Legislative Reporter | March 4

March 4, 2024 | Legislative Reporter

There is one week left in session as it is scheduled to end on March 8.

The number of bills available for lawmakers to consider shrinks this week. House Rule 10.18 says that after the 55th day, the House can no longer take up bills on second reading, meaning any House bill that will get a vote must already have been rolled over to third reading. Much of the final week of session will be taken up with bills that have already passed one chamber or the other and are in messages, or are bouncing back and forth between the chambers as they pass amendments. Any amendments made must be signed off on by the other chamber. The last two days of the session the House may only consider returning messages, conference reports and concurrent resolutions.

There are rule changes affecting amendments that come into play after the 55th day as well, with floor amendments to bills on the special-order calendar required to be filed no later than two hours before the start of session, or 8 am on the day of the session, whichever is earlier, and amendments to floor amendments and substitute amendments required to be filed by an hour after the main floor amendment deadline.

In addition to bills on third reading and messages, the Legislature will have to take up a finalized budget this week.

Pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of the Florida Constitution, “Every bill passed by the legislature shall be presented to the governor for approval and shall become a 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 shall have fifteen consecutive days from the date of presentation to act on the bill.”

Governor DeSantis has begun to receive bills for his action. To follow his actions, go to flgov.com and click on the 2024 Bill Actions icon on the right side of the home page.

The latest Bill Tracking Report as of March 3 can be viewed here. Please review it to see the bills filed that APA Florida is tracking. Note that if you click on the bill number, you will be linked to more information about the bill. If you would like any bills added to this report or would like more information about a specific bill, please contact Stefanie Svisco at ssvisco@floridaplanning.org

Note that the following bill was passed out of both the House and Senate this past week:

• Affordable Housing: SB 328ER (Sen. Calatayud)

The following bills of particular interest had action this past week.

Please 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. For brevity, bills impacting the Florida Statutes will look like s.XXX.XXX(x). We will note the chapter when required.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT

Counties Designated as Areas of Critical State Concern: CS/CS/SB 1456 (Sen. Rodriguez) was reported favorably by the Senate Appropriations Committee on Feb. 27 and subsequently passed by the Senate on Feb. 29. It has been placed on the House Special Order Calendar for March 4. The vote was 39 Yeas/0 Nays.

The bill makes the following changes to current law, applying specifically to the Florida Keys or the City of Key West Areas of Critical State Concern:

• amends s.380.0552 to make changes related to local comprehensive plan requirements. It provides that mobile home residents are not considered permanent residents for purposes of hurricane evacuation clearance time. Additionally, it specifies that the City of Key West Area of Critical State Concern must be included in the Department of Commerce’s hurricane evacuation study and is subject to 24-hour evacuation requirements;

• authorizes land authorities to require compliance with income limitations on land conveyed for affordable housing by memorializing the original land authority funding or contribution in a recordable perpetual deed restriction:

o if a purchase receives state or federal funding that requires a priority lien position over the land authority deed restriction, the land authority funding or contribution may be subordinate to a first purchase money mortgage and the state or federal funding lien.

• exempts a county or municipality whose land has been designated by the legislature as an area of critical state concern within the past five years, and for which the legislature has declared an intent to provide affordable housing, from a requirement to specified portions of the local housing assistance trust fund to aid very-low-income and low-income persons:

o this provision expires on July 1, 2029, and applies retroactively.

• allows a county that has been designated as an area of critical state concern and that levies a tourist development tax and a tourist impact tax to use the accumulated surplus from those taxes incurred through Sept. 30, 2024, for affordable housing:

o the expenditure of funds cannot exceed $35 million and is subject to approval by a majority vote of the board of county commissioners;

o affordable housing must be available to employees of private sector tourism-related businesses in the county; and

o any housing financed from the accumulated surplus must be used to provide affordable housing for no less than 99 years.

A similar bill, CS/CS/CS/HB 1297 (Rep. Mooney, Jr.), was temporarily postponed on Second Reading on March 1.

Everglades Protection Area: CS/CS/SB 1364 (Sen. Calatayud) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 26 and placed on the Senate Special Order Calendar for March 4.

The bill amends s.163.3184 to require any proposed plan or plan amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1) (i.e., Miami-Dade County) or any municipality located therein, applying to land within, or within two miles of, the Everglades Protection Area to be reviewed pursuant to the State Coordinated Review Process.

Under the bill, the Florida Department of Environmental Protections (DEP) must determine whether the proposed plan or plan amendment, or any portion thereof, will adversely impact the Everglades Protection Area or the

Everglades restoration and protection objectives identified in s.373.4592. DEP must issue a written determination to the Department of Commerce, and the local government, within 30 days after receipt of the proposed plan or plan amendment:

• the determination must identify any adverse impacts and may be provided as part of DEP’s reviewing comments;

• before adoption of the proposed plan or plan amendment, DEP must coordinate with the Department of Commerce and the local government to identify any planning strategies or measures that the local government could include in the proposed plan or plan amendment to eliminate or mitigate any adverse impacts to the Everglades Protection Area or the Everglades restoration and protection objectives identified in s.373.4592; and

• if DEP determines that any portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment will adversely impact the Everglades Protection Area or the Everglades restoration and protection objectives identified in s.373.4592 the local government must modify that portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment to include planning strategies or measures to eliminate or mitigate such adverse impacts before adopting the proposed plan or plan amendment, or that portion of the proposed plan or plan amendment may not be adopted.

The bill provides that comprehensive plan amendments that apply to any land within, or within two miles of, the Everglades Protection Area must be transmitted within 10 working days after the second public hearing to DEP. It also provides that the act may not be construed to limit the Right to Farm Act.

It also amends s.163.3187 to:

• clarify that site-specific text changes relating directly to, and adopted simultaneously with, a small-scale future land use map amendment is permissible under that section;

• provide that a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment is not permitted for property that is the subject of a proposed amendment by a county as defined in s.125.011(1) (i.e., Miami-Dade County) or any municipality within, that is located in whole or in part, or within two miles of the Everglades Protection Area (committee amendment);

• provide that within 10 days after the adoption of a small-scale development amendment, a county whose boundaries include any portion of the Everglades Protection Area, and the municipalities within the county, must transmit a copy of the amendment to the Department of Commerce for recordkeeping purposes; and

• provide that the act may not be construed to limit the Right to Farm Act

A similar bill, HB 723 (Rep. Busatta Cabrera), is in the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Subcommittee, its second of three committees of reference.

Expedited Approval of Residential Building Permits: CS/CS/CS/SB 812E1 (Sen. Ingoglia) was passed unanimously, reflecting an amendment on Second Reading, by the Senate on Feb. 28 and has been referred to the House Calendar.

The amended bill creates s.177.073 relating to the expedited approval of residential building permits before a final plat is recorded. It provides definitions for the following terms: applicant, final plat, local building official, plans, preliminary plat and qualified contractor.

By Oct. 1, 2024, the bill requires a governing body of a county that has 75,000 residents or more and any governing body of a municipality that has 10,000 residents or more and 25 acres or more of contiguous land that the local government has designated in the local comprehensive plan and future land use map as land that is agricultural or to be developed for residential purpose shall create a program to expedite the process for issuing building permits for residential subdivisions or planned communities before a final plat is recorded with the clerk of the circuit court. (The criteria of 10,000 residents was added on Second Reading).

The expedited process must include an application for an applicant to identify up to 50 percent of planned homes, or the number of building permits, that the governing body must issue for the residential subdivision or planned community:

• a local government may issue building permits that exceed 50 percent of the residential subdivision or planned community;

• the application or the local government’s final approval may not alter or restrict the applicant from receiving the number of building permits requested, so long as the request does not exceed 50 percent of the planned homes of the residential subdivision or planned community or the number of building permits; and

• this provision does not apply to a county subject to s.380.0552.

If a governing body had a program in place before July 1, 2023, to expedite the building permit process, the bill requires such governing body to only update their program to approve an applicant’s written application to issue up to 50 percent of the building permits for the residential subdivision or planned community. However, such a local government may issue building permits that exceed 50 percent of the residential subdivision or planned community.

