BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

CS/SB 246 (Hooper) and CS/HB 101 (Andrade) would allow municipalities the ability to retain only up to 5% across an entire construction project. Currently, municipalities can withhold up to 10% of retainage for the first half of a construction project and up to 5% on the last half. Retainage serves as a safeguard against possible overpayment to the general contractor when the estimated percentage of project completion, used for periodic payments, exceeds the actual percentage completed. Additionally, retainage helps to ensure that the project is 100% complete prior to funds being released to the contractor. CS/HB 101 passed both chambers and is awaiting action by the governor. (Branch)

HB 1419 (Good) authorizes a local government, college or university to install and operate renewable energy systems on any property owned by the entity to offset the entity’s electricity requirements. Electricity generated by such devices is deemed customer-owned generation without regard to ownership of the device by a contracted third-party. The bill authorizes a contracted third-party to sell the electricity generated by a renewable energy generating system to a local government, college or university and provide that such sales shall not be deemed retail sales of electricity. The bill authorizes a local government, college or university with multiple meters to aggregate its electricity consumption by totaling the consumption on all meters and offset such aggregated consumption requirements with customer-owned renewable energy generation under the electric utility’s net metering program. The bill requires electric utilities to offer all public customers a method to aggregate meters consistent with its net metering program and its standard interconnection agreement for customer-owned renewable energy generation. The bill requires each public utility to file with the Public Service Commission a program that offers a renewable energy tariff for all nonresidential customers to purchase renewable energy from the utility to meet up to 100% of the customer’s electricity requirements. The bill requires municipal electric utilities to offer a renewable energy tariff for all nonresidential customers as well. If a utility does not have sufficient renewable energy available to meet a customer’s requirements within a specified time period, the bill authorizes the customer to contract with a third party to purchase renewable energy from generating systems interconnected with the utility’s grid or transmission lines. (O’Hara)

SB 446 (Brandes) allows the owner of a business or contracted third party to install, maintain and operate a renewable energy source device on or about the structure in which the business operates or on any property the business leases. The bill provides the business owner or third party may sell the electricity that is generated from the device to another business immediately adjacent to or within the same parcel as the business, and such sales shall not be considered or regulated as retail sales of electricity. The bill provides that if the energy-producing business or its customers require additional related services from a utility, such as backup generation capacity or transmission services, the utility may recover the full cost of providing those services. The bill authorizes a utility to enter a contract with a business to install, maintain or operate any type of renewable energy source device on or about the structure from which the business operates and to sell the electricity to an adjacent business, and provides that such electricity sales shall not be considered or regulated as retail sales of electricity. The bill specifies that if the Public Service Commission determines that the level of reduction in electricity purchases by customers using renewable energy source devices is significant enough to adversely impact the rates that other customers pay in the rate territory, the commission may approve a utility’s requests to recover its costs of providing the electricity needed by all customers, including customers using a renewable energy source device. The bill provides for methodology of such cost recovery, a process for customers to challenge the cost recovery and authorized rulemaking by the commission. The bill may have a negative fiscal impact on municipal revenues, including potential impacts to municipal electric franchise revenues and municipal public service utility taxes. (O’Hara)

CS/CS/HB 715 (Maggard) and CS/CS/SB 1656 (Albritton) recognize potable reuse as an alternative water supply and provide that potable reuse projects are eligible for alternative water supply funding that may not be excluded from regional water supply plans. The bills direct the Department of Environmental Protection to develop rules relating to the beneficial reuse of water for public water supply purposes that are protective of the environment and public health, building on the guiding principles and goals set forth in the Potable Reuse Commission’s 2019 report on advancing potable reuse in Florida. The bills specify the rules should require the treatment of reclaimed water to drinking water standards. The bills include provisions to ensure that projects do not cause harm to the state’s aquifer and surface waters by requiring such projects do not cause or contribute to violations of water quality standards and that when such water is released into surface or groundwater, consideration of emerging constituents may be required. The bills direct DEP to adopt rules for implementation of potable water reuse projects and specify minimum requirements for the rules, authorize DEP to revise existing drinking water and reclaimed water rules, and authorize DEP to convene technical advisory committees to coordinate the rule review and rulemaking required in the bills. The bills direct DEP and the water management districts to execute a memorandum of agreement providing optional processes for coordinated review of any permits associated with indirect potable reuse projects. The bills authorize potential incentives for public-private partnerships for water recycling projects including expedited permitting and tax credits. The bills require local governments to authorize the use of residential graywater technologies and provide incentives (density bonuses, waiver of fees, etc.) to developers to fully offset the developer’s cost of providing such technology in proposed developments containing 25 or more single family residential homes. CS/CS/SB 1656 prohibits domestic wastewater utilities from disposing of effluent, reclaimed water or reuse water by surface water discharge beginning January 2026. The following discharges are exempted from this prohibition: indirect potable reuse projects; permitted wet weather discharges; discharges into stormwater management systems that are subsequently withdrawn for irrigation; projects where reclaimed water is recovered from an aquifer recharge system and subsequently discharged for potable reuse; wetlands creation, restoration and enhancement projects; surface water minimum flows and levels recovery and prevention projects; and domestic water utilities in fiscally constrained counties or municipalities in rural areas of opportunity; and wastewater treatment facilities located in municipalities that have less than $10 million in total annual revenue.  CS/CS/HB 715 requires, within one year of the effective date of adoption of DEP potable water reuse rules or by July 2023, each wastewater utility that disposes of effluent, reclaimed water or reuse water by surface water discharge to submit to DEP a plan for eliminating nonbeneficial surface water discharges within five years. If approved by DEP, the plan must be incorporated into the utility’s operating permit. The bill specifies the required content of the utilities’ plans and the conditions under which DEP must approve such plans. It requires DEP to approve a plan that demonstrates it is technically, economically, or environmentally infeasible to meet the requirement to eliminate surface water discharges, or that implementing such requirements would create a severe undue economic hardship on the community served by the utility. If approved by DEP, a utility’s plan must be fully implemented by January 2027, but a utility has until January 2029 to implement a potable water reuse project contained in a plan. The bill exempts from these requirements wastewater utilities located in a fiscally constrained county, a rural area of economic opportunity, or within a municipality that generates less than $10 million in total revenue. (O’Hara)

