Legislative Reporter | April 25, 2025 by APA Florida

April 25, 2025 | Legislative Reporter

There is just one week left until the 2025 legislative session is scheduled to end this Friday, May 2 Committees have stopped meeting as the focus turns to budget negotiations. The Senate and House have not yet agreed on allocations and, as a result, Senate President Albritton indicated on April 24 that the session will not end as scheduled.

To date in the regular season, 43 bills have passed both chambers. Pursuant to Article III section 8 of the Florida Constitution, every bill passed by the legislature is presented to the governor for approval and becomes law if the governor approves and signs it, or fails to veto it within seven consecutive days after presentation. If during that period or on the seventh day the legislature adjourns sine die or takes a recess of more than thirty days, the governor has fifteen consecutive days from the date of presentation to act on the bill.

You can follow Governor DeSantis’s bill actions by going to his office website. Scroll down to the Quick Links section and click on the button titled 2025 Bill Actions

The Bill Tracking Report, as of April 25 can be viewed here. Please review it to see the filed bills that APA Florida is tracking and their status.

The following bills of interest had action this week. Note these summaries are based on a review of the bill language and legislative staff analysis. You are encouraged to read the actual bill language of bills that interest you. Please note that not all bills are covered in all legislative reports. The reports focus on bills of particular interest that have had action over the previous week. You can use the Bill Tracking Report to see the status of other bills.

PRIORITY BILLS

SB 184 (ADUs)

SB 1264 (Rural/Business Enterprise)

SB 1080/HB 579 (Land Regulation)

SB 140 (Charter Schools)

HB 943 (Live Local Act)

HB 209 (State Parks)

SB 1730 (Affordable Housing)

Bill history here

Bill history here.

Bill history here

Requires counties and municipalities to adopt an ordinance by Dec. 1, 2025, to allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in any area zoned for single-family residential use. (page 20)

Repeals Regional Planning Councils, minority business enterprises and redefines a rural community (No movement.)

Amends certain statutes regulating the development permit review and approval and order applications by local governments. (page 3)

Limits who may apply for a conversion charter school to only parents with children enrolled at the school and certain municipalities seeking a job engine charter school to attract job-producing entities to the municipality. (No movement)

Amends various provisions in the Live Local Act relating to affordable housing, certain building moratoriums, and reporting requirements. (page 7)

Bill history here Creates the State Park Preservation Act. It requires state parks or preserves to be managed in a manner that provides the greatest combination of benefits to the public and the land’s natural resources (page 18)

Bill history here

Requires local governments to authorize multifamily and mixed use residential as allowable uses in portions of any flexibly zoned area such as a planned unit development permitted for commercial, industrial, or mixed use, if at least 40 percent of the residential units in a proposed multifamily development are rental units that, for a period of at least 30 years, are affordable. (No movement.)

GROWTH MANAGEMENT

Areas of Critical State Concern: CS/CS/HB 995 (Rep. Mooney, Jr.) was passed by the House on April 23, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Rules Committee.

The bill amends s.255.05 to exempt a person who enters into a formal contract with the state or any county, city, political subdivision, or other public authority or private entity for the construction, completion, or repair of public buildings or public works from executing the required payment and performance bond if the following conditions are met:

• the work is done on property located within an area of critical state concern that is subject to a long-term ground lease of 99 years or more with Habitat for Humanity International, Inc., or any of its local affiliates, at the discretion of the official or board that owns the subject underlying property in fee simple; and

• the leasehold interest created by the ground lease of 99 years or more is subject to any claims by claimants who are lienors and applicable lien provisions; the underlying real property owned by the state, or any county, city, or political subdivision thereof, or other public authority is not subject to any lien rights established in Chapter 713.

The bill also amends s.259.105 to extend the date through which at least $5 million of the funds allocated from the Florida Forever Act to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for the acquisition of lands and capital project expenditures must be spent on land acquisition within the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern. The funding requirement currently extends through fiscal year 2026-27 and the bill extends it through fiscal year 2035-36.

Additionally, it changes s.380.0552 that establishes the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, to revise the requirement that local comprehensive plans maintain a hurricane evacuation clearance time for permanent residents of no more than 24 hours by extending it to no more than 24.5 hours or 825 permit allocations, whichever is less. The bill also adds that, to ensure the hurricane evacuation clearance time is met, Monroe County, the Village of Islamorada, the cities of Marathon, Layton, and Key West must each continue to maintain permit allocation systems limiting the number of permits issued for new residential dwelling units.

The bill provides that the Administration Commission must distribute 825 permit allocations over a period of at least 10 years:

• Monroe County must receive 539 permit allocations, all of which must be issued to vacant, buildable parcels. Only one of the allocated building permits shall be awarded to any individual parcel and 377 must be issued only for workforce housing;

• The City of Marathon must receive 187 permit allocations, all of which must be issued to vacant, buildable parcels. Only one of the allocated building permits shall be awarded to any individual parcel. Distribution of the permits must prioritize allocations for owner-occupied residences, affordable housing, and workforce housing;

• The City of Islamorada must receive 71 permit allocations, all of which must be issued to vacant, buildable parcels. Only one of the allocated building permits shall be awarded to any individual parcel. Distribution of the permits must prioritize allocations for owner-occupied residences, affordable housing, and workforce housing; and

• The City of Key West must receive 28 permit allocations. The housing constructed pursuant to the allocated permits must be affordable.

The bill defines “workforce housing” as residential dwelling units restricted for a period of at least 99 years to occupancy by households who derive at least 70 percent of their household income from gainful employment in Monroe County supplying goods or services to Monroe County residents or visitors.

A similar bill, CS/CS/SB 1326 (Sen. Rodriguez) is in the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference.

Construction Regulations: CS/CS/CS/HB 683 E1 (Rep. Griffitts, Jr.) was passed by the House on April 23, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Rules Committee.

The bill creates s.125.572 to direct the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to adopt minimum standards for the installation of synthetic turf on single-family residential properties 1 acre or less in size. These standards must consider material type, color, permeability, stormwater management, potable water conservation, water quality, proximity to trees and other vegetation, and other factors impacting environmental conditions of adjacent properties.

Upon the adoption of such standards, local governments are prohibited from adopting or enforcing any ordinance, resolution, order, rule, or policy that prohibits, or is enforced to prohibit, a property owner from installing synthetic turf that complies with these standards which apply to single family residential properties. A local government is prohibited from adopting or enforcing any ordinance, resolution, order, rule, or policy that regulates synthetic turf which is inconsistent with the standards adopted which apply to single-family residential property. “Synthetic turf” is defined to mean a manufactured product that resembles natural grass and is used as a surface for landscaping and recreational areas. It also directs the DEP to adopt rules to implement the section.

The bill creates s.218.755 to provide that, beginning on or after July 1, 2025, if a local government receives a price quote from its contractor for a change order requested or issued by the local government for construction services, and the price quote meets all statutory and contractual requirements for the project, the local government must provide written notice to the contractor approving or denying the price quote within 35 days. If a local government denies the price quote, the written notice must specify the alleged deficiencies in the quote and list the actions necessary to remedy the deficiencies. If a local government fails to provide the contractor with a notice in compliance with this section, the change order and price quote are deemed approved, and the local government must pay the contractor the amount stated in the price quote upon completion of the change order. A contract between a local government and a contractor may not alter these provisions.

The language changes s.255.0992 to provide that the state or any political subdivision, when scoring or evaluating bids for a public works project, may not penalize a bidder for performing a larger volume of construction work for the state or political subdivision, or reward a bidder for performing a smaller volume of construction work for the state or political subdivision.

It also amends s.399.035. related to elevator accessibility requirements for the physically handicapped, and s.489.505 related to certified alarm system contractors.

Furthermore, it amends s.553.73 to provide total exemption from the Florida Building Code for any system or equipment, whether affixed or movable, which is located on property within a spaceport territory pursuant to s.331.304 and which is used for the production, erection, alteration, modification, repair, launch, processing, recovery, transport, integration, fueling, conditioning, or equipping of a space launch vehicle, payload, or spacecraft.

The text changes s 553.79 to provide that a local government may not require a contract between a builder and an owner, any copies of such contract, or any associated documents including, but not limited to, letters of intent, material cost lists, labor costs, or overhead or profit statements as a requirement to apply for or receive a building permit.

Finally, s 553.791, related to the alternative plans review and inspection process, is changed as follows:

• expands permit application requirements to include, in the case of a single-trade plan review where a private provider uses an automated or software-based plans review system, the information reviewed by the automated or softwarebased plans review system to determine compliance with one or more applicable codes

• includes solar energy and energy storage installations or alterations in the definition of what can be part of a single trade inspection or plans review

• allows, for single-trade plans review, the use of automated or software-based plans review systems designed to determine compliance with one or more applicable codes, including but not limited to, the National Electrical Code and the Florida Building Code

• for permit applications related to a single-trade plans review for a single-family or two-family dwelling, requires the local government to approve a permit or provide written notice of deficiencies within 5 business days after receipt of the permit application and affidavit

Note that the bill was amended on the floor to remove previously proposed provisions related to swimming pool contractors, and provisions related to the approval of mass timber construction products under the Florida Building Code.

CS/CS/CS/SB 712 (Sen. Grall), a similar bill, was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee, its third and final committee of reference, on April 21 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

Farm Products: HB 211 (Rep. Cobb and Rep. Hunschofsky) was passed by the House on April 23, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Rules Committee.

The bill amends the definition of “farm products” in s.163.3162. to mean plants and plant products, regardless of whether the plants and plant products are edible or non-edible, or any animal useful to humans and includes, but is not limited to, any product derived therefrom.

The bill also amends s.163.3162(3)(a) to provide that a bona fide farm operation, that cannot be regulated or limited by a local government, includes, but is not limited to, the collection, storage, processing, and distribution of a farm product.

SB 374 (Sen. Truenow), an identical bill, is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its second committee of reference.

Local Government Land Regulation: CS/SB 1080 (Sen. McClain), with several amendments being adopted on Second Reading, failed to pass the Senate on April 23. The vote was 18 - Yeas, 19 - Nays. It was reconsidered and temporarily postponed on its Third Reading.

The bill amends s.125.022 and s.166.033 to require that a county or municipality respectively must specify in writing the minimum information that must be submitted in an application for a zoning approval, rezoning approval, subdivision approval, certification, special exception, or variance. Under the bill, the local government must:

• make the minimum information available for inspection and copying at the location where the local government receives applications for development permits and orders;

• provide the minimum information to the applicant at a preapplication meeting; or

• post the minimum information on the local government’s website.

Within five business days after receiving an application for approval of a development permit or development order, the bill requires that a local government must confirm receipt of the application using the contact information provided by the applicant.