By Dec. 31, 2027, the bill requires a governing body of a county that has 75,000 residents or more and any governing body of a municipality that has 10,000 residents or more and 25 acres or more of contiguous land that the local government has designated in the local comprehensive plan and future land use map as land that is agricultural or to be developed for residential purpose to update its expedited process to contain an application that allows an applicant to request an increased percentage of up to 75 percent of building permits for planned homes that the local governing body must issue for the residential subdivision or planned community

The bill requires a governing body to create:

• a two-step application process for the adoption of a preliminary plat, inclusive of any plans, in order to expedite the issuance of building permits related to such plats. The application must allow an applicant to identify the percentage of planned homes, or the number of building permits, that the governing body must issue for the residential subdivision or planned community indicated in the preliminary plat;

• a master building permit process consistent with existing master building permit application requirements for applicants seeking multiple building permits for residential subdivisions or planned communities:

o provides that a master building permit issued pursuant to this requirement is valid for three consecutive years after its issuance or until the adoption of a new Florida Building Code, whichever is earlier; and

o after a new Building Code is adopted, the applicant may apply for a new master building permit, which, upon approval, is valid for three consecutive years.

Applicants arepermitted to usea private provider to expedite the application process. The governingbodyis required to establish aregistryof at least three qualified contractors whom can beused to supplement staffresources for processing and expediting preliminaryplats andrelatedplans.However, a qualified contractorwho is hired toreview an application, or any part thereof., maynot have a conflict of interest, as defined in s.112.312,with the applicant

A governing body is allowed to work with appropriate local government agencies to issue an address and a temporary parcel identification number for lot lines and lot sizes based on the metes and bounds of the plat contained in an application.

In accordance with the timelines above, the bill requires the governing body to issue the number or percentage of building permits requested by an applicant, provided the residential buildings or structures are unoccupied and all of the following conditions are met:

• the governing body has approved a preliminary plat for each residential subdivision or planned community;

• theapplicantprovidesprooftothegoverningbody that theapplicanthasprovided acopyoftheapproved preliminaryplat,alongwiththeapprovedplans,totherelevantelectric,gas,water,andwastewaterutilities; and

• the applicant holds a valid performance bond for up to 130 percent of the necessary improvements that have not been completed upon submission of the application under this section. For purposes of a master planned community, a valid performance bond is required on a phase-by-phase basis.

Applicants are allowed to contract to sell, but not transfer ownership of, a residential structure or building located in the residential subdivision or planned community until the final plat is approved by the governing body and recorded in the public records by the clerk of the circuit court.

Applicants are prohibited from obtaining a temporary or final certificate of occupancy for each residential structure or building for which a building permit is issued until the final plat is approved by the governing body and recorded in the public records by the clerk of the circuit court.

The bill provides that an applicant has a vested right in a preliminary plat that has been approved by a governing body if all of the following conditions are met:

• the applicant relies in good faith on the approved preliminary plat or any amendments thereto; and

• the applicant incurs obligations and expenses, commences construction of the residential subdivision or planned community, and is continuing in good faith with the development of the property.

The bill provides that upon the establishment of an applicant’s vested rights, a governing body may not make substantive changes to the preliminary plat without the applicant’s written consent.

It also requires an applicant to indemnify and hold harmless the local government, its governing body, its agents, and its employees from liability or damages resulting from:

• theissuanceofabuildingpermitorthe construction,reconstruction,orimprovementorrepairof aresidential buildingorstructure,includinganyassociatedutilities,locatedintheresidentialsubdivisionorplanned community;and

• theissuanceofacertificateofoccupancyforaresidentialbuildingorstructurethatisconstructed,reconstructed, improved,orrepairedbeforetheapprovalandrecordationofthefinalplatofthequalifiedproject.

This indemnification includes, but is not limited to, any liability and damage resulting from wind, fire, flood, construction defects, bodily injury, and any actions, issues, or disputes arising out of a contract or other agreement between the developer and a utility operating in the residential subdivision or planned community. However, this indemnification does not extend to governmental actions that infringe on the applicant’s vested rights.

Asimilarbill,CS/CS/HB665(Rep.McClain),wastemporarilypostponedbytheHouseonSecondReadingon Feb.29.

Local Government Actions: CS/CS/SB 1628E1 (Sen. Collins) was passed, as amended on Second Reading, by the Senate on March 1. The vote was 30 Yeas/1 Nay. The bill is in Messages to the House.

The bill amends ss.125.66 and 166.041 to amend the exemptions to the requirement that counties and cities, respectively, produce or have produced a “business impact estimate” prior to passing an ordinance.

Whereas current law exempts the entirety of growth policy, county and municipal planning, and land development regulations under Part II of Chapter 163 the bill limits this exemption to development orders, permits, and agreements. This requirement does not apply to those comprehensive plan amendments and development regulation amendments initiated by an application of a private party other than the county or municipality.

It was amended on Second Reading to require that that if a bond issue amount is greater than $500 million, the required bond referendum must be held at a general election.

CS/HB 1547 (Rep. McClure), which also deals with similar issues, is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Millage Rates: CS/CS/CS/HB 1195E1 (Rep. Garrison), was passed by the House, reflecting an amendment on Second Reading, on March 1 and has been referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The vote was 85 Yeas/21 Nays.

The bill provides that a two-thirds vote of the governing body of a county, municipality, or independent special district is required to pass any millage rate increase, other than a millage rate increase that already requires a threefourths, unanimous vote, or approval in a referendum under current law.

The bill was amended on Second Reading to authorize the Department of Revenue to adopt emergency rules to implement the bill while permanent rules are being adopted.

A similar bill, CS/SB1322(Sen. Ingoglia), is in theSenate Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference.

Public Works Projects: CS/HB 705E1 (Rep. Shoaf) was passed by the House, reflecting an amendment on Second Reading, on Feb. 28 and has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee. The vote was 80 Yeas/32 Nays.

Current law prohibits the state or any political subdivision that contracts for a public works project using state appropriated funds from imposing certain requirements on contractors for public works projects, with certain exceptions. Current law defines “public works project” as an activity that is paid for with any state-appropriated funds and that consists of the construction, maintenance, repair, renovation, remodeling, or improvement of a building, road, street, sewer, storm drain, water system, site development, irrigation system, reclamation project, gas or electrical distribution system, gas or electrical substation, or other facility, project, or portion thereof owned in whole or in part by any political subdivision.

The bill amends s.255.0992 to revise the definition of the term “public works project” to include all projects paid for with local funds in addition to state funds.

The bill was amended on Second Reading to:

• specify that the term does not include the provision of goods, services, or work incidental to the public works project, such as the provision of security services, janitorial services, landscaping services, maintenance services, transportation services, or other services that do not require a construction contracting license or involve supplying or carrying construction materials for a public works project; and

• maintain the ability for municipalities and counties to preclude certain contractors from bidding on a public works project based on the geographic location of the contractor’s headquarters or offices, if the project is paid solely with local funds.

CS/SB 742 (Sen. Grall), an identical bill, was temporarily postponed on Second Reading on March 1 but was retained on the Special Order Calendar.

Residential Building Permits: CS/CS/CS SB 684 (Sen. DiCeglie) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 26.

The Senate Rules Committee:

• removed bill provisions requiring local governments to create a program to expedite issuance of building permits based on a preliminary plat; and

• removed the bill provision which reverts the definition of “windborne debris region” to the definition in the previous version of the Florida Building Code.

The amended bill revises s.553.73 to require the Florida Building Commission to modify Section 505 of the 8th edition Building Code to state that sealed drawings by a design professional may not be required for the replacement of windows, doors, or garage doors.

It amends s.553.79 to remove provisions which require single-family residential dwelling permits to be issued within 30 days unless the application does not conform to the Building Code or local laws or ordinances. However, the bill incorporates the time period to review single-family residential dwellings into s.553.792.

