Florida Senate - 2019 COMMITTEE AMENDMENT
Bill No. CS for CS for SB 1730
Ì817794UÎ817794
LEGISLATIVE ACTION
Senate . House
Comm: RCS .
04/24/2019 .
.
.
.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
The Committee on Rules (Lee) recommended the following:
1 Senate Amendment (with title amendment)
2
3 Delete lines 104 - 365
4 and insert:
5 application complete, or 180 days for applications that require
6 final action through a quasi-judicial hearing or a public
7 hearing, the county must approve, approve with conditions, or
8 deny the application for a development permit or development
9 order. Both parties may agree to a reasonable request for an
10 extension of time, particularly in the event of a force majeure
11 or other extraordinary circumstance. An approval, approval with
12 conditions, or denial of the application for a development
13 permit or development order must include written findings
14 supporting the county’s decision.
15 (2)(1) When reviewing an application for a development
16 permit or development order that is certified by a professional
17 listed in s. 403.0877, a county may not request additional
18 information from the applicant more than three times, unless the
19 applicant waives the limitation in writing. Before a third
20 request for additional information, the applicant must be
21 offered a meeting to attempt to resolve outstanding issues.
22 Except as provided in subsection (5) (4), if the applicant
23 believes the request for additional information is not
24 authorized by ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal
25 authority, the county, at the applicant’s request, shall proceed
26 to process the application for approval or denial.
27 (3)(2) When a county denies an application for a
28 development permit or development order, the county shall give
29 written notice to the applicant. The notice must include a
30 citation to the applicable portions of an ordinance, rule,
31 statute, or other legal authority for the denial of the permit
32 or order.
33 (4)(3) As used in this section, the terms term “development
34 permit” and “development order” have has the same meaning as in
35 s. 163.3164, but do does not include building permits.
36 (5)(4) For any development permit application filed with
37 the county after July 1, 2012, a county may not require as a
38 condition of processing or issuing a development permit or
39 development order that an applicant obtain a permit or approval
40 from any state or federal agency unless the agency has issued a
41 final agency action that denies the federal or state permit
42 before the county action on the local development permit.
43 (6)(5) Issuance of a development permit or development
44 order by a county does not in any way create any rights on the
45 part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal
46 agency and does not create any liability on the part of the
47 county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to
48 obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by
49 a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a
50 violation of state or federal law. A county shall attach such a
51 disclaimer to the issuance of a development permit and shall
52 include a permit condition that all other applicable state or
53 federal permits be obtained before commencement of the
54 development.
55 (7)(6) This section does not prohibit a county from
56 providing information to an applicant regarding what other state
57 or federal permits may apply.
58 Section 3. Paragraph (i) of subsection (5) and paragraph
59 (h) of subsection (6) of section 163.3180, Florida Statutes, are
60 amended to read:
61 163.3180 Concurrency.—
62 (5)
63 (i) If a local government elects to repeal transportation
64 concurrency, it is encouraged to adopt an alternative mobility
65 funding system that uses one or more of the tools and techniques
66 identified in paragraph (f). Any alternative mobility funding
67 system adopted may not be used to deny, time, or phase an
68 application for site plan approval, plat approval, final
69 subdivision approval, building permits, or the functional
70 equivalent of such approvals provided that the developer agrees
71 to pay for the development’s identified transportation impacts
72 via the funding mechanism implemented by the local government.
73 The revenue from the funding mechanism used in the alternative
74 system must be used to implement the needs of the local
75 government’s plan which serves as the basis for the fee imposed.
76 A mobility fee-based funding system must comply with s.
77 163.31801 governing the dual rational nexus test applicable to
78 impact fees. An alternative system that is not mobility fee
79 based shall not be applied in a manner that imposes upon new
80 development any responsibility for funding an existing
81 transportation deficiency as defined in paragraph (h).
82 (6)
83 (h)1. In order to limit the liability of local governments,
84 a local government may allow a landowner to proceed with
85 development of a specific parcel of land notwithstanding a
86 failure of the development to satisfy school concurrency, if all
87 the following factors are shown to exist:
88 a. The proposed development would be consistent with the
89 future land use designation for the specific property and with
90 pertinent portions of the adopted local plan, as determined by
91 the local government.
