March 28, 2025 | Legislative Reporter
This pastweek was the fourth week of the 2025 Legislative Session, scheduled to end on May 2.
The BillTracking Report, as of March 28, can be viewed here. Please review itto see the filed bills thatAPA Florida is tracking and their status. Note that if you click on the bill number, you willbe linked to more information about the bill. If you would like any bills added to this report or would like more information abouta specific bill, please contact Stefanie Svisco at ssvisco@floridaplanning.org
The following bills of interesthad 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.
GROWTHMANAGEMENT
Annexing State-owned Lands: CS/CS/SB 384 (Sen. Burton) was reported favorably by the Senate Rules Committee, its third and finalcommittee of reference, on March 26 and placed on the Senate Calendar on Second Reading. The billamends s.171.0413 to provide that, upon advertising for the firstpublic hearing on adopting an ordinance proposing to annex state-owned lands, a municipality mustnotify by writing or e-mail each member of the legislative delegation of the county in which the land is located.
A similar bill, CS/HB275 (Rep. Albert), is in the House State Affairs Committee, its second and finalcommittee of reference.
Areas of Critical State Concern: CS/SB1326 (Sen. Rodriguez) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Environmentand Natural Resources Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, its second of three committees of reference.
The billamends s.196.1978 to revise one of the three conditions thatmust be met before property in a multifamily projectis considered property used for a charitable purpose and therefore eligible to receive an ad valorem tax exemption. Current law requires the property to be either a newly constructed multifamily projectwith a certain number of units or within a newly constructed multifamily project in an area of critical state concern, which contains more than ten units dedicated to housing naturalpersons or families meeting certain income limitations. The billremoves the requirementthatthe property within an area of critical state concern must be within a newly constructed multifamily projectand lowers the number of units required from “more than ten” to “one or more.”
The billamends s.255.05 to exempt, atthe discretion of the officialor board who owns the subjectunderlying property in fee simple, a person entering into a construction contractproviding for services or materialfrombeing required to execute a payment and performance bond if certain conditions are met. The underlying realproperty owned by the state or any county, city, or
political subdivision thereof, or by any other public authority, may notbe subject to any lien rights created under Chapter 713 relating to liens, generally.
The billalso amends s.259.105 to extend the date through which at least$5 million of the funds allocated from the Florida Forever Actto the Florida Departmentof Environmental Protection for the acquisition of lands and capitalprojectexpenditures must be spenton land acquisition within the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern. The funding requirementcurrently extends through fiscalyear 2026-27 and the bill extends itthrough fiscal year 2035- 37.
The billamends s.380.0552 which establishes the Florida Keys Area of CriticalState Concern, to revise the requirement that localcomprehensive plans maintain a hurricane evacuation clearance time for permanentresidents of no more than 24 hours by extending it to no more than 24.5 hours or 825 permitallocations, whichever is less. The billalso adds that, to ensure the hurricane evacuation clearance time is met, Monroe County, the Village of Islamorada, the cities of Marathon, Layton, and Key Westmusteach continue to maintain permitallocation systems limiting the number of permits issued for new residential dwelling units.
The billprovides that the Administration Commission must distribute 825 permitallocations over a period of atleast10 years, as follows:
• Monroe County mustreceive 580 permitallocations, allof which must be issued to vacant, buildable parcels. Only one of the allocated building permits shallbe awarded to any individualparcel. Of the 580 permit allocations, 406 mustbe used for workforce housing;
• The City of Marathon must receive 201 permitallocations, allof which must be issued to vacant, buildable parcels. Only one of the allocated building permits shallbe awarded to any individualparcel. Distribution of the permits must prioritize allocations for owner-occupied residences, affordable housing, and workforce housing;
• The City of Islamorada mustreceive 77 permitallocations, allof which must be issued to vacant, buildable parcels. Only one of the allocated building permits shallbe awarded to any individualparcel. Distribution of the permits must prioritize allocations for owner-occupied residences, affordable housing, and workforce housing;and
• The City of Key Westmustreceive 30 permitallocations. The housing constructed pursuant to the allocated permits must be affordable.
The billdefines “workforce housing” as residential dwelling units restricted for a period of no less than 99 years to occupancy by households who derive at least 70 percentof their household income from gainfulemploymentin Monroe County supplying goods or services to Monroe County residents or visitors.
A similar bill, CS/HB995 (Rep. Mooney, Jr.) was reported favorably by the House Ways & Means Committee on March 27 and moves to the House Agriculture &Natural Resources BudgetSubcommittee, its third of four committees of reference.
Construction and Facilities: CS/HB569 (House IntergovernmentalAffairs Subcommittee), was reported favorably by the House Education Administration Subcommittee on March 27 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its third and finalcommittee of reference.
The amended billdoes the following:
• revises s.163.3180 to provide that, with respect to the concurrency requirement, a charter schoolis considered to be a public facility;
• amends ss.163.31801(5) to provide that, if a localgovernmentor specialdistrictcharges and collects an education impactfee, a developer may contractwith a schooldistrictor charter schoolto provide an improvementor contribution, including monetary contributions, land dedications, site planning and design, or construction, and shallbe credited against the collection of the education impactfee on a dollar-for-dollar basis atfair marketvalue. The public school that benefits from the improvementor contribution must be within a 3-mile radius of the developmentand the credits must be approved by the local governmentor specialdistrict;
• creates s.316.18941 to provide thatlocalauthorities may not impose or enforce any vehicular stacking ordinance or regulation againstany public schoolor private schoolduring adopted school hours, including during studentdrop-off and pick-up hours, if such ordinance or regulation would limitenrollment;and
• amends s.1002.33 to prohibitlocalgovernmentfromalso enforcing any localbuilding requirements or site-development restrictions on charter schools thatare more stringentthan those found in the State Requirements for Education Facilities of the Florida Building Code, and to prohibit a local governmentfrom requiring a charter schoolto obtain a special exemption or conditional use approval to be an allowable use under the local government’s land development code.
SB1188 (Sen. McClain), a similar bill, is in the Senate Transportation Committee, its second committee of reference.
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services: CS/CS/HB651 (Reps. Tuck and D. Alvarez), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Criminal Justice Subcommittee on March 26 and is scheduled to be heard in the House Agriculture &Natural Resources Subcommittee, its third of four committees of reference, on March 31.
This comprehensive billmakes a number of changes to regulations related to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS).
Of particular interest, the bill amends s.163.3162 to address housing for legally verified agriculturalworkers. The billdefines “housing site” as the totality of development supporting authorized housing, including buildings, mobile homes, barracks, dormitories used as living areas, parking areas, common areas such as athletic fields or playgrounds, storage structures, and other related structures.
The billalso defines “legally verified agriculturalworker” as a person who:
• is lawfully presentin the United States;
• meets the definition of eligible worker pursuantto 29 C.F.R. s.502.10;
• has been verified according to the state’s employmenteligibility verification requirements and is authorized to work at the time of employment.;
• is seasonally or annually employed in a bona fide agriculturalproduction;
• remains lawfully presentand authorized to work throughout the duration of thatemployment;and
• is notan unauthorized alien as defined in s.448.095(1).
The billprovides thata governmental entity may notadoptor enforce any legislation, regulation, or ordinance to inhibit the construction or installation of housing for legally verified agriculturalworkers on land classified as agricultural land pursuantto s.193.461 which is operated as a bona fide farm, except as provided.
Itadditionally provides that construction or installation of housing units for legally verified agriculturalworkers on parcels of lands classified as agricultural land must satisfy all of the following criteria:
• must meetfederal, localand state building standards, including migrantfarmworker housing standards regulated by the Departmentof Health and federalstandards for H-2A visa housing; if written notice of intent is required to be submitted to the Departmentof Health, the appropriate local governmentalentity with jurisdiction over the agriculturallands may also require a copy of the written notice;
• must be maintained in a neat, orderly, and safe manner;
• allstructures containing dwelling units mustbe located a minimumof 10 feetapart;
• the square footage of the housing site’s climate-controlled facilities may not exceed 1.5 percentof the property’s area or 35,000 square feet, whichever is less;
• must provide 50-footsetbacks on allsides. However, an internalprojectdriveway may be located in the required yard space if the yard is adjacent to a public roadway or to property thatis under common ownership with the housing site;
• may not be located less than 100 feetfroma property line adjacentto property zoned for residentialuse;
• if within 250 feetof a property line, mustprovide screening, meeting specified designs, between the housing site and any residentially developed adjacentparcels thatare under differentownership;and
• must cover access drives with relatively dust-free materialsuch as packed shellor gravel.
