BILL SUMMARY DETAILS

SB 58 (Stewart) and HB 475 (Killebrew) – Sales Tax Holiday for Micromobility Vehicles and Related Personal Safety Equipment 

HB 113 (Maney) and SB 216 (Hooper) – Tax Collections and Sales

HB 171 (Daniels) – Homestead Exemptions for Totally and Permanently Disabled First Responders

SB 172 (Polsky) – Verification of Eligibility for Homestead Exemption

SB 218 (Wright) and HB 239 (Killebrew) – Property Tax Exemption for Surviving Spouses of Veterans

SB 230 (Wright) – Sales Tax on Aircraft Sales and Leases

SB 264 (Rodriguez) and HB 269 (Overdorf) – Aircraft Taxes

HB 331 (Garcia) and HB 333 (Garcia) – Limitation of Property Tax Assessment

SB 378 (Garcia) – Property Tax Assessment

SB 380 (Hooper) and HB 295 (Anderson) – Disclosure of Estimated Ad Valorem Taxes

SB 652 (Garcia) and SB 654 (Garcia) – Homestead Assessments

HB 727 (Amesty) – Tax Exemption for Disabled Ex-servicemembers

SB 102 (Jones) – Property Insurance

HB 55 (Tant) and SB 616 (Simon) are the implementing bills for HJR 53/SJR 618 if it is voter-approved and would provide for a property tax exemption for the surviving spouse of a quadriplegic who was receiving a property tax exemption on real estate used and owned as a homestead at the time of their death. (Chapman)

HB 609 (Botana) seeks to repeal local governments' ability to levy a local business tax. (Chapman)

HB 503 (Fabricio) and SB 578 (Ingoglia) would prohibit a local government from imposing, levying or collecting certain fees relating to the utilization of a virtual office. (Chapman)

SB 220 (Wright) and HB 689 (Smith) expand the current ad valorem tax exemption for not-for-profit homes for the aged. The bills will allow a home for the aged owned by a separate entity that is owned by a not-for-profit corporation to also receive the exemption. (Chapman)

HJR 53 (Tant) and SJR 618 (Simon) propose an amendment to the constitution to authorize the Legislature to provide for a property tax exemption for the surviving spouse of a quadriplegic who was receiving a property tax exemption on real estate used and owned as a homestead at the time of their death. The constitutional amendment must be approved by at least 60% of electors at the November 2024 general election and will take effect on January 1, 2025. (Chapman)

SB 734 (Ingoglia) and HB 735 (Andrade) impose restrictions on the renewal or extension of contracts for the chief executive officer of a municipality and the municipal general counsel; lobbyist registration requirements for lobbying counties, municipalities or special districts; and revise physical quorum requirements for public meetings. The bills prohibit a person from lobbying a county, municipality, or special district unless he or she is registered as a lobbyist with such entity. “Lobby” is defined as seeking, on behalf of another person or group, to influence a decision of the governing entity in an area of policy or procurement or in an attempt to obtain the goodwill of an official or employee of such entity. “Lobbyist” has the same meaning as in section 112.3215(1). A municipality, county, or special district may use the state’s executive or legislative branch lobbyist registration forms, or it may develop its own lobbyist registration form that requires disclosure of the name and address of the lobbyist, the name and address of the principal, and the existence of any direct or indirect business association or financial relationship the lobbyist has with any officer or employee of the county, municipality, or special district. The municipality, county or special district must make available to the public copies of lobbyist registrations and, if the entity maintains a website, it must make the information available on its website. The local lobbyist registration must be filed electronically with the Florida Commission on Ethics. The bill authorizes a municipality, county or special district to impose a lobbyist registration fee not to exceed $40 for each principal represented. The bill authorizes the Florida Commission on Ethics or the county or municipality’s local ethics commission to investigate violations of the registration requirements. It specifies that it does not preempt or supersede any ordinance or charter provision establishing a lobbyist registration program before July 2024, but provides that the state law prevails over a conflicting local requirement. An ordinance may include additional or more stringent disclosure requirements. The bills prohibit public officers, public employees, a local government attorney, or candidate for nomination or election from soliciting or accepting anything of value from a foreign country of concern. The bills prohibit the governing body of a municipality from renewing or extending the employment contract of a chief executive officer of the municipality during the eight months immediately preceding a general election for the mayor or for members of the governing body unless the renewal or extension is approved by a unanimous vote. In addition, the bills prohibit the governing body of a municipality from renewing or extending the employment contract of a municipal general counsel during the eight months immediately preceding a general election for mayor or for members of the governing body unless the renewal or extension is approved by a unanimous vote. The bills specify that when at least two members of the governing body are physically present, a member of the governing body may be considered present if, by the use of any technology, the member can participate in the deliberation of the governing body. The bills define “present” as meaning that a member of a governing body has, for the purpose of determining a quorum, the ability to participate meaningfully in the deliberation of the governing body, either by physical presence at the meeting or by his or her use of technology that allows the member to see, hear and speak at the meeting as if physically present. (O’Hara)