Additionally, the bill amends s.553.791 to require a local government to issue a permit or provide written notice of plan deficiencies within 12 business days after receipt of a permit application that is accompanied by the required affidavit in s.553.791(6) prepared by a private provider who is a licensed engineer or architect:

• the local building official must provide with specificity the plan’s deficiencies, the reasons the permit application failed, and the applicable codes being violated in such written notice;

• if the local building official does not provide specific written notice to the permit applicant within the 12-day period, the permit application is deemed approved as a matter of law, and the permit must be issued by the local building official on the next business day;

• defines the term “private provider firm” for purposes of allowing local governments to establish a registration system to verify private provider licensure requirements;

• provides that a local government may not audit the performance of building code inspection services by private providers until the local government has created a manual for standard operating procedures for staff performing such audits. The manual must include, at a minimum, the audit purpose and scope, audit criteria, an explanation of processes and objectives, and detailed findings of area of noncompliance;

• the manual must be publicly available online or the printed manual must be readily accessible in building department offices, and the audit results of the staff for the prior two quarters must be publicly available;

• a local government’s private provider audit processes must adhere to the local government’s posted standard operating audit procedures; and

• a local government may not audit the same private provider more than four times in a year, as opposed to four times in a month provided in current law.

It also amends s.553.792 to modify the timeframes for which local governments must process building permit applications. The bill requires a local government to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a building permit application after receipt of a completed and sufficient application within the following timeframes, unless the applicant waives such timeframes in writing within:

• 30 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits for structures less than 7,500 square feet: residential units including a single-family residential unit or a single-family residential dwelling, accessory structure, alarm, electrical, irrigation, landscaping, mechanical, plumbing, or roofing;

• 60 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits for structures of 7,500 square feet or greater: residential units including a single-family residential unit or a single-family residential dwelling, accessory structure, alarm, electrical, irrigation, landscaping, mechanical, plumbing, or roofing;

• 60 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits: signs or nonresidential buildings less than 25,000 square feet;

• 120 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a local government plans reviewer to obtain the following building permits: multifamily residential not exceeding 50 units; site plan approvals and subdivision plats not requiring public hearing or public notice; and lot grading and site alteration;

• 15 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant using a master building permit consistent with s.553.794 to obtain a site-specific building permit; and

• 10 business days after receiving a complete and sufficient application, for an applicant for a single-family residential dwelling applied for by a contractor licensed in this state on behalf of a property owner who participates in a Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery program administered by the Department of Commerce, unless the permit application fails to satisfy the Florida Building Code or the enforcing agency’s laws or ordinances.

These timeframes do not apply if the timeframes set by local ordinances that are more stringent than the timeframes provided in the bill. Additionally, the local government may not require a permit applicant to waive the permit processing timeframes as a condition to review an application for a building permit.

A local government is required to provide written notice to a building permit applicant within five business days after receipt of the application advising the applicant what information, if any, is needed to deem or determine that the application is properly complete:

• if the local government does not provide timely written notice that the applicant has not submitted the properly completed application, the application is automatically deemed or determined to be property completed and accepted

If a local government fails to meet a deadline provided in the bill, it must reduce the building permit fee by 10 percent, based on the original amount of the permit fee, for each business day that it fails to meet the deadline, unless the parties agree in writing to a reasonable extension of time, the delay is caused by the applicant, or the delay is attributable to a force majeure or other extraordinary circumstances.

However, a local government need not reduce building permit fees if the local government provides written notice to the applicant within the applicable timeframes specifically stating the reasons the permit application is deficient. If the applicant submits revisions within 10 business days after receiving the written notice, the local government has 10 business days after receiving such revisions to approve or deny the permit unless the applicant agrees to a longer period in writing. If the local government fails to issue or deny the permit within 10 business days after receiving revisions, it must reduce the building permit fee by 20 percent for each business day it fails to meet the deadline unless the applicant agrees to a longer period in writing.

The bill removes from current law the schedule for which local governments may make up to three requests for additional information from an applicant.

It also amends s.553.80 to specify that local governments may use fees, and any related fines or investment earnings, they have collected for enforcing the Building Code to upgrade technology hardware and software systems used to enforce the Building Code.

A similar bill, CS/CS/CS/HB 267E1 (Rep. Esposito) is on the House Calendar for Third Reading on March 4.

Term Limits: CS/CS/SB 438 (Sen. Ingoglia) was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 26.

The bill previously imposed 8-year term limits. Now the amended bill creates s.124.012 to require the following counties to hold a referendum at the 2024 general election to determine whether to adopt eight-year term limits for county commissioners:

• non-charter counties;

• charter counties whose charter does not impose term limits on county commissioners as of July 1, 2024; and

• charter counties whose charter, as of July 1, 2024, imposes term limits longer than 8 consecutive years

Charter counties with existing 8-year term limits are not required to hold the referendum.

The bill specifies implementing provisions for counties that adopt 8-year term limits pursuant to the bill, including:

• clarification that existing statutory provisions governing decennial redistricting will still apply; and

• a requirement that a county commissioner who completes 8 years of consecutive service must then sit out for 2 years before running for another county commission seat, including a different district seat or at-large seat.

In a county without existing term limits which adopts new eight-year term limits pursuant to this bill, for sitting commissioners, the bill provides that service in a term that begins before the 2026 general election will not count toward the new term limits.

The bill provides for applicability of its provisions to charter counties with existing 12-year term limits. Specifically, in a charter county with existing 12-year term limits which adopts eight-year term limits pursuant to this bill, a sitting commissioner will be able to serve out however much time remains in his or her 12 years. The 12 years will neither be cut short nor extended by the change to 8-year term limits. A county commissioner who is first elected after the 2024 general election will be subject to the 8-year term limits.

It also:

• prohibits future referendums related to term limits of county commissioners, except that a county which rejects the referendum at the 2024 general election may, at any general election in the future, again put to the voters the question of 8-year term limits for county commissioners; and

• specifies that s.106.113 an existing statutory prohibition against the use of public funds by local governments to advocate for or against a ballot issue, applies to a referendum conducted pursuant to the bill’s provisions.

CS/CS/HB 57 (Rep. Salzman), which was similar to CS/CS/SB 438 before its recent amendments, is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Economic Development: CS/HB 141 (Rep. Abbott) was passed by the House on March 1 and referred to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee. The vote was 112 Yeas/0 Nays.

The bill eliminates several requirements related to the Regional Rural Development Grants Program:

• removes the requirements for grant funds received by a regional development organization to be matched each year by nonstate resources in an amount equal to 25 percent of the state contributions;

• removes the requirement for local governments and private businesses to make financial or in-kind commitments to the regional organization; and

• removes the requirement that the DOC consider the demonstrated need of the applicant for assistance when approving participants for the program.

The bill also allows Triumph Gulf Coast, Inc., to retain interest earned on the funds in its trust account rather than having those funds revert to the Triumph Gulf Coast Trust Fund. The funds held are required to be used to make awards or for administrative costs.

A similar bill, CS/SB 196 (Sen. Simon), is on the Senate Special Order Calendar for March 4.

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Energy Resources: CS/CS/HB 1645E1 (Rep. Payne) was passed, reflecting amendments on Second Reading, by the House on March 1 and has been referred to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee. The vote was 88 Yeas/19 Nays.

The bill amends several sections of Florida law and creates new statutory provisions relating to energy resources. Among these amendments are the following which:

• creates s.163.3210 which provides that a resiliency facility is a permitted use in all commercial, industrial, and manufacturing land use categories in a local government comprehensive plan and all commercial, industrial, and manufacturing districts:

o such facilities must comply with setback and landscape criteria that would apply to other similar uses;

o local governments may adopt ordinances specifying buffer and landscaping requirements for these facilities, provided that the requirements do not exceed requirements for similar uses involving the construction of other facilities that are permitted uses in commercial, industrial, and manufacturing land use categories and zoning districts;

o provides that, after July 1, 2024, local governments may not amend their comprehensive plans, land use maps, zoning districts, or land development regulations in a manner that would conflict with a resiliency facility’s classification as a permitted and allowable use, including but not limited to an amendment that causes a resiliency facility to be a non-conforming use, structure or development; and

o defines “resiliency facility” to mean a facility owned and operated by a public utility for the purposes of assembling, creating, holding, securing, or deploying natural gas reserves for temporary use during a system outage or natural disaster.

