BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

HB 305 (Rommel) and SB 1126 (Gruters) prohibit a political subdivision, including a municipality, from establishing, mandating or otherwise requiring an employer to offer conditions of employment not otherwise required by state or federal law. An “employer” is defined as any person who is engaged in any activity, enterprise or business in this state and employs at least one employee. The bills expressly preempt the regulation of minimum wage and other conditions of employment to the state. The bills do not limit the authority of a political subdivision to regulate minimum wage or to require conditions of employment for employees of the political subdivision, employees of a contractor or subcontractor who provides goods or services to the political subdivision and employees of an employer receiving a direct tax abatement or subsidy from the political subdivision as a condition of the direct tax abatement or subsidy. Any ordinance, regulation or policy of a political subdivision that is preempted by the bills and which existed before or on the effective date of this act is void. (Hughes)

HB 215 (Casello) and CS/SB 620 (Hooper) revise the current process that must be followed for the interrogation of firefighters. The bills revise the definition of “interrogation” to include questioning related to informal inquiries. The bills require all witnesses to be interviewed prior to beginning the interrogation of the firefighter when possible. The bills also require that the firefighter be provided the complaint, all witness statements and all other existing evidence before the interrogation. A firefighter being interrogated may not be threatened with transfer, dismissal or disciplinary action. The bills also set a timeline for certain information to be provided to the firefighter and prohibit any retaliatory action against the firefighter for exercising his or her rights. The complaint and other investigative information are confidential and exempt from public records pursuant to the current law, and the “informal inquiry” does not include discussions such as safety sessions, normal operations fire debriefings and routine work-related discussions. (Hughes)

CS/SB 1352 (Brandes) and CS/HB 1039 (Rommel) establish a regulatory framework for digital advertising on transportation network company vehicles and for luxury ground transportation network company vehicles, preempting such regulation to the state. The bills would also preempt local governments who are currently collecting revenue from the regulation of digital advertising on vehicles. (Branch)

CS/HB 971 (Grant, M.) and CS/SB 1148 (Brandes) create regulations governing the operation of e-bikes and provide that an e-bike or an operator of an e-bike must be afforded all the rights and privileges of a bicycle. The bills authorize an e-bike to operate where bicycles are allowed, including, but not limited to, streets, highways, roadways, shoulders and bicycle lanes. However, local governments are authorized to regulate the operation of e-bikes on the prescribed areas. Additionally, following notice and a public hearing, a municipality or county may restrict or prohibit the operation of an e-bike on the path if the entity finds that such a restriction is necessary in the interest of public safety or to comply with other laws or legal obligations. CS/SB 1148 was amended in committee to remove the preemption language. The FLC now supports CS/SB 1148. (Branch)

HB 6083 (Rodriguez, Anthony) preempts cities, counties and the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles from installing, maintaining, or utilizing red light cameras effective July 1, 2023. (Branch)

CS/CS/SB 998 (Hutson) and CS/CS/CS/HB 1339 (Yarborough) makes varied and comprehensive changes to Florida law impacting affordable housing. Of concern to municipalities, the bills permit a mobile home park damaged or destroyed by wind, water or other natural force to be rebuilt on the same site with the same density as was approved, permitted or built before being damaged or destroyed. CS/CS/CS/HB 1339 was amended in committee to regulate local governments to allow accessory dwelling units in all single-family residential areas. This bill would also require jurisdictions participating in the State Housing Initiatives Partnership program to prioritize applicants who need less assistance in an effort to maximize the total number of applicants who may receive an award. (Branch)

CS/CS/SB 474 (Albritton) deals with the deregulation of certain professions and occupations. The bill preempts the regulation of mobile food dispensing vehicles (food trucks) to the state and prohibits local governments from prohibiting the operation of food trucks. Additionally, the bill also deletes the authority of the Florida League of Cities and the Florida Association of Counties to recommend a list of candidates for consideration to the Florida Building Commission. (Branch)

HB 1199 (Ingoglia) and CS/SB 1382 (Albritton) prohibit local governments from recognizing or granting certain legal rights to the natural environment (e.g., granting legal standing to waterbodies) or granting enforcement of such rights to persons or political subdivision. (O’Hara)