The billprovides thata localordinance adopted mustcomply with all state and federalregulations for migrantfarmworker housing, as applicable. A local governmentmay validly adoptlessrestrictive land use regulations butwhich still meetspecified Departmentof Health regulations and specified federalregulations. However, the ordinance may notconflict with the definition and requirements of a legally verified agriculturalworker.
Itfurther provides that, beginning July 1, 2025, a property owner must maintain records of allapproved permits for migrantlabor camps or residential migranthousing for three years, and make the records available for inspection within 14 days after receiving a requestby a governmental entity.
Additionally, the bill provides thata housing site may notcontinue to be used and may be required to be removed under the following circumstances:
• if a housing site is not being used for legally verified agriculturalworkers for longer than 365 days, any structure used as living quarters must be removed with 180 days after receiptof written notice fromthe county unlessthe property owner can demonstrate use of the site for housing for legally verified agriculturalworkers willoccur within 90 days;
• if the property on which the housing site is located ceases to be classified as agricultural land pursuant to s.193.461;
• if the permitauthorized by the if Departmentof Health for the housing site is revoked, all structures mustbe removed within 180 days of notice fromthe county unless the permit is reinstated by the Departmentof Health; and
• if a housing site is found to be occupied by any person who does not meet the definition of a legally verified agricultural worker, or is otherwise unlawfully presentin the United States;the property owner, shallbe imposed a Class Ifine not to exceed $1,000, for the first violation and a Class IIfine, notto exceed $5,000, for any subsequentviolations.
The billprovides that the construction or installation of housing sites for legally verified agriculturalworkers in the Florida Keys and the City of Key Westareas of critical state concern is subjectto the permitallocation systems.
The billprovides thata housing site constructed and in use before July 1, 2024, may continue to be used, and the property owner may not be required to make changes to meetthe new requirements, unless the housing site will be enlarged, remodeled, renovated, or rehabilitated.
The billalso amends s.366.94 to allow localgovernments to issue permits for charging stations.
The billalso prohibits a localgovernmentfromadopting, any ordinance, regulation, rule, or policy to prohibit, restrict, regulate, or otherwise limit any activities of public education facilities and auxiliary facilities constructed by a board for agricultural education, for Future Farmers of America or 4-H activities, or the storage of any animalor equipment thereof.
Italso provides that lands used for agriculturaleducation or for Future Farmers of America or 4-H activities are considered agricultural lands pursuantto s.193.461 and subject to s.823.14.
CS/CS/SB700 (Sen. Truenow), a similar bill, was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and GeneralGovernment on March 26 and moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its third and final committee of reference.
Infrastructure and Resilience: CS/SB 1580 (Sen. Rodriguez), a delete-allamendment, was reported favorably by the Senate Environmentand Natural Resources Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, its second of three committees of reference.
The billamends s.255.065 regarding public-private partnerships. The billadds coastalresiliency projects as defined in s.380.0934 (created by this bill) to the definition of “qualifying projects.”
The billcreates s.380.0934 regarding public-private partnerships for coastalresiliency projects. Itprovides that “coastal resiliency project” means:
• the planning, contracting, and execution of a project to address flooding and sea levelrise in a coastalor inland community in this state pursuantto the Statewide Flooding and Sea LevelRise Resilience Plan;
• public infrastructure repair and upgrades to seawalls and stormwater drainage;and
• resiliency measures designed to withstand extreme weather, mitigate flooding, and preventcoastalerosion, including:
o acquisition of at-risk coastal and flood-prone properties;
o acquisition of properties in areas athigh risk of flooding;
o infrastructure hardening and developmentof naturalbarriers;
o construction of large-scale seawalls, levees, and elevated flood barriers;and
o expansion and restoration of natural protective systems.
The billprovides 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 coastalresiliency projectentered into by DEPunder s.255.065.
The legislation provides that, to encourage investmentfrom the private sector in coastalresiliency projects, DEPmay:
• enter into long-termrevenue-sharing agreements;
• provide expedited permitting for construction;
• seek comments from localgovernments and the public during projectplanning and execution and incorporate actions responsive to such comments into the project;and
• engage in-state vocationalschools and apprenticeship programs to train workers in specialized resiliency construction.
Finally, the billrequires DEP to publish biennial progress reports for each coastal resiliency projectfunded through a publicprivate partnership, including project milestones, expenditures, and public benefits, on DEP’s website. DEP mustalso create and maintain on its website an online dashboard for real-time updates on projectexecution.
Note there is no House companion to this bill.
Local Government: SB482(Sen.DiCeglie) wasreportedunfavorably by theSenateCommunityAffairs Committee onMarch25, butis pendingreconsideration. Itwillbe heardagainin theSenate CommunityAffairs Committee onMarch 31.
Thebillamends s.125.022and 166.033 to provide thatacounty or municipality, respectively, may notrequireanapplicantto install, payafeefor, or reimburse thecosts ofa workofartasa condition ofprocessingor issuinga developmentpermitor order.
Italso amends s.163.31801 to provide a definition of “extraordinary circumstance” for the purposes of raising impactfees beyond the statutorily prescribed percentage:
• for a county, an extraordinary circumstance is when the permanentpopulation estimate determined for the county by the University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research is atleast 1.25 times the five-year high-series population projection for the county as published immediately before the year of the population estimate;and
• for a municipality, an extraordinary circumstance is when the municipality is located within a county experiencing extraordinary circumstances as above, and the municipality demonstrates thatithas maintained a proportionate share of population growth over the preceding five years.
The billalso states thatthe required demonstrated-need study mustidentify the specific projects thatwill benefit, and how such projects will benefit, fromexceeding the phase-in limitations.
An identicalbill, HB 665 (Rep. Steele), is in the House Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.
Real Property and Land Use and Development: CS/HB943 (Rep. Lopez) was reported favorably, reflecting several amendments, by the House Housing, Agriculture &Tourism Subcommittee on March 25 and moves to the House Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee, its second of four committees of reference.