• adds “development districts” to s.366.032 that prohibits a municipality, county, special district, or other political subdivision of the state from enacting or enforcing a resolution, ordinance, rule, code, or policy or taking any action that restricts or prohibits or has the effect of restricting or prohibiting the types or fuel sources of energy production which may be used, delivered, converted, or supplied by utilities, gas districts, natural gas transmission companies, and certain liquefied petroleum gas dealers, dispensers, and cylinder exchange operators;

• adds “development districts” to a provision in 366.032 F.S. that prohibits a municipality, county, special district, or other political subdivision of the state from restricting or prohibiting the use of an appliance using the fuels or energy types supplied by the entities above;

• prohibits the following the construction or expansion of:

o offshore wind energy facilities;

o wind turbines or wind energy facility located on real property within one mile of the state’s coastline;

o wind turbine or wind energy facility on real property within one mile of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway or Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (Added on Second Reading); and

o the construction or expansion of a wind turbine or wind energy facility on waters of the state and any submerged lands.

• provides that this does not prohibit:

o affixation of a wind turbine directly a vessel for the purpose of providing power to electronic equipment located onboard the vessel; and

o operation of a wind turbine installed before July 1, 2024.(Added on Second Reading).

• provides that department shall review all applications for federal wind energy leases in the territorial waters of the United States adjacent to waters of this state and shall signify its approval of or objection to each application; and

• provides that the department may bring an action for injunctive relief against any person who owns, constructs, or operates an offshore wind energy facility or a wind turbine in this state in violation of this section.

A similar bill, CS/CS/SB 1624 (Sen. Collins), was reported favorably by the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 27 and placed on the Senate Special Order Calendar for March 5.

Environmental Management: CS/CS/CS/SB738E1(Sen. Burgess), was passedby theSenate, reflecting an amendment on Second Reading,on Feb. 29. The vote was 26Yeas/7Nays. The bill isnow inMessages to the House.

The bill requires the side slopes of nonindustrial stormwater management systems, in or adjacent to residential or urban areas that are accessible to the general public, to be designed with a horizontal-to-vertical ratio no steeper than 4:1 to a depth of at least two feet below the control elevation and be stabilized with vegetation. The bill provides an exception if the slope incorporates erosion and sediment control best management practices.

A Second Reading amendment deleted a requirement that, in order to meet the exception, the system also must be fenced, greenscaped, or have other barriers installed to prevent accidental incursion into the system.

The bill supersedes all side slope rules that have been adopted by the Department of Environment Protection (DEP), water management districts (WMD), or delegated programs as of July 1, 2024.

In addition, the bill clarifies that causes of action under the Water Quality Assurance Act must be limited to damages to real or personal property directly resulting from pollution that was not authorized by any government approval or permit. The bill provides that the strict liability exceptions to such causes of action include those specified in s.376.82 regarding the rehabilitation of a brownfields site.

An identical bill, CS/CS/HB 789 (Rep. Overdorf), is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Mitigation: CS/CS/CS/SB 1532 (Sen. Brodeur) was passed by the Senate on Feb. 28 and has been placed on the House Special Order Calendar for March 4. The vote was 39 Yeas/0 Nays. A similar bill, CS/CS/HB 1073 (Rep. Truenow), is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

CS/CS/CS/SB 1532 expands the water quality enhancement credit program to allow private entities to purchase credits. Specifically, the bill provides that water quality enhancement credits may be sold to governmental entities seeking to meet an assigned basin management action plan allocation or reasonable assurance plan or to private or governmental applicants for the purpose of achieving net improvement or meeting environmental resource permit performance standards.

Regarding mitigation banking, the bill allows limited use of local government land for private mitigation banks, provided that the private mitigation banks are located in credit-deficient basins and would produce certain habitat type credits that are unavailable or insufficient in such basins. A local government with land in a credit-deficient basin may consider a proposal from a private entity for the right to establish a mitigation bank on the local government land, including such lands purchased for conservation purposes, provided acquisition encumbrances do not exist to the contrary. The bill provides that if such a mitigation bank is to be established and operated on local government land, the local government and private applicant must enter into a use agreement that meets certain requirements. The bill does not apply to lands owned by the state or a water management district

The bill providesthat, in determiningthe numberof mitigation bank credits to be awarded toa mitigation bank established pursuant to thissubsection, theproposed mitigation bank’s location in or adjacent to the local government conservation lands maynot increase the uniformmitigation assessment method location factor assessment and scoring value, even if the conservationstatus of the mitigationbank land is improved due tosuch location.

The bill also does the following:

• clarifies that water quality enhancement areas (WQEAs) are a valuable tool in providing net improvement of the water quality in a receiving waterbody that does not meet standards or in satisfying environmental resource permit performance standards;

• changes the definition of “applicant” to mean a governmental entity seeking to purchase WQEA credits to meet an assigned basin management action plan or reasonable assurance plan or a governmental entity or a private sector entity that seeks to purchase WQEA credits to achieve net improvement or satisfy environmental resource permit performance standards;

• provides that applicants may purchase WQEA credits to address impacts of activities regulated under ss.373.403 - 373.443 instead of the entire Part IV of Chapter 373 as this section currently provides;

• provides that WQEA credits may be sold to governmental entities seeking to meet allocations under a basin management action plan or reasonable assurance plan, or to applicants (private and government) to achieve net improvement or meet environmental resource permit performance standards; and

• provides that WQEAs must be used to address contributions of one or more pollutants or other constituents in the watershed, basin, sub-basin, targeted restoration DEP, in which the WQEA is located that do not meet applicable state water quality standards or environmental resource permit performance standards.

Saltwater Intrusion Vulnerability Assessments: CS/SB 298E1 (Sen. Polsky) was passed, reflecting amendments on Second Reading, by the Senate on March 1 and is in Messages to the House. The vote was 26 Yeas/0 Nays.

The bill amends the Resilient Florida Grant Program to authorize DEP to provide grants, beginning July 1, 2025, to coastal counties to conduct vulnerability assessments analyzing the effects of saltwater intrusion on their water supplies and the preparedness to respond to such a threat. Each vulnerability assessment must include an analysis of all of the following information:

• the coastal county’s primary water utilities;

• current maps of the coastal county’s freshwater wellfields and latest saltwater intrusion impact lines;

• projections of saltwater intrusion over the next decade, including specific wells that may be impacted during that timeframe; and

• the costs necessary to relocate freshwater wellfields that are anticipated to be impacted, including current projects that are underway to relocate the freshwater wellfields.

The bill also requires DEP to do all of the following:

• use the information contained in a coastal county’s saltwater intrusion vulnerability assessment to update its Comprehensive Statewide Flood Vulnerability and Sea Level Rise Data Set;

• make publicly available on DEP’s website any appropriate information from a saltwater intrusion vulnerability assessment it receives from coastal counties; and

• provide 50 percent cost-share funding up to $250,000 for each grant awarded under this section of the Resilient Florida Grant Program. A coastal county with a population of 50,000 or less is not required to contribute to the cost share.

Note that the bill was amended on the floor to delete previously proposed language that provided that:

• a coastal county or coastal municipality may not establish local coastal construction zoning and building codes unless such zones and codes were approved in writing by DEP on or before Dec. 1, 2023, and exceptions to such locally established zones and codes may not be granted unless approved by DEP before Dec. 1, 2023; and

• DEP could not delegate authority for permitting certain activities to a coastal county or coastal municipality that did not receive local coastal construction zoning and building code exceptions to the coastal control line on or before Dec. 1, 2023

A similar bill, HB 1079 (Rep. McFarland), is in the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Committee, its second of three committees of reference.

HOUSING

Affordable Housing: SB 328ER (Sen. Calatayud) was passed by the Senate on Feb. 7. On Feb. 28, the House substituted it for HB 1239 and passed it. The vote was 112 Yeas/1 Nay.