92 b. The local government’s capital improvements element and
93 the school board’s educational facilities plan provide for
94 school facilities adequate to serve the proposed development,
95 and the local government or school board has not implemented
96 that element or the project includes a plan that demonstrates
97 that the capital facilities needed as a result of the project
98 can be reasonably provided.
99 c. The local government and school board have provided a
100 means by which the landowner will be assessed a proportionate
101 share of the cost of providing the school facilities necessary
102 to serve the proposed development.
103 2. If a local government applies school concurrency, it may
104 not deny an application for site plan, final subdivision
105 approval, or the functional equivalent for a development or
106 phase of a development authorizing residential development for
107 failure to achieve and maintain the level-of-service standard
108 for public school capacity in a local school concurrency
109 management system where adequate school facilities will be in
110 place or under actual construction within 3 years after the
111 issuance of final subdivision or site plan approval, or the
112 functional equivalent. School concurrency is satisfied if the
113 developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide
114 mitigation proportionate to the demand for public school
115 facilities to be created by actual development of the property,
116 including, but not limited to, the options described in sub
117 subparagraph a. Options for proportionate-share mitigation of
118 impacts on public school facilities must be established in the
119 comprehensive plan and the interlocal agreement pursuant to s.
120 163.31777.
121 a. Appropriate mitigation options include the contribution
122 of land; the construction, expansion, or payment for land
123 acquisition or construction of a public school facility; the
124 construction of a charter school that complies with the
125 requirements of s. 1002.33(18); or the creation of mitigation
126 banking based on the construction of a public school facility in
127 exchange for the right to sell capacity credits. Such options
128 must include execution by the applicant and the local government
129 of a development agreement that constitutes a legally binding
130 commitment to pay proportionate-share mitigation for the
131 additional residential units approved by the local government in
132 a development order and actually developed on the property,
133 taking into account residential density allowed on the property
134 prior to the plan amendment that increased the overall
135 residential density. The district school board must be a party
136 to such an agreement. As a condition of its entry into such a
137 development agreement, the local government may require the
138 landowner to agree to continuing renewal of the agreement upon
139 its expiration.
140 b. If the interlocal agreement and the local government
141 comprehensive plan authorize a contribution of land; the
142 construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition; the
143 construction or expansion of a public school facility, or a
144 portion thereof; or the construction of a charter school that
145 complies with the requirements of s. 1002.33(18), as
146 proportionate-share mitigation, the local government shall
147 credit such a contribution, construction, expansion, or payment
148 toward any other impact fee or exaction imposed by local
149 ordinance for public educational facilities the same need, on a
150 dollar-for-dollar basis at fair market value. The credit must be
151 based on the total impact fee assessed and not on the impact fee
152 for any particular type of school.
153 c. Any proportionate-share mitigation must be directed by
154 the school board toward a school capacity improvement identified
155 in the 5-year school board educational facilities plan that
156 satisfies the demands created by the development in accordance
157 with a binding developer’s agreement.
158 3. This paragraph does not limit the authority of a local
159 government to deny a development permit or its functional
160 equivalent pursuant to its home rule regulatory powers, except
161 as provided in this part.
162 Section 4. Section 163.31801, Florida Statutes, is amended
163 to read:
164 163.31801 Impact fees; short title; intent; minimum
165 requirements; audits; challenges definitions; ordinances levying
166 impact fees.—
167 (1) This section may be cited as the “Florida Impact Fee
168 Act.”
169 (2) The Legislature finds that impact fees are an important
170 source of revenue for a local government to use in funding the
171 infrastructure necessitated by new growth. The Legislature
172 further finds that impact fees are an outgrowth of the home rule
173 power of a local government to provide certain services within
174 its jurisdiction. Due to the growth of impact fee collections
175 and local governments’ reliance on impact fees, it is the intent
176 of the Legislature to ensure that, when a county or municipality
177 adopts an impact fee by ordinance or a special district adopts
178 an impact fee by resolution, the governing authority complies
179 with this section.
180 (3) At a minimum, an impact fee adopted by ordinance of a
181 county or municipality or by resolution of a special district
182 must satisfy all of the following conditions, at minimum:
183 (a) Require that The calculation of the impact fee must be
184 based on the most recent and localized data.
185 (b) The local government must provide for accounting and
186 reporting of impact fee collections and expenditures. If a local
187 governmental entity imposes an impact fee to address its
188 infrastructure needs, the entity must shall account for the
189 revenues and expenditures of such impact fee in a separate
190 accounting fund.