SB 782 (Yarborough) amends section 102.012, Florida Statutes, to require election boards to include at least one member from each of the two largest political parties in the state. (O’Hara)

SB 190 (Garcia) and HB 671 (Borrero) require a law enforcement officer to transport ballot boxes or ballot transfer containers from a supervisor of elections to a precinct and require that all ballot boxes and ballot transfer containers be supervised by a law enforcement officer at all times. The bills require all ballot boxes, ballots, ballot stubs, memoranda and papers relating to the tabulation of votes and proclamation of results under section 102.071, Florida Statutes, to be transported by a law enforcement officer. (O’Hara)

SB 7014 (Ethics and Elections Committee) creates timeframes for the completion of investigations of alleged ethics violations conducted by the Florida Commission on Ethics (Commission). The bill creates a harmless error standard for the Commission’s failure to meet the deadlines, tolls the timeframes until any related criminal cases are resolved and that specifies the new timeframes will apply to existing and new cases. In addition, the bill provides that terms of Commission members are limited to two terms total, rather than two successive terms. It adds candidates for public office to the categories of persons authorized to recover costs and attorney fees for defending against a maliciously filed ethics complaint. The bill also requires a vote of six Commission members to reject or deviate from a recommendation of Commission counsel to the Commission and removes the Commission’s ability to conduct a formal hearing to determine disputed material facts. It authorizes an alleged violator to request a hearing before the Division of Administrative Hearings or to select an informal hearing with the Commission. Finally, the bill conforms the maximum penalty (changing the penalty from $10,000 to $20,000) for a violation of the constitutional prohibition against lobbying by a public officer to the penalties authorized for violations of other ethics laws. (O’Hara)

HB 473 (Giallombardo) and SB 658 (DiCeglie) exempt cities and counties from liability in connection with a cybersecurity incident if the local entity has substantially complied with the current training and cybersecurity standards requirements under Section 282.3185, Florida Statutes. (Wagoner)

CS/HB 267 (Esposito) and SB 684 (DiCeglie) are comprehensive building permit bills. Of concern to cities, the bills do the following:

Expedited Approval of Residential Permits

•Require municipalities with a population of 30,000 or more to create a program to expedite the process of issuing building permits for residential subdivisions by August 15, 2024.

•Create a two-step application process that would include the adoption of a preliminary plat and a final plat in order to expedite the issuance of building permits.

•Allow cities to work with the appropriate local government agencies to issue an address and a temporary parcel identification number for lot lines and lot sizes based on the metes and bounds of the plat contained in the application.

•CS/HB 267 was amended to require applicants to have a performance bond for up to 130%. The Senate Companion, SB 684, requires applicants to have a performance bond for up to 120%.

•Require applicants to indemnify local governments that issue the permit.

•Specifies that upon an applicant's request, a local government must issue no less than 50% of the permits for dwellings to be built.

Shorten Timeframes for Building Permits  (applies to all municipalities)

•CS/HB 267 was amended to remove the requirement for the local jurisdiction to reduce the permit fee by 75% if an owner retains a private provider. SB 684 maintains this provision. 

•Reduce the timeframe when municipalities must provide written notice of receipt and any other additional information that is required for a properly completed application to an applicant.

•Reduce the number of times a municipality can ask an applicant for additional information.