The bill amends various provisionsof the Live LocalAct (act), passed during the 2023 Regular Session,whichmade substantial changes andadditionsto affordable housingrelated programs and policies at both thestate and local level.

As it pertains to the act’s preemption of certain local zoning and land use regulations to expedite development of affordable housing, the bill:

• prohibits local government from restricting the density of a proposed development authorized under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7) below the highest currently allowed density on land where residential development is allowed under the land development regulations:

o the term “highest currently allowed density” does not include the density of any development that met the requirements of this subsection or the density of any development which has received any bonus, variance, or other special exception for density provided in the land development regulations as an incentive for development.

• prohibits local government from restricting the floor area ratio of a proposed development authorized under s.125.01055(7) or s.166.04151(7) below 150 percent of the highest currently allowed floor area ratio on land where development is allowed under the land development regulations:

o the term “highest currently allowed floor area ratio” does not include the floor area ratio of any development that met the requirements of this subsection or the floor area ratio of any development which has received any bonus, variance, or other special exception for floor area ratio provided in the land development regulations as an incentive for development. For purposes of this subsection, the term floor area ratio includes floor lot ratio.

• clarifiesthatthe term“highestcurrentlyallowedheight”doesnotincludetheheightofanydevelopmentthatmet therequirementsofthissubsectionor theheightofanydevelopmentwhichhasreceivedanybonus,variance,or otherspecialexceptionforheightprovidedinlanddevelopmentregulationsasanincentivefordevelopment;

• provides that if the proposed development is adjacent to, on two or more sides, a parcel zoned for singlefamily residential use that 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 adjacent property, the highest currently allowed height for the property allowed in the land development regulations or 3 stories, whichever is higher:

o the term “adjacent to” means those properties sharing more than one point of a property line, but does not include properties separated by a public road.

• prohibits qualifying developments within one-quarter mile of a military installation from utilizing the act’s administrative approval process;

• exempts certain airport impacted areas from the act’s provisions;

• requires developments authorized under the act be treated as a conforming use even after expiration of the development’s affordability period and after the expiration of the applicable statutes;

• modifiesparkingreductionrequirementsforqualifyingdevelopmentslocatednearcertaintransportationfacilities;

• requires local governments to publish on its website a policy containing procedures and expectations for the administrative approval of qualifying developments;

• clarifies that only the affordable units in a qualifying development must be rental units;

• requiresaqualifyingdevelopmentwithinatransit-orienteddevelopmentorareatobemixed-useresidential;and

• allows applicantsfora proposeddevelopment authorized unders.125.01055(7)ors.166.04151(7), who submitted an application,written request ornotice to utilize these provisionsand the requestwasreceived by the local government before the effective date of the bill,can notify the local government by July 1,2024 that they want toproceed under the provisions as they existed at the time of submittal. Local government must also give the applicant an opportunity tosubmit arevised application etc. to account for thechangesin the bill.

As it pertains to the act’s ad valorem tax exemption for newly constructed multifamily developments, the bill makes the following changes:

• requires more than 10 units, rather than 70 units, to be set aside for income-limited persons and families in Florida Keys to qualify for the exemption;

• clarifies that the Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (FHFC) duties are ministerial in certifying eligibility for exemption, while local property appraisers maintain authority to grant tax exemptions; and

• outlines the method for property appraisers to determine values of tax-exempt units and deletes previously proposed language which identified criteria for a required market value analysis.

The bill also appropriates, for the 2024-25 fiscal year, $100 million in non-recurring funds from the state’s allocation from the federal Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund in the General Revenue Fund to the FHFC to implement the Florida Hometown Hero Program and makes one programmatic change, and expands the authority for the FHFC to preclude developers from participating in its programs for certain violations.

Housing for Legally Verified Agricultural Workers: CS/SB 1082 (Sen. Collins) was passed by the Senate on Feb. 29 and has been placed on the House Special Order Calendar for March 4. The vote was 34 Yeas/0 Nays.

The bill amends s.163.3162 to define “legally verified agricultural worker” as a person who:

• is lawfully present in the United States;

• hasbeenverifiedthroughtheprocessprovidedins.488.095andisauthorizedtoworkatthetimeofemployment;

• is seasonally or annually employed in bona fide agricultural production; and

• remains lawfully present and authorized to work throughout the duration of that employment.

It defines “housing site” as the totality of development supporting authorized housing, including buildings, mobile homes, barracks, dormitories used as living quarters, parking areas, common areas such as athletic fields or playgrounds, storage structures, and other related structures.

Additionally, it provides that a governmental entity may not adopt or enforce any legislation which inhibits the construction or installation of housing for legally verified agricultural employees on land classified as agricultural use and operated as a bona fide farm, except as provided in the bill.

The bill requires that a housing site authorized under this section:

• must meet all local and state building standards, including standards regulated by the Department of Health and federal standards for H-2A visa housing:

o if written notice of intent is required to be submitted to the Department of Health, the appropriate governmental entity with jurisdiction over the agricultural lands may also require submittal of a copy of the written notice.

• must be maintained in a neat, orderly, and safe manner;

• must have structures containing dwelling units placed a minimum of 10 feet apart;

• may not exceed square footage of 1.5 percent of the property’s area or 35,000 square feet, whichever is less, for the square footage of the housing site’s climate-controlled facilities;

• must provide 50-foot setbacks on all sides:

o an internal project driveway may be located in the required yard space if the yard is adjacent to a public roadway or to property that is under common ownership with the housing site.

• may not be located less than 250 feet from a property line adjacent to property zoned for residential use:

o if located less than 500 feet of a property line, must provide screening, consisting of tree, wall, berm or fence coverage of specified sizes and opacity, between the housing site and any residentially developed adjacent parcels under different ownership.

• must cover access drives with dust-free material such as packed shell or gravel or similar material.

Furthermore, the bill provides that a local ordinance adopted pursuant to this section must comply with state and federal regulations for migrant farmworker housing, including rules adopted by the Department of Health pursuant to ss.381.008 – 381.00897 and federal regulations under the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act or the H-2A visa program. The bill also provides that a local government may validly adopt less restrictive land use regulations.

It also provides that, beginning July 1, 2024, a property owner must maintain records of all permits for such housing for three years, and make the records available for inspection within 14 days.

If,foranyreason,ahousingsiteisnotusedforagriculturalworkersforlongerthan365days,structuresusedasdwelling unitsmustberemovedwithin180days afternoticefromthelocalgovernmentunlessthepropertyownerdemonstrates thatitsintendedusewillresumewithin90days.Ifthepropertyceasestobeclassifiedasagricultural,housingestablished underthissectionisnolongereligibleforresidentialusewithoutfurtherapprovalunder thelocal jurisdiction’szoningand landuseregulations.Additionally,ifDepartmentofHealthpermitsforagriculturalhousinguses arerevoked,structures mustberemovedwithin180daysofnoticefromthe localgovernmentunless thepermitisreinstated.

The bill provides that, notwithstanding the provisions herein, the construction or installation of housing for legal agricultural employees in the Florida Keys and City of Key West Areas of Critical State Concern is subject to the permit allocation systems of those areas.

Finally, the bill provides that a 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 meet the requirements in this bill, unless the housing site will be enlarged, remodeled, renovated, or rehabilitated. The property owner of a housing site must provide regular maintenance and repair, including compliance with health and safety regulations and maintenance standards, for such housing site to ensure the health, safety, and habitability of the housing site.

A similar bill, CS/CS/HB 1051 (Rep. Tuck) was temporarily postponed on Second Reading on Feb. 29.

TRANSPORTATION

Alternative Mobility Funding Systems: CS/HB479E1 (Rep. Robinson,Jr.)was passedby theHouse, as amended on Second Reading, onFeb. 28 andhasbeen referred to theSenate RulesCommittee. The vote was 115 Yeas/0Nays

Specifically, the bill does the following:

• amends s.163.3164 to provide the following definitions to be used within the Community Planning Act:

o “mobility fee” means a local government fee schedule established by ordinance and based on the projects included in the local government’s adopted mobility plan; and

o “mobility plan” means an alternative transportation system mobility study developed by using a planbased methodology and adopted into a local government comprehensive plan that promotes a compact, mixed use, and interconnected development served by a multimodal transportation system in an area that is urban in character, or designated to be urban in character, as defined in s.171.031. (Amended on Second Reading).

