BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

Florida League of Cities

  • Municipal Electric Utilities (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Local Government Lobbyist Registration Fees (Oppose – Preemption and Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Clean Energy (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Renewable Energy (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Recycled/Reclaimed Water (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    CS/HB 715 (Maggard) and CS/CS/SB 1656 (Albritton) prohibit domestic wastewater utilities from disposing of effluent, reclaimed water or reuse water by surface water discharge beginning January 2026. The bills exempt the following discharges 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. The bills recognize potable reuse as an alternative water supply and provide that potable reuse projects are eligible for alternative water supply funding and that such projects 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 residential units. (O’Hara)

  • Discharge of Domestic Wastewater (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Transportation (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Infrastructure (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    CS/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/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/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. (Branch, O’Hara)

  • Tax on Aviation Fuel (Oppose – Unfunded Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Traffic and Pedestrian Safety (Oppose – Unfunded Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Local Government Reporting (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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. (Hughes)

  • Local Government Fiscal Transparency (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    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)

  • Supermajority Vote Required to Impose, Authorize or Raise Local Taxes or Fees (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    HJR 477 (Rommel) proposes an amendment to the Florida Constitution requiring that any local tax or fee that is imposed, authorized or raised by a local jurisdiction, including municipalities, be approved by two-thirds of the membership of the jurisdiction. “Fee” is defined as any charge or payment required by ordinance or regulation. The proposed amendment requires any local tax or fee imposed or raised under this section to be contained in a separate resolution or ordinance. This proposed amendment would require 60 percent approval of the electorate for passage. (Hughes)

  • Charter Schools Zoning (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    CS/CS/HB 1029 (Rodriguez, A.M.) 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)

  • Communication Services Tax (Oppose – Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    HB 701 (Fischer) and SB 1174 (Hutson) reform the communications services tax (CST) to clarify that certain streaming services are subject to the tax and create uniform rates. The bills reduce the local CST rate to 5% or less by January 1, 2021, and 4% or less by January 1, 2022. The bills also reduce the state CST rate from 4.92% to 4.9% and the noncharter county CST rate to 2% by January 1, 2022. The bills repeal the local option sales surtax conversion that is levied on communications services. The Revenue Estimating Conference has partially determined the fiscal impact of this bill. It is estimated to negatively impact local government revenues by $190 million each year. (Hughes)

  • Growth Management (Oppose – Unfunded Mandate)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    CS/SB 410 (Perry) and CS/CS/HB 203 (McClain) would require local governments to adopt by July 1, 2023, a new mandatory element in their comprehensive plans that addresses the protection of private property rights. CS/SB 410 was amended to require the Department of Economic Opportunity to give funding preference for technical assistance to certain counties and municipalities. CS/CS/HB 203 now provides that a municipality may not annex an area within another municipal jurisdiction without consent from the other municipality. The amended bill also provides that a Development of Regional Impact may be amended by the development order process, allowing a change in land use if the change does not increase impact to public facilities. The bill also allows existing Developments of Regional Impact agreements that are classified as essentially built out and were valid on or before April 6, 2018, to exchange land uses under certain circumstances. As amended, the bill now provides that on or after July 1, 2020, a municipality may not extend new water or sewer services into the unincorporated area of a county without consent of the county if the county already provides the same service. The amended bill requires that all utility permit applications for use of the public right of way be processed within the timeframe that currently applies only to permit applications submitted by communications services providers. (See also HB 7099.) The bill now requires the Department of Economic Opportunity to give preference to counties and municipalities with populations less than 200,000 when selecting applications for funding for technical assistance related to certain determinations that need to be made when developing or amending a local government's comprehensive plan. Lastly, the amended bill allows the prevailing party in a challenge to certain local ordinances for local growth policy and land development regulation to seek attorney fees and costs. (Cruz)

  • Monuments and Memorials (Oppose – Preemption)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    HB 31 (Hill) preempts the ability of local governments to remove, alter, rename or otherwise disturb a memorial or monument on public property placed in memory of a veteran or war. This preemption includes the removal of Civil War memorials made to honor or commemorate the war, soldiers or government officials that aided the war effort. The legislation specifies that a remembrance erected, named or dedicated on or after March 22, 1822, on public property may be relocated, removed, altered, renamed, rededicated or otherwise disturbed only if necessary to accommodate construction, repair or improvements to the remembrance or to the surrounding property on which the remembrance is located. Additionally, the bill requires that a remembrance on public property that is sold or repurposed must be relocated to a location of equal prominence as the original location. (Cruz)

  • Public Records (Watch SB 162/Oppose HB 195 – Preemption)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    CS/SB 162 (Perry) and HB 195 (Rodrigues) are two bills relating to public record requests. The bills

    prohibit a city, after receiving a public record request, from filing an action for declaratory judgement against the individual or entity making the request. These bills would prevent cities from seeking clarification from the courts as to whether a record is exempt or exempt and confidential. (Cook)

  • Pet Stores (Oppose – Preemption)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    HB 1237 (Avila), SB 1698 (Diaz) and SB 1700 (Diaz) preempt any local government ordinance or regulation that prohibits or regulates pet stores. The bills specify requirements for sourcing, sale or transfer of animals from a pet store as well as impose inspections and other conditions on the pet store. SB 1698 creates the Florida Pet Protection Act requiring the Florida Department of Professional Regulation to adopt procedures and oversee the licensures and inspections of pet stores. SB 1700 requires a fee of $25 to acquire or maintain a pet store license. (Cook)

  • Towing and Immobilizing Vehicles and Vessels (Oppose – Preemption)

    by Mary Edenfield | Feb 28, 2020

    CS/CS/HB 133 (McClain) and CS/CS/SB 1332 (Hooper) require local governments to establish maximum rates for the towing and immobilization of vessels and prohibit a county or municipality from enacting a rule or ordinance that imposes a fee or charge on authorized wrecker operators. The bills provide that an authorized wrecker operator may impose and collect an administrative fee and is required to remit the fee to the county or municipality only after it has been collected. The bills prohibit local governments from adopting or enforcing ordinances or rules that impose fees on the registered owner or lien holder of a vehicle or vessel removed and impounded by an authorized wrecker operator. The bills provide that a wrecker operator that recovers, removes or stores a vehicle or vessel must have a lien on the vehicle or vessel that includes the value of the reasonable administrative fee or charge imposed by a county or municipality. The bills exempt certain counties with towing or immobilization licensing, regulatory or enforcement programs as of January 1, 2020, from the prohibition on imposing a fee or charge on an authorized wrecker operator or on a towing business. The bill prohibits a municipality or county from enacting an ordinance or rule requiring an authorized wrecker operator or towing business to accept credit cards as a form of payment.

    CS/CS/SB 1332 was amended to remove the lien holder of a vehicle or vessel as an entity that may be assessed a charge or fee by a county or city when the vehicle or vessel is towed from public property by a towing business or by an authorized wrecker operator. (Cook)