Item R15
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: September 22.2005
Division:
County Administrator
Bulk Item: Yes
No --1L-
Department: County Administrator
Staff Contact Person:
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Discussion of Monroe County's legislative agenda for the 2006
Session and direction for Lobbyist Bill Pfeiffer, Esq.
ITEM BACKGROUND:
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCe ACTION:
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
ST AFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
TOT AL COST:
-0-
BUDGETED: Yes
NoX
COST TO COUNTY:
-0-
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
No
AMOUNT PER MONTH_ Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty _ OMB/Purchasing _ Risk Management ~m
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
g flu.tnuM J. Wi1.f.i
(TYPE NAME HERE)
DOCUMENTATION:
Included
Not Required_
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM #
Revised 2/05
TPC
GOVERNMENTAL CONSULTING
WILLIAM R. PFEIFFER, ESQ.
PRE~IDENT
P.O, Box IOS28
n.U,..UfASSBE, FU)[Im \ .12.102
Tel: f'iSO-2 12-S94 I
WEn: TPCGG.cOA!
E-Mail: bill@TPCGC.C(h\!
Memorandum
e
To: BOCC and To . . i
From: Bill PfeifferW
Date: 9-25-05
Subject: 2006 Initial Legislative Information
2005 LEGISLATIVE INTERIM COMMITTEE MTG SCHEDULE
October 2005 -
November 2005 -
December 2005 -
Week of the 10-17-05
Week of the 11-7-05
Week ofthe 12-5-05
2006 SESSION DATES
August 1, 2005
January 27,20065:00 p.m.
Deadline for filing claim bills (Rule 4.81)
Deadline for filing requests for drafts of general
bills, including requests for companion bills
March 3, 2006 5:00 p.m.
March 7, 2006
Deadline for submitting final drafts
Regular Session convenes
March 7, 2006 12:00 noon
Deadline for filing bills for introduction
April 25, 2006 50th day
May 1, 2006
Last day for regularly scheduled committee
meetings (Rule 2.9)
All bills are immediately certified (Rule 6.8)
Conference Committee Reports require only
one reading (Rule 4.5)
May 5,2006 60th day
Last day of Regular Session (Article III, section
3(d), Constitution)
f2- .\ ~
SenateCommitreeProjects wi POIeiitiat1mpact on
Monroe County
I. Banking and Insurance Committee
A. INTERIM MONITOR PROJECT: Citizens Property Insurance Corporation and
the Task Force on Long-Term Solutions for Florida's Hurricane Insurance
Market
DATE DUE: N/ A
PROJECT NUMBER: 2006-307
BACKGROUND and DESCRIPTION:
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation ("Citizens"), the state-created insurer of
last resort for windstorm coverage and residential property insurance coverage, has over
825,000 policies in force, with over $200 billion in insured value, as of April 30, 2005,
making it the second largest homeowners insurer in the state. Policy growth in Citizens is
a reflection of the inability or unwillingness of insurers in the private (or "voluntary")
market to provide adequate insurance capacity in the state.
The 2004 hurricanes resulted in a deficit to Citizens of about $516 million, which
is expected to result in an assessment equal to about a 7 percent premium surcharge on all
property insurance policyholders in the state. Citizens' problems in securing sufficient
numbers of adjusters caused delays in settling its 118,000 hurricane claims and resulted
in about 4,000 complaints to the Department of Financial Services, nearly double the
number filed against the largest carrier in the state.
In the 2004 Session, the Legislature enacted significant property insurance
reforms, including changes to the board of governors of Citizens (CS/SB 1486).
Currently, a 7-member board is appointed by the Chief Financial Officer (CFO); but,
effective August 1,2005, the Governor, CFO, President of the Senate, and Speaker of the
House will each appoint 2 members of a new 8-member board.
The legislation also requires the Auditor General to conduct an operational audit
of Citizens by February 1, 2006, including an analysis of its infrastructure, customer
service, claims handling, take-out bonus programs, and fmancing arrangements, among
other issues. The act also requires the board of Citizens to submit a report to the
Legislature by February 1,2006, regarding its policy growth, depopulation efforts, and
actions to improve the availability of coverage in the voluntary market.
