BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

SB 480 (DiCeglie) and HB 683 (Yeager) authorize an investor-owned utility to recover, through an appropriate cost-recovery mechanism administered by the Public Service Commission, prudently incurred renewable natural gas infrastructure project costs. The bill revises the required contents of a basin management action plan for an Outstanding Florida Spring to include identification of water quality improvement projects that can also produce and capture renewable natural gas through anaerobic digestion or other similar technologies at wastewater treatment plants, livestock farms, food production facilities and organic waste management operations. It encourages municipalities and counties to develop regional solutions to the processing, capture and reuse or sale of renewable natural gas from landfills and wastewater treatment facilities. Finally, it authorizes the Department of Agriculture to expand any “farm-to-fuel” initiative to address the production and capture of renewable natural gas. (O’Hara)

SB 1330 (Calatayud) creates a process for establishing resilience districts in Florida to support local governments’ efforts to mitigate the risk of sea-level rise and increased flooding. The bill defines several relevant terms to support the formation of these citizen-initiated financing districts that are intended to address infrastructure and resilience problems. The bill sets boundaries for resilience districts, defines their acceptable uses, and includes provisions for project management fees. If a local government acts as project manager for a resilience district, the bill authorizes the local government to receive a project management fee of up to 5% of the total cost of design and construction. The bill establishes conditions for local government review and approval of a resilience district and imposes additional obligations on local governments that “inappropriately” deny a petition to establish a district. Additional obligations include but are not limited to a requirement that the local government fund and implement a proposed resiliency project instead of the district. If a proposed district is identical to or shares more than 90% of the geography of any existing special taxing district that serves a similar function, the bill requires dissolution of the special taxing district and reconstitution as a resilience district, with all existing funds serving the special taxing district transferred to the resilience district. Additionally, the bill prescribes the composition and responsibilities of district boards and establishes financial transparency measures. (O’Hara)

SB 602 (DiCeglie) and HB 321 (Chaney) revise the current law prohibiting the release of certain balloons. SB 602 deletes the specified timeframe and number of balloons subject to the prohibition, making the intentional release of any number of balloons over any timeframe a violation of state law. SB 602 also deletes the current law exemption from the prohibition for certain biodegradable or photodegradable balloons. Both bills provide that a person who violates the statutory prohibition commits the noncriminal infraction of littering, punishable as provided in Section 403.413(6)(a), Florida Statutes. (O’Hara)

SB 698 (Rodriguez) requires the Department of Environmental Protection to review and periodically update its 2010 report and recommendations relating to the use of plastic bags and auxiliary containers. The bill establishes a pilot program for coastal municipalities to establish a pilot program to regulate single-use plastic products upon meeting specified conditions. (O’Hara).

SB 1126 (Martin) and HB 1641 (Yeager) preempt the regulation of auxiliary containers (reusable or single-use bags, cups, bottles or other packaging) and deletes a current law provision that requires the Department of Environmental Protection to review and update its 2010 report on retail bags and auxiliary containers. (O’Hara)

SB 7040 (Environment and Natural Resources Committee) and HB 7053 (Water Quality, Supply and Treatment Subcommittee) ratify the Department of Environmental Protection’s revisions to the stormwater rules within Chapter 62-330, Florida Administrative Code, with additional changes, including: (1) clarifying provisions relating to grandfathered projects; (2) providing that entities implementing stormwater best management practices also regulated under different provisions of law are not subject to duplicate inspections for the same practices; and (3) allowing alternative treatment standards for redevelopment projects in areas with impaired waters. (O’Hara)

SB 7006 (Regulated Industries) and HB 7047 (Ethics, Elections and Open Government Subcommittee) extend the repeal date for the public records and public meetings exemptions relating to information technology security of local government utilities to October 2, 2027, which coincides with the repeal date for cybersecurity public records exemptions for all public agencies. In addition, the bills save from repeal the public record exemption related to customer meter-derived data and billing information. (O’Hara)

SB 498 (Stewart) removes the state law preemption of local laws regarding the regulation of auxiliary containers, wrappings or disposable plastic bags and removes the state preemption of local law regarding the use or sale of polystyrene products. (O’Hara)