• amends s.163.3180 to provide that:

o pursuant to a transportation concurrency agreement, after an applicant makes its contribution or constructs its proportionate share, the project shall be considered to have mitigated its transportation impacts and must be allowed to proceed if the applicant has satisfied all other local government development requirements for the project (Last clause added on Second Reading.);

o local governments may not prevent a single applicant from proceeding after the applicant has satisfied its proportionate-share contribution if the applicant has satisfied all other local government development requirements for the project (Last clause added on Second Reading).

• creates s.163.3180(5)(j) to require that, if a county and municipality charge the developer of a new development or redevelopment a fee for transportation capacity impacts, the county and municipality must create and execute an interlocal agreement to coordinate the mitigation of their respective transportation capacity impacts:

o the interlocal agreement must, at a minimum, require:

▪ that any new development or redevelopment is not charged twice for the same transportation capacity impacts;

▪ establish a plan-based methodology for determining the legally permissible fee to be charged to a new development or redevelopment;

▪ require the county or municipality issuing the building permit to collect the fee, unless agreed to otherwise; and

▪ provide a method for the proportionate distribution of the revenue collected by the county or municipality to address the transportation capacity impacts of a new development or redevelopment, or provide a method of assigning responsibility for the mitigation of the transportation capacity impacts belonging to the county and the municipality.

o if an interlocal agreement is not executed by Oct. 1, 2025:

▪ the fee charged to a new development or redevelopment shall be based on the transportation capacity impacts apportioned to the county and municipality as identified in the developer’s traffic impact study or the mobility plan adopted by the county or municipality;

▪ the developer shall receive a 10 percent reduction in the total fee calculated pursuant to subsubparagraph a; and

▪ the county or municipality issuing the building permit must collect the fee charged pursuant to subsubparagraphs a. and b. and distribute the proceeds of such fee to the county and municipality within 60 days after the developer’s payment. (This new s.163.3180(5)(j) added on Second Reading.)

• provides that s.163.3180(5)(j) does not apply to:

o a county as defined in s.125.011(1); and

o a county or municipality that has entered into, or otherwise updated, an existing interlocal agreement, as of Oct. 1, 2024, to coordinate the mitigation of transportation impacts. However, if such existing interlocal agreement is terminated, the affected county and municipality that have entered into the agreement shall be subject to the requirements of this paragraph unless the county and municipality mutually agree to extend the existing interlocal agreement before the expiration of the agreement.

(Exemptions added on Second Reading)

• amends s.163.31801 to provide that:

o local governments adopting and collecting impact fees must ensure that the fee calculation on a study using the most recent and localized data available within 4 years of the current impact fee update. The new study must be adopted by the local government within 12 months of the initiation of the new impact fee study if the local government increases the impact (Amended on Second Reading);

o local governments must also credit against the collection of the impact any contribution identified in the development order or any form of exaction, including monetary contributions; and

o holders of transportation or road impact fee credits which existed before the adoption of the alternative transportation system, are entitled to the full benefit of the intensity and density prepaid by the credit balance as of the date the alternative transportation system was first established.

A similar bill, CS/SB688(Sen.Martin), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by theSenate Rules Committee, its final committee of reference,on Feb. 27and placed on theSenate Special OrderCalendar for March 4.

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services: CS/CS/SB1084E1(Sen.Collins),reflectingamendmentsonSecond Reading,waspassedbytheSenateonFeb.29.Thevotewas26Yeas/10Nays.ItisnowinMessagestotheHouse.

The bill contains modifications to several agricultural, consumer services, and licensure activities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Among the changes, it amends s.366.94 to preempt the regulation of electric vehicle charging stations to the state and prohibits local governmental entities from enacting or enforcing such regulations.

The bill was amended on the floor to delete specified requirements that the rules the department is required to adopt must contain.

CS/CS/HB 1071 (Rep. Alvarez), which also contains modifications to several agricultural, consumer services, and licensure activities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, including the preemption identified above, is on the House Calendar on Second Reading.

Department of Transportation: CS/CS/CS/HB 1301E1 (Rep. Abbott), was passed by the House, reflecting amendments on Second Reading, on Feb. 28 and has been referred to the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee. The vote was 82 Yeas/33 Nays.

Note that the House amended the bill to delete previously proposed language that would:

• create s.339.155 to provide that when developing transportation plans, FDOT and Metropolitan Planning Organizations may not consider any nonpecuniary social, political, or ideological factor; and

• create s.339.652 to establish a Supply Chain Innovation Grant Program within the Department of Commerce to fund proposed projects that support supply change innovation.

The bill addresses matters related to transportation. Specifically, the bill now:

• amends s.20.23 to add the following to department’s areas of responsibility:

o modal development (replaced public transportation);

o transportation technology;

o work program development and budget (replaced management and budget);

o statewide corridors;

o forecasting and performance;

o emergency management; and

o safety office.

• deletes language that requires FDOT Secretary to appoint FDOT’s inspector general;

• provides that, beginning with the 2024-25 fiscal year through the 2029-30 fiscal year, $15 million in recurring funds shall be made available from the State Transportation Trust Fund for the Intermodal Logistics Center Infrastructure Support Program. The Department of Transportation shall include projects proposed to be funded under this section in the tentative work program developed pursuant to s.339.135(4). (Provisions added on Second Reading);

• amends s.334.046 which deals with FDOT’s mission, goals and objectives (Added on Second Reading);

• creates s.334.61 (added on Second Reading), to provide that, whenever a governmental entity proposes any project that will repurpose one or more existing traffic lanes, the governmental entity shall include a traffic study to address any potential adverse impacts of the project, including, but not limited to, changes in traffic congestion and impacts on safety:

o if, following the study, the governmental entity elects to continue with the design of the project, it must notify all affected property owners, impacted municipalities, and the counties in which the project is located at least 180 days before the design phase of the project is completed;

o the notice must provide a written explanation regarding the need for the project, include information on how to review the traffic study and indicate that all affected parties will be given an opportunity to provide comments to the proposing entity regarding potential impacts of the change;

o the governmental entity shall hold at leastone public meeting, with at least 30 days’ prior notice,before completing the designphaseof the project in the jurisdiction where theproject is located.At thepublic meeting, the governmental entityshall explain the purpose of theproject and receive public input, including possible alternatives, todetermine the manner inwhich the project will affect the community; and

o the governmental entity shall review all comments from the public meeting and take the comments and any alternatives presented during the meeting into consideration in the final design of the project.

• changes the time period a prepaid toll account can remain dormant from three years to 10;

• provides that FDOT may not expend any state funds to support a project or program of a public transit provider, authority, public-use airport, or a port that is found in violation s.381.00316 and state funds will be withheld until the entity is in compliance;

• provides that revenues deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund (STTF) derived from the registration of motor vehicles must first be available for appropriation for payments under a service contract entered into with the Florida Department of Transportation Financing Corporation to fund arterial highway projects:

o for the corporation’s bonding purposes, two or more of such projects in the department’s approved work program may be treated as a single project; and

o funds appropriated for payments under a service contract shall be available after funds pledged to payment on bonds but before other statutorily required distributions.

• allows FDOT to enter into a service contract with the Florida Department of Transportation Financing Corporation to finance projects authorized in s.215 of Chapters 2023-239, Laws of Florida, and in Budget Amendment EOG# 2024-B0112, and subsequently adopted into the five-year work program

o service contract payments may not exceed 7 percent of the funds deposited in the State Transportation Trust Fund in each fiscal year;

o the annual payments under such service contract shall be included in the department’s work program and legislative budget request developed pursuant to s.339.135; and

o the department shall ensure that the annual payments are programmed for the life of the service contract before execution of the service contract and shall remain programmed until fully paid.