HB 225 (Zika) and SB 824 (Hooper) amend current law relating to “Property Assessed Clean Energy” (PACE) programs and requirements. The bill provides definitions for PACE administrator, PACE contractor, PACE loan, PACE loan contract, qualifying commercial real property and qualifying residential property. It provides that a local government may enter an agreement with a PACE administrator to administer the program and specifies that local government or PACE administrator may enter into a PACE loan contract only with the record owner of the property. It eliminates current language in law stating that a recorded PACE loan contract provides constructive notice that the assessment to be levied constitutes a lien of equal dignity to county taxes and assessments. The bill includes new provisions regarding a PACE loan’s lien position. It provides that a PACE loan is: subordinate to all liens on the property recorded before the PACE lien notice is recorded; subordinate to a first mortgage on the property recorded after the PACE notice is recorded; and superior to any lien recorded after the PACE notice is recorded. The bill imposes substantial new requirements on local governments financing for qualifying residential property (maturity date of PACE loan, limits on loan amount, total combined debt may not exceed 75 percent of assessed value). The bill specifies required contents for PACE loan contracts for residential real property and prohibits such contracts from resulting in negative amortization, charging any interest upon interest or fees or containing any provision requiring forced arbitration or restricting class action. The bill prohibits a residential PACE contract from being entered until it has been verified the property owner has the ability to repay the loan: owner’s monthly debt to income ratio does not exceed 43 percent and must have sufficient residual income to meet basic living expenses. The bill specifies methodology and sources for verification of property owner’s income, debt and expenses. The bill requires the local government or PACE administrator, prior to execution of a contract, to confirm the key terms of the PACE agreement and scope of energy improvement work with the property owner in a live, recorded telephone conversation. The bill requires specific disclosures be made to the owner during the telephone call. The bill requires that prior to entering a PACE loan on residential property, the household be screened for eligibility for low-or no-cost programs that may be provided by government or utility service providers. The bill prohibits a local government from permitting a property owner from entering a contract unless the owner is given a right to cancel the contract within a specified timeframe. It requires the use of a specified financing estimate and disclosure form and that such form be provided to an owner at least three business days before a contract is signed. The bill delineates prohibited practices by PACE administrators or PACE contractors. The bill prohibits a local government or PACE administrator from entering into a PACE contract unless written notice has been provided to, and written consent obtained from, each of the holders of any mortgage on the qualifying residential or commercial property. It provides that a PACE loan shall not be made unless the holder of any mortgage on the qualifying property provides signed confirmation that entering into the loan contract does not constitute an event of default or give rise to any remedies under the terms of the mortgage loan. The bill provides for preservation of claims and defenses for successors in interest to property owners and provides for attorney fees and costs for aggrieved residential property owners. (O’Hara)

HB 1199 (Ingoglia) and CS/SB 1382 (Albritton) prohibit local governments from recognizing or granting certain legal rights to the natural environment (e.g., granting legal standing to waterbodies) or granting enforcement of such rights to persons or political subdivision. (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/SB 1372 (Brandes) makes technical, election administration changes recommended by the Florida State Supervisors of Elections Association for the 2020 general election cycle. In addition, the bill expressly preempts a local government from enacting or imposing any limitation on contributions to a political committee or electioneering communications organization, or limitations on any expenditures for an electioneering organization or an independent expenditure. (O’Hara)

SB 766 (Perry) and HB 611 (Sabatini) impose mandatory lobbyist registration requirements on all governmental entities as defined in the bill, including all municipalities and counties. The bills also amend statutory meeting notice requirements for cities and counties.

The bills require the Florida Commission on Ethics to create the Local Government Lobbyist Registration System, and beginning October 2020, any local government lobbyist registration ordinance or requirement is preempted by the state system. The bills define lobbying, provide exceptions and specify activities that do not constitute lobbying.

A person may not lobby a government entity (which includes any municipality or county) until the person has electronically registered as a lobbyist with the commission. The bills appear to prohibit separate registration fees for each municipality in a county, as they authorize separate registration submissions for each county and prohibits additional fees for governmental entities within each county. The bills specify information to be included in the lobbyist registration. Registration is renewable annually and must include authorization from each principal identified. HB 611 directs the Commission on Ethics to set the annual lobbying registration fee by rule but provides the fee shall not exceed $20 for each principal represented within a county and governmental entities therein and that it may not exceed $5 for each additional principal represented. Registration fee limits and penalty amounts are addressed in a separate Senate bill, SB 768 (Perry).
 

The bills require the commission to publish lobbyist registration information on the internet. It requires a governmental entity to make reasonable efforts to ascertain whether a person who lobbies that entity is registered with the commission. Upon discovery of a violation of requirements of these provisions, the bill authorizes a person or governmental entity to file a complaint with the commission. If probable cause is found, a person may be subject to reprimand, censure, assessment of a civil penalty not to exceed $500 per violation or suspension from lobbying for a specified period. HB 611 authorizes governmental entities to impose additional civil penalties not to exceed $500 per violation or a suspension from lobbying the entity for up to two years.

The bills prohibit a governmental entity from requiring classes, certifications or additional requirements as a requisite for lobbyist registration. They authorize a governmental entity to require lobbyist compensation reporting and disclosure of lobbyist contacts with government officials and authorizes restrictions on the exchange of money or things of value between lobbyists and government officials.
 

By January 2021, a governmental entity shall notify the commission of any local requirement that imposes additional or more stringent obligations with respect to lobbyist compensation reporting or other lobbying activities and provide this information and any associated forms to the commission. By January 2022, each governmental entity shall conform its lobbyist regulation system, if any, to the commission’s system to eliminate duplicative requirements. The bill authorizes the commission to adopt rules to implement its provisions.