The billamends s.125.01055 and s.166.04151 related to affordable housing, to:
• provide thata county or municipality may notadoptor enforce any law, ordinance, rule, or other measure thatlimits or prohibits affordable housing, including, butnotlimited to, any measure thatis adopted for the purpose of limiting the maximumpercentage of units within a certain geographic area or within a certain distance fromanother affordable housing project, or thatotherwise prohibits affordable housing in areas zoned for such use;
• allows a county or municipality to approve the development of affordable housing on any parcel, including any contiguous parcelconnectthereto, that is owned by a religious institution that contains a house of worship, regardless of the underlying zoning as long as 10 percentof the units included in the projectare for housing that is affordable;
• add definitions for allowable density, allowable use, commercialuse, industrial use, planned unit development;
• provide that, notwithstanding any other law, localordinance, or regulation to the contrary, including any local moratoriumestablished after March 29, 2023, a county or municipality mustauthorize multifamily and mixed-use residential as allowable uses on any site owned by the county or municipality, a districtschoolboard, a religious institution as defined in s.170.201(2), and in any area zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed use, any planned unit development permitted for commercial, industrial, or mixed use, or any zoning district not zoned solely for use as a single-family home or duplex, if at least 40 percentof the residentialunits in a proposed multifamily or mixed-use residential developmentare rental units that, for a period of atleast30 years, are affordable;
• require a county or municipality to include an adjacentparcelof land as partof the multifamily development, regardless of the land use designation of the adjacent parcel, if the residentialunits to be builton the adjacentparcelcomply with the requirements within ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7);
• provide thata county or municipality may notrequire a proposed multifamily or mixed-use residentialdevelopment to acquire or transfer density, density units, or developmentunits, or obtain an amendment to a development of regional
impact, amendment to a developmentagreement, or amendmentto a restrictive covenant or a zoning or land use change, specialexception, conditional use approval, variance, or comprehensive plan amendment, or any other approvalfor the building height, zoning, and densities authorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7);
• provide thata county or municipality may notrequire that more than 10 percentof a mixed-use residential projectbe used for non-residentialpurposes;
• provide thatareas zoned for mixed use shallbe defined as areas thatinclude both residentialand nonresidential uses, regardless of whether the residential or nonresidentialuses are permitted as principaluse, conditionaluse, ancillary use, specialuse, unusualuse, accessory use, planned unit development, or planned development. Nonresidential use includes, butis notlimited to, retail, office, hotel, lodging, civic, institutional, parking, utilities, or other commercialuses;
• provide thataffordable or workforce units thatreceive any incentive under subsection (4) also qualify as affordable under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) as long as the units satisfy the requirements of s.420.0004 and the local regulations;and
• prohibita county or municipality fromdirectly restricting or taking action thathas the effectof restricting, the following for a proposed multifamily or mixed-use residential developmentauthorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7):
o restricting the density below the highestdensity allowed on or after July 1, 2023 on any land under their jurisdiction where residential developmentis allowed under the local land developmentregulations; directly restricting or taking action thathas the effectof restricting density includes requirements to procure or transfer density units for development units fromother properties;
o restricting the maximum lot size below the largest maximumlotsize allowed on or after July 1, 2023 on land under their jurisdiction where multifamily or mixed-use residential developmentis allowed pursuantto the local land development regulations;maximumlotcoverage may not be restricted below 70 percent;
o restricting the floor area ratio below 150 percentof the highestfloor area ratio allowed on or after July 1, 2023 on land under their jurisdiction where development is allowed under land development regulations;and
o restricting the heightbelow the highestallowed on or after 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; includes the height of the tallestexisting building within the jurisdiction within 1 mile of the proposed development if the existing building exceeds the highestheightallowed on or after July 1, 2023.
• require a proposed multifamily or mixed-use residential development to be administratively approved and no further action, including thatof any quasi-judicial board of the reviewing body, is required if the development satisfies certain requirements;
• provide thatthe removal or demolition of an existing structure to be performed as part of the proposed development must also be administratively approved;
• provide thata development authorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) must be treated as a conforming use;
• prohibita county or municipality frominitiating or enforcing zoning-in-progress or a building moratoriumon a proposed developmentthatis subjectto ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) and for which the preliminary site plan has been approved;
• require the county or municipality to maintain on its website a policy containing the zoning map and zoning regulations in effecton July 1, 2023, and the procedures and expectations for administrative approval;
• require the county or municipality reduce parking requirements by at least20 percentfor developmentauthorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) or by 100 percentfor structures that are 20,000 square feetor less;
• require a county or municipality, for a proposed developmentauthorized under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7), to approve a building permitplan review within 60 days and prioritize a building permitreview for these projects over other developmentprojects;
• provide thata prevailing party in a challenge under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7) is entitled to recover attorney fees and costs, including reasonable appellate attorney fees and costs;
• provide thatordinances or resolutions or decisions, made after July 1, 2023 thathave the effectof limiting, delaying, or restricting specified aspects of a projectunder these sections, are deemed preempted and the administrative review process mustonly be based on the land developmentregulations in effecton the date of a site plan application filing;
• provide thatthe regulation of affordable housing under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7) is expressly preempted to the state;
• require that, if an action is filed to challenge on the grounds thata localordinance or resolution is expressly preempted to the state, the courtis required to expedite and render a decision within 30 days;notice of appeal mustbe filed and served within 30 days after the rendition of the judgmentappealed from;
• provide thatthe county or municipality’s review or approval of an application for a developmentpermit or development order may not be conditioned on procurementor transfer of density units or development units, or the waiver, forbearance, acquisition, transfer or abandonmentof any development rightauthorized by these sections;any such waiver, forbearance, acquisition, transfer, procurement, or abandonmentis void;
• require the county or municipality to provide an annualreport, 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 Presidentand House Speaker regarding compliance with these sections;
• prohibita county or municipality fromimposing a building moratoriumthathas the effectof delaying the permitting or construction of a multifamily project thatwould otherwise qualify for an affordable housing ad valorem tax exemption, a grantloan or other incentive provided for the development of affordable housing under Chapter 420, or any abatement of developmentrestrictions under ss.125.01055(7) or ss.166.04151(7); and
• provide thatan owner of an administratively approved proposed development, thathas acted in reliance on the approval, has a vested right to proceed with developmentcertain conditions.
The billamends s.163.31801(11) to provide thatqualified developments authorized pursuant to s.125.01055 or s.166.04151 must receive an exception or waiver for 20 percentof the impactfees for the development of, or construction of the portion of the development that is, affordable housing.
Additionally, it targets s.166.041 to require thatany ordinance thatdesignates property as a historic landmark mustrequire thata printed or digital map of the property be readily available and a municipality mustsubmit the map to the State Historic Preservation Officer by June 1, 2027. Furthermore, any resolution thatdesignates the character of privately-owned property as a historic landmark withoutthe consent of the property owner must include a finding by the governing body, based on substantial competentevidence, that the historic significance of the property is commensurate, to an equal or greater degree, with property thatis already designated as a historic landmark within the municipality.
Italsochanges s.163.2517 to provide that,notwithstandingany ordinance to thecontraryexisting onJuly1, 2025,a proposed urban infilldevelopmentmustbeadministrativelyapproved,andacomprehensive planamendment,rezoning, or variance is notrequired.
The billamends s.163.3167 to add that the approval of an increase in height or floor area ratio in the land development regulations by a localgovernment, commission, council, or board shall be by ordinance with a simple majority vote, and provides that the term“floor area ratio” includes floor lotarea.
The billalso amends s.163.31771 to:
• add that the term“accessory dwelling unit” includes a manufactured home constructed on or after Jan. 1, 2025, which meets the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards;
• require a localgovernment to adoptan ordinance to allow accessory dwelling units in any area zoned for single-family residential use:
• provide thata localgovernmentmay not directly, unreasonably increase, or in effectunreasonably increase, the cost to construct, in effectprohibitthe construction of, or extinguish the ability to otherwise constructan accessory dwelling unit;
• provide thatthe regulation does notinclude:
o restrictions on the terms of rentals that do notapply generally to other housing in the same district or zone;
o parking requirements and minimum lot size requirements thatdo notapply generalto other housing in the same districtor zone, other lot design regulations that unreasonably increase the costto constructor unreasonably extinguish the ability to constructan accessory dwelling unit on a lot;and
o discretionary conditionaluse permit procedures or standards thatdo notapply generally to other housing in the same districtor zone.
• require a localgovernment, beginning Oct. 1, 2025 and annually thereafter, to submitan annualreport to the Departmentof Commerce which includes specified information regarding accessory dwelling units; the report must also be posted on the localgovernment website;
• provide thatthe owner of property with an accessory dwelling unitmay not be denied a homestead exemption or homestead property assessmentlimitation solely on the basis of the property containing an accessory dwelling unit that may be rented;and
• provide guidance on how an accessory dwelling unit should be assessed based on rental status.
The legislation amends s.196.1979 dealing with county and municipalaffordable housing property tax exemption. The bill provides that developmentwithin a multifamily projectthat meets specified criteria, and accessory dwelling units, are eligible for the tax exemption. It also provides thataccessory dwelling units that are used to provide affordable housing may receive an ad valoremtax exemption of up to 100 percentof the assessed value of the unit.
Italso amends s.333.03 to provide thatss.125.01055(7) and 166.04151(7) do not apply to certain developments relative to existing or planned commercialservice airportrunways.
