license for a job scope that does not substantially correspond to the job scope of certain contractor categories set forth in Chapter 489, Florida Statutes. In addition, the bills will authorize local governments to issue journeyman licenses in specified trades. HB 735 passed the House (82-32) and is awaiting action by the Senate. (Cruz)

HB 439 (Fine) and SB 810 (Gruters) prohibit an agency or local governmental entity from purchasing or entering into a contract for any good made in or that contains at least 25% or more parts that were produced in China. The bills also prohibit a local governmental entity from purchasing any good or service made, sold or provided by Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, Apple or Alphabet, Inc. (Taggart)

SB 7050 (Community Affairs) amends a provision relating to an exemption from public records requirements for unsolicited proposals related to public-private partnerships. The bill removes the scheduled repeal of the exemption. (Cruz)

SB 646 (Taddeo) and HB 813 (Chambliss) require counties and municipalities to rename their respective portions of Dixie Highway, Old Dixie Highway, North Dixie Highway or South Dixie Highway as “Harriet Tubman Highway.” (Taggart)

HB 115 (Fabricio) provides that an individual with a valid active local license may work in any local government jurisdiction without having to obtain additional local licensing, take additional examinations or pay additional local licensing fees. The bill explicitly states that this multi-jurisdictional approval does not impede a local government's ability to collect business taxes from businesses operating within the local government's boundaries. Local governments' disciplinary jurisdiction for licenses within their jurisdictions is also retained. The bill details the process for a local government to execute its disciplinary jurisdiction. (Cruz)

CS/HB 35 (Fine) allows a governmental agency the option to publish legally required advertisements and notices on a publicly accessible website if the online publication results in a cost savings to the local government. The bill also requires a governmental agency to publish a notice at least once a year in a newspaper of general circulation that the resident or property owner may receive legally required notices or advertisements via first class mail or email by registration of his or her name, address and email address with the local governmental agency. CS/HB 35 passed the House 85-34 and is now awaiting action by the Senate.

CS/CS/SB 402 (Rodrigues) is similar to CS/HB 35 as it gives local governments the option to publish legally required notices on a website, but the bill specifies that the website must be owned by a newspaper of general circulation. The bill allows for the newspaper to charge a fee for the online publication of legal notices, but it clarifies that the rate may be no higher than the rate for printed notices. The bill also specifies that if a local government chooses to publish their legal notices on the newspaper's website in lieu of purchasing a printed ad, the local government must purchase an ad once per week in the print edition of the newspaper stating that not all legal notices are appearing in print and that additional legal notices may be found on the statewide website managed by the Florida Press Association. (Taggart)

HB 261 (Rayner), SB 670 (Jones) and SB 1982 (Powell) create a new lawsuit against an officer, employee or agent of a political subdivision of the sate for when they are acting under color of law and deprive someone's rights under the U.S. and state constitutions. The bills provide claims may not be used as defense against liability and specifies circumstances under which an officer, employee or agent is immune. (Cruz)

CS/SB 60 (Bradley) and CS/CS/HB 883 (Overdorf) would prohibit code enforcement officers from investigating and enforcing a potential code violation if the complaint is received anonymously. The bill requires any person who reports a violation of a code or ordinance to provide their name and address to the local government before any enforcement proceedings occur. The bills were amended to still allow for enforcement of anonymous complaints if they pose an imminent threat to public health, safety or welfare or imminent destruction of habitat or sensitive resources. Nothing in the bills prohibit a code enforcement officer from proactively enforcing a code violation. CS/CS/HB 883 was amended to allow for anonymous complaints if the individual making the complaint has a substantial fear of retaliation. CS/SB 60 passed the Senate (27-11) and is now awaiting action by the House. (Taggart)

CS/HB 663 (Salzman) and SB 1294 (Brodeur) deal with the regulation of “cottage food” operations which encompasses any person or entity that produces or packages certain foods at their residence intended to be sold. The bills increase the current sales cap on cottage food operations from $50,000 to $250,000. The bills also preempt the regulation of cottage food operations to the state and prohibit local governments from prohibiting or regulating cottage food operations. CS/HB 663 passed the House (91-24) and is awaiting action by the Senate. (Taggart)