The bill clarifies that, within 30 days after receiving an application for approval of a development permit or order, a local government must review the application for completeness and either issue a written notification to the applicant indicating that all required information is submitted or specify, with particularity and in writing, any areas that are deficient.

For an application for a development permit or order that does not require final action through a quasi-judicial hearing or public hearing, the bill requires a local government to, within 120 days after the local government has deemed the application complete, approve the application, approve the application with conditions or deny the application.

For an application for a development permit or order that does require final action through a quasi-judicial hearing or public hearing, the bill requires a local government to, within 180 days after the local government has deemed the application complete, approve the application, approve the application with conditions or deny the application.

Additionally, the bill clarifies that a local government and an applicant may agree in writing to an extension of time for processing an application, particularly in the event of a force majeure or other extraordinary circumstance. (Note the bill was amended on the floor to delete previously proposed language which prohibited a local government from limiting the number of quasi-judicial hearings or public hearings held each month if such limitation causes any delay in the consideration of an application for approval of a development permit or order.)

The bill also provides that these timeframes restart if an applicant makes a substantive change to the application. The term is defined as an applicant-initiated change of 15 percent or more in the proposed density, intensity, or square footage of a parcel.

The bill requires a local government to issue specified refunds to an applicant if timeframes are not met. However, a local government is not required to issue a refund if:

• the applicant and the local government agree to an extension of time;

• the delay is caused by the applicant; or

• the delay is attributable to a force majeure or other extraordinary circumstance

The bill revises ss.163.3162(4). related to agricultural enclaves, to do the following:

• allows the owner of a parcel of land to apply to the local governing body for certification of the parcel as an agricultural enclave if one or more adjacent parcels or an adjacent development permits the same density as, or higher density than, the proposed development

• for purposes of determining adjacency (Floor amendment):

o a parcel is adjacent to another parcel if it shares a continuous boundary of at least 100 feet, including where such parcels are separated by a public street or other public right of-way;

o a retention pond, stormwater area, park, or other designated common area of a community counts toward the 100foot boundary requirement if the parcel has the same or substantially similar zoning classification as the parcel being used by the agricultural enclave for density purposes; this applies to a parcel, regardless of whether such parcel contains residential lots, provided the parcel has the same or similar zoning as the parcels containing residential lots and was part of the development review of the adjoining subdivision; and

o multiple parcels aggregated within a single unified application concerning an enclave parcel or development site satisfy the adjacency requirements of this subsection if, in the aggregate, the combined parcels meet the 100-foot boundary requirement

• requires the local government to provide the applicant with a written report detailing the application’s compliance with this subsection with 30 days after receipt of the application;

• requires the local government to hold a public hearing, withing 30 days after providing the above report, to approve or deny the certification;

• if the local government does not approve or deny the certification within 90 days after receipt of the application, the parcel must be certified as an agricultural enclave;

• if the application is denied, the local government must issue its decision in writing with detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law; the applicant may seek review of the denial by filing a petition for writ of certiorari in the circuit court within 30 days after the local government renders its decision;

• if the application is approved, the parcel owner may submit development plans for single-family residential housing which are consistent with the land use requirements, or future land use designations, including uses, density, and intensity, of one or more adjacent parcels or an adjacent development; the submitted development must be treated as a conforming use;

• prohibits a local government from enacting or enforcing a law or regulation for an agricultural enclave which is more burdensome than for other types of applications for comparable uses or densities;

• requires a local government to treat an agricultural enclave that is adjacent to an urban service district as if it is within that district;

• within 30 days after receipt of the development plans, the local government and parcel owner must agree in writing to a process and schedule for information submittal, analysis, and final approval, which may be administrative in nature, of the development plans; the local government may not require the owner to agree to a process that is longer than 180 days or that includes further review of the plans in a quasi-judicial process or public hearing; and

• provides that nothing in this subsection preempts or replaces any protection currently existing for property located within the boundaries of a military installation or range identified in s.163.3175(2).

The bill amends ss.163.3164(4) to revise the definition of “agricultural enclave” to mean an unincorporated parcel, or parcels, that as of Jan. 1, 2025:

• are owned or controlled by a single person or entity;

• have been in continuous use for bona fide agricultural purposes, as defined by s.193.461, for a period of 5 years before the date of any comprehensive plan amendment or development application;

• are surrounded by at least 75 percent of their perimeter by:

 a parcel or parcels that have existing industrial, commercial, or residential development, or

 a parcel or parcels that the local government has designated, in the local government’s comprehensive plan, zoning map, and future land use map, as land that is to be developed for industrial, commercial, or residential purposes, and at least 75 percent of such parcel or parcels exists industrial, commercial, or residential development

o do not exceed 700 acres and are surrounded on at least 50 percent of their perimeter by a parcel or parcels that the local government has designated on the local government’s future land use map as land that is to be developed for industrial, commercial, or residential purposes; and the parcel or parcels are surrounded on at least 50 percent of their perimeter by a parcel or parcels within an urban service district, area, or line; or

o are located within the boundary of an established rural study area adopted in the local government’s comprehensive plan which was intended to be developed with residential uses and is surrounded on at least 50 percent of its perimeter by a parcel or parcels that the local government has designated on the local government’s future land use plan as land that can be developed for industrial, commercial, or residential purposes

• have public services, including water, wastewater, transportation, schools, and recreation facilities, available or such public services are scheduled in the capital improvement element to be provided by the local government or can be provided by an alternative provider of local government infrastructure in order to ensure consistency with applicable concurrency provisions of s.163.3180, or the applicant offers to enter into a binding agreement to pay for, construct, or contribute land for its proportionate share of such improvements;

• do not exceed 1,280 acres; however, if the parcel or parcels are surrounded by existing or authorized residential development that will result in a density at buildout of at least 1,000 residents per square mile, then the area must be determined to be urban and the parcel or parcels may not exceed 4,480 acres; and

• are located within a county with a population of 1.75 million or less. For purposes of this subsection, population shall be determined in accordance with the most recent official estimate pursuant to s.186.901.

The bill provides that where a right-of-way, body of water, or canal exists along the perimeter of a parcel, the perimeter calculations of the agricultural enclave must be based on the adjacent parcel or parcels across the right-of-way, body of water, or canal.

It also provides that the amendments to ss.163.3162(4) and 163.3164(4) expire on Jan. 1, 2027, and the text of those subsections shall revert to that in existence on Sept. 30, 2025, except that any amendments to such text enacted other than by this bill will be preserved and continue to operate to the extent that such amendments are not dependent upon the portions of text which expire pursuant to this section.

The language changes s.163.3180 related to concurrency, to provide that a school district may not collect, charge, or impose any alternative fee in lieu of an impact fee to mitigate the development impact on educational facilities unless such fee meets the requirements of s.163.31801(4)(f) and (g). In any action challenging a fee under this paragraph, the school district has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the imposition and amount of the fee meet the requirements of state legal precedent.

It also amends ss.163.31801(6)(g) related an increase in impact fees by a local government, school district or special district. The bill requires that the impact fee increase ordinance is unanimously approved by the governing body, as opposed to the currently required two-thirds vote. It also requires that an impact fee increase approved under this paragraph must be implemented in at least two but not more than four equal annual increments beginning with the date on which the impact fee increase ordinance is adopted. Additionally, a local government may not increase an impact fee rate beyond the phase-in limitations under this paragraph if the local government has not increased the impact fee within the past 5 years. Any year in which the local government is prohibited from increasing an impact fee because the jurisdiction is in a hurricane disaster area is not included in the 5-year period. (Floor amendment changes timeframe from 7 years to 5 years.)

It deletes current language that provides that the requirements of s.163.31801(6) apply retroactively to Jan. 1, 2021.

Finally, it amends s.163.3184 dealing with the expedited state review process, clarifying that the local government must transmit adopted plan amendments and appropriate supporting data and analyses to the reviewing agencies within ten working days after the date of adoption. The bill also provides that the local government complies if the second public hearing is held within the 180-day period following receipt of agency comments, even if the amendments are approved at a subsequent hearing.

A similar bill, CS/CS/HB 579 (Rep. Overdorf), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 22 and added to the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Local Option Taxes: CS/CS/HB 1221 E1 (Rep. Miller), was reported favorably by the House State Affairs Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 22 and passed by the House, reflecting floor amendments on April 25. It was received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee.

The revised bill provides express authority for a levying local government (the board of county commissioners or the school board) of any discretionary sales surtax to reduce or repeal such surtax with a two-thirds vote of the board, beginning four years after a surtax is levied. The reduced rate can be any lower rate otherwise allowable under the applicable statutory provision. A reduced or repealed rate is effective on the January 1 following the board’s vote, or on any subsequent January 1 as provided by the board.

It provides that, beginning July 1, 2025, all tourist development tax (TDT) revenues are available to counties to complete any project under way as of Jan. 1, 2025, or to service any bonds or other indebtedness pledged or assigned before July 1, 2025 in existence on Jan 1, 2025, pursuant to the restrictions that exist currently. Any such contracts may not be renewed or extended. Bonds or other debt outstanding as of July 1, 2025, may be refinanced, but the duration of such debt may not be extended and the outstanding principal may not be increased, except to account for costs of issuance

Revenues not needed for projects, contracts, or debt obligations may be used for any public purpose, rather than being limited to the current authorized uses of TDT. Bonds or other debt obligations may be refinanced, but the duration of such debt may not be extended and the outstanding principal may not be increased, except to account for costs of issuance.

The bill defines “adjusted collections” and requires that beginning in 2026, a county must reduce its ad valorem tax levy by an amount equal to at least 75 percent of the adjusted collections from the prior state fiscal year. The reduction shall be through a credit against the county tax due on each affected tax notice. Any adjusted collections not required to be used to provide ad valorem tax relief may be used for any public purpose, including, but not limited to, pledging such revenues for the repayment of current or future bonded indebtedness. (This was amended through a floor amendment.)

Additionally, the bill provides that all tourist development councils are dissolved Dec 31, 2025. The bill dissolves all county tourism promotion agencies but provides that such agencies may continue if affirmatively extended by resolution of the board of county commissioners on or before Dec. 31, 2025.

The bill provides an eight-year limitation for the imposition of the local option food and beverage tax under s.212.0306 in those cities in Miami-Dade County which currently levy the municipal resort tax pursuant to Chapter 67-930, L.O.F. An ordinance levying such a tax may be reenacted for subsequent eight-year periods if approved in a referendum.