CS/HB 777 (Brackett) and SB 1088 (Martin) remove statutory authorization for municipalities to impose any surcharge for serving customers outside their municipal boundaries. HB 777 would require that rates, fees and charges be the same for customers served inside and outside the municipality’s boundaries. SB 1088 specifies that rates, fees, and charges for extraterritorial customers must be just and equitable and be based on the same factors used to fix rates, fees, and charges for customers inside the municipality’s boundaries. The bills also require municipal utilities that serve extraterritorial customers to conduct a rate study by January 1, 2027, and every seven years thereafter. (O’Hara)

HB 47 (Robinson, F.) and SB 104 (Jones) require a municipality that operates a water or sewer utility providing services to customers in another recipient municipality using a facility or plant located in the recipient municipality to charge customers in the recipient municipality the same rates, fees and charges it imposes on customers within its own municipal boundaries. (O'Hara)

SB 836 (Simon) amends Section 373.414, Florida Statutes, relating to wetland and surface water mitigation areas and assessments. It specifies conditions under which the required “degree of risk” may not be considered when a uniform mitigation assessment method is being applied. For mitigation areas created after January 2022, and for which mitigation has not been determined by the state to be successful for a mitigation area as of July 2024, the bill specifies that no conservation easement or other similar form of encumbrance of real property may be required as a condition of approval of the permit or mitigation plan, and the mitigation credits attributable to the mitigation area will be determined without regard to the presence or absence of a conservation easement or other similar form of encumbrance. (O’Hara)

SB 1606 (Torres) and HB 1631 (Campbell) change the state agency responsible for administering the Municipal Solid Waste-to-Energy Program from the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to the Department of Environmental Protection. The bills revise the eligibility requirements for financial assistance under the program and provide that an applicant that does not meet minimum federal air quality standards is ineligible for grant funding. The bills also require an environmental justice evaluation by the agency of the facility’s impact on low-income and historically marginalized groups. (O’Hara)

CS/CS/HB 1277 (Busatta Cabrera) and SB 1510 (Brodeur) impose restrictions on the use of municipal water, wastewater, gas or electric utility revenues to fund general government services and impose restrictions on the imposition of water and wastewater extraterritorial surcharges. CS/CS/HB 1277 requires interlocal agreements for extraterritorial utility service (gas, electric, water and wastewater) to be written and provides that such agreements may not become effective until the provider municipality holds a joint public meeting with the governing body of the recipient jurisdiction. In addition, the bill requires a joint annual customer meeting between the providing municipality and the recipient jurisdictions’ governing bodies for the purpose of obtaining public input on utility matters. CS/CS/HB 1277 imposes a 10% cap of gross utility revenues on any utility enterprise fund transfers to the general fund. Beginning November 2024, municipal utilities providing extraterritorial services are required to submit an annual report to the Public Service Commission with information about the scope and nature of the services. Beginning January 2025, the Public Service Commission is required to aggregate the information submitted by municipal utilities and provide an annual report to the Legislature. SB 1510 specifies that the portion of utility revenues transferred to the general fund may not exceed the transfer rates specified in the bill. The specified transfer rates are based on the average midpoints of the rates of return on equity approved by the Public Service Commission for investor-owned utilities. The bill requires further reductions in the allowable transfer rate based on the percentage of the utility’s retail customers located outside the municipality’s boundaries. The bill further specifies that these reductions do not apply if the utility service is governed by a utility authority board that, through the election of voting members from outside the municipal boundaries, provides for proportionate representation of customers located outside the municipal boundaries. With respect to extraterritorial surcharges, CS/CS/HB 1277 and SB 1510 eliminate the first 25% extraterritorial surcharge that may be imposed without a public hearing. The bills eliminate the second 25% surcharge that may be imposed after a public hearing. In addition, the bills provide that rates, fees and charges that may be imposed on extraterritorial customers shall not exceed 25% (reduced from the 50% allowed under current law) of the total amount the municipality charges customers served within the municipality for corresponding service. The effective date of the bills is July 2025. (O’Hara)

