Florida Senate - 2019                        COMMITTEE AMENDMENT
       Bill No. CS for CS for SB 1730
                              LEGISLATIVE ACTION                        
                    Senate             .             House              

       The Committee on Rules (Lee) recommended the following:
    1         Senate Amendment (with title amendment)
    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.
  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.;