The bill requires that, during the review of audit reports, the Auditor General shall contact each local government that is not in compliance with s.125.0104(5)(b), and request evidence of corrective action. The local government shall provide the Auditor

General with evidence of the initiation of corrective action within 45 days after the date the corrective action is requested by the Auditor General and evidence of completion of corrective action within 180 days after the date the corrective action is requested by the Auditor General. If the local government fails to comply with the Auditor General's request or is unable to take corrective action within the required timeframe, the Auditor General shall notify the Legislative Auditing Committee. (Floor amendment.)

The bill also provides that an audit of financial statements of a local government which is performed by a certified public accountant pursuant to s.218.39 and submitted to the Auditor General must be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the chair of the governing board of the local government, as a separate document, stating that the local government has complied with the provisions of s.125.0104(5)(b) and must be filed with the Auditor General. In the event the local government has not complied with s.125.0104(5)(b), the affidavit shall instead include a description of the noncompliance and corrective action taken by the local government to correct the noncompliance and to prevent such noncompliance in the future. (Floor amendment.)

CS/CS/SB 1664 (Sen. Trumbull) was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 22 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill amends requirements for local discretionary sales surtaxes, tourist development taxes, and local option food and beverage taxes in Miami-Dade County, as follows:

Local Discretionary Sales Surtaxes: The bill requires that, for any local discretionary sales surtax that currently must be enacted pursuant to a referendum and that is in effect on June 30, 2025, the local government must renew or continue such tax by a referendum on or before Jan. 1, 2033 or the expiration date for the tax as of June 30, 2025, whichever is later, in order for the tax to remain in effect after Jan 1, 2033, or the existing expiration date.

Additionally, a tax approved by voters in a referendum before July 1, 2025, which has not yet been levied, must be renewed or continued by an ordinance approved in a referendum on or before 8 years from the date the tax takes effect, or the expiration date for the tax as of June 30, 2025, whichever is later, in order to remain in effect.

A tax which is required to be approved by voters in a referendum must have an expiration date and be subject to approval by a majority of the electors voting in a subsequent referendum to be renewed or continued.

If taxes are pledged for debt service, the levy may continue until the debt is retired, and the levy will be subject to renewal the following January 1.

Additionally, if proceeds are used for the purpose of servicing bond indebtedness, the ordinance enacting a new tax or reenacting an existing tax must specify that the proceeds from the tax will be used for the purpose of servicing bond indebtedness and that the maximum duration of such bond indebtedness is not to exceed 30 years. The ordinance must also provide specificity regarding the purposes of the bond indebtedness. The referendum question on the ballot must specify that the proceeds of the tax will be used for that purpose and must include a brief and general description of the purposes for which the indebtedness will be incurred and the maximum length of time the tax may be imposed.

None of these changes affect the pension liability discretionary sales surtax found in s.212.055(9).

Tourist Development Taxes: For any tourist development tax that currently must be enacted pursuant to a referendum and that is in effect on June 30, 2025, the local government must renew or reenact such tax by a referendum on or before Jan 1, 2033 or the expiration date for the tax as of June 30, 2025, whichever is later, in order for the tax to remain in effect after Jan 1, 2033, or the existing expiration date.

Additionally, a tax approved by voters in a referendum before July 1, 2025, which has not yet been levied, must be renewed or reenacted by an ordinance approved in a referendum on or before 8 years from the date the tax takes effect, or the expiration date for the tax as of June 30, 2025, whichever is later, in order to remain in effect.

If tax levies are pledged for debt service, the levy may continue until the debt is retired, and the levy will be subject to renewal the following January 1.

Additionally, if proceeds will be used for the purpose of servicing bond indebtedness, the ordinance enacting a new tax or renewing or reenacting an existing tax must specify that the proceeds from the tax will be used for the purpose of servicing

bond indebtedness and that the maximum duration of such bond indebtedness is not to exceed 30 years. The ordinance must also provide specificity regarding the purposes of the bond indebtedness. The referendum question on the ballot must specify that the proceeds of the tax will be used for that purpose and must include a brief and general description of the purposes for which the indebtedness will be incurred and the maximum length of time the tax may be imposed.

Local Option Food & Beverage Tax (Miami-Dade): The bill also provides requirements for the imposition of the local option food and beverage tax in those cities in Miami-Dade County that currently levy the municipal resort tax. Any tax levied and in effect on June 30, 2025, must be reenacted by an ordinance approved in a referendum on or before Jan 1, 2033, or the expiration date for the tax as of June 30, 2025, whichever is later, to remain in effect after Jan 1, 2033, or the existing expiration date. Any tax levied must also have an expiration date.

Municipal Water and Sewer Utility Rates: HB 11 (Rep. F. Robinson), was passed by the Senate, reflecting a delete-all floor amendment, on April 23 after being substituted for CS/SB 202 (Sen. Jones). It is in Returning Messages to the House.

The bill amends s.180.191 to provide that a municipality which operates a water or sewer utility providing service to customers in another recipient municipality, which also has a facility in that recipient municipality, shall charge consumers in the recipient municipality the same rates, fees, and charges as it does the consumers inside its own municipal boundaries. This applies only to a municipality located within a county as defined in s.125.011(1) (The last sentence was added on the floor.)

The bill was also amended on the floor to include definitions for facility, wastewater treatment facility, and water treatment facility.

Real Property and Land Use and Development: CS/CS/CS/SB 943 (Rep. V. Lopez), reflecting a delete-all amendment and additional amendments, was reported favorably by the House Commerce Committee, its final committee of reference, and added to the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill amends various provisions related to the Live Local Act, such as:

• s.125.01055(6) and s.166.04151(6) related to affordable housing, to allow a county or municipality to approve the development of affordable housing on any parcel, including any contiguous parcel connect thereto, that is owned by a religious institution that contains a house of worship, regardless of the underlying zoning as long as 10 percent of the units included in the project are for housing that is affordable.

• s.125.01055(7) and s.166.04151(7) to:

o require a county or municipality to authorize multifamily and mixed-use residential as allowable uses in any area zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed use, and in portions of any flexibly zoned area such as a planned unit development permitted for commercial, industrial, or mixed use, if at least 40 percent of the residential units in a proposed multifamily development are rental units that, for a period of at least 30 years, are affordable;

o provide that a county or municipality may not require a proposed multifamily development to acquire or transfer density or development units, for the building height, zoning, and densities authorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7);

o provide that a county or municipality may not require that more than 10 percent of a mixed-use residential project be used for non-residential purposes; and

o prohibit a county or municipality from restricting the following for a proposed multifamily or mixed-use residential development authorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7):

 restricting the density below the highest currently allowed density or the highest allowed on July 1, 2023 on any land under their jurisdiction where residential development is allowed under the local land development regulations;

 restricting the floor area ratio below 150 percent of the highest floor area ratio currently allowed or the highest allowed on July 1, 2023, on land under their jurisdiction where development is allowed under land development regulations ;

 restricting the height below the highest currently allowed or the highest allowed on July 1, 2023 for a commercial or residential building located within its jurisdiction within 1 mile of the proposed development or three stories whichever is higher;

 if the proposed development is adjacent to, on two or more sides, a parcel zoned for single-family residential use which is within a single-family residential development with at least 25 contiguous single-family homes, the local government may restrict the height of the proposed development to 150 percent of the tallest building on any property adjacent to the proposed development, the highest currently allowed height or the highest height allowed on July 1, 2023, for the property provided in the land development regulations, or 3 stories, whichever is highest, but not to exceed 10 stories; and

 for a proposed development located within a county within an area of critical state concern, as designated by s.380.0552 and chapter 28-36, 97 Florida Administrative Code, the term "story" includes only the habitable space beginning at the base flood elevation, as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the most recent Flood Insurance Rate Map; a story may not exceed 10 feet in height measured from finished floor to finished floor, including space for mechanical equipment and the highest story may 103 not exceed 10 feet from finished floor to the top plate.

o require a proposed multifamily or mixed-use residential development to be administratively approved and no further action, including that of any quasi-judicial board of the reviewing body, is required if the development satisfies certain requirements;

o provide that the removal or demolition of all or part of a structure to be performed as part of the proposed development does not require a public hearing, unless the structure is, as of July 1, 2023, classified as “contributing” in a local government historic properties database; the rear portion of a structure abutting or facing an alley may not be deemed “contributing”;

o upon request of an applicant, require the county or municipality to reduce, as opposed to consider reducing, parking requirements by 20 percent for development authorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) if they meet certain requirements;

o provide that a county or municipality may allow an adjacent parcel of land to be included within a proposed multifamily development authorized under these subsections;

o provide that ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) do not apply to the Wekiva Study Area, the Everglades Protection Area, The Florida Keys and City of Key West Areas of Critical State Concern; this is remedial and applies retroactively to April 1, 2025;

o requires the court to give priority to a civil action file for a violation of ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) and render a decision as expeditiously as possible, and assess and award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the previewing party; and

o includes definitions for commercial use, industrial use, mixed use, planned unit development

• s.125.01055 and s.166.04151 to:

o provide that a proposed development on a parcel of land primarily developed and maintained as a golf course, a tennis court, or a swimming pool, regardless of the zoning of such parcel, may use the approval process provided in subsection (7); and

o provide that a county or municipality may not impose or enforce a building moratorium that has the effect of delaying the permitting or construction of a multifamily residential or mixed-use residential development authorized under subsection (7); however:

 a county or municipality may, by ordinance, impose or enforce a building moratorium that has the effect of delaying the permitting or construction of a multifamily residential or mixed-use residential development for no more than 90 days within a 3-year period if, before the adoption of such ordinance, the county prepares or causes to be prepared an assessment of its need for affordable housing for extremely-low income persons, very-low-income persons, low-income persons, and moderate-income persons, as defined in s.420.0004, including projections of future need for the preceding 5 years; and

 does not apply to any moratorium that is imposed or enforced to address stormwater or flood water management, to address the supply of potable water, or due to the necessary repair of sanitary sewer systems, if such moratorium applies equally to all types of multifamily or mixed-use residential development.

• If a civil action is filed against a county for a violation of this moratorium prohibition, the court must assess and award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party, not to exceed $500,000

o require the county or municipality to provide an annual report, beginning June 30, 2026, to the state land planning agency including certain items related to litigation and development under these sections; require the state land planning agency to provide an annual report to the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker regarding county compliance with these sections.

The bill amends s.163.3202 to require that the designation by a local government of property or a district as a historic property or historic district, and the adoption of land development regulations for historic preservation, must be made by the adoption of a local preservation ordinance. Property that is designated or otherwise subject to historic preservation regulations must be clearly identified on a map that is maintained by the local government, and included on the map within 30 days after such designation or regulation application. The local government must post the map on its website no later than June 1, 2026 and include contact information for the local government official who is responsible for providing public information about the historic preservation regulations. These requirements do not apply to a historic site or district that is designated as such solely for the purpose of public recognition and which is not subject to land development regulations by virtue of the designation.