The 2004 act also creates the Task Force on Long-Term Solutions for Florida's
Hurricane Insurance Market, to make recommendations relating to the creation and
maintenance of insurance capacity in the private sector and public sector which is
sufficient to ensure that all property owners in this state are able to obtain appropriate
insurance coverage for hurricane losses. The Task Force is required to research particular
issues related to this purpose, including issues specific to the operation and role of
Citizens, witha-fmal report due April 1, 2006.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S):
To monitor and review: 1) the operational audit of Citizens by the Auditor
General, 2) the report and recommendations of the board of governors of Citizens, and 3)
the Task Force for Long-Term Solutions for Florida's Hurricane Insurance Market.
METHODOWGY:
Staff attended meetings of the Task Force and board meetings of Citizens, and
reviewed and analyzed the operational audit of Citizens by the Auditor General, the
report and recommendations of the board of governors of Citizens, and the report and
recommendations of the Task Force. Reports will be presented to the committee during
the interim as the work of each of these groups' progresses.
II. Community Affairs Committee
A. INTERIM PROJECT: Land Use Board of Appeals
DATE DUE: September 1, 2005
PROJECT NUMBER: 2006-107
BACKGROUND and DESCRIPTION:
In an effort to provide a more streamlined process for the review of land use
decisions, several states have opted to create a land use board of appeals. In general, the
purposes of instituting a land use board of appeals include the provision of a timely
review of land use decisions, to provide more cost effective review, and to achieve
consistency in land use decisions.
The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development
Regulation Act of 1985, ss. 163.3161-163.3246, F.S., establishes a growth management
system in Florida which requires each local government (or combination of local
governments) to adopt a comprehensive land use plan. A local government's
comprehensive plan and any amendments thereto, must be consistent with the state
comprehensive plan. All land development regulations and development orders must be
consistent with the local government's comprehensive plan.
Florida law currently provides for administrative and judicial review of land use
decisions based on the type of decision at issue. Under s. 163.3184, F .S., an "affected
person" can challenge the decision of the Department of Community Affairs that a
comprehensive plan or an amendment to the plan is, or is not, in compliance with the
chapter 163, F.S. In order to challenge the department's decision, the affected person may
file a petition with the department for a hearing before an administrative law judge of the
Division of Administrative Hearings. For purposes of maintaining such action, the term
"affected person" means the local government adopting the plan or an amendment, an
adjoining local government that can demonstrate substantial impacts, and persons that
own property, reside, or own or operate a business with the local government's
jurisdiction that adopted the plan or amendment.
If a future land use map amendment is involved, owners of real property abutting
the subject real property can challenge the department's decision. If a plan or plan
wmanlHlent is found not in compliance, the recommend0d ord0r is subject to final agency
action by the Administration Commission (Governor and Cabinet). With regard to land
development regulations, s. 163.3213, F.S., defines the term "land development
regulation" as an ordinance enacted by a local governing body for the regulation of any
aspect of land development. This term includes a general zoning code, but does not
include a zoning map or any action that results in zoning or rezoning of land. The section
authorizes a substantially affected person within 12 months after final adoption of a land
development regulation to petition the Department of Community Affairs for review after
notifying the local government.
If the department determines that the regulation is consistent with the local
comprehensive plan, the substantially affected person may request a hearing from the
Division of Administrative Hearings. Section 163.3215(3), F.S., allows an aggrieved or
adversely affected party to maintain a de novo action challenging the consistency of a
development order with an adopted local comprehensive plan.
An aggrieved or adversely affected party may challenge any action on a
development order by a local government which "materially alters the use or density or
intensity of use on a particular piece of property that is not consistent with the
comprehensive plan..." If a local government adopts the standards established in s.
163.3215(4), F.S., which provide for a quasi-judicial hearing before a special master, an
aggrieved or adversely affected party may only challenge the decision of a local
government granting or denying a development order by writ of certiorari. The local
government determines what types of development orders are subject to the special
master process.