•Allow an application to be “deemed” approved if municipalities fail to meet any of the timeframes. (Branch)

SB 742 (Grall) and HB 705 (Shoaf) revise and expand the definition of "public works project" to include an activity that is paid using any local or state-appropriated funds. Under current law, this is defined as any state funds. Of concern to cities, the bills prohibit municipalities that contract for a public works project from requiring a contractor to do the following:

•Pay employees a predetermined amount of wages or prescribe any wage rate

•Provide employees a specified type, amount or rate of employee benefits

•Control, limit or expand staffing

•Recruit, train or hire employees from a designated, restricted or single source.

The bills also prohibit a local government from denying the ability of a licensed contractor within the state from receiving information about a public works opportunity or from submitting a bid on a project. (Branch)

HB 665 (McClain) and SB 812 (Ingoglia) are comprehensive bills dealing with the expedited approval of residential building permits. Of concern to municipalities, the bills do the following:

•Require counties with a population of 75,000 or more and municipalities with a population of 30,000 or more to create a program to expedite the process of issuing building permits for residential subdivisions by August 15, 2024.

•Create a two-step application process that would include the adoption of a preliminary plat and a final plat in order to expedite the issuance of building permits.

•Allow cities to work with the appropriate local government agencies to issue an address and a temporary parcel identification number for lot lines and lot sizes based on the metes and bounds of the plat contained in the application.

•Require applicants to have a performance bond for up to 130%.

•Require applicants to indemnify local governments that issue the permit.

•Specify that upon an applicant's request, a local government must issue no less than 50% of the permits for dwellings to be built. (Chapman)

HB 601 (Duggan) makes it unlawful for municipalities or citizen oversight boards to pass or enforce any ordinance relating to the receipt, processing or investigation of complaints of misconduct by law enforcement officers and correctional officers. The bill also prohibits the creation of any laws in relation to civilian oversight of a law enforcement agency in relation to the investigation of complaints. (Wagoner)

HB 479 (Robinson, W.) and SB 688 (Martin) revise and provide additional guidance concerning the use of mobility plans and the collection of mobility fees. The bills provide definitions for “mobility fee” and “mobility plan” to be used within the Community Planning Act. The bills prohibit local governments from charging for transportation impacts if they are not the local government that is issuing a building permit, require that local governments collect for extra jurisdictional impacts if they are issuing building permits and prohibit local governments from assessing multiple charges for the same transportation impact. Concerning impact fees, the bills provide that local governments adopting and collecting impact fees by ordinance or resolution must use localized data available within the previous 12 months of adoption for the local government’s calculation of impact fees. (Cruz)

SB 280 (DiCeglie) is a comprehensive bill dealing with short-term rentals. Of concern to cities, the bill does the following:

Impact on Local Governments

SB 280 maintains the current preemption on local governments from adopting zoning ordinances specific to short-term rentals, as well as regulating the duration of stays and the frequency in which the properties are rented. 

Local Registration Programs 

The local government has 15 business days after receiving an application for registration to either accept the application or issue a written notice specifying all deficiencies. Both parties may agree to extend the timeline. If a municipality does not accept or deny an application within that 15-day window, that application is deemed approved. 

As a condition of registration, the local registration program may only require the owner or operator of a vacation rental to:

•Pay a fee of no more than $150 per unit for processing an individual registration application and a $50 per unit yearly renewal. A local government may impose a $300 fine for failure to register. 

•Charge a reasonable fee for inspections to ensure compliance with the Florida Building and Fire Prevention Code. 

•Renew their registration no more than once per year per unit, unless the property has a change in ownership.

•Submit identifying information about the owner or the property manager and the short-term rental being registered.

•Obtain a license as a transient public lodging establishment by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR).

•Obtain all required tax registration, receipts or certificates issued by the Department of Revenue, a county or a municipal government. 

•Maintain all registration information on a continuing basis so it is current.

•Designate and maintain a property designee who can respond to complaints and other immediate problems related to the property, including being available by phone 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

•Pay in full all municipal or county code liens against the property being registered. 

•State the maximum occupancy of the short-term rental based on the number of sleeping accommodations for persons staying in the short-term rental. 

June 1, 2011, Grandfather Provision

The bill maintains the grandfathering of ordinances that were adopted prior to June 1, 2011. Additionally, the bill clarifies that cities may amend grandfathered ordinances to be less restrictive without voiding those ordinances. 

Impact on Advertising Platforms and DBPR

Advertising platforms will now be required to:

•Collect and remit all required taxes.