The bill provides that, effective on becoming law, an applicant for a proposed development authorized under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7), who submits to a county or municipality, as applicable, an application, written request, or notice of intent to use such provisions and which application, written request, or notice of intent is received by the county or municipality as applicable, before July 1, 2025, may give notice to the county or municipality no later than July 1, 2025, of the intent to proceed under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7), as applicable, as it existed at the time of submittal. A county or municipality, as applicable, shall allow an applicant who submits such application, written request, or notice of intent the opportunity to submit a revised application, written request, or notice of intent to account for the changes made by this act.

It also amends s.196.1978 dealing with affordable housing property exemptions, to require the property appraiser to issue a letter to verify that a multifamily project, if constructed and leased as described in the site plan, qualifies for an exemption. The letter qualifies the project, if constructed and leased as described in the site plan, to obtain the exemption beginning with the January 1 assessment immediately after the date on which the property obtains a certificate of occupancy and is placed in service allowing the property to be used as an affordable housing property.

The language also amends s.380.0552 to increase the hurricane evacuation clearance time for the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern to 24 hours and 30 minutes. The bill also adds that, to ensure the hurricane evacuation clearance time is met, Monroe County, the Village of Islamorada, the cities of Marathon, Layton, and Key West must each continue to maintain permit allocation systems limiting the number of permits issued for new residential dwelling units.

It provides that the Administration Commission must distribute 825 permit allocations over a period of at least 10 years, as follows:

• The City of Key West must receive 28 permit allocations. The housing constructed pursuant to the allocated permits must be affordable.

It defines “workforce housing” as residential dwelling units restricted for a period of at least 99 years to occupancy by households who derive at least 70 percent of their household income from gainful employment in Monroe County supplying goods or services to Monroe County residents or visitors.

The text changes s.420.50871 to add housing near U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs medical centers or outpatient clinics as projects which the Florida Housing Finance Corporation must finance.

Additionally, it amends s.420.5098 that establishes a public-sector and hospital employer-sponsored housing policy for the development of affordable housing for employees of health care facilities and governmental entities.

The bill amends s.760.22 to revise the definition of “person” to also include any other legal or commercial entity, a state agency, or any governmental entity or agency.

It also changes s.760.26 to add that it is unlawful to discriminate in land use decisions or in the permitting of development based on the development or proposed development being affordable housing as defined under s.420.0004(3). The bill also states that it is the intent of the legislature that this amendment is remedial and clarifying in nature, and shall apply retrospectively for any causes of action filed on or before the effective date of the passage of this act.

The bill amends s.760.35 to provide that the state, for itself and its agencies or political subdivisions, waives sovereign immunity for causes of action based on the application of this section.

Sewer Collection Systems: HB 1123 (Rep. Cassel) was passed by the House on April 25, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Rules Committee.

The bill amends s.180.03 to authorize a municipality to utilize revenue generated by the municipality from operation of the municipality's central sewage system for expansion of the central sewage system.

An identical bill, SB 1784 (Sen. Pizzo), is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its second committee of reference.

Transportation Concurrency: CS/HB 203 (Rep. Grow) was passed by the House on April 23, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Rules Committee.

The bill amends s.163.3180 with respect to transportation concurrency, to provide that the capital improvements element must identify facilities necessary to meet adopted levels of service during a 5-year period or to maintain current levels of service for small counties as defined in s.339.2818(2).

SB 1738 (Sen. Ingoglia), a similar bill, is in the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference. It amends s.163.3180 to provide that the capital improvements element must identify facilities necessary to meet adopted levels of service during a 5year period or to maintain current levels of service.

SB 1074 (Sen. McClain), identical to SB 1738, is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its first committee of reference.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Community Redevelopment Agencies: CS/SB 1242 (Sen. McClain), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 21 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

Note that the committee deleted previously proposed language that:

• provided that a CRA may not initiate any new projects or issue any new debt on or after Oct 1, 2025

• provided that no CRA may be created on or after July 1, 2025

The bill now amends s.163.356 related to the creating and governing structure of a community redevelopment agency. It provides that the alternate governing structure provided in current s.163.357 replaces the current appointed board structure as the default for creating future agencies. (Committee addition.)

Under the bill, when the governing body of a county or municipality creates a community redevelopment agency the body will declare itself the agency, and the members of the governing body sit as members of the agency. A governing body that consists of five members may appoint two additional members to four-year terms to the agency. The section removes statutory provisions related to the appointment of agency board members, preserving the ability of the agency to employ a director, technical experts, and other agents.

The amendments made to this section do not amend or require the amendment of the structure, membership, or bylaws of any preexisting agency. It also repeals s.163.357 that contains the alternate governing structure subsumed into the previous section of law. (Committee addition.)

The language amends s.163.361 to prohibit the governing body from adopting any modification to a community redevelopment plan that expands the boundaries of the community redevelopment area or extends the time certain set forth in the redevelopment plan as required by s.163.362(10). (Committee addition.)

It changes s.163.370 to, both of which are committee additions:

• delete public areas of major hotels that are constructed in support of convention centers, including meeting rooms and banquet facilities, from types of community redevelopment and related activities that a county or municipality has the power to undertake within a community redevelopment area; and

• prohibit the sponsorship, whether direct or indirect, of concerts, festivals, holiday events, parades, or other similar activities, from being paid for or financed by increment revenues

Additionally, it amends s.163.3755 to provide that a community redevelopment agency (CRA) terminates on the time certain for completing all redevelopment provided in the agency’s charter as required by s.163.362(10) or as may have been extended by ordinance or resolution before May 1, 2025. (The bill previously stated that a CRA in existence on July 1, 2025, shall terminate on the expiration date provided in the agency’s charter on July 1, 2025 or Sept 30, 2045, whichever is earlier.) It removes the current law option for a local government to vote to extend a subordinate CRA’s expiration date.

However, the bill provides that a CRA with outstanding bonds as of Oct. 1, 2025 that do not mature until after the time certain for completing all redevelopment remains in existence until the bonds mature. A CRA may not extend the maturity date of any outstanding bonds beyond the time certain for completing all redevelopment activity provided in the agency’s charter.

Finally, the bill amends s.163.360 dealing with community redevelopment plans. It specifies that, for those community redevelopment agencies in existence on Oct. 1, 2025, for which the board of commissioners of the CRA are comprised as specified in s.163.356(2) a designee of the CRA shall participate in the required joint meeting as a non-voting member.

Rural Communities: CS/SB 110 E1 (Sen. Simon) was amended on the floor with a delete-all amendment and passed by the House on April 25, after being substituted for CS/CS/HB 991 (Rep. Giallombardo). In part, the 569-page delete-all amendment appears to include provisions of CS/HB 1461 related to industries and professional activities and provisions of HB 1427 related to rural community economic development, housing, and infrastructure.

Of particular interest, the bill amends s.163.3755 related to community redevelopment agencies (CRAs)

This bill prohibits the creation of new CRAs on or after July 1, 2025. It also prohibits a CRA, or the governing body of the county or municipality that created the CRA, from expanding the boundaries of the agency’s community redevelopment area on or after July 1, 2025.

The bill also:

• revises the current schedule for termination of existing CRAs to provide that agency in existence on July 1, 2025, terminate on the expiration date provided in the CRA’s charter on July 1, 2025 or Sept. 30, 2045, whichever date is earlier;

• removes the ability of the governing body of a county or municipality that created the CRA to approve its continued existence by a majority vote;

• prohibits a CRA from initiating new projects or issuing new debt on or after October 1, 2025, unless the new project is completed by, and any new debt issued to finance a new project matures on or before, the agency’s termination date;

• defines a “new project” as any project for which a CRA has not appropriated funds in its budget for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, or for which the CRA has not retained appropriated funds pursuant to S.163.387(7)(d). for the fiscal year ending Sept 30, 2025; and

• provides that if a CRA has outstanding bonds as of July 1, 2025, that will not mature until after the earlier of its termination date or Sept 30, 2045, the CRA will remain in existence until the bonds mature. A CRA operating in this manner on or after Sept 30, 2045, is prohibited from extending the maturity date of any outstanding bonds, The county or municipality that created the CRA must issue an amended community redevelopment plan, as opposed to issuing a new finding of necessity

The bill provides that the amendments to s.163.3755, not including those related to the creation of new CRAs and expansion of a CRA’s boundaries, do not apply to a CRA created by a county if the county that created the CRA is the only taxing authority that contributes to the CRA’s redevelopment trust fund and the county’s charter establishes a limitation on the amount of revenue the county may collect each year. A CRA that meets this definition may not issue any new bond debt on or after Oct 1, 2025.

The bill also amends s.373.219 to provide that a permit is not required for landscape irrigation water use by a property owner of a residential single-family home.

Additionally, the bill addresses several issues for the benefit of rural communities in the state. It creates a statewide office to coordinate the advancement of rural communities and opportunity therein, and amends several programs and regulations across various departments and policy areas. The bill generally does the following:

• modifies divisions and offices within the Department of Commerce, and adding roles focused on rural prosperity and economic accountability;

• creates the Office of Rural Prosperity in the Department of Commerce for the purpose of supporting rural communities by helping rural stakeholders navigate available programs and resources and representing rural interests across state government;

• require the establishment of seven regional rural community liaison centers across the state by Oct 1, 2025;

• requires the Office of Economic and Demographic Research to prepare a report on the impact of Florida statutes on rural communities, and submit the report with recommendations to address any findings, to the Senate President and House Speaker by Dec 31, 2025

• creates the Renaissance Grants program to provide block grants to growth-impeded counties, meaning counties with a declining population over the last two years

• creates programs aimed at developing infrastructure, including the Public Infrastructure Smart Technology Grant Program and Florida Arterial Road Modernization Program

• adjusts funding mechanisms and grant programs to better allocate resources toward rural development initiatives

• supports housing and infrastructure development in rural areas by amending funding allocations and revising eligibility and planning requirements

The bill also amends s.553.79. to provide that:

• a local enforcement agency may not deny the issuance of a certificate of occupancy to an owner of a residential or commercial structure based on noncompliance with a Florida friendly landscaping ordinance adopted to implement s.373.185. if the owner was issued a building permit for such structure within one year of the declaration of a state of emergency for a natural disaster for the county in which the structure is located; and

• a local enforcement agency may not deny the issuance of a building permit for the alteration, modification, or repair of a single-family residential structure if such alteration, modification, or repair:

o is completed within 1 year after the declaration of a state of emergency for a natural disaster for the county in which the structure is located;

o is necessitated by damage to the structure caused by the natural disaster;

o has a total cost that does not exceed more than 50 percent of the value of the structure;

o does not affect more than 50 percent of the structure; and

o does not alter the footprint of the structure

• a local enforcement agency may not require a building permit for the construction of playground equipment, fences, or landscape irrigation systems on a parcel containing a single-family residential dwelling; however, a local government may require a building permit for any electrical work performed as part of the construction of playground equipment, fences, or landscape irrigation systems;

• a local enforcement agency may not require a building permit to perform any work that is valued at less than $7,500 on a parcel containing a single-family residential dwelling; this does not apply to a larger or major project in which a division of the project is made in amounts less than $7,500; and

• a local government may require a building permit for any electrical, plumbing, or structural work performed on a parcel containing a single-family residential dwelling regardless of the value of the work.