191 (c) Limit Administrative charges for the collection of
192 impact fees must be limited to actual costs.
193 (d) The local government must provide Require that notice
194 not be provided no less than 90 days before the effective date
195 of an ordinance or resolution imposing a new or increased impact
196 fee. A county or municipality is not required to wait 90 days to
197 decrease, suspend, or eliminate an impact fee.
198 (e) Collection of the impact fee may not be required to
199 occur earlier than the date of issuance of the building permit
200 for the property that is subject to the fee.
201 (f) The impact fee must be proportional and reasonably
202 connected to, or have a rational nexus with, the need for
203 additional capital facilities and the increased impact generated
204 by the new residential or commercial construction.
205 (g) The impact fee must be proportional and reasonably
206 connected to, or have a rational nexus with, the expenditures of
207 the funds collected and the benefits accruing to the new
208 residential or nonresidential construction.
209 (h) The local government must specifically earmark funds
210 collected under the impact fee for use in acquiring,
211 constructing, or improving capital facilities to benefit new
212 users.
213 (i) Revenues generated by the impact fee may not be used,
214 in whole or in part, to pay existing debt or for previously
215 approved projects unless the expenditure is reasonably connected
216 to, or has a rational nexus with, the increased impact generated
217 by the new residential or nonresidential construction.
218 (4) The local government must credit against the collection
219 of the impact fee any contribution, whether identified in a
220 proportionate share agreement or other form of exaction, related
221 to public education facilities, including land dedication, site
222 planning and design, or construction. Any contribution must be
223 applied to reduce any education-based impact fees on a dollar
224 for-dollar basis at fair market value.
225 (5) If a local government increases its impact fee rates,
226 the holder of any impact fee credits, whether such credits are
227 granted under s. 163.3180, s. 380.06, or otherwise, which were
228 in existence before the increase, is entitled to the full
229 benefit of the intensity or density prepaid by the credit
230 balance as of the date it was first established.
231 (6)(4) Audits of financial statements of local governmental
232 entities and district school boards which are performed by a
233 certified public accountant pursuant to s. 218.39 and submitted
234 to the Auditor General must include an affidavit signed by the
235 chief financial officer of the local governmental entity or
236 district school board stating that the local governmental entity
237 or district school board has complied with this section.
238 (7)(5) In any action challenging an impact fee or the
239 government’s failure to provide required dollar-for-dollar
240 credits for the payment of impact fees as provided in s.
241 163.3180(6)(h)2.b., the government has the burden of proving by
242 a preponderance of the evidence that the imposition or amount of
243 the fee or credit meets the requirements of state legal
244 precedent and or this section. The court may not use a
245 deferential standard for the benefit of the government.
246 (8) A county, municipality, or special district may provide
247 an exception or waiver for an impact fee for the development or
248 construction of housing that is affordable, as defined in s.
249 420.9071. If a county, municipality, or special district
250 provides such an exception or waiver, it is not required to use
251 any revenues to offset the impact.
252 (9) This section does not apply to water and sewer
253 connection fees.
254 Section 5. Section 166.033, Florida Statutes, is amended to
255 read:
256 166.033 Development permits and orders.—
257 (1) Within 30 days after receiving an application for
258 approval of a development permit or development order, a
259 municipality must review the application for completeness and
260 issue a letter indicating that all required information is
261 submitted or specifying with particularity any areas that are
262 deficient. If the application is deficient, the applicant has 30
263 days to address the deficiencies by submitting the required
264 additional information. Within 120 days after the municipality
265 has deemed the application complete, or 180 days for
266 applications that require final action through a quasi-judicial
267 hearing or a public hearing, the municipality must approve,
268 approve with conditions, or deny the application for a
269 development permit or development order. Both parties may agree
270 to a reasonable request for an extension of time, particularly
271 in the event of a force majeure or other extraordinary
272 circumstance. An approval, approval with conditions, or denial
273 of the application for a development permit or development order
274 must include written findings supporting the municipality’s
275 decision.
276
277 ================= T I T L E A M E N D M E N T ================
278 And the title is amended as follows:
279 Delete line 48
280 and insert:
281 offset the impact; providing applicability; amending
282 s. 166.033, F.S.;