BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

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/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reuse projects; permitted wet weather discharges; discharges into stormwater management systems that are subsequently withdrawn for irrigation; projects where reclaimed water is recovered from an aquifer recharge system and subsequently discharged for potable reuse; wetlands creation,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)

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)

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)

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)

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. (Branch)

CS/SB 504 (Perry) and CS/HB 279 (Smith, D.) require the local government and other specified entities, in deciding whether it is in the public’s best interest for the local government to perform a public building construction project using its own services, to consider the estimated costs of the project using generally accepted cost-accounting principles. This requirement includes all costs associated with performing and completing the work, including employee compensation and benefits and other determining factors.

The bills also require a local government that performs a public building construction project using its own services to disclose after completion, the actual costs of the project after completion to the auditor general. CS/SB 504 was amended in committee to remove language prohibiting a local government from performing the project using its own services, employees and equipment if the project requires an increase in the number of government employees or an increase in such capital expenditures. CS/SB 279 was amended in committee to raise the threshold above which a local government must competitively bid a project from $300,000 to $400,000 when seeking to construct or improve a public building or structure as well as raising the same threshold for electrical work from $75,000 to $100,000. (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. 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. (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)

SB 1512 (Diaz) and 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. 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)

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)

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)

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)

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/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)

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)

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)

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)

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)