EDUCATION

Charter Schools: CS/CS/HB 443 (Rep. Snyder) was passed by the House on April 24, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Rules Committee.

The bill revises current provisions relating to charter schools, charter school sponsors, and the use of real property for public education purposes.

Among the provisions, the bill amends s.1002.33(18) to provide that, in addition to facilities, any land owned by a library, community service, museum, performing arts, theater, cinema, church facility, Florida College System institution or university, or any similar public institutional facilities may provide space to charter schools under their preexisting zoning and land use designations without obtaining a special exception, rezoning, or land use change.

The bill amends s.1013.15 to provide that, prior to the sale, transfer, lease, or disposal of any land, facilities, or educational plants, a district school board shall provide public notice of the proposed transaction and provide charter schools with the first right of refusal. Each charter school seeking to exercise the right of first refusal must submit a proposal within 60 days after the public notice. The district school board shall evaluate proposals and award a contract considering such factors as price, quality, and concept of the proposal. If no proposals are accepted pursuant to this subsection, the district school board may proceed with the transaction. This does not apply to school district facilities used for administration prior to July 1, 2025.

CS/CS/SB 822 (Sen. Rodriguez), which was similar to CS/CS/HB 443 as originally filed, was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee on April 21 and placed on the Senate Special Order Calendar for April 29. This bill does not contain either of the above provisions.

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Beaches: CS/SB 1622 (Sen. Trumbull) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 21, and passed by the Senate on April 24. It is in Messages to the House.

The bill repeals s.163.035 which established procedures that a governmental entity must follow when attempting to establish a “recreational customary use of property”.

The bill provides that the legislature declares the erosion control line shall be the mean high-water line as determined by a survey conducted by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund for the following counties located on the Gulf with:

• at least three municipalities; and

• an estimated population of less than 275,000, according to the most recent population, excluding the inmate population

The bill also includes the following provisions in which to apply to the above counties:

• the legislature further declares that there is no intention on the part of the state to deprive any upland or submerged landowner estimate prepared pursuant to s.186.901 of the legitimate and constitutional use and enjoyment of his or her property;

• if an erosion control line has not been established for a critically eroded shoreline, the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund must adopt the erosion control line by resolution and file in the official records of the respective county, a copy of the resolution establishing the location of the erosion control line; and in the book of plats of the respective county, a survey showing the area of beach to be restored and the location of the erosion control line; and

• DEP may proceed with beach restoration projects for any area designated by the department as critically eroded in the Critically Eroded Beaches in Florida report dated August 2024. Notwithstanding s.161.141 beach restoration projects conducted pursuant to this section do not require a public easement. Any additions to property seaward of the erosion control line which result from the restoration project remain state sovereignty lands. The legislature declares that such projects are in the public interest

HB 6043 (Rep. Andrade), which just repeals s.163.035 is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Comprehensive Waster Reduction and Recycling Plan: SB 200 (Sen. Berman) was reported favorably by the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final committees of reference, on April 22, and placed on the Senate Special Order Calendar for April 29.

The bill amends s.403.7032 to direct the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to develop a comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan by July 1, 2026, based on recommendations from DEP’s Florida and the 2020 75% Recycling Goal: Final Report. The bill requires DEP to create and convene a technical assistance group to help develop the plan.

The bill provides that the plan, at a minimum, must:

• identify recycling goals based on sustainable materials management and waste diversion; and

• include a three-year plan to implement the following strategies:

o recycling education and outreach. DEP must propose statewide solutions to provide local recycling information and education;

o local government recycling assistance. DEP must evaluate the benefits and challenges of the former state Recycling and Education Grant Program and provide recommendations for reinstating the program or consider other means of providing assistance to local governments; and

o recycling materials market development. DEP must consider and recommend plans to develop and promote markets for recycling materials.

The bill directs DEP to provide a report to the Senate President and House Speaker upon completion of the comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan. The bill requires that the report include any recommendations for statutory changes necessary to achieve the recycling goals and strategies identified in the plan.

An identical bill, HB 295 (Rep. Casello and Rep. Hart), was passed by the House on April 16, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee.

Infrastructure and Resiliency: CS/SB 1580 (Sen. Rodriguez) was reported favorably by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on April 21 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill amends s.255.065 regarding public-private partnerships. The bill adds coastal resiliency projects as defined in s.380.0934 (created by this bill) to the definition of “qualifying projects.”

The bill creates s.380.0934 regarding public-private partnerships for coastal resiliency projects. It provides that “coastal resiliency project” means:

• the planning, contracting, and execution of a project to address flooding and sea level rise in a coastal or inland community in this state pursuant to the Statewide Flooding and Sea Level Rise Resilience Plan;

• public infrastructure repair and upgrades to seawalls and stormwater drainage; and

• resiliency measures designed to withstand extreme weather, mitigate flooding, and prevent coastal erosion, including:

o acquisition of at-risk coastal and flood-prone properties;

o acquisition of properties in areas at high risk of flooding;

o infrastructure hardening and development of natural barriers;

o construction of large-scale seawalls, levees, and elevated flood barriers; and

o expansion and restoration of natural protective systems.

The bill provides that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has the exclusive authority to execute coastal resiliency projects through public-private partnerships. The bill defines “public-private partnerships” as a coastal resiliency project entered into by DEP under s.255.065.

The bill also provides that, to encourage investment from the private sector in coastal resiliency projects, DEP may:

• enter into long-term revenue-sharing agreements;

• provide expedited permitting for construction;

• seek comments from local governments and the public during project planning and execution and incorporate actions responsive to such comments into the project; and

• engage in-state vocational schools and apprenticeship programs to train workers in specialized resiliency construction

Finally, the bill requires DEP to publish biennial progress reports for each coastal resiliency project funded through a publicprivate partnership, including project milestones, expenditures, and public benefits, on DEP’s website. DEP must also create and maintain on its website an online dashboard for real-time updates on project execution.

An identical bill, CS/HB 1345 (Rep. LaMarca) is in the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.

Land Development: CS/CS/SB 492 (Sen. McClain), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee, its third and final committee of reference, on April 21 and placed on the Senate Special Order Calendar for April 29. Note the committee amended the bill to delete previously proposed language related to the release of conservation easements.

The bill provides, when issuing a mitigation bank permit after July 1, 2025, a standardized schedule for releasing mitigation credits that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and water management districts must adhere to, and deletes existing language that provides they determine the credit release schedule on a case-by-case basis pursuant to statutorily enumerated factors. The bill provides that credits must be released as follows:

• 30 percent after the recordation of the conservation easement and establishment of financial assurances required by the mitigation bank permit; if a preservation-only assessment area is used, 100 percent for the recordation of the conservation easement and establishment of financial assurances required by the mitigation bank permit

• 30 percent after completing initial construction activities as established by the mitigation bank permit

• 20 percent released in increments as monitoring indicates interim performance criteria established in the mitigation bank permit are being met

• 20 percent upon meeting final success criteria as established by the mitigation bank permit

The bill also provides that the mitigation bank applicant may propose an alternative credit release schedule, and the department or water management district shall consider the proposed alternative credit release schedule.

Upon request by a mitigation bank permittee for modification of the credit release schedule of a permitted mitigation bank, the DEP or water management district must modify the credit release schedule to conform it to the bill’s credit release schedule if such permitted mitigation bank has not yet had mitigation credits released for the completion of construction activities. (This was added by the committee.) The DEP or water management district may not alter, change, or modify any other provision of the mitigation bank permit unrelated to the credit release schedule.

Additionally, the bill provides the release of freshwater wetland creation credits after the success criteria established in the mitigation bank permit for initial construction activities are met.

The bill provides that, once a mitigation bank service area has been established by the department or a water management district for a mitigation bank, that mitigation bank shall be deemed to implement a plan that provides regional ecological value and the use of credits from such mitigation bank to offset impacts within that bank’s service area shall be considered to have met the cumulative impact requirements of s.373.414(8)(a).

The bill provides that, when the provisions of s.373.414(1)(b) and (8) are met and an insufficient number or type of credits from banks whose permitted service area overlays in whole or in part the regional watershed in which the impacts occur, the permit applicant is entitled to a one-time use of credits released from a mitigation bank outside the mitigation bank service area to offset impacts. The DEP or water management district must have determined that the mitigation service area lacked the appropriate credit type, and the implementation of permittee responsible mitigation was not sufficient to offset impacts associated with the proposed project. Priority must be given to mitigation banks whose permitted service area fully includes the impacted site. (Committee added last two provisions.)

The bill provides that, if the number of released credits within a mitigation service area only partially offsets the impacts associated with a proposed project in that mitigation service area, the project applicant may use out-of-service area credits to account for the difference between the released credits available in the mitigation bank service area and the credits required to offset the impacts associated with the proposed project. The bill requires the DEP and the water management districts to follow the following guidelines to apply a proximity factor to determine adequate compensatory mitigation as follows:

• 1.0 multiplier shall be applied for use of in-kind credits within the service area;

• 1.0 multiplier shall be applied for use of in-kind and out-of-service-area credits when the service area overlays part of the same regional watershed as the proposed impacts only after credit-deficiency has been established;

• 1.2 multiplier shall be applied for use of in-kind and out-of-service-area credits located within a regional watershed immediately adjacent to the regional watershed overlain by a mitigation bank service area in which proposed impacts are located only after credit deficiency has been established only after credit-deficiency has been established;

• when in-kind credits are not available to offset impacts in the regional watershed immediately adjacent to the regional watershed overlain by a bank service area in which the proposed impacts are located, an additional 0.25 multiplier shall be applied for each additional regional watershed boundary crossed; and

• an additional 0.50 multiplier shall be applied if the mitigation used to offset impacts entails an out-of-kind replacement

The bill provides that the use of these multipliers meets the requirements for addressing cumulative impacts.