The billchanges s.420.50871 to require the Florida Housing Finance Corporation to:
• fund projects thatprovide housing near U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs medicalcenters of outpatientclinics;and
• provide housing in areas of critical housing shortage for essential service and high-demand career employees though a public-private housing partnership with major public and private sector employers for who housing shortages are affecting the recru9itment and retention of workers.
Itcreates s.702.13. to provide expedited foreclosure proceedings for abandoned realproperty. It also changes s.760.22 to revise the definition of “person” to also include any other legalor commercialentity, or any governmentalentity or agency.
The s.760.26 is amended to add that it is unlawfulto discriminate in land use decisions or in the permitting of development based on the developmentor proposed developmentbeing affordable housing as defined under s.420.0004(3). The billalso states that it is the intentof the legislature that this amendment is remedialand clarifying in nature, and shallapply retrospectively for any causes of action filed on or before the effective date of the passage of this act.
Italso changes s.1001.43 to require each district school board to adoptbestpractices for surplus land programs, including, but notlimited to:
• establishing eligibility criteria for the receipt or purchase of surplus land by developers;
• making the process for requesting surplus lands publicly available; and
• ensuring long-termaffordability through ground leases by retaining the right of firstrefusal to purchase property that would be sold or offered atmarketrate and by requiring reversion of property notused for affordable housing within a certain timeframe.
Additionally, itrequires each school district’s mostrecentand allfuture educationalplan surveys to be updated to include an inventory list of such surplus land.
Sewer Collection Systems: HB 1123 (Rep. Cassel) was reported favorably by the House Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee on March 25 and moves to the House State Affairs Subcommittee, its third and finalcommittee of reference.
The billamends s.180.03 to authorize municipalities that operate a sewer utility to use revenue generated by a municipality’s operation of a central sewage system to expand the central sewage system.
An identicalbill, SB1784 (Sen Pizzo) was also reported favorably by the Senate Environmentaland NaturalResources Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its second of three committees of reference.
Special Districts: CS/HB 973 (Rep. Overdorf), a delete-allamendment, was reported favorably by the House Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee on March 26 and moves to the House Agriculture &Natural Resources BudgetSubcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.
The billmakes severalchanges applicable to all special districts:
• limits the legalliability of independent specialdistricts that make district lands and water areas available to the public for outdoor recreation;
• allows specialdistricts to utilize purchasing agreements entered into by the state;and
• authorizes independent specialdistricts to conduct state and federalcriminalhistory checks of district’s employees, vendors, and certain users of the district’s facilities.
Italso makes revisions specific to certain types of special districts. For independentfire controldistricts, the billprovides thatthe districtcontinues to provide services in perpetuity in the eventa portion of the district is annexed by a municipality and removes a requirementthatthose districts conducta performance review every five years. For soiland water conservation districts, the bill dissolves 35 districts and revises the powers and member criteria for the governing body of the remaining districts.
A similar bill, SB986 (Sen. Truenow), is in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its first of three committees of reference.
Stormwater Management Systems: CS/SB810 (Sen. Burgess), a delete-all amendment, was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development on March 24 and moves to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its third and finalcommittee of reference.
The billchanges s.373.423 relating to the stormwater managementsystem inspections and provides that MS4 means a municipal separate storm sewer as defined in 40 C.F.R. s.122.26(b), which in turn defines the termas a conveyance or systemof conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipalstreets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains):
• owned or operated by a state, city, town, borough, county, parish, district, association, or other public body (created by or pursuant to state law) having jurisdiction over disposalof sewage, industrialwastes, stormwater, or other wastes, including specialdistricts under state law such as a sewer district, flood control district or drainage district, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe or an authorized Indian tribalorganization, or a designated and approved managementagency under Section 208 of the Clean Water Actthat discharges to waters of the United States;
• designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater;
• which is nota combined sewer;and
• which is notpartof a publicly owned treatmentworks.
Itrequires each MS4 entity to conductannualoperation and maintenance inspections of allpermitted stormwater management systems owned or operated by the MS4 entity. As partof such inspections, the MS4 entity mustidentify any infrastructure within the MS4, or any component thereof, which has a significant vulnerability to obstruction, blockage, deterioration, failure, or other deficiencies and, upon operational failure, would result in flooding and property damage.
The billrequires the MS4 entity to complete the stormwater facility inspection checklistdeveloped by the Departmentof Environmental Protection (DEP) for each MS4 inspected pursuantto this bill. The completed checklistmust be submitted to the DEPand the Division of Emergency Management by September 1, 2026, and by June 1 of each year thereafter. Each checklist must include any vulnerable infrastructure within the MS4, or any component thereof, as identified by the inspection.
Transportation Concurrency: SB1738 (Sen. Ingoglia) was reported favorably by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its third and final committee of reference.
The billamends s.163.3180(5) to provide thatthe capital improvements element shall identify facilities necessary to meet adopted levels of service during a 5-year period or to maintain currentlevels of service.
HB203(Rep. Grow),anidenticalbill,is in theHouse Housing, Agriculture &TourismSubcommittee, its firstcommitteeof reference.SB1074(Sen. McClain),a similarbill, is in the Community AffairsCommittee, itsfirstof threecommitteesofreference.
Waste Facilities: CS/SB946 (Sen. Rodriguez) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Environmentand NaturalResources Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its second of three committees of reference.
The billamends s.373.4592 regarding Everglades improvementand management. It provides that, notwithstanding any law to the contrary, a state or localgovernmentalentity may not approve any permitfor the construction or operation of any of the following facilities thatare proposed to be located within one mile of the C-9 impoundment, authorized by the Water Resources Reformand Development Actof 2014:
• a municipalsolid waste-to-energy facility;
• a pyrolysis facility;and
• to the extent that it includes incineration of any type, a solid waste disposalfacility.
It provides thatthis prohibition does notapply to a facility thatwas constructed and had an operating permitauthorizing incineration before July 1, 2025.
Note that the committee made a number of changes to the original billas follows:
• reduced the prohibited area from two miles around Everglades-related sites and certain federally and state-funded water storage and conveyance structures to one mile around the C-9 impoundmentauthorized by the Water Resources Reform and DevelopmentActof 2014;
• removed solid waste facilities and solid waste managementfacilities thatdo not include incineration fromthe types of prohibited facilities;
• clarified that the restriction applies to both state and localpermits;
• clarified that the billdoes notapply to a facility that was constructed and had an operating permitauthorizing incineration before July 1, 2025;and
• removed the provision that the bill preempted permitting to the state and superseded localgovernmentregulations.
HB1199 (Rep. Gentry), similar to the originalSB 946, is in the House NaturalResources &Disasters Subcommittee, its firstof two committees of reference.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Rural Communities: HB 1427 (Reps. Griffitts, Jr. and Abbott) was reported favorably by the House Commerce Committee on March 24 and moves to the House Health &Human Services Committee, its second of three committees of reference.
This comprehensive billaddresses a number of issues for the benefitof ruralcommunities in the state. Namely, the billcreates a statewide office to coordinate the advancementof ruralcommunities and opportunity therein, and amends a number of programs and regulations, related to health, transportation, affordable housing and education, across various departments and policy areas.
The billgenerally does the following:
• modifies divisions and offices within the Department of Commerce, creating the Office of Rural Prosperity and adding roles focused on ruralprosperity and economic accountability;
• creates severalprograms aimed atdeveloping infrastructure, including the Public Infrastructure Smart Technology Grant Programand Florida ArterialRoad Modernization Program;
• enhances healthcare accessibility through programs like the RuralAccess to Primary and Preventive Care Grant Programand facilities improvementgrants for rural hospitals;
• implements educationalsupport mechanisms such as the RuralIncentive for ProfessionalEducators Program to encourage educators to work in ruralareas;
• adjusts funding mechanisms for various state and localentities to better allocate resources toward ruraldevelopment initiatives;and
• supports housing and infrastructure developmentin ruralareas by amending funding allocations and revising eligibility and planning requirements.