SB 454 (Rodriguez) prohibits the construction of new deep injection wells for domestic wastewater discharge or the expansion of existing wells. It limits the discharge capacity of domestic wastewater deep well injection and required current ocean outfall and deep well injection permitholders to install a functioning reuse system by specified dates. The bill prohibits the discharge of domestic wastewater through ocean outfalls and deep injection wells after specified dates and requires current deep injection well permitholders to submit a plan with specified requirements and annual progress reports to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. (O’Hara)

HB 995 (Davis) and SB 1014 (Rouson) require certain 911 public safety telecommunicators to receive telephone cardiopulmonary resuscitation training and the Department of Health to establish a procedure to monitor adherence to this training. (Cook)

HB 1405 (Greico) requires public swimming pools to have a telephone available for all public swimming pool users in case of an emergency. (Cook)

SB 1472 (Book) authorizes the governor to mandate certain improvements to a local government’s public safety communications system if the Department of Management Services finds that the system is inadequate. A system can be found “inadequate” if the system is unable to support the public safety needs of a community based on the age of the system, the number of towers available within the community or the ability of the system as a whole to withstand high volumes of radio and cellular traffic during a specific timeframe. The bill requires local governments to reimburse the state for improvements made to inadequate community communication systems. (Cook)

CS/CS/CS/HB 395 (Andrade) is the transportation vehicle for the Florida Department of Transportation. Of concerns to municipalities, the bill would expand the “shot clock” and “deemed approved” requirements to permit applications for all utilities in the right of way. This language is also included in CS/HB 203 (McClain), HB 7099 (State Affairs) and CS/SB 7018 (Infrastructure and Security). (Branch)

CS/SB 7018 (Infrastructure and Security) and HB 7099 (State Affairs) require the Public Service Commission (PSC), in coordination with the Department of Transportation and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, to develop and recommend a plan for the development of electric vehicle charging station infrastructure along the State Highway System. The plan must include recommendations for legislation and may include other recommendations as determined by the PSC. The bills require the recommended plan to be developed and submitted to the Governor, the Senate President, and the House Speaker by July 1, 2021. CS/SB 7018 was amended in committee to expand the “shot clock” and “deemed approved” requirements to permit applications for all utilities in the right of way in a municipality or county. The bill would also allow agricultural property owners who have granted a conservation easement over their property to unilaterally encumber the conservation easement by allowing the use of the land for a linear facility and related appurtenances. CS/SB 7018 as amended directs DOT to plan, design and construct staging areas for emergencies as part of the turnpike system. These sites are intended to be designated staging areas for emergency supplies to facilitate the prompt provision of emergency assistance to the public in response to a declared state of emergency. CS/SB 7018 passed the Senate 38-0 and is on the way to the House. (Branch, O’Hara)

SB 1192 (Gruters) and HB 6061 (Roach) repeal the excise tax imposed on aviation fuel, aviation gasoline and kerosene sold or brought into the state. Under current law, the monies from this tax are deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund to fund various program areas. Repealing the excise tax on aviation fuel will reduce the money going to the STTF. This reduction in revenues will negatively affect the ability of cities to adequately maintain and improve critical infrastructure needed to meet the ever-changing transportation demands. Additionally, repealing the aviation fuel tax will impact the Aviation Grant Program. This grant money, which local governments can apply for, is used to fund projects relating to airport planning, capital improvement, land acquisition and economic development. (Branch)

CS/CS/SB 1000 (Perry) and CS/CS/HB 1371 (Fine) require that crosswalks located at any place other than an intersection of a public street, highway or road be controlled by pedestrian and traffic signals that meet requirements of the Florida Department of Transportation Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. (Branch)