SB 1646 (DiCeglie) revises the list of projects eligible to use wetland mitigation banks and authorizes the use of mitigation credits within surrounding basins, rather than in the basin being impacted if credits are deemed unavailable within that basin. The bill specifies the circumstances under which credits may be deemed unavailable in a basin and specifies the factors the Department of Environmental Protection and water management districts must consider when awarding mitigation credits. In addition, the bill provides requirements for the calculation of additional credits necessary to use mitigation credits from outside a project area basin. The bill requires the Department to adopt rules that conform to and implement the bill’s requirements. (O’Hara)

SB 1720 (Rodriguez) and HB 1407 (Altman) modify current growth management laws to expand the types of military installations that local governments must cooperate with to encourage compatible land uses in associated areas. The bills encourage partnerships with local governments to create local mangrove protection and restoration zone programs. The expansion adds military “ranges” specified annexes in the Keys as well as ranges at Fleming Bay to the types of installations subject to the cooperation requirements. (O’Hara)

SB 986 (Burton) provides an exemption from surface water management and storage regulations for implementing water quality improvements and specified measures for environmental habitat restoration, enhancement and creation on certain agricultural lands or government-owned lands. The measures may alter topography of the land, divert or impede the flow of surface waters on the land, or impact wetlands if the measures result in a net increase in wetland functions. The bill prohibits the use of the exemption to establish mitigation banks or regional offsite mitigation areas. (O’Hara)

HB 527 (Maggard) and SB 664 (Burgess) require a local government to use eminent domain to acquire any land or water buffer area that exceeds the minimum land or water buffer areas required under state law for development in or around wetlands. The bills also preempt dredge and fill permitting to the state and eliminate statutory authority for Land Management Review Teams at water management districts. (O’Hara)

SB 784 (Gruters) revises the application and installation requirements for uniform waterway markers. It requires that all waterway markers and information markers be affixed to plastic breakaway structures or floating buoys by January 1, 2025. The bill prohibits a governmental entity from affixing a waterway marker to a steel beam or wood piling. (O’Hara)

HB 1005 (Roth) and SB 1354 (Wright) require 40% or $60 million, whichever is greater, of the proceeds paid into the state’s Water Protection and Sustainability Trust Fund to be used for the Indian River Lagoon Protection Program (Program). The funds may only be used to install and connect septic systems within the Program area to wastewater treatment facilities that have been prioritized by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). The funds shall be disbursed to local governments but may not be used to cover more than 50% of the total cost to install and connect dwellings to wastewater treatment facilities. In addition, the bills require DEP to identify and categorize all the commercial or residential properties that use septic systems within Basin Management Action plan areas that are within the Program area and estimate the economic cost of connecting the septic systems to a wastewater treatment facility. The bills direct DEP to perform a cost-benefit analysis to rank and prioritize systems for funding connection grants. The bills require DEP to submit an annual report on its actions relating to the Program to the Governor and the Legislature. (O’Hara)

CS/CS/SB 770 (Martin) and CS/HB 927 (Trabulsy) revise requirements relating to the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program. The bills define “commercial property,” “facility,” “government commercial property,” nongovernmental lessee,” program administrator,” “qualifying improvement contractor,” “qualifying improvement program,” “qualifying improvement,” and “residential property” for purposes of the PACE program. CS/CS/SB 770 authorizes the use of interlocal agreements for the purpose of PACE financing but specifies that the property for which qualifying improvements are made must be located within the jurisdictions of the local governments that are parties to the interlocal agreement. The bills authorize local governments to enter financing agreements with property owners to finance or refinance qualifying improvements and require such agreements to meet specified conditions. The definition of “qualifying improvement” is expanded to include wastewater improvements relating to repair, replacement, or conversion of a septic tank system, and flood and water damage mitigation and resiliency improvements. The bills define “qualifying improvements” for commercial properties. The bills revise and specify public recording requirements for assessment financing agreements and notices of lien. The bills authorize local governments to include in any contracts with program administrators provisions for performing annual reviews to confirm compliance. The bills prohibit liens relating to PACE improvements from being enforced in a manner that accelerates the remaining nondelinquent unpaid balance. Numerous new consumer protection requirements are imposed on the approval of PACE financing agreements, including requirements that a local government or program administrator determine whether a property owner has the ability to pay the assessment, requirements for disclosures to property owners, requirements for obtaining the consent of certain mortgage holders or loan servicers, requirements for monitoring compliance by qualifying improvement contractors, and requirements for annual reporting by local governments. (O’Hara)