A similar bill, CS/SB110 E1 (Sen. Simon) was passed by the Senate on March 19 and is in Messages to the House.
EDUCATION
Charter Schools: CS/HB443 (Rep. Snyder) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Education Administration Subcommittee on March 27 and moves to the House PreK-12 BudgetSubcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.
The billrevises currentprovisions relating to charter schools, charter school sponsors, and the use of realproperty for public education purposes. Of particular interest, the billamends s.1013.28 dealing with the disposal of property.
Itrequires schooldistricts to provide charter schools with a right of firstrefusalwhen the schooldistrict seeks to sell, transfer, lease, or dispose of any realproperty, including schoolfacilities. The rightof firstrefusal period for charter schools begins on the date the publicly noticed agenda item is heard ata school board meeting.
A charter schoolseeking to exercise the rightof firstrefusal must submita formal offer to the schooldistrictwithin 60 days after the agenda itemis heard. The offer has to include the proposed terms, intended use, and evidence of the charter school’s financial capability. The districtschool board has to acknowledge receiptof alloffers in writing and engage in good faith negotiations with any charter school that submits an offer.
The district school board may notfinalize any transaction or engage in negotiations with any non-charter school entity for the sale, transfer, lease, or disposal of the real property untilthe right of first refusalprocess is completed. If no charter school submits a formaloffer within the designated timeframe, the districtmay proceed with disposal of the realproperty. However, a districtmay not structure any transaction in a manner to avoid these requirements, nor may it execute any transfer of ownership or lease agreementbefore completing this process.
SB822 (Sen. Rodriguez), which was similar to CS/HB 443 as originally filed, is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Education PreK-12 Committee on March 31.
ENVIRONMENTAND NATURAL RESOURCES
Brownfields: CS/CS/SB736 (Sen. Truenow) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Governmenton March 26 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its third and finalcommittee of reference.
The billamends s.376.303 regarding the powers and duties of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). It eliminates the requirement for brownfield property owners to provide localgovernments with institutionalcontrol information for mapping purposes when a contaminated site in a designated brownfield area has such controls in place. Italso removes the obligation for localgovernments to: (1) note the existence of institutionalcontrols on land use and zoning maps;and (2) remove such notations when the local governmentis provided with evidence that the DEPhas issued a “no further action” order withoutinstitutional controls for a site currently noted on such maps.
Under currentlaw, the DEP mustmaintain a registry of allcontaminated sites located in a brownfield area which are subject to institutionaland engineering controls. Sites for which the DEPhas issued a “no further action” order must be removed fromthis registry. The billamends this to require that sites be removed fromthe registry when the DEP has issued a “site rehabilitation completion order,” rather than a “no further action order.”
The billalso amends s.376.30781 regarding tax credits for rehabilitation of brownfield sites in designated brownfield areas. The bill removes the provision that the additional25 percenttax creditfor site rehabilitation costs can be claimed in the final year of cleanup as evidenced by a “no further action” order issued by the DEP. Instead, the billprovides that the credit may claimed if the DEPapproves the applicant’s annualsite rehabilitation application and issues a site rehabilitation completion order. The bill provides that the tax creditapplicant mustsubmitthe claim for the additional25 percentwithin two years after receipt of the site rehabilitation completion order for thatsite.
Under currentlaw, costs related to solid waste removalare eligible for a tax credit if the applicant submits an affidavitstating that, to the best of the applicant’s knowledge based upon a consultation with appropriate local governmentofficials and available historicalrecords, the brownfield site was never operated as a permitted solid waste disposalarea or was never operated for monetary compensation, and the applicant submits all other required documentation and certifications required by law. The bill limits the restriction to sites thatwere never operated as a permitted solid waste disposalarea regulated by modern DEPrules but eliminates both the affidavitrequirementand the requirementthat the brownfield site was never operated for monetary compensation.
The billalso extends the deadline for the DEPto notify tax creditapplicants of their eligibility status and credit amount from May 1 to June 1. Italso gives the DEPan additional30 days (for a total of 120 days instead of the current 90 days) to respond after receiving a tax credit applicant’s response to a notice of deficiency.
Itchanges s.376.78 regarding the legislative intentfor the PollutantDischarge Prevention and Control Act. Currently, this statute provides that the reduction of public health and environmentalhazards on “existing commercialand industrial” sites is vitalto their use and reuse as sources of employment, housing, recreation, and open space areas. The billchanges “existing commercial and industrialsites” to “sites proposed to be rehabilitated and redeveloped.”
Thebillalsoamends s.376.79which providesdefinitionsfor the Brownfields RedevelopmentAct. Currently,this statute defines “brownfield sites”asrealproperty, theexpansion,redevelopment, orreuseofwhich may becomplicatedbyactualorperceived environmentalcontamination. Thebillchangestheterm“brownfield sites” to“brownfield” andadds thatthe termonlyincludes real property whichhasnotyetbeenentered into abrownfield siterehabilitationagreement.The billaddsthe followingnew definition for“brownfield site”:the realproperty identified inabrownfield site rehabilitationagreementexecutedby the personresponsiblefor brownfield siterehabilitationof thepropertyand theDEPoradelegatedlocalpollutioncontrolprogram,asapplicable.
Furthermore, s.376.81 is amended regarding brownfield site and brownfield areas contamination cleanup criteria, to include the following legislative findings. Italso provides that if the person responsible for a brownfield site rehabilitation demonstrates compliance with the applicable contamination cleanup criteria, and the brownfield site is only a portion of a larger contaminated site, the DEPor any delegated localpollution controlprogrammay notdeny a “No Further Action” status for the brownfield site; or refuse to issue a site rehabilitation completion order for the brownfield site, regardless of whether it has engineering and institutionalcontrols. This applies even where similar contamination exists elsewhere on the contaminated site which was the resultof similar or related activities or operations that occurred both on the contaminated site and the brownfield site, provided
thatallsoiland groundwater contamination emanating from the brownfield site is adequately addressed pursuant to Chapter 62780 of the Florida Administrative Code. This applies to all brownfield sites, irrespective of the effective date of the brownfield site rehabilitation agreement.
Italso provides that the cleanup criteria described in s.376.81 applies only to site rehabilitation activities occurring at a “brownfield site,” rather than a “contaminated site,” as the law currently provides.
Additionally, the billamends s.376.82 regarding eligibility criteria and liability protection for the brownfield program. The bill provides thata localgovernmentalentity may also participate in the program, including any other person who may be organized or united with the localgovernmental entity for a business purpose, if such entity or person did not cause or contribute to the contamination of a brownfield site on or after July 1, 2025.
Under currentlaw, certain sites are noteligible for participation in the brownfield program unlessspecific exemptions are secured by a memorandumof agreement (MOA) with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The bill amends this process by providing that, instead of securing an exemption through the MOA, these sites may participate in the brownfields programif the EPA issues a letter stating ithas no objection to the site’s participation, and the DEPissues a letter of concurrence.
The billprovides that the existing job creation requirement, related to participation of certain entities in the program, does not apply to the rehabilitation and redevelopment of a brownfield site thatwillprovide housing thatis affordable, create recreational areas, conservation areas, or parks, or maintained for culturalor historicalpreservation purposes.
Currentlaw required the DEP to attempt to negotiate a MOA or similar document with the EPA whereby the EPA agrees to forego enforcementof federalcorrective action authority at brownfield sites that have received a site rehabilitation completion or “no further action” determination fromthe DEP or the approved localpollution controlprogram, or thatare in the processof implementing a brownfield site rehabilitation agreement. The bill removes this provision and instead provides that, if the EPA issues a letter stating ithas no objection to a site’s participation and the person seeking to participate in the brownfield program can reasonably demonstrate he or she willconduct site rehabilitation pursuant to the state contamination cleanup criteria, the DEPmay issue a letter of no objection thatstates the person may participate in the brownfield program.