The bill provides that, once the amount of mitigation required to offset impacts has been determined, and the DEP or water management district determines that out-of-service-area or out-of-kind mitigation is necessary, the DEP or water management district must contact all mitigation banks within a mitigation service area encompassing the location of the proposed impacts within seven business days after the request from the project applicant and request an accounting of available credits, including out-of-kind credits. (The committee amended the timeframe from 5 days to 7 days.) The accounting may not include credits reserved for other project applicants. The mitigation banks contacted must provide such accounting within 15 business days after the request.

If one or more mitigation banks replying to the request notifies the DEP or the water management district that out-of-kind credits are available to offset the proposed impact and the DEP or water management district determines that such out-of-kind credits are appropriate to offset all or part of the proposed impact, the DEP or water management district must notify the permit applicant that sufficient credits are available within that bank’s service area to offset the proposed impacts and the use of credits from another mitigation bank outside of that other mitigation bank’s service area may not occur until use of all of the out-of-kind credits occurs. (Committee addition.) If a mitigation bank does not reply within the 15-business day timeframe, it is presumed credits from that bank are not available.

Upon receipt of the accounting from the mitigation banks, the DEP or the water management district must determine if sufficient credits exist to offset impacts associated with the proposed project and notify the project applicant of such determination, within 15 business days. The applicant, and no other entity, may rely on the determination for a period of six months after such determination, but only for purposes relating to the pending application producing such determination and not any extensions, nor renewals, nor modifications of any permit issued pursuant to that pending application, nor for any other permit application. (The committee amended the timeframe from 1 year to 6 months.)

The bill also requires mitigation banks to begin on July 1, 2026, and each July 1 thereafter, to submit annual reports detailing the number and type of available credits for sale. DEP and water management districts must compile these reports and provide an annual assessment of the state’s mitigation banking system to the legislature.

A similar bill, CS/CS/HB 1175 (Rep. Duggan) is on the House Special Order Calendar and was temporarily postponed on Second Reading on April 23.

Permits for Drilling, Exploration, and Extraction of Oil and Gas Resources: CS/HB 1143 (Rep. Shoaf and Rep. Tant) was passed by the Senate, with amendments, on April 23 after being substituted for SB 1300 (Sen. Simon). It is in Returning Messages to the House.

The bill amends s.377.24 to, notwithstanding any law or rule to the contrary, prohibit drilling, exploration, or production of oil, gas, or other petroleum products in counties designated as rural areas of opportunity under s.288.0656 if the proposed site is within 10 miles of a national estuarine research reserve. (The clause related to counties designated as rural areas of opportunity was added as a floor amendment.)

The bill also amends s.377.242 to require the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to conduct a balancing test when granting a permit for oil and gas activities in areas within one mile inland from the shoreline of the coast or other bodies of water. DEP must balance the measures in place to protect the natural resources with the potential harm to the natural resources when determining whether a natural resource will be adequately protected in the event of an accident or a blowout from oil or gas drilling or exploration activities. The bill requires the balancing test to assess the potential impact of an accident or a blowout on the natural resources of such bodies of water and shore areas, including the ecological functions and any water quality impacts. The balancing test must include the community’s current condition, hydrological connection, uniqueness, location, fish and wildlife use, time lag, and the potential cost of restoration.

State Land Management: CS/SB 80 (Sen. Harrell) was reported favorably by the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its third and final committee of reference, on April 22 and placed on the Senate Special Order Calendar for April 29.

The bill, cited as the “State Park Preservation Act”, amends s.253.034 to require at least one public hearing when conservation and nonconservation land management plans are updated. Current law only requires a public hearing when a land management plan is in development.

The bill also adds a deadline of at least 30 days before the public hearing by which the Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP’s) Division of State Lands must make an electronic copy of land management plans, for both parcels that exceed 160 acres in size and for parcels located within a state park, available to the public.

The bill also amends s.259.032 to require individual land management plans for parcels within a state park to be developed with input from an advisory group. Current law requires the advisory group to hold at least one public hearing within the county in which the parcel or project is located and contains notice requirements for such hearing. The bill adds to the notice requirements that the public hearing must be noticed at least 30 days before it is held. The bill also requires that individual land management plans for parcels within a state park must be updated with input from an advisory group.

The bill amends s.258.004 to require all lands managed pursuant to the laws on state parks and preserves (ch. 258.) be managed for the greatest combination of benefits to the public and to the lands’ natural resources. The bill also requires lands to be managed for:

• conservation-based public outdoor recreational uses, defined to include fishing, camping, bicycling, hiking, nature study, swimming, boating, canoeing, horseback riding, diving, birding, sailing, jogging, and similar, conservation-based public recreational uses. The bill specifies that the term does not include sports that require sporting facilities, such as golf courses, tennis courts, pickleball courts, ball fields, and other similar facilities.

• public access and related amenities, including roads, parking areas, walkways, and visitor centers, and

• scientific research, including archaeology

The bill states that these uses must be managed in a manner that is compatible with and that ensures the conservation of the state’s natural resources by minimizing impacts to undisturbed habitat and using disturbed upland regions to the maximum extent practicable.

The bill amends s.258.007 F.S. to highlight that the DEP’s Division of Recreation and Parks may grant privileges, leases, concessions, and permits for the use of land for the accommodation of visitors in the various parks, monuments, and memorials in accordance with certain provisions in a manner that is consistent with s.258.004.

It also authorizes the Division of Recreation and Parks to acquire, install, or permit the installation or operation of camping cabins that have a maximum occupancy of six guests at state parks. The installation and operation of any camping cabin in a state park must be compatible with the park’s land management plan and must be approved pursuant to the statutory requirements for land management plan approval. The bill also requires that camping cabins must, to the maximum extent practicable, be sited to avoid impacts to a state park’s critical habitat and natural and historical resources.

The bill also prohibits the Division of Recreation and Parks from authorizing uses or construction activities within a state park that may cause significant harm to the resources of the state park. This includes building or altering structures. The bill directs that any use or construction activity must, to the maximum extent practicable, be conducted to avoid impacts on a state park’s critical habitat and natural and historical resources. The bill further prohibits the Division of Recreation and Parks from installing or permitting the installation at state parks of any lodging establishment as defined in s.509.242.

Finally, the bill directs DEP to submit a report to the Governor, Senate President, and House Speaker by December 1, 2025 that includes the following information regarding the state park system:

• the number of state parks with amenities or areas that have limited use or are temporarily closed due to needed repairs or inadequate infrastructure necessary to support conservation- based public recreation uses

• the system’s estimated budget allocation expenditures for the 2023-2024 fiscal year, broken down by salaries and benefits, equipment costs, and contracting costs for the following categories: operations, maintenance and repair, park improvement, and administrative overhead

• estimated costs associated with the facility maintenance backlog by each state park, including a plan to reduce or eliminate the backlog for the state park system by July 1, 2035, to ensure access to and the safe enjoyment of such public lands for Florida residents and visitors

A similar bill, CS/CS/HB 209 (Rep. Snyder), was passed by the House on April 16, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee.

Water Management Districts: CS/CS/CS/HB 1169 (Rep. Conerly), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House State Affairs Committee on April 22 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill revises various provisions related to water management district (WMD) planning, funding, budgeting, reporting, and business practices. Specifically, the bill:

• prohibits a lobbyist or principal from making, directly or indirectly, and a WMD governing board member, executive director, or any WMD employee who qualifies as a local officer from knowingly accepting, directly or indirectly, any expenditure;

• requires a quorum for a WMD governing board to conduct official business and specifies that a majority of the members of the governing board, including both appointed members and vacancies, constitutes a quorum, and a board member’s appearance at a board meeting, whether it is in person or using communications media technology, must be counted for the determination of a quorum;

• provides that, except where otherwise provided by law, action may be taken by the governing board only upon affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the governing board;

• requires the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to include in its annual progress report on the comprehensive plan for the Central and Southern Florida Project Comprehensive Review Study the total estimated remaining cost to implement the comprehensive plan; the report must include applicable performance indicators for all project components, and requires the project components to be subdivided into specific categories based on the project’s status;

• specifies that the Integrated Delivery Schedule (IDS) is a forward-looking snapshot of upcoming planning, design, and construction schedules for the comprehensive plan as a tool that provides information to decisionmakers and facilitates the achievement of the goals and purposes of the comprehensive plan at the earliest possible time to the extent practical given funding, engineering, and other contractual constraints;

• specifies that the IDS acts as a planning document and does not represent a budgetary or financial commitment on behalf of any of the members of the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force;

• requires the state and local members of the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task force to identify project funding sources to reflect whether the project will be funded using recurring or nonrecurring state funds when making recommendations for any update to the IDS;

• prohibits a WMD from using state funds as a local match for any state grant program unless those funds have been specifically appropriated to the WMD for that purpose;

• authorizes a WMD to, by resolution adopted by a governing board majority vote, levy ad valorem taxes within the WMD;

• authorizes a WMD to, by referendum, levy separate ad valorem taxes on property within the WMD or basin for the purposes of the construction of capital improvement projects and defines that term;

• requires that a WMD that chooses to levy separate ad valorem taxes for this purpose must adopt a resolution to be approved by a majority vote of the electors in the WMD or basin, as applicable, voting in a referendum held at a general election, and the resolution must include specific information; also the referendum question on the ballot must provide a brief and general description for the purpose of the levy, and specify the maximum length of time the millage may be imposed;

• provides that any millage raised for capital improvement projects, when combined with the ad valorem millage raised for properties within the WMD, cannot exceed the maximum total millage rate established for a WMD in statute; a resolution must take effect on the January 1 immediately succeeding approval;

• requires a WMD to include a section in its preliminary budget that includes the WMD’s capital improvement plan for the current fiscal year and the next fiscal year, which will be incorporated as part of the WMD’s five-year capital improvement plan, and requires that specific information to be included for each project;

• requires the SFWMD to include a separate section in its preliminary budget for all projects within the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP); the information for the separate section must be provided on a project-by-project basis and include the source of funds;

• requires the SFWMD to indicate which fiscal year the appropriation is from for expenditures funded by state appropriations; when estimating expenditures for the next fiscal year, the SFWMD may only incorporate state revenues in an amount up to the amount of funds specifically provided for in the Land Acquisition Trust Fund, unless the SFWMD commits its own revenues on a dollar-for-dollar basis for any amount over such amount specifically provided;

• authorizes the Legislative Budget Commission (LBC) to reject certain WMD budget proposals unless they were specifically appropriated by the Legislature; in addition to the projects LBC can currently reject, the bill authorizes the LBC to reject any individual portion of a WMD’s tentative budget funded with state appropriations, and any individual project within the WMD’s five-year capital improvement plan;

• requires a WMD’s capital improvement plan for the current fiscal year and next fiscal year to be included in the tentative budget in the same format as required in the preliminary budget;

• requires the SFWMD to specify the amount of state revenues appropriated for costs associated with the Everglades Construction Project and the CERP in the separate document it prepares as part of its tentative budget;

• requires a WMD that has requested bids for a contract for the design, engineering, or construction, or for any combination of the design, engineering, or construction, of capital improvement projects with an estimated cost of $20 million or more to give preference to the lowest responsible and responsive bid, proposal, or reply that includes proof of district-defined acceptable minimum work experience within the state, project-specific payment and performance bonds in amounts appropriate for the project contract amount, and a minimum warranty of two years beginning at substantial completion of the project or that provides proof of a comparable financial assurance mechanism, as defined by a WMD in rule;

• require, for the purpose of the competitive selection process in the Consultants’ Competitive Negotiation Act or the procurement procedures applicable to public-private partnerships, a WMD to consider whether a bid, proposal, or reply includes appropriate payment and performance bonds; proof of a comparable financial assurance mechanism, as defined by a WMD in rule; or documentation of any and all bond faults or bond claims within the last 10 years, including all open and closed claims and agreed-upon amounts with a description of the claim and any resolution, including all open and closed claims and agreed-upon amounts with a description of the claim and any resolution; and

• repeals a section of law that requires WMDs to establish management review teams (Committee addition.)

