BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

HB 6063 (Jenne) and SB 1680 (Berman) repeal legislation passed in 2018 regarding customary use. Under current law, a governmental entity may not maintain an ordinance or rule that is based on customary use granting access to the public on private property of a beach above the mean high-water line unless it is based on a judicial declaration. (Cruz)

SB 748 (Flores) and HB 587 (Rashcein) provides that a local government entity located within an area of critical state concern shall split with the state any award of compensation, costs, attorney fees and prejudgment interest awarded to a property owner if the court has found liability against the state and the local government. The bills also state that a governmental entity is not liable for post-judgement interest on a judgement entered against another governmental entity. (Cruz)

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 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 now 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)

CS/HB 519 (Grant, J.) and CS/SB 1766 (Lee) open the door for an explosion of potential lawsuits against cities by making one-sided changes to the Bert J. Harris Act and leaving taxpayers to pay the price. The Harris Act gives landowners a way to seek compensation when a local government takes action that impacts the use/potential use of their property. The Harris Act is detailed and fair. It allows local governments to negotiate with property owners who are filing a claim and calls on courts to consider the unique conditions of each claim.

The bills require any settlement reached on a Bert Harris claim to be automatically applied by the government entity to all "similarly situated" residential properties that are subject to the same rules or regulations. In essence, this provision would undo legislative action a government entity undertakes by requiring a settlement on one case to be applied across the board, turning Harris Act settlements into quasi class-action lawsuits. The bills do not define what a similarly situated property is, which opens the door for more litigation. The bills significantly amend the attorney fee provisions of the Harris Act, allowing only property owners to recover costs if they prevail. Additionally, the legislation would now include business losses as part of a Bert Harris claim. The Florida League of Cities opposes making one-sided changes to the Harris Act that only benefit attorneys and leaves taxpayers footing the bill.

CS/HB 519 was amended in the House Civil Justice Committee to provide an additional avenue for resolving disputes concerning comprehensive plan amendments. The amendment allows comprehensive plan amendment challenges initiated by citizens to now follow the dispute process from the Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act.

CS/SB 1766 was substantially amended in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Senate bill no longer contains the similarly situated concept. It no longer has any provisions affecting how attorney fees are determined, nor does it open the door to include business damages as part of any Harris claim. Currently, the Senate bill reduces the presuit timeframe to respond to claims from 150 days to 90 days and a provision that address the “ripeness” of claims by allowing a property owner to bring a claim prior to being officially denied a permit. (Cruz)

CS/HB 7037 (Judiciary Committee) and SB 1794 (Rader) strengthen the requirements and processes for amending the Florida constitution by petition. The legislation creates additional requirements for petition circulators and political action committees that back petitions. The bills increase the number of signatures that must be gathered from 10% to 50% before the secretary of state refers the petition to the attorney general. CS/HB 7037 was amended to require the signature threshold for starting the referral process be met in half of the state's 29 Congressional districts. The amendment provides each county supervisor of elections an extra 30 days to verify any petitions submitted before December 1 of an odd-numbered year. The amendment removed requirements that required a group sponsoring an amendment to disclose the percentage of contributions received from in-state persons and required that a  percentage of contributions obtained from in-state donors must appear on the ballot. The amendment clarified that petitions gathered before the bill's effective date are governed by the law in effect when the petitions were gathered. (Cruz)

HB 545 (Geller) and SB 1452 (Torres) create the right for citizens to propose legislation by ballot initiative. The bills define the process by which proposed legislation by ballot initiative would need to abide by, as well as the criteria that said legislation must comply with. The bills also set forth the process by which laws adopted by citizen initiative could be changed or repealed. The bills provide exceptions for types of proposed legislation if said legislation is proposed by legislative initiative. Of interest to cities: laws that change the boundaries of any municipality, county or special legislative or congressional district may not be proposed by initiative. (Cruz)

SB 1674 (Farmer) provides that the legislature may not preempt to the state a field of regulation or other subject of legislation unless it is passed by a two-thirds vote of each house. The bill also requires a supermajority vote of each house for a general law that preempts a subject of legislation to the state. (Cruz)

SB 1522 (Broxson) and CS/HB 1209 (Fischer) expand the instances whereby voters can vote to dissolve a municipality. Under the bills, a municipality can be dissolved by a referendum by a majority vote of qualified voters. The referendum must be held if a municipality meets one or more of the following criteria: the municipality has been in a state of financial emergency for two years or more, a financial emergency board has been established in response to a financial emergency and the municipality has failed to comply with the terms included in a signed agreement with the Governor's office, the municipality has submitted its annual financial report or annual financial audit report significantly late for two or more years consecutively or a grand jury or auditor general audit report issued within the past three years identifies significant problems with the municipality.