The billprovides that the DEP may notrequire as a condition of such letter of concurrence that the EPA forego enforcementof federalcorrective action authority atbrownfield sites that have received a site rehabilitation completion order. The billrequires a letter of no objection fromthe EPA and a letter of concurrence fromDEP to be added as attachments to the brownfield site rehabilitation agreement. (The clarification that the EPA letter is a letter of no objection, vs. a letter of concurrence was added by the committee.)
Italso provides that proposed brownfield sites thatare subjectto ongoing formal judicial or administrative enforcement action or corrective action pursuant to an EPA order under s.3008(h) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, or thathave obtained or are required to obtain a permitfor the operation of a hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposalfacility, a postclosure permit, or a permitpursuantto the federalHazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 are eligible for participation in the brownfield program provided that the sites obtain the necessary letters no objection and concurrence, or comply with the provisions of Section V50 of the Memorandumof Agreementbetween the DEPand the EPA Region 4 covering Florida’s Brownfield Program, dated Nov. 28, 2005, as may be amended.
CS/HB 733 (Rep. Anderson), a similar bill, was reported favorably by the House Ways & Means Committee on March 27 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its finalcommittee of reference.
Comprehensive Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan: HB 295 (Reps. Casello and Hart) was reported favorably by the House Agriculture &Natural Resources BudgetSubcommittee on March 25 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its third and finalcommittee of reference.
The billprovides that, by July 1, 2026, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is required to develop a statewide comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan based on recommendations from its report on Florida’s recycling goal titled “Florida and the 2020 75% Recycling Goal”. DEP mustconvene a technicaladvisory group to help develop the plan.
Ata minimum, the bill requires the plan to identify recycling goals based on sustainable materials management and waste diversion and include a three-year plan to implement the following strategies:
1. recycling education and outreach. DEP mustpropose statewide solutions to provide localrecycling information and education throughout the state;
2. localgovernmentrecycling assistance. DEPis required to evaluate the benefits and challenges of the former state Recycling and Education Grant Program and provide recommendations for reinstating the program or considering other means of providing recycling assistance to local governments;and
3. recycling materials market development. DEP mustconsider and recommend plans to develop and promote markets for recycling materials.
Upon completion of the plan, the billrequires DEP to provide a reportto the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The report must include recommendations for statutory changes necessary to achieve the recycling goals and strategies identified in the plan.
An identicalbill, SB200 (Sen. Berman) is in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, its second of three committees of reference.
Municipal Water and Sewer Utility Rates: HB11 (Rep. F. Robinson) was passed by the House on March 26 and is in Messages to the Senate.
The billamends s.180.191 to provide that any municipality thatoperates a water or sewer utility providing service to consumers within the boundaries of a separate municipality using a water treatmentplantor sewer treatment plant located within the boundaries of that separate municipality shallcharge consumers in the separate municipality the same rates, fees, and charges as itcharges the consumers within its own municipal boundaries.
A similar bill, SB202 (Sen. Jones), is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its second of three committees of reference, on March 31. This billalso includes definitions for facility, wastewater treatmentfacility and water treatmentfacility.
Recreational Customary Use of Beaches: SB1622 (Sen. Trumbull) was reported favorably by the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 25 and is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Community Affairs Committee, its second of three committees of reference, on March 31.
The billrepeals s.163.035 which established procedures that a governmental entity mustfollow when attempting to establish a “recreationalcustomary use of property”.
According to the committee staff report, the repealof the statute means a return to how customary use rights were determined prior to enactment of the statute:
• a governmentalentity may declare the existence of a customary use and adopta localcustomary use ordinance;
• property owners mustfile a lawsuitchallenging the ordinance and demonstrate in court that the public does notenjoy customary use rights over their privately-owned beaches;and
• courts willapply the common law doctrine of customary use when ascertaining, on a case-by-case basis, whether the public enjoys customary use rights over privately-owned beaches.
HB6043 (Rep. Andrade), an identicalbill, was reported favorably by the House CivilJustice &Claims Subcommittee on March 27 and moves to the House Natural Resources &Disasters Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference. SB284 (Sen Rouson), also an identicalbill, is in the Senate Judiciary Committee, its first of three committees of reference.
Dry Sandy Beaches: CS/SB1792 (Sen. Gruters) was reported favorably, reflecting an amendment, by the Senate Environment and NaturalResources Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Finance and Tax Committee, its second of three committees of reference.
The billprovides that land dedicated in perpetuity to retaining the naturalvalue of dry sandy beaches may qualify for a property tax exemption. The billexcludes dry sandy beach parcels fromthe generalrequirement that land must be atleast40 contiguous acres to qualify for a property tax exemption.
It provides thatthe Board of Trustees of the Internal ImprovementTrustFund may expend funds appropriated by the Legislature to acquire lands to protect dry sandy beaches and provide areas, including public parking and ancillary facilities, related to public dry sandy beach access.
The billincreases the number of members of the Acquisition and Restoration Councilfrom10 to 12. Italso adds another member to the Departmentof Environmental Protection’s regional land managementreview team, who mustbe fromthe Office of Coastaland Aquatic Managed Areas.
The billrequires the Board of Trustees of the Internal ImprovementTrust Fund to include dry sandy beaches in its comprehensive, statewide 5-year plan. The billalso requires the Division of State Lands and the Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas to establish a pilotprogram to conductan inventory of existing dry sandy beaches in preparation for an application to Acquisition and Restoration Council.
Note there is no House companion to this bill.
Permits for Drilling, Exploration, and Extraction of Oil and Gas Resources: SB1300 (Sen. Simon) was reported favorably by the Senate Environmentand Natural Resources Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, its second of three committees of reference.
The billamends s.377.242 which regulates permits for drilling or exploring and extracting through wellholes or by other means. Under currentlaw, no structure intended for the drilling for, or production of, oil, gas, or other petroleumproducts may be permitted or constructed within one mile inland from the shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico, the Atlantic Ocean, or any bay or estuary or within one mile of any freshwater lake, river, or streamunless the Departmentof Environmental Protection (DEP) is satisfied that the naturalresources of such bodies of water and shore areas of the state will be adequately protected in the event of accidentor blowout.
The billprovides thatDEP’s determination of whether a resource is adequately protected mustbalance the measures in place to protectthe naturalresources with the potentialharm to the naturalresources. This balancing test should assessthe potential impactof an accidentor a blowouton the naturalresources of such bodies of water and shore areas, including ecological functions and any water quality impacts. The balancing test must consider the ecologicalcommunity’s currentcondition, hydrologic connection, uniqueness, location, fish and wildlife use, time lag, and the potentialcosts of restoration.
A similar bill, HB 1143 (Reps. Shoaf and Tant) was reported favorably by the House Natural Resources &Disasters Subcommittee on March 25 and moves to the House State Affairs Committee, its second and finalcommittee of reference.
This billcontains similar language to SB1300 butalso contains a prohibition againstthe drilling, exploration, or production of oil, gas, or other petroleum products within 10 miles of a nationalestuarine research reserve.
Release of Conservation Easements: SB 1142 (Sen. Rodriguez) was reported favorably by the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its finalcommittee of reference.
The billamends s.704.06 to require a water management to release a conservation easementupon application by the fee simple owner of a parcelof land that is subject to a conservation easementif the following conditions are met:
• the land subject to the easement is less than 15 acres and is bordered on three or more sides by impervious surfaces;
• any undeveloped adjacentparcels of land are less than 15 acres and similarly bordered on three or more sides by impervious surfaces;
• the land contains no historical, architectural, archaeological, or cultural significance;and
• the applicanthas secured sufficient mitigation credits using the uniform mitigation assessment method froma mitigation bank in Florida to offset the loss of wetlands located on the land subject to the conservation easement.
The billalso provides thatupon the water management district’s release of the conservation easement, the ad valorem taxes on the property mustbe based on the justvalue of the property, and the property may be used for developmentthatis consistent with the zoning designation of the adjacent lands.
CS/HB 1175 (Rep. Duggan), which deals with mitigation banking, also includes the above provisions among its changes and is in the House State Affairs Committee, its second and finalcommittee of reference.