CS/HB 1053 (Overdorf) and CS/SB 102 (Burgess) will have the effect of limiting or prohibiting various civil actions and class action matters by local governments including recent class actions involving opioids, PFAS and predatory lending. CS/HB 1053 authorizes the attorney general to unilaterally declare any conduct or harm that adversely affects the interests of citizens of at least five counties in the state a “matter of great governmental concern.” It requires local governments to notify the attorney general of the commencement of “any civil action” and authorizes the attorney general to determine the local government civil action involves a matter of great governmental concern. CS/HB 1053 authorizes the attorney general, within one year of publishing notice of a determination that a matter is of great governmental concern, to file a civil action on behalf of the citizens of the state on the matter. The attorney general’s determination operates to stay any civil action of a local government on the same matter. The bill requires any funds recovered by the attorney general be deposited into the General Revenue Fund and requires a state court to dismiss as moot a local government civil action that is based on the same matter as the attorney general’s action and resolved by settlement or judgment of that action. CS/SB 102 authorizes the Legislature by concurrent resolution to declare any circumstance that has caused economic or similar harm to governmental entities in 15 or more counties to be a matter of great governmental concern. Upon such a declaration, the attorney general would have sole authority to file a civil action on behalf of the affected governmental entities. The bills authorize the attorney general to intervene in any pending civil proceeding in federal or state court (including pending appeals) and dismiss, consolidate, settle or take any action he or she believes to be in the public interest. A declaration by the attorney general that a matter is of great governmental concern will operate to abate or stay any pending civil action unless and until the attorney general takes an action in the proceeding. The bills require governmental entities that are parties to any action that has been declared a matter of great governmental interest to notify the attorney general of the existence of the action and provide that any settlement or resolution of a proceeding by a governmental entity after the attorney general’s declaration and without the attorney general’s consent is void. The declaration of a matter of great governmental concern is not “final agency action” subject to review under the Administrative Procedure Act. The bills provide a process by which governmental entities may apply to a court to recover attorney fees and costs incurred prior to the attorney general’s declaration, but they fail to identify a source of funding, responsible party or conditions for obtaining such recovery. (O’Hara)

HB 1393 (Davis) and SB 1808 (Powell) revise the indication criteria for an “abandoned residential property” to make the process for abating nuisance properties easier and less costly to local governments. The bills revise the process for a local government to notify a mortgagee or mortgage servicer of a nuisance residential property and directs them to abate the nuisance until ownership of the property has been transferred through the foreclosure process. If the local government steps in to abate the nuisance property, the bills allow the local government to recover the costs of abatement by placing a lien on the property, which may not be foreclosed. The bills specify that the local government may request reimbursement for the cost of abatement from the mortgagee or mortgage servicer, which must be paid within 20 days. (Taggart)

CS/HB 1103 (Maggard) and SB 1624 (Albritton) require certain independent special districts that levy a non-ad valorem special assessment to contract with an independent entity to conduct performance audits. These bills also require the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability to conduct performance audits of certain classifications of independent special districts and report the performance audits by a specified date. (Cruz)

HB 487 (Duggan) and CS/SB 1274 (Perry) revise acreage thresholds for adopting comprehensive plan amendments using a small-scale development amendment. HB 487 passed the House (103-9) and is awaiting action by the Senate. (Cruz)

CS/CS/HB 337 (DiCeglie) and CS/CS/SB 750 (Gruters) are comprehensive impact fee bills. Of concern to cities, the bills would cap impact fee increases to no more than 3% annually. The bills would allow a local government to collect an impact fee only if it has a planned or funded capital improvement within the applicable impact fee assessment district at the time the fee is collected. Lastly, the bills require the submittal of an affidavit by local governments that collect impact fees attesting that all impact fees were collected and expended by the local government in compliance with the bills. CS/HB 337 was amended in committee to provide the cap on impact fees may not be more than 25% of the current rate and for the increase to be phased in. CS/SB 750 was amended in committee to make it identical to CS/HB 337. (Cruz)

CS/CS/CS/SB 496 (Perry) and CS/CS/CS/HB 59 (McClain) are comprehensive growth management bills. The legislation requires local governments to create and include a private property rights element in their comprehensive plans. The bill requires the consent of certain property owners is not required for development agreement changes under certain circumstances. Under certain circumstances the legislation authorizes developers to exchange approved land uses, subject to demonstrating that the exchange will not increase impacts to public facilities. The bills require the Department of Transportation to afford a right of first refusal to previous property owners under specified circumstances. The bills were amended to provide that in certain situations a city or county will have additional time to amend their comprehensive plan to comply with the requirements of the legislation. As amended, a city or county can now wait until the next time they amend their comprehensive plan or until their seven-year review of their comprehensive plan is due to comply with the new private property element. CS/CS/CS/HB 59 was substituted for CS/CS/CS/SB 496. CS/CS/CS/HB 59 passed the House (82-32) and Senate (38-0) and is now awaiting action by the governor. (Cruz)

CS/HB 1139 (Smith) and CS/SB 1520 (Boyd) provide that a utility easement is an interest in real property and subject to certain actions unless otherwise provided in the instrument creating the easement. These bills revise rights that are not affected or extinguished by marketable record titles and require persons with certain interests in land that may be extinguished by this act to file a specified notice to preserve their interests. (Cruz)

HB 255 (Geller) and SB 1338 (Torres, Jr.) – Legislation by Initiative

HB 6021 (Eskamani) and SB 1020 (Torres) – Rent Control Measures

HB 499 (Benjamin) and SB 576 (Jones) –  Prohibited Landlord Practices

SB 1068 (Taddeo) and SB 567 (Bartleman) – Local Housing Assistance Plans

HB 1543 (Koster) and SB 1150 (Harrell) – Low-income Home Accessibility Program

HB 1469 (Smith) and SB 2002 (Taddeo) –  Florida Commercial Rent Stabilization Fund