CS/SB 7002 E1 (Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee), which also deals with water management districts, was passed by the Senate on April 9 and is in Messages to the House.

HOUSING

Affordable Housing: CS/CS/CS/HB 247, a proposed committee substitute, was reported favorably by the House Commerce Committee, its third and final committee of referenced, on April 21, and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

The bill creates s.83.471 dealing with reusable tenant screening reports, which authorizes, but does not require, a landlord to accept a reusable tenant screening report from a prospective tenant.

The bill amends s.163.31771 to require, rather than authorize, local governments to adopt an ordinance to allow the construction of ADUs in any area zoned for single-family residential use. The bill requires the ordinance to be adopted by Dec. 1, 2025, and provides that the ordinance applies prospectively to ADUs approved after the date the ordinance is adopted. The ordinance may regulate the permitting, construction, and use of an ADU, but may not:

• require that the owner of a parcel on which an ADU is constructed reside in the primary dwelling unit;

• increase parking requirements on any parcel that can accommodate an additional motor vehicle on a driveway without impeding access to the primary dwelling unit; and

• require replacement parking if a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is converted to create an ADU.

The bill defines a primary dwelling unit as an existing or proposed single-family dwelling on the property where a proposed accessory dwelling unit (ADU) would be located.

Each accessory dwelling unit allowed by an ordinance adopted under this section which provides affordable rental housing shall apply toward satisfying the affordable housing component of the housing element in the local government's comprehensive plan. However, the bill prohibits a local government from adopting an ordinance to allow accessory dwelling units within any area of critical state concern as designated in ss.380.055, 380.0551, 380.0552, 380.0553, and 380.0555.

The bill provides that the owner of a property with an accessory dwelling unit may not be denied a homestead exemption for those portions of property on which the owner maintains a permanent residence solely based on the property containing an accessory dwelling unit that is or may be rented to another person. However, if the accessory dwelling unit is rented to another person, the accessory dwelling unit must be assessed separately from the homestead property and taxed according to its use.

It also amends s.420.615 to allow a local government to provide density bonus incentives to landowners who donate real estate for the purpose of assisting local governments in providing affordable housing to military families that are receiving the basic allowance for housing.

The bill requires the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA) to assess the efficacy of using mezzanine finance, or second-position short-term debt, to stimulate the construction of owner-occupied affordable housing, and the ability of tiny homes to help meet the state’s affordable housing needs. The bill requires OPPAGA to consult with the Florida Housing Finance Corporation and the University of Florida Shimberg Center for Housing Studies in conducting its evaluation. OPPAGA is required to report its conclusions to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives by Dec. 31, 2026. The report must include recommendations for a model mezzanine finance program.

The bill amends s.553.80. to add that a change in occupancy as defined in the Florid Building Code does not occur solely due to using or converting single-family or two-family dwellings into a residence owned by a tax-exempt charitable organization under s.501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code whose stated corporate purpose relates to the support of people who are living with a mental health disorder when the dwelling:

• has no fewer than two and no more than four bedrooms;

• is occupied by a group or family of no more than six ambulatory adults living with a mental health disorder; and

• has no more than two adults assigned to any bedroom.

The bill also provides that use as or conversion of single-family or two-family dwellings into such mental health support residences may not be reclassified for purposes of enforcing the Florida Fire Prevention Code solely due to such dwelling’s use or conversion.

A similar bill, CS/CS/CS/SB 184 E1 (Sen. Gaetz), was adopted on April 9 and is in Messages to the House. Note this version does not include the provision against adopting ADU ordinances in areas of critical state concern, the provisions related to the Florid Building Code or the Florida Fire Prevention Code. It also provides that the ADU ordinance may not prohibit the renting or leasing of an ADU except to prohibit the renting or leasing of one approved after the effective date of the ordinance for a term of less than one month.

Local Housing Assistance Plans: CS/HB 701 (Rep. Stark and Rep. Berfield) was passed by the House on April 23, received by the Senate and referred to the Senate Rules Committee.

The bill amends s.420.9072 to allow a local government participating in the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) to use program funds to provide lot rental assistance to mobile homeowners not to exceed six months.

It amends s.420.9075 to require each local government participating in SHIP to address in its local housing assistance plan the needs of persons who are deprived of affordable housing due to the closure of a mobile home park. The bill also requires a local housing assistance plan to include a strategy for providing program funds to mobile homeowners, which must include lot rental assistance. It also specifies that lot rental assistance for mobile homeowners is an approved home ownership activity, and authorizes the use of SHIP funds for rehabilitation and emergency repairs for mobile homeowners. The bill also eliminates the restriction that limits the allocation of SHIP funds for manufactured housing to no more than 20 percent of the allocated amount.

An identical bill, CS/SB 1714 (Sen. Burton) is in the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference.

TRANSPORTATION

Hazardous Walking Conditions: CS/CS/HB 85 ER (Rep. Kendall), passed by the House on March 26, was passed by the Senate on April 23, after having been substituted for CS/CS/SB 650 (Sen. Leek).

The bill amends s.1006.23(2). to expand the criteria for identifying hazardous walking conditions to include walkways along a limited access facility, as defined in s.334.03(12).

Transportation: CS/CS/CS/SB 462 E1 (Sen. DiCeglie) was passed by the Senate, reflecting floor amendments, on April 23 and is in Messages to the House.

The bill addresses various provisions relating to transportation. The bill:

• revises provisions regarding metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) to:

o amend legislative intent regarding MPOs to emphasize: developing multimodal transportation systems, instead of surface transportation systems; and serving the mobility needs of people and freight and fostering economic growth and development throughout the urbanized areas of this state in accordance with FDOT’s mission statement;

o provide that after July 1, 2025, no additional MPOs may be designated in Florida except in urbanized areas where the urbanized area is not contiguous to an urbanized area designated before the 2020 census;

o amend the considerations required by each MPO in developing its Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to include conserving natural resources, instead of promoting energy conservation; additionally, MPOs must consider projects and strategies to reduce traffic and congestion;

o require that Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to at least annually, convene MPOs of similar size, based on population served, to exchange best practices, and authorize MPOs to develop committees or working groups as needed to accomplish such purpose;

o provide that, at FDOT’s discretion, training for new MPO governing board members shall be provided by FDOT, an entity pursuant to a contract with FDOT, by the Center for Urban Transportation Research or by the Implementing Solutions for Transportation Research and Evaluation of Emerging Technologies (I-STREET) Living Lab;

o include public-private partnerships in the list of innovative financing techniques that MPOs may consider;

o regarding transportation enhancement activities, include the integration of advanced air mobility and integration of autonomous and electric vehicles, electric bicycles, and motorized scooters used for freight, commuter or micromobility purposes; remove historic preservation, mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff, and control of outdoor advertising as potential transportation enhancement activities;

o authorize each MPO to execute a written agreement with FDOT, which must be reviewed, and updated as necessary, every five years, which clearly establishes the cooperative relationship essential to accomplish state and federal transportation planning requirements; and

o require FDOT to establish, in collaboration with each MPO, quality performance metrics such as safety, infrastructure condition, congestion relief, and mobility; require each MPO, as part of its LRTP, in direct coordination with FDOT, to develop targets for each performance measure within the metropolitan planning area and report progress toward establishing performance targets for each measure annually in its transportation improvement plan

• allows vehicular traffic on coastal beaches for removal of rental equipment using off-highway vehicles as defined in s.317.0003, as authorized by the governing body having jurisdiction of the coastal property through formal agreement (Floor amendment.);

• require each county to annually submit specific information for surtax revenues received pursuant to s.212.055(1) to the Office of Economic and Demographic Research;

• amend the definition of micromobility device to mean a motorized transportation device designed for individual use which is typically 20 to 36 inches in width and 50 pounds or less in weight and which operates at a speed of typically less than 15 miles per hour but no more than 28 miles per hour; includes both a human powered and a nonhumanpowered device such as a bicycle, electric bicycle, motorized scooter, or any other device that is owned by an individual or part of a shared fleet (Floor amendment.);

• expands the authority of a local government to adopt an ordinance governing the operation of electric bicycles to include on streets, highways, sidewalks and sidewalk areas within their jurisdiction, as well as those under their jurisdiction;

• authorizes a local government to adopt an ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements to operate an electric bicycle and may adopt an ordinance requiring an operator of an electric bicycle to possess a government-issued photographic identification while operating the electric bicycle, and allows local government to provide training on the safe operation of electric bicycles and compliance with the traffic laws of this state that apply to electric bicycles;

• authorizes a local government to adopt an ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements to operate a motorized scooter or micromobility device and may adopt an ordinance requiring a person who operates a motorized scooter or micromobility device to possess a government-issued photographic identification while operating the motorized scooter or micromobility device; allows a local government to provide training on the safe operation of motorized scooters and micromobility devices and compliance with the traffic laws of this state that apply to motorized scooters and micromobility devices;

• prohibits a person from operating a motor vehicle, vessel, or any other conveyance at a speed that creates an excessive wake on a flooded or inundated street or highway (Floor amendment);

• creates a process for FDOT to issue expectant mother parking permits (Floor amendment);

• amends the Florida Airport Development and Assistance Act to change various references from airports to public-use airports;

• amends the definition of the term “eligible agency” to include a public-private partnership through a lease or agreement under s.255.065 with a political subdivision of the state or an authority, which owns or seeks to develop a public-use airport.;