Spring Restoration: SB 1228 (Sen. McClain) was reported favorably by the Senate Regulated Industries Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its third and finalcommittee of reference.
The billamends s.403.064 which regulates the reuse of reclaimed water. It provides thata domestic wastewater facility with an approved plan may submita request to the Departmentof Environmental Protection (DEP) to amend the plan to incorporate a reclaimed water project identified in an Outstanding Florida Springs recovery or prevention strategy. DEP mustapprove the requestwithin 60 days after receiptof the request if all the following conditions are met:
• the identified use of reclaimed water willbenefit a ruralarea of opportunity;
• the projectwillprovide at least35 million gallons per day of reclaimed water to benefitan Outstanding Florida Spring;
• the project involves more than one domestic wastewater treatmentfacility;and
• the project implementation and surface water discharge elimination schedule meets the minimum flows and minimum water levels requirements for Outstanding Florida Springs
An identicalbill, HB 691 (Rep. Conerly), was reported favorably by the House State Affairs Committee, its finalcommittee of reference, on March 26 and placed on the House SpecialOrder Calendar for April3.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Unlawful Demolition of Historical Buildings and Structures: SB582 (Sen. Leek) was reported favorably by the Senate GovernmentalOversightand Accountability Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Rules Committee, its third and finalcommittee of reference.
The billamends s.162.09 to authorize a code enforcement board or special magistrate to impose a fine thatexceeds the limits specified in s.162.09 for the demolition of a structure that is individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places or is a contributing resource to a district listed on the National Register. To impose the fine, a code enforcementboard or special magistrate mustfind, based on competent substantialevidence, thatthe demolition of the historic structure was knowing and willfuland notpermitted or the resultof a naturaldisaster. The fine may notexceed 20 percent of the fair or justmarket value of the property as determined by the property appraiser.
HB717 (Rep. Greco), an identicalbill, is in the House State Affairs Committee, its finalof three committees of reference.
HOUSING
Local Housing Assistance Plans: CS/HB701 (Rep. Stark), a delete-allamendment, was reported favorably by the House Housing, Agriculture &TourismSubcommittee on March 26 and moves to the House IntergovernmentalAffairs Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.
The billamends s.420.9072 to allow a local governmentparticipating in the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) to use such funds to provide lotrental assistance to mobile home owners notto exceed six months.
Itamends s.420. 9075 to require each localgovernment participating in SHIPto address in its localhousing assistance plan the needs of persons who are deprived of affordable housing due to the closure of a mobile home park. The billalso requires a local housing assistance plan to include a strategy for providing programfunds to mobile home owners, which mustinclude lotrental assistance. Itspecifies thatlotrental assistance for mobile home owners is an approved home ownership activity and authorizes the use of SHIP funds for rehabilitation and emergency repairs for mobile home owners.
A similar bill, SB1714 (Sen. Burton), is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Community Affairs Committee on March 31.
TRANSPORTATION
Hazardous Walking Conditions: CS/CS/HB85 (Rep. Kendall) was passed by the House on March 26 and is in Messages to the Senate.
The billamends ss.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).
CS/SB650 (Sen. Leek), which also deals with hazardous walking conditions, is in the Senate Appropriations Committee on PreK-12 Education, its second of three committees of reference.
K-12 School Route Optimization Pilot Program: CS/HB1213 (House Education Administration Subcommittee), a proposed committee substitute, was reported favorably by the House Education Administration Subcommittee on March 27 and moves to the House PreK-12 BudgetSubcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.
The billcreates a route optimization pilotprogram in Duval, Highlands, Hillsborough, Okeechobee, and Pasco county school districts to modeland evaluate the efficiencies and financial impacts of different studenttransportation routing scenarios. Itrequires the schooldistricts to use their existing transportation management systemin conjunction with a studenttransportation intelligence platformwith artificial intelligence, if available, to evaluate diverse routing scenarios and optimize student transportation efficiency while maintaining studentsafety. The routing scenario evaluations must include:
• expanding school transportation to students in grades 7-12, if such students are subject to hazardous walking conditions as defined in Florida statute while en route to or fromschool;
• expanding school transportation to students in kindergarten through grade 12 whose homes are more than 1 mile, rather than the current 2-mile requirement, from the nearestappropriate school;
• reducing hazardous walking conditions thatrequire students to walk along a roadway within 4 feetof lanes of traffic, along a roadway thatis 30 miles per hour or greater, in the dark, or along a path where there is nota sidewalk adjacent to the road;and
• dynamically changing routes if a student’s route mustwalk within 3 miles of the residence of a sexual predator or a sexualoffender, as defined in Florida statutes.
The billrequires each schooldistrict to report the costs to implementeach of the requirements and the costsavings, if any, associated with the use of artificialintelligence, including reduction in fueluse, accidents, injuries, the number of buses required to provide transportation, the number or length of routes, and any changes to existing routes based on the use of artificial intelligence or routing scenarios.
The Departmentof Education is required to assist schooldistricts with the implementation of the pilotprogram and submita summary, of the evaluations submitted by each schooldistrictto the legislature by Sept. 1, 2026. The pilot programwill be repealed July 1, 2027.
An identicalbill, SB1424 (Sen. Collins), is in the Education Pre-K-12 Committee, its firstof three committees of reference.
Transportation: CS/SB1662 (Sen. Collins) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 25 and moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development, its second of three committees of reference.
CS/SB1662 addresses various provisions relating to transportation. Specifically, the bill:
• provides position titles for the assistant secretaries of the Florida Departmentof Transportation (FDOT) and authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to appointan Executive Director of Transportation Technology;
• revises provisions regarding the qualifications of Florida Transportation Commission (FTC) members;
• requires the FTC to monitor any transitentity receiving public transitblock grantfunding;
• creates the Florida Transportation Research Institute as a consortiumof higher education professionals to drive cuttingedge research, innovation, transformational technologies, and breakthrough solutions to supportworkforce development efforts thatcontribute to Florida’s transportation industry;
• authorizes certain space-related and commercial shipbuilding projects to receive Florida SeaportTransportation and Economic Development funding;
• requires seaports to submit semiannualreports to FDOT regarding their operations;
• prohibits state funding to a seaportnear certain spaceportterritory unless it agrees to specified land use requirements;
• repeals provisions regarding high-occupancy vehicle lanes, including a related toll exemption;
• authorizes the withholding of state transportation funds to localjurisdictions for traffic signals not in compliance with FDOT’s uniform systemfor traffic control devices;
• requires FDOT to certify private airports of public interest;
• authorizes FDOT to fund certain infrastructure projects associated with spaceports;
• requires airports to provide FDOT with the opportunity to use airportproperty as a staging area during certain declared states of emergency;
• authorizes FDOT to inspectcommercialairportfacilities;
• requires airports to submitannual maintenance reports to FDOT and authorizes FDOT to withhold capital improvement funds if an airportfails to perform routine maintenance;
• authorizes FDOT to fund additional aviation-related workforce development projects;
• makes nonhub airports subject to commercialservice airport transparency and accountability requirements and amends such requirements for allcommercialservice airports;
• requires commercial service airports to notify FDOT after receiving certain communications or directives from the federalgovernmentand following issues or incidents of concern;
• codifies advanced air mobility into Florida law;
• revises FDOT’s authorization regarding public information and education campaigns;
• authorizes FDOT to adopt rules to comply with federaldisadvantaged businessenterprise rules;
• creates the Florida Transportation Academy, within FDOT, to coordinate with certain entities regarding workforce development;
• authorizes FDOT to require the modification of an existing connection to a state road due to safety or operational concerns;
• increases the size of a “small business” as it relates to FDOT’s business developmentprogram;
• repeals FDOT’s disadvantaged business enterprise program;
• authorizes FDOT to require a surety bond in an amount less than the awarded contract price;
• prohibits camping on right-of-way of the State Highway System, excepton the Florida NationalScenic Trailwith the appropriate permit;
• prohibits FDOT fromproviding funds to transportation-related entities for projects or programs thatare inconsistent with the energy policy of the state;
• makes permanent the authorization for the chair and vice chair of the Legislative Budget Commission to approve FDOT work programamendments in certain cases;
• repeals an obsolete reportrequirementrelated to electric vehicle charging infrastructure;
• removes the Legislative Budget Commission’s approvalof emergency loans fromthe State Infrastructure Bank;
• revises and makes permanent FDOT’s Strategic Intermodal Systemsupply chain demands program;
• revises and makes permanent the allocation of unused New Starts Transitfunds to the Strategic IntermodalSystem;
• revises the membership of the Jacksonville Transportation Authority’s governing body;and
• requires the Jacksonville Transportation Authority to post on information on its website regarding on salaries, travel, and contracts and to follow FDOT’s business developmentprogram.