Lastly, the bills amend statutory meeting notice requirements for municipalities and counties. Except in the case of emergency meetings, the governing body of a municipality or governing board of a county must provide notice of any meeting of the body or board at least seven days in advance by posting a notice on body or board’s website. The meeting notice must include a statement of the general subject matter to be considered by the body or board. (O’Hara)

CS/HB 3 (Grant, M.) and CS/SB 1336 (Perry) expressly preempt the licensing of occupations to the state. The bill defines occupation to include a paid job, work, trade, employment or profession and defines 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. The bills are effective July 1, 2020. CS/SB 1336, was amended in committee to grandfather all existing local regulations on professions. (Cruz)

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)

CS/CS/HB 637 (DiCeglie) and CS/CS/SB 1066 (Gruters) are comprehensive bills regarding impact fees. The bills require a financial report for each impact fee trust fund annually. Local governments would be prohibited from collecting impact fees earlier than the date the building permit is issued. The bills allow impact fee credits to be transferred from one development to another within the same impact fee jurisdiction for the same type of facility. Each municipality is required to establish an impact fee review committee composed of two members from the local government, two members of the business community, two local contractors and one at large member. CS/CS/HB 637 was amended in committee to define the term infrastructure and in doing so, limit the use of impact fee revenue to capital expenditures specifically listed in the definition. This would include any fixed capital expenditure or fixed capital outlay associated with the construction, reconstruction or improvement of public facilities that have a life expectancy of five or more years; any related land acquisition, land improvement, design, engineering and permitting costs; and all other professional and related costs required to bring the public facilities into service. Previously under CS/SB 1066, an impact fee was not necessarily required to be used in the area that was impacted by development. However, CS/SB 1066 was amended in committee to further restrict the transferability of impact fees to allow, for purposes of impact fee credit transfers, that a benefit be recognized within any zone or district located within five miles of the zone or district where the credit was generated. (Cruz)

CS/HB 537 (Donalds) and SB 778 (Perry) define a "home-based business" and preempt local governments from licensing and regulating home-based businesses. Local governments would be prohibited from enacting or enforcing any ordinance, regulation or policy regarding home-based businesses. However, such home-based businesses could not substantially increase traffic, noise, waste or recycling.  CS/HB 537 was amended to specify that a home-based business may not be regulated or licensed in a manner that is different from other businesses within a local government's jurisdiction. The bill now allows a party to challenge any local government action that violates the preemption. The prevailing party is entitled to recover attorney's fees and costs. (Cruz)

SB 772 (Hutson) and CS/CS/CS/HB 647 (Drake) preempt local government regulations to allow any recreational vehicle park that is damaged or destroyed as a result of wind, water or other natural disaster to be rebuilt on the same site using the same density standards that were approved or permitted before the park was damaged or destroyed. CS/CS/CS/HB 647 adds an exemption from supervision and regulation by the Department of Health for certain surf pools. (Cruz)

CS/SB 1128 (Diaz) and CS/CS/HB 1011 (Fischer) change current law relating to vacation rentals, also known as short-term rentals (STRs). The bills were amended to:

•clarify the definition of an advertising platform and narrow it by removing print

advertisements from its scope.

•allow a “grandfathered” city to amend its short-term rental regulations if the amendment makes the regulation less restrictive.

•require the department to maintain vacation rental property license information in

an accessible electronic format.

•require advertising platforms to verify a property’s license number prior to publishing its advertisement on its platform and every quarter thereafter.

•require advertising platforms to quarterly provide the department with the physical

address of the vacation rental properties that advertise on their platforms.

•impose a duty on advertising platforms to collect and remit taxes in relation to the

rental of a vacation rental property through its platform.

•establish requirements that advertising platforms adopt an anti-discrimination

policy and inform their users of the public lodging discrimination prohibition found in current law.

•clarify that the provision of the bill shall not supersede any current or future community association governing document.

Additionally, CS/CS/HB 1011 now requires sexual predators to notify the sheriff's office of a temporary residence within 24 hours of arrival. Language carving out the Florida Keys from certain elements of the preemption was also added to the bill. (Cook)

SB 168 (Cruz) and HB 139 (Jenne) – Drinking Water in Public Schools

SB 318 (Stewart) – Sale of Sunscreen

SB 338 (Rodriguez) – Energy Efficiency in State Agencies

HB 237 (Roth) – Agricultural Products

SB 386 (Bradley) and HB 1333 (Stone) – Water Management District Boundaries Levy County

HB 401 (Jacobs) and SB 680 (Hutson) – Shark Fins

HB 921 (Brannan) and SB 1514 (Albritton) – Department of Agriculture & Consumer Service

HB 935 (Webb) and SB 1290 (Berman) – Solar Energy Systems in Schools

SB 1042 (Albritton) and HB 1061 (Massullo) – Nature Coast Aquatic Preserve 

HB 1047 (Avila) and SB 1618 (Diaz) – Construction Materials Mining Activities 

HB 1067 (Hattersley) and SB 1360 (Rodriguez) – Fla. Endangered & Threatened Species Act

SB 1474 (Taddeo) and SB 1842 (Powell) – Required Flood Disclosures for Real Property Sales

SB 1772 (Montford) – Environmental Value of Agricultural Lands

HB 6081 (Eskamani) – Conservation Easements