• amends s.339.2818 relating to the Small County Outreach Program, to allow a local government either wholly or partially within the Everglades Agricultural Area as defined in s.373.4592(15), the Peace River Basin, or the Suwannee River Basin to compete for additional funding at up to 100 percent of project costs on state or county roads used primarily as farm-to-market connections between rural agricultural areas and market distribution centers, excluding capacity improvement projects. (Added on Second Reading).

• amends s.341.051 to add that:

o any lane elimination or lane repurposing, recommendation, or application relating to public transit projects must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the transit authority board in a public meeting with a 30-day public notice;

o anyactionofeminentdomainforacquisitionofpublictransitfacilitiescarriedoutbyapublictransitprovider mustbediscussedbythepublictransitprovideratapublicmeetingwitha30-daypublicnotice;and

o provides that remaining unallocated New Starts Transit Program funds as of June 30 of each fiscal year shall be reallocated for the purpose of the Strategic Intermodal System within the State Transportation Trust Fund. (Provisions added on Second Reading)

• creates s.341.072 which provides that:

o a public transit provider may not expend department funds for marketing or advertising activities, including any wrap, tinting, paint, or other medium displayed, attached, or affixed on a bus, commercial motor vehicle, or motor vehicle that is owned, leased, or operated by a public transit provider;

o public transit provider is limited to displaying a brand or logo of the public transit provider, the official seal of the jurisdictional government entity, or a state agency public service announcement;

o FDOT must incorporate guidelines for the activities allowed in the public transportation grant agreement entered with each transit provider; and

o any new wrap, tinting, paint, medium, or advertisement on the passenger windows of a vehicle used by a public transit provider may not be darker than the legally allowed window tinting requirements.

• amends s.341.071 to:

o provide definitions of general administrative costs, public transit provider, Tier 1 provider, Tier 2 provider;

o beginning November 1, 2024 and annually thereafter, require each public transit provider, at a publicly noticed meeting, to:

▪ annually certify that its budgeted and general administration costs are not greater than 20 percent above the annual state average of administrative costs for their respective tier;

▪ annually present a line-item budget report of its budgeted and actual general administration costs; and

▪ disclose all salaried executive and management level employees’ total compensation package, and post this report on the website.

o require FDOT todetermine,bytier, the annualstate average of administrativecosts bydetermining the percentageofthetotaloperatingbudgetthatis expendedongeneral administrationcosts in thisstate annuallybyMarch31toinformthepublictransitprovider’s budgetforthefollowingfiscal year.Upon review andcertificationbythedepartment, costsbudgeted and expendedinassociationwithnon-transitrelatedengineeringand constructionservices may be excluded. (Provisions added on Second Reading);and

o require that a year-over-year cumulative increase of 3 percent or more of general administration costs must be reviewed before the start of the next fiscal year and must be reviewed and approved by FDOT before approval by the public transportation provider’s governing board (Amended on Second Reading to change 2 percent to 3 percent, and have FDOT approve versus the Florida Transportation Commission).

• grants the Florida Rail Enterprise the power and duty to preserve future rail corridors and rights of way.

A similar bill, CS/CS/CS/SB 1226 (Sen. DiCeglie), was reported favorably, reflecting amendments, by the Senate Fiscal Policy Committee, its final committee of reference, on Feb. 27.

Transportation: CS/HB 7049 (Rep. McFarland) was passed by the House on Feb. 29 and has been referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The vote was 114 Yeas/0 Nays.

The bill addresses mattersrelated to transportation, including metropolitan planning districts (MPOs). Specifically, it:

• requires the FDOT secretary to establish annual performance and production measures, establish a minimum standard for such measures, and publish a report on actual performance. Such measures shall be developed by a working group comprised of transportation industry leaders and stakeholders and must include specified minimum requirements;

• expands the responsibilities of the Florida Transportation Commission to add that the commission must monitor the efficiency, productivity and management of:

o any public transit provider as defined in s.341.031(1); and

o any community transportation coordinator as defined in s.427,011(5).

• provides that for agencies or authorities that do not meet minimum performance standards, the Florida Transportation Commission must make recommendations to FDOT, the Governor, Senate President, House Speaker, and the applicable governing board regarding any leadership, process, management, or legislative changes needed to improve performance;

• amend existing law related to obeying traffic control at railway crossings;

• increases penalties for certain traffic infractions;

• amends s.316.20655 relating to electric bicycles to provide that a local government may:

o adopt an ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements for the operation of electric bicycles and may adopt an ordinance requiring an operator of an electric bicycle to possess a government-issued photographic identification; and

o provide training on safe operation of electric bicycles and compliance with the traffic laws of this state which are applicable to electric bicycles.

• amends s.316.2128 relating to micromobility devices, motorized scooters, and miniature motorcycles, to provide that a local government may:

o adopt an ordinance providing one or more minimum age requirements for the operation of motorized scooters or micromobility devices and may adopt an ordinance requiring an operator of a motorized scooter or micromobility device to possess a government-issued photographic identification; and

o provide training on safe operation of motorized scooters or micromobility devices and compliance with the traffic laws of this state that are 31 applicable to motorized scooters or micromobility devices.

• provides that, with respect to department allocation for the purchase of plant material under s.334.044(26) a project with a total contracted construction cost greater than $500 million shall have 0.5 percent of the total construction cost expended in the fiscal year the project is planned for construction, and the remaining 1 percent may be planned and expended over four fiscal years;

• revises the membership of the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) advisory board and expands the required expertise of members;

• requires CUTR, by Jan. 1, 2025, to deliver a report to FDOT on model policies and procedures or best practices for paratransit providers to complete trips within an acceptable time from pickup;

• requires CUTR, by Dec. 1, 2025, to deliver a report to FDOT, the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker which examines alternative revenue sources for the State Transportations Trust Fund;

• makes a technical change to the name of a member of the Implementing Solutions from Transportation Research and Evaluating Emerging Technologies Living Lab (I-STREET) advisory board and expands the required expertise of the members;

• requires I-STREET, by Jan. 1, 2025, to deliver a comprehensive report on technology and training improvements to better support people with disabilities utilizing paratransit services to FDOT, the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker;

• requires I-STREET, by Dec. 1, 2025 to deliver a report examining methods of taxation or usage fees for residential charging of electric vehicles to the FDOT, Governor, Senate President and House Speaker;

• deletes ability of FDOT and an MPO to cooperatively agree to vary the submittal date of the MPO project priorities due by Aug. 1 of each year;

• makes the following changes to laws that govern MPOs:

o codifies the legislative intent of MPOs to emphasize:

▪ the development of multimodal transportation systems, instead of surface transportation systems; and

▪ serving the mobility needs of people and freight and fostering economic growth and development within and through urbanized areas of this state while balancing conservation of natural resources.

o deletes from the intent existing language related to minimizing transportation-related fuel consumption, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions;

o provides that when two or more MPOs merge to form a regional MPO, the voting membership of the regional MPO may consist of up to 35 apportioned members for equitable geographic-population representation, subject to review by FDOT and approval by the governor;

o provides that an MPO be involved in the planning and prioritization of transportation facilities, vs the current language referencing planning and programming;

o requires each MPO to timely amend its Long Range Transportation Plan, Transportation Improvement Program, and Unified Planning Work Program;

o revises the items that each MPO must consider when developing its Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to delete energy conservation and include projects and strategies that will conserve natural resources and reduce traffic and congestion where feasible;

o deletes the requirement that minorities, the elderly and the handicapped must be adequately represented on the MPO citizen advisory committee;

o requires, by Feb. 28, 2025, the MPOs serving Lee and Collier counties to submit a report considering the feasibility of consolidation into a single MPO and eliminates the obsolete provision that required Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas counties to do so by Dec. 31, 2023;

o repeals the MPO Advisory Council (MPOAC);

o revises the minimum requirements that each MPO must include in its long-range plan by:

▪ eliminating the requirement that strategies to integrate transportation and land use planning should provide for sustainable development and reduce greenhouse gas emissions;

▪ providing that MPOs within the same urbanized area shall develop a regional long-range transportation plan and pool resources for regionally significant transportation infrastructure projects;

▪ eliminating the provision that requires the MPOAC to review the plans

▪ allowing, in the financial plan requirement, public-private partnerships to be included as an innovative financing technique to be used to fund needed projects and programs; and

▪ revising the list of proposed transportation enhancement activities that an MPO must indicate, as appropriate, to include integration of advanced air mobility, and integration of autonomous and electric vehicles, electric bicycles, and motorized scooters used for freight, commuter, or micromobility purposes. The list of activities no longer is required to indicate historic preservation, mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff, and control of outdoor advertising.