•Require each person listing a property as a vacation rental to include in the advertisement the state license number and, if applicable, the local registration number. They will also be required to attest that the license and registration numbers are valid.

•By January 1, 2026, the advertising platform will be required to check and verify the license number of all listings with DBPR prior to posting the advertisement. Additionally, license numbers must be checked at the end of each calendar quarter with the department.

•Remove from public view an advertisement from their website within 15 business days after notification by DBPR in writing that a vacation rental fails to display a valid license number.

•Adopt an anti-discrimination policy.

Revocation/Denial of License

A local government may revoke or refuse to renew a vacation rental registration:

•An owner’s vacation rental registration has been suspended three times.

•There is an unsatisfied municipal or county code lien, so long as the local government allows the owner at least 60 days before the termination to satisfy the lien.

•The premises and its owner are subject of a final order or judgment directing the termination of the premises’ use as a vacation rental.

•A local government may suspend a local registration for up to 30 days if a short-term rental is found to have one or more violations on five separate days for violations of another local law, ordinance or regulation in a 30, 60 or 90-day period. (Wagoner)

HB 665 (McClain) and SB 812 (Ingoglia) are comprehensive bills dealing with the expedited approval of residential building permits. Of concern to municipalities, the bills do the following:

•Require counties with a population of 75,000 or more and municipalities with a population of 30,000 or more to create a program to expedite the process of issuing building permits for residential subdivisions by August 15, 2024.

•Create a two-step application process that would include the adoption of a preliminary plat and a final plat in order to expedite the issuance of building permits.

•Allow cities to work with the appropriate local government agencies to issue an address and a temporary parcel identification number for lot lines and lot sizes based on the metes and bounds of the plat contained in the application.

•Require applicants to have a performance bond for up to 130%.

•Require applicants to indemnify local governments that issue the permit.

•Specify that upon an applicant's request, a local government must issue no less than 50% of the permits for dwellings to be built. (Chapman)

CS/HB 267 (Esposito) and SB 684 (DiCeglie) are comprehensive building permit bills. Of concern to cities, the bills do the following:

Expedited Approval of Residential Permits

•Require municipalities with a population of 30,000 or more to create a program to expedite the process of issuing building permits for residential subdivisions by August 15, 2024.

•Create a two-step application process that would include the adoption of a preliminary plat and a final plat in order to expedite the issuance of building permits.

•Allow cities to work with the appropriate local government agencies to issue an address and a temporary parcel identification number for lot lines and lot sizes based on the metes and bounds of the plat contained in the application.

•CS/HB 267 was amended to require applicants to have a performance bond for up to 130%. The Senate Companion, SB 684, requires applicants to have a performance bond for up to 120%.

•Require applicants to indemnify local governments that issue the permit.

•Specifies that upon an applicant's request, a local government must issue no less than 50% of the permits for dwellings to be built.

Shorten Timeframes for Building Permits  (applies to all municipalities)

•CS/HB 267 was amended to remove the requirement for the local jurisdiction to reduce the permit fee by 75% if an owner retains a private provider. SB 684 maintains this provision. 

•Reduce the timeframe when municipalities must provide written notice of receipt and any other additional information that is required for a properly completed application to an applicant.

•Reduce the number of times a municipality can ask an applicant for additional information.

•Allow an application to be “deemed” approved if municipalities fail to meet any of the timeframes. (Branch)

SB 472 (Brodeur) and HB 569 (McFarland) increase the statutory limits on liability for tort claims against the state and its agencies and subdivisions (which include cities). The current statutory limits for claims are $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident. Both bills would increase the caps to $400,000 per person and $600,000 per incident. To reflect inflation, the bills require caps to be adjusted annually on July 1 to reflect changes in the regional Consumer Price Index. The bills prohibit an insurance policy from conditioning the payout of a claim on the passage of a claims bill. HB 569 allows a subdivision of the state to settle a claim above the statutory limits without the need for a claims bill. HB 569 narrows the statute of limitation on negligence claims against government entities from 4 years to 2 years. Both the House and Senate bills allow the limitations of liability in effect on the date a final judgment is entered to apply to the claim. Therefore, allowing claims that occurred prior to implementation of these new limits to avail themselves to the increase in caps. (Cruz)