Note that the committee, as part of its amendments to the bill, removed various provisions from the previously proposed bill, including:
• changes relating to the independence of the Florida Transportation Commission;
• transfer of certain sales tax revenues to the State Transportation Trust Fund;
• revisions relating to FDOT’s expenditures on landscaping;and
• additionalfunding for the Small County Road Assistance Programand the Small County Outreach Program.
A similar bill, CS/HB1397 (Reps. Abbottand Bankson), a proposed committee substitute, was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the House Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee on March 25 and moves to the House Transportation & Economic Budget Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference. Note that the committee, among its amendments, also deleted previously proposed language relating to FDOT’s expenditures on landscaping.
Transportation: CS/HB567 (Rep. McFarland), a delete-all amendment, was reported favorably by the House Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee on March 25 and moves to the House Transportation &Economic DevelopmentBudget Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.
CS/HB 567 addresses various provisions relating to transportation. The bill:
• revises provisions regarding metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) to:
o repealthe Metropolitan Planning Organization Advisory Council(MPOAC);
o amend legislative intentregarding MPOs to emphasize: developing multimodal transportation systems, instead of surface transportation systems; and serving the mobility needs of people and freightand fostering economic growth and developmentthroughout the urbanized areas of this state while balancing conservation of natural resources;
o provide thatafter July 1, 2025, no additional MPOs may be designated in Florida except in urbanized areas where the urbanized area is notcontiguous to an urbanized area designated before the 2020 census;
o repealthe requirement thatwhen there is more than one MPO in an urbanized area, the MPOs must consult with every other MPO in the urbanized area and the state to coordinate plans and transportation improvement programs and to ensure consistency in data used in the planning process;
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 mustconsider projects and strategies to reduce traffic and congestion;
o require that Florida Departmentof Transportation (FDOT) to, atleastannually, convene MPOs of similar size, based on population served, to exchange best practices, and authorizes MPOs to develop committees or working groups as needed to accomplish such purpose;
o provide thattraining for new MPO governing board members mustbe provided by FDOT or, atits discretion, by an entity pursuant to a contractwith FDOT, by the Center for Urban Transportation Research atthe University of South Florida, or by the Implementing Solutions for Transportation Research and Evaluation of Emerging Technologies (I-STREET) Living Lab at the University of Florida;
o revise provisions relating to MPO LRTP’s by removing the requirementthatmultiple MPOs within a contiguous urbanized area to coordinate the developmentof LRTPs to be reviewed by the MPOAC;
o include public-private partnerships in the listof innovative financing techniques that MPOs may consider;
o regarding transportation enhancementactivities in the LRTP, include, as appropriate, 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 controlof outdoor advertising as potential transportation enhancementactivities to be addressed;
o authorize each MPO to execute a written agreement with FDOT, which mustbe reviewed, and updated as necessary, every five years, which clearly establishes the cooperative relationship essential to accomplish state and federaltransportation 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 partof its LRTP, in direct coordination with FDOT, to develop targets for each performance measure within the metropolitan planning area and reportprogress toward establishing performance targets for each measure annually in its transportation improvementplan.
• distributes $4.167 million monthly, beginning July 1, 2025, in sales tax revenues to the State Transportation Trust Fund to accountfor the impactof electric and hybrid vehicles;
• requires each county to annually submit specified transportation projectdata to FDOT;
• requires FDOT to implement the Next-Generation Traffic SignalModernization Program, consisting of retrofitting existing traffic signals and controllers and providing a communication backbone for remote operations and management of such signals on the State Highway Systemand nonstate highway system;
• increases maximumallowable speed limits on certain highways by five miles per hour;
• allows a localgovernment to adoptan ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements to operate an electric bicycle and adoptan ordinance requiring an operator of an electric bicycle to possessa government-issued photographic identification while operating the electric bicycle;provides thata local governmentcan provide training on the safe operation of electric bicycles and compliance with traffic laws thatapply to them;
• allows a localgovernment to adoptan ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements to operate a motorized scooter or micromobility device and adoptan ordinance requiring an operator of a motorized scooter or micromobility device to possess a government-issued photographic identification while operating the electric bicycle; provides thata localgovernmentcan provide training on the safe operation of motorized scooters and micromobility devices and compliance with traffic laws thatapply to them;
• requires FDOT, or its authorized agents, to issue an expectantmother parking permitplacard or decalto an expectant mother upon application;
• deletes the existing requirementfor Space Florida to partner with the MPOAC;
• authorizes public-use airports to participate in the federalAirport Investment Partnership Programand make such airports eligible for certain state funds;
• authorizes FDOT to use eminent domain for the advance purchase of property or property rights to preserve a corridor for future proposed improvements;
• amends the membership of the Center for Urban Transportation Research and removes the Center frombeing administered by the Board of Governors of the State University System;
• authorizes FDOT to provide workforce developmentgrants to state colleges and schooldistricts to purchase equipment simulators;recipients mustoffer elective courses in heavy civilconstruction;
• requires certain studies regarding capacity improvements on limited access facilities to evaluate the use of elevated roadways above existing lanes;
• requires certain project developmentand environmental studies to be completed within 18 months;
• revises FDOT’s contracting and bidding process;
• revises provisions related to phased design-build contracts;
• provides additional insurance requirements for bridge-related contracts over navigable waters;
• prohibits FDOT, through the settlement of a bid protest, fromcreating a new contractunless the new contract is competitively procured;
• authorizes FDOT to waive prequalification for certain contracts of $1 million or less;
• requires contractors seeking to bid on certain FDOT maintenance contracts to possessthe qualifications and equipment needed to performsuch work;
• increases threshold amounts for contractdisputes resolved by the State Arbitration Board;
• requires lawsuits related to warranty and construction defect claims made after finalacceptance, mustbe made within 360 days after notification of the claim;
• requires underground utilities within a right-of-way to be electronically detectable using techniques approved by FDOT;
• requires utility owners to pay authorities reasonable damages for failure to or refusal to timely remove or relocate a utility;
• provides requirements for the use of as-builtplans as itrelates to utility work in the right-of-way;
• authorizes FDOT, at its discretion, to provide an incentive to the owner of an electric, natural gas, or water or wastewater utility to facilitate the accelerated completion of utility relocation; such incentive mustbe provided for via a jointagreementbetween FDOT and the utility;
• provides procedures for FDOT and the utility owner to follow related to notice requirements, the submission of relocation plans, and the need for additional work;
• requires FDOT to prioritize projects thataddress gaps in a Strategic Intermodal System corridor so thatthe corridor becomes continuous;
• requires FDOT to develop and submit a reportregarding the widening of Interstate 4 between US 27 in Polk County and I-75 in Hillsborough County; the report is to be submitted to the Governor, Senate Presidentand House Speaker by Dec. 31, 2025;
• requires FDOT to develop and submit a reportthatprovides a comprehensive review of the boundaries of its districts and whether any should be redrawn due to population growth and increased urban density; the report is to be submitted to the Governor, Senate Presidentand House Speaker by Oct. 31, 2025;and
• creates an airportpilot programat the Sarasota Manatee AirportAuthority.
A similar bill, CS/SB462 (Sen. DiCeglie), is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Regulated Industries Committee, its second of three committees of reference, on April1.