• provides that, with respect to a TIP, it is the MPO’s responsibility, in cooperation with FDOT, to identify, prioritize, and present a complete list of multimodal transportation projects consistent with the needs of the metropolitan planning area, and it is FDOT’s responsibility to program projects in the state transportation improvement program;

• expands what an MPO’s annual list of project priorities must consider to include essential projects to update the state’s transportation network, address congestion, enhance safety, ensure resiliency and facilitate supply chain needs;

• requires the MPO’s TIP to be consistent, to the maximum extent feasible with the Strategic Intermodal System Plan;

• provides that, when a project is removed from or rescheduled in a subsequent transportation improvement program, funding for the previously committed phases shall be reprogrammed for other projects within the list of project priorities;

• requires the FDOT to, at least annually, convene MPOs of similar size for the purpose of exchanging best practices and allows MPOs to develop committees or working groups as needed to accomplish such purpose;

• provides that training for new MPO governing board members must be provided by FDOT and by either the Florida CUTR, or by the I-STREET Living Lab;

• creates the following MPO accountability and transparency provisions:

o allows an MPO to execute a written agreement with FDOT which formulizes the roles, responsibilities and expectations for accomplishing consistency with federal and state requirements. Priorities must be described. The agreement is reviewed every five years and updated as necessary;

o requires FDOT, in cooperation with MPOs, to create quality performance metrics, such as safety, infrastructure condition, congestion relief, and mobility;

o requires each MPO, as part of its long-range transportation plan, to develop targets for such performance measures within its boundaries, and the targets must support efficient and safe movement of people and goods within the MPO and between regions;

o requires each MPO to report progress towards establishing performance targets for each measure annually in the transportation improvement plan; and

o requires FDOT to evaluate and post on its website whether each MPO has made significant progress towards its target for the applicable reporting period.

• requires, by Oct. 31, 2024, FDOT to submit a report to the Governor, Senate President and House Speaker, that provides a comprehensive review of the boundaries of each of FDOT’s districts and whether any district boundaries should be redrawn as a result of population growth and increased urban density; and

• requires, by Oct. 1, 2024, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to begin implementation of a redesigned registration license plate

CS/CS/SB 1032 (Sen. Gruters), which also deals some of the same transportation issues, is in the Senate Appropriations Committee, its final committee of reference.

Transportation: CS/CS/CS/HB 287E1 (Rep. Esposito) was passed by the House, reflecting amendments on Second Reading, on March 1 and has been referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee. The vote was 95 Yeas/11 Nays.

The bill address matters related to transportation. Specifically, the bill:

• provides that FDOT may not annually commit more than 20 percent of the revenue derived from state fuel taxes and motor vehicle license-related fees deposited into the State Transportation Trust Fund for public transit projects, with the exception of the following public transit projects:

o a project that uses revenues to match funds made available by the Federal Government;

o a project included in an MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program adopted pursuant to s.339.175(8) and approved by a supermajority vote of the board of county commissioners where the project is located, or a supermajority vote of the governing board of a consolidated county and city government where the project is located; and

o a bus rapid transit or rail project that would result in maintaining or enhancing the level of service of the state highway system along the corridor of the project, provided that state funds do not exceed 50 percent of the non-federal share of the costs and the percent of the local share.

• amends s.288.9606 dealing with issue of revenue bonds, to replace the term “public-private partnership agreement” with “comprehensive agreement”;

• increases from five to eight the number of Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV)approved Basic Driver Improvement course elections that are allowed in a lifetime for a person without a commercial driver license or commercial learner’s permit who is cited for a noncriminal moving violation while driving a noncommercial motor vehicle;

• requires the DHSMV to annually review changes made to major traffic laws of this state and to require course content for certain driving courses to be modified accordingly;

• amends s.334.30 relating to public-private transportation facilities and partnerships by:

o replacing the term “public-private partnership agreement” with the term “comprehensive agreement”;

o requiring a private entity, as part of the private entity proposal, to provide an independent traffic and revenue study prepared by a traffic and revenue expert, rather than an investment grade traffic and revenue study prepared by an internationally recognized traffic and revenue expert. The independent traffic and revenue study must be accepted by national bond rating agencies before closing on financing that supports the comprehensive agreement for the public-private partnership project;

o adding a minimum timeframe of 30 days for FDOT to accept other proposals on a project where FDOT has received an unsolicited proposal and providing FDOT discretion for how many days to accept other proposals based on the complexity of the project;

o authorizing FDOT before or in connection with the negotiation of a comprehensive agreement, to enter into an interim agreement with the private entity proposing the development or operation of a qualifying project. An interim agreement does not obligate FDOT to enter into a comprehensive agreement. The interim agreement is discretionary with the parties and is not required on a project for which the parties may proceed directly to a comprehensive agreement without the need for an interim agreement. An interim agreement must be limited to any of the following provisions that:

▪ authorize the private entity to commence activities for which it may be compensated related to the proposed qualifying project, including, but not limited to, project planning and development, design, environmental analysis and mitigation, surveying, other activities concerning any part of the proposed qualifying project, and ascertaining the availability of financing for the proposed facility or facilities;

▪ establish the process and timing for the negotiation of the comprehensive agreement; and

▪ contain such other provisions related to an aspect of the development or operation of a qualifying project which FDOT and the private entity deem appropriate.

o providing that a comprehensive agreement with a term of more than 50 and no more than 75 years may only be authorized for projects that are partially or completely funded from project user fees; and

o require FDOT to notify the Division of Bond Finance prior to entering into an interim or comprehensive agreement, in addition to the already required consultation.

• provides that a local government may not adopt standards or specifications that deem reclaimed asphalt material as solid waste;

• adds design-build and phased design-build contracts to the requirements that FDOT receive at least three letters of interest in order to proceed with a request for proposals and that FDOT request proposals from no fewer than three of the firms submitting letters of interest;

• provides in law, rather than as a requirement in an FDOT contract, that a motor vehicle used for the performance of road or bridge construction or maintenance work on an FDOT project must be registered in compliance with Chapter 320;

• allows FDOT, with respect to phased design-build construction contracts under s.337.11(7)(b) to allow the issuance of multiple contract performance and payment bonds is succession to align with each phase of the contract to meet the bonding requirements;

• shortens the deadline for a claimant to institute an action, except an action for recovery of retainage, against the contractor or surety to within 365 days after performance of the labor or completion of delivery of the materials or supplies, rather than within 365 days after the final acceptance of the contract work by FDOT;

• provides that if within 10 years of FDOT’s acquisition of property, that it now determines it does not need, the previous owner notifies the department that he is interested in reacquiring the property, the right to receive the right of first refusal vests with the previous owner. The department must acknowledge receipt of this notice within 60 days of receiving it;

• amends the reimbursement amount that a local government entity can be reimbursed for the direct actual costs of operating the fire station at mile marker 63 on Alligator Alley. (Amended on Second Reading);

• codifies the Local Agency Program (LAP) within FDOT; and

• amends provisions to the liability limitation of FDOT and its contractors. (Amended on Second Reading).

The bill was also amended on Second Reading to delete previously proposed language that would have revised statutory requirements for vehicles equipped with teleoperation systems.

A similar bill, CS/CS/CS/SB 266 (Sen. Hooper), is on the Senate Special Order Calendar for March 5.

LEGISLATIVE NEWS

Florida lawmakers eye home insurance bills ahead of final week of legislative session

Matt Sczesny | WPTV | March 1

Budget conference: Lawmakers seal PreK-12 deal, still at odds on string of issues

Gray Rohrer | Florida Politics |March 2