• authorizes a municipality, county, or authority that owns a public-use airport to participate in the FAA’s Airport Investment Partnership Program by contracting with a private partner to operate the airport under lease or agreement. Subject to the availability of appropriated funds from aviation fuel tax revenues, FDOT may provide improvements to a municipality, county, or authority that has a private partner under the federal Airport Investment Partnership Program for capital costs of a discretionary improvement project at a public-use airport;

• prohibit a publicly owned airport to charge a landing fee established on or after Jan. 1, 2025, for aircraft operations conducted by an accredited non-profit institution located in the state which offers a 4-year collegiate aviation program, when such aircraft operations are for flight training necessary for pilot certification and proficiency;

• establishes an airport pilot program at the Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority;

• authorizes FDOT to use eminent domain to preserve a corridor for future proposed improvements;

• authorizes FDOT to provide workforce development grants to state colleges and school districts, prioritizing those in in counties in rural communities, for the purchase of equipment simulators and the purchase of instructional aids for use in conjunction with the simulators, and to support offering elective courses in heavy civil construction; allows FDOT annually expend up to $5 million form the State Transportation Fund for FY 2025-26 through 2029-30;

• amends the membership of the Center for Urban Transportation Research ;

• requires project concept studies and PD&E studies for capacity improvements on limited access facilities to evaluate alternatives to using elevated roadways above existing lanes;

• requires PD&E studies for new alignment projects and capacity improvement projects to be completed, to the maximum extent possible, within 18 months after the date of commencement;

• require FDOT, if it intends to reject all bids on a project, to provide the lowest responsive, responsible bidder the opportunity to negotiate the scope of work with a reduction in price, and to provide a reduced bid without filing a protest or posting a bond;

• revises provisions related to design-build contracts;

• provides additional insurance requirements for bridge-related contracts over navigable waters;

• authorizes FDOT to waive prequalification for push-button projects having contracts of $1 million or less or non-pushbutton projects having a contract price of $500,000 or less;

• authorizes FDOT to waive the requirement for a contract bond for contracts of $250,000 or less;

• requires contractors seeking to bid on certain FDOT maintenance contracts to possess the qualifications, record, experience, and equipment needed to perform such work;

• increases threshold amounts for contract disputes resolved by the State Arbitration Board from $1 million to up to $2 million, or upon agreement, greater than $2 million;

• requires FDOT, in its Strategic Intermodal System highway corridors plan of projects, to prioritize projects, in collaboration with each MPO, affecting gaps in a corridor so that the corridor becomes contiguous in its functional characteristics;

• amends provisions related to school bus infractions (Floor amendment.);

• requires FDOT to implement a next-generation traffic signal modernization program, to increase traffic signal interconnectivity and provide real-time traffic optimization to improve traffic flow and safety;

• amends the requirements for the Greater Miami Expressway Authority governing body members; and

• requires FDOT to develop and submit a report on the widening of Interstate 4 from US 27 in Polk County to I-75 in Hillsborough County; the report must be submitted to the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker by Dec 31, 2025

A similar bill, CS/CS/CS/HB 567 (Rep. McFarland), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments by the House Commerce Committee, its third and final committee of reference, on April 22 and placed on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Transportation: CS/CS/CS/SB 1662 E1 (Sen. Collins) was passed by the Senate, reflecting floor amendments, on April 23 and is in Messages to the House.

The bill addresses various provisions relating to transportation. Specifically, it:

• provides position titles for the assistant secretaries of the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to appoint an Executive Director of Transportation Technology;

• revises provisions regarding the qualifications of Florida Transportation Commission (FTC) members and requires them to follow the standards for public officers provided in s.112.313;

• requires the FTC to monitor any transit entity receiving public transit block grant funding;

• creates the Florida Transportation Research Institute whose mission of the institute is to advance the state’s transportation infrastructure and systems through research, education, and engagement for a safer and more efficient, resilient, and innovative movement of people and goods throughout this state;

• amends FDOT’s areas of program responsibility to add operational technology, change modal development to supply chain and modal development, and change information systems to information technology;

• authorizes certain space-related and commercial shipbuilding projects to receive Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development funding;

• requires the Florida Seaport Mission Plan to provide specific recommendations for the construction of transportation facilities connecting any port to the space and aerospace industries;

• requires seaports to submit semiannual reports to FDOT regarding their operations and support of the state’s economic competitiveness and supply chain;

• prohibits state funding to a seaport near certain spaceport territory unless it agrees not to convert any planned or existing land, facility, or infrastructure designated for cargo purposes to any alternative purpose unless the conversion is approved by the seaport at a publicly noticed meeting as a separate line item on the agenda and with a reasonable opportunity for public comment;

• creates an intermodal logistics center working group within FDOT to coordinate the planning and development of intermodal logistic centers across the state;

• repeals provisions regarding high-occupancy vehicle lanes;

• authorizes the withholding of state transportation funds to local jurisdictions for traffic signals not in compliance with FDOT’s uniform system for traffic control devices until the local jurisdiction demonstrates the signals are complying;

• allows FDOT to issue a mobile crane special blanket permit for certain purposes;

• revises provisions related to disabled veterans license plates;

• amends definitions in s.330.27 dealing with aircraft and airports;

• requires FDOT to certify private airports of public interest before aircraft operations are allowed; a private airport that was engaged in operations associated with a private airport of public interest on or before July 1, 2025, must obtain a certificate from the department by July 1, 2030;

• prohibits a publicly owned airport from charging a landing fee established on or after Jan. 1, 2025 for aircraft operations conducted by an accredited non-profit institution located in the state which offers a 4-year collegiate aviation program, if such aircraft operations are for flight training necessary for pilot certification and proficiency;

• authorizes FDOT to fund certain infrastructure projects associated with spaceports as long as the project supports aerospace or launch support facilities within an adjacent spaceport territory boundary;

• requires airports to provide FDOT with the opportunity to use airport property that is not within the air navigation facility as a staging area for equipment and personnel during certain declared states of emergency;

• require each commercial service airport to establish and maintain a comprehensive infrastructure program to ensure the ongoing preservation and of airport infrastructure and facilities in safe and serviceable condition;

• expands the types of public airport and the aviation discretionary capacity improvement projects that FDOT shall provide priority funding in support of;

• revises s.332.0075 to amend the definition of “commercial service airport” to include airports providing commercial service, including large, medium, small, and nonhub airports as classified by the FAA;

• amends the information that commercial airports must post on their websites and submit annually to FDOT;

• requires commercial service airports to notify FDOT after receiving certain communications or directives from the federal government and following issues or incidents of concern;

• codifies advanced air mobility into Florida law;

• revises FDOT’s authorization regarding public information and education campaigns, and provides authorization to enter into insurance contracts and purchase heavy equipment and vehicles;

• requires that, on an annual basis, an amount equal to at least 1.5 percent of the total amount contracted for the average of the previous 3 completed fiscal years of construction projects must be allocated by FDOT on a statewide basis for the purchase of plant materials to enhance the State Highway System rights-of-ways and arterial facilities;

• requires FDOT to develop standards for landscaping materials native to specific regions of the state which are reflective of the state’s heritage and natural landscapes;

• provides that a parking authority created by special act may operate, manage, and control parking facilities in contiguous counties, municipalities, or other local governmental entities upon entering into interlocal agreements with the governing bodies of the appropriate contiguous counties, municipalities, or local governmental entities (Floor amendment.);

• creates the Florida Transportation Academy, within FDOT, to coordinate with certain entities regarding transportation industry workforce development;

• authorizes FDOT, for access management permits issued after July 1, 1988, to require the modification of an existing connection to a state road if the connection would jeopardize public safety or negatively impact the highway’s operational characteristics;

• increases the size of a “small business” as it relates to FDOT’s business development program from less than $15 million in yearly gross receipts for road and bridge contracts to less than $25 million, and from less than $6.5 million in yearly gross receipts for professional and non-professional services contracts to less than $10 million;

• repeals FDOT’s disadvantaged business enterprise program and related provisions;

• authorizes FDOT, at the discretion of the Secretary of FDOT, to require a surety bond in an amount less than the awarded contract price;

• provides that a municipality may not prohibit, or require a permit for, the installation of a public sewer transmission line placed and maintained within and under publicly dedicated rights-of-way as part of a septic-to-sewer conversion where the work is being performed under permits issued by the Department of Transportation pursuant to this chapter and the Department of Environmental Protection, or its delegate, pursuant to Chapter 403;

• prohibits camping on right-of-way of the State Highway System, unless you are actively navigating the Florida National Scenic Trail with the appropriate permit;

• defines “energy policy of the state” as the policy described in s.377.601(3) and includes any intended or actual measure, obligation, target, or timeframe related to a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions;

• prohibits FDOT from expending any state funds as described in s.215.31 to support a project or program of any of the following entities if such entities adopt or promote energy policy goals inconsistent with the energy policy of the state: a public transit provider as defined in s.341.031(1); an authority created pursuant to Chapter 343, Chapter 1181 348, or Chapter 349; a public-use airport as defined in s.332.004; a port listed in s.311.09(1);

• specifies that funds for rural transit operating block grants must be allocated to the FDOT districts pursuant to s.341.0525;

• amends the FDOT’s Strategic Intermodal System supply chain program by making FDOT’s funding permissive, and removing specific dates, including the 2028 repeal date, making the program permanent;

• revises and makes permanent the allocation of unused New Starts Transit funds to the Strategic Intermodal Systems;

• amends provisions related to the public transit block grant program;

• creates a rural transit operating block grant program within FDOT, available only to public transit providers not eligible to receive public transit block grants;

• revises the membership of the Jacksonville Transportation Authority’s governing body;

• require FDOT to coordinate with all state agencies, including the Department of Environmental Protection, and water management districts to establish a workgroup to review state statutes, policies, practices, and standards relating to statewide mapping programs (Floor amendment.); and

• require FDOT, in coordination with the workgroup, to review state statutes and policies related to geospatial data sharing throughout state government and make recommendations to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives by November 15, 2025, for any legislative action necessary to establish the Department of Transportation as the primary point of contact for statewide geographic information systems and to update statutes relating to geographic information systems and geospatial data sharing to allow for coordination and access to such systems and geospatial data (Floor amendment.)

A similar bill, CS/CS/CS/HB 1397 (Rep. Abbott), was temporarily postponed on Second Reading on April 24.

LEGISLATIVE NEWS

Pizzo exits party, leadership post News Service of Florida | Tallahassee Reports | April 25

Government expert explains mounting pressure for Florida lawmakers to meet critical deadline amid budget disputes Kent Justice | News4Jax | April 24

Florida lawmakers at an impasse – legislative session will not end as scheduled next week Mitch Perry | Florida Phoenix | April 24