CS/CS/SB 1258 (Diaz) and CS/CS/HB 915 (Avila) revise several provisions to enhance transparency and accountability for large-hub commercial service airports. The bills require that at least once every seven years the auditor general conduct operational and financial audits of the state’s large-hub commercial service airports. The bills also require the members of the governing bodies of large-hub commercial service airports to submit the more detailed financial disclosure (Form 6) to the Commission on Ethics. The bills mandate the governing body of each commercial service airport to establish and maintain a website containing specified information including meeting notices, agendas, approved budgets and certain documents submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration. CS/CS/HB 915 passed the House (112-0) and is on the way to the Senate. (Branch)

SB 1710 (Torres) prohibits investor-owned utilities and municipal electric utilities or an affiliate of such utility from engaging in construction contracting as defined in Chapter 489, Florida Statutes, and prohibits such utility or affiliate from providing bookkeeping, billing, financial, legal or insurance products or services that are related to construction contracting, including warranty products or construction liens. The bill prohibits such utilities or affiliates from engaging in construction contracting services in a manner that subsidizes the activities of the utility to the extent of changing rates or service charges. Affiliates or contractors are prohibited from using any utility asset, the cost of which is recoverable in the utility’s regulated rates, to engage in construction contracting services unless the utility is compensated for use of the asset. (O’Hara)

HB 653 (Caruso) prohibits municipal electric utilities from using revenues generated from the electric utility to finance general government functions and provides that electric utility revenues must be used exclusively for electric utility functions or improving infrastructure of the electric utility. (O’Hara)

SB 768 (Perry) is linked to SB 766 (Perry). SB 768 establishes a statewide local government lobbyist registration fee. It provides the fee may not exceed $40 for each principal represented for one county and governmental entities therein or exceed $5 for each principal represented for each additional county and governmental entities therein. The bill prohibits a local government from charging a fee for the registration of lobbyists or principals, or for the enforcement of lobbyist regulation except as may be reasonable and necessary to cover the cost of such enforcement. Enforcement fees may be charged only if enforcement action is initiated and are limited to the direct and actual cost of the enforcement action. (O’Hara)

CS/CS/HB 1029 (Rodriguez, Anthony) includes language that would allow charter school the ability to expand under their preexisting zoning without obtaining a special exception or rezoning. The bill requires a local government, if requested by a charter school, to provide within 14 days a written justification for any challenged requirements. The bill would also award attorneys fees and court costs to charter schools only if they prevailed. (Branch)

SB 954 (Perry) and CS/CS/HB 459 (Overdorf) preempt local governments from adopting zoning and development regulations that require specific building design elements for single- and two-family dwellings, unless certain conditions are met. The bills define the term “building design elements” to mean exterior color, type or style of exterior cladding; style or material of roof structures or porches; exterior nonstructural architectural ornamentation; location or architectural styling of windows or doors; and number, type, and layout of rooms.

The bills provide a limited exemption from the preemption by allowing allow local governments to adopt and enforce regulations that require “building design elements” for single- and two-family dwellings only if they are listed on the Historical Preservation Registry, housed within a Community Redevelopment Agency or if regulations are adopted in order to implement the National Flood Insurance Program.

The bills also allow a substantially affected person to petition the Florida Building Commission to review a local government regulation to determine if the regulation is actually an unauthorized amendment to the Building Code. (Branch)

SB 1512 (Diaz) and CS/HB 7069 (State Affairs) repeal an existing reporting requirement that municipalities report certain budget and economic data to the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and replace it with a new reporting requirement. The bills require municipalities and counties to electronically submit to the Department of Financial Services all necessary information needed to facilitate the department preparing a local government report and interactive website that can be used to compare and rank local governments. Some of the information that may need to be submitted includes government spending per capita, government debt per capita, crime rates, school grades, median income and unemployment. The department will adopt, by rule, the method and format of the required reporting. CS/HB 7069 also requires that the local government report grade cities and counties, using an “A” through “F” grading scale, on factors such as government spending, debt, public safety and education. Given the difference in the scope and breadth of the services provided by cities, ranking and comparing municipalities will generate data that may have no value and, in fact, could cause confusion among residents. CS/HB 7069 passed the House (83-34) and is awaiting Senate action. (Hughes)

HB 1149 (DiCeglie) and SB 1702 (Diaz) amend multiple provisions related to local government financial transparency. The bills expand public notice and public hearing requirements for local option tax increases, other than property taxes and taxes adopted by referendum, and new long-term tax-supported debt issuances. Each local government is required to prominently post on its website the voting records on any action taken by its governing board related to tax increases and new tax-supported debt issuances. The bills impose requirements on county property appraisers and local governments relating to Truth in Millage (TRIM) notices, millage rate history and the amount of tax levied by each taxing authority on each parcel.

Additionally, local governments will be required to conduct a debt affordability analysis prior to approving the issuance of new long-term tax-supported debt. The bills require the local government annual audit reports to include information regarding compliance with the requirements of this newly created section of law. Failure to comply would result in the withholding of state-shared revenues. The bills revise the local government reporting requirements for economic development incentives. They require each municipality to report to the Office of Economic and Demographic Research whether the incentive is provided directly to an individual business or by another entity on behalf of the local government and the source of dollars obligated for the incentive (including local, state and federal). (Hughes)