Within 30 days after one of the above criteria are met, the governing body of the municipality or, in the event the municipal government does not act, the governing body of the county or counties that the municipality is in, shall set the date of the referendum to dissolve the municipality. The referendum shall be at the next regularly scheduled election or a special election can be called. The election shall be noticed at least once a week for two weeks before the election in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality. (Cruz)

HB 173 (Polo) – Nonenforcement of Immigration Detainers and Nonjudicial Immigration Warrants

HB 6023 (Polo) would repeal legislation from the 2019 Session relating to state and local government enforcement of federal immigration laws. (Cruz)

SB 1466 (Baxley) and HB 855 (Payne) – Special Districts 

SB 856 (Pizzo) and HB 1459 (Silvers) – Affordable Housing Tax Reduction

SB 1434 (Torres) and HB 493 (Cortes) – Community Development Districts

HB 163 (Altman) and SB 68 (Book) - Homelessness

CS/CS/SB 364 (Rader) and CS/CS/CS/HB 39 (Gottlieb) create the Assisted and Independent Living Facility Task Force within the Agency for Person with Disabilities. The task force must develop and evaluate policy proposals that incentivize developers or contractors to dedicate space for assisted living facilities or independent living facilities within mixed-use developments to house individuals with an intellectual disability, autism or mental illness. The task force membership includes a representative from the Florida League of Cities. (Branch)

SB 306 (Mayfield) and HB 381 (Silvers) specify that funds deposited in the State Housing Trust Fund and the Local Government Housing Trust Fund may not be transferred or used for any other purpose. (Branch)

CS/CS/SB 998 (Hutson) and 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. (Branch)

SB 54 (Book) and HB 87 (Mercado) – Sales Tax Exemption: Diapers and Incontinence Products 

HB 93 (Casello) and SB 192 (Berman) – Sales Tax Exemption: Assist Living Facilities

SJR 282 (Diaz) – Constitutional Amendment: Homestead Assessment Limitation for Certain Persons 

SB 284 (Diaz) – Implementation Bill: Homestead Assessments for Certain Persons

SB 296 (Albritton) – Property Assessment Administration 

HB 429 (Valdes) and SB 508 (Baxley) – Sales Tax Absorption 

SB 524 (Gruters) – Sales Tax Holiday for Disaster Preparedness Supplies

HB 527 (Hill) – Sales Tax Exemption: Industrial Machinery and Equipment

SB 542 (Perry) – Back-to-school Sales Tax Holiday

SJR 396 (Rodriguez) – Single Subject Limitation for Taxation and Budget Reform Commission

HB 555 (Aloupis) and SB 844 (Taddeo) – Sales Tax Exemption for Hurricane Shutters and Impact-resistant Windows

SB 654 (Lee) – Sales Tax Refund for Eligible Job Training Organizations

HB 1077 (LaMarca) and SB 1404 (Perry) – Department of Financial Services

SB 1052 (Taddeo) – Small Business Saturday Sales Tax Holiday

HB 1141 (Caruso) and SB 1778 (Gruters) – Taxation of Real Property

HB 1249 (Sullivan) and SB 1662 (Albritton) – Transfer of Tax Exemption for Veterans

SB 1310 (Mayfield) – Hunting and Fishing Sales Tax Holiday

HB 811 (Geller) and SB 1306 (Thurston) – Transfers in Divorce

SB 2500 (Appropriations Committee) and HB 5001 (Appropriations) – General Appropriations Act

SB 2502 (Appropriations) HB 5003 (Appropriations) – Implementing the 2020-2021 General Appropriations Act

HB 919 (Caruso) – Property Tax Exemptions Used by Hospitals

SJR 1502 (Diaz) and HB 7061 (State Affairs Committee) propose an amendment to the Florida Constitution requiring Florida’s chief financial officer to annually provide information about counties and municipalities to residents in a manner that allows residents to compare economic and noneconomic factors of each local government. (Hughes)

SB 1330 (Gruters) require that establishment, merger, or abolishment of a municipal service taxing (MSTU) or municipal service benefit unit (MSBU) be approved by majority vote of certain qualified electors who would be or are subject to any service charge, special assessment, or tax within the unit in an election that is called for such purpose by the governing body of the county. The boundaries of an MSTU or MSBU may include all or part of the boundaries of a municipality if, in addition to the majority approval of qualified electors, consent by ordinance of the governing body of the affected municipality is given either annually or for a term of years. This bill provides procedures for the dissolution of an MSTU or MSBU that is created after July 1, 2020 and does not achieve the majority vote of qualified electors. (Hughes)