For review of a development order in any area of critical state concern or relating
to any development of regional impact, s. 380.07, F.S., allows the owner, the developer,
or the Department of Community Affairs to petition the Florida Land and Water
Adjudicatory Commission (Governor and Cabinet).
During the 2004-2005 Legislative Interim, the Senate Comprehensive Planning
Committee staff conducted an interim study on land use decisions in Florida, and the
possibility of developing a specialized land use board of appeals. The creation of a land
use board of appeals requires a determination as to the length of appointments,
qualifications of appointees, applicable standard of review, and the type of decisions to
be reviewed by the board. However, no action was taken on this issue during the 2005
Legislative Session.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S):
The objective of the project was to evaluate the effectiveness of creating a land
use board of appeals to review certain land use decisions. The project objectives included
proposing a model for the composition of the board, including qualifications and the
appointment process for board members and the scope of the board's jurisdiction.
METHODOLOGY:
Committee staff worked with interested parties to determine whether a land use
board of appeals should be created and developed proposed legislation.
B. INTERIM PROJECT: Growth Management Glit~b Bill
DATE DUE: September 1, 2005
PROJECT NUMBER: 2006-108
BACKGROUND and DESCRIPTION:
With more than 1,000 new residents moving to Florida daily, the state's
population is projected to grow by over 5 million in the next 17 years. To address the
critical infrastructure and planning needed to accommodate this new growth as it relates
to roads, schools and water, the 2005 Legislature enacted (CS/CS/CS for SB 360). The
bill creates and amends numerous provisions relating to school, water and transportation
concurrency, the development of regional impact program and other significant portions
of the local government comprehensive planning process. The bill also provides $1.5
billion in fiscal year 2005-2006 for infrastructure funding for transportation, water and
schools, with recurring funding of $750 million annually thereafter. Unfortunately,
because of the timing and magnitude of these growth management legislative changes
several technical errors have been identified.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S):
The objective of the project was to review and assess the legislation and to
identify and specify any issues that may need to be addressed in the 2006 legislative
seSSIOn.
METHODOLOGY:
Committee staff consulted with interested parties and the Departments of
Community Affairs, Transportation, and Environmental Protection to determine what
changes need to be implemented.
III. Environmental Preservation
Committee
A. INTERIM PROJECT: Land Acquisition - Florida
Forever Mid-Term Review
DATE DUE: October 1,2005
PROJECT NUMBER: 2006-120
BACKGROUND and DESCRIPTION:
Section 259.105, F.S., created in 1999, provides for the Florida Forever program.
This program, the successor to Preservation 2000, is a 10-year, $300 million per year,
land acquisition effort, and has reached the half-way point. The cornerstone of the Florida
Forever program is the annual Conservation and Recreational Lands priority acquisition
list. Over the past few years the Governor and Cabinet have directed that the list be
modified to better reflect the state's priorities in acquiring conservation lands.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S):
- - The project will review the progress made under the Florida Forever program,
evaluate its effectiveness m meetmg statutory goals and objectives, and review the
evolution of the acquisition list during the past several years. Additional objectives
include a review of the state's land surplusing process with an emphasis on the sale of
surplus lands to local governments.
MEmODOLOGY:
Staff of the committee will review and analyze activities related to the
development of the Florida Forever acquisition list and the changing priorities established
by the Governor and Cabinet. In addition, staff will review the acquisition history under
Florida Forever to determine the classifications of lands being purchased with the goal of
assisting the Department of Environmental Protection in moving forward with an
inventory of state-owned lands. As part of the project, staff will develop a survey to be
submitted to all of the state's land acquisition agencies to determine the acreage,
categories and purchase price of lands purchased at the mid-point; the purposes for which
the acquired lands are being used, the nwnber of local government surplusing requests
received and processed, and how much land each agency has identified as available to be
surplused.
B. INTERIM PROJECT: Review of Solid Waste Management Act
DATE DUE: September 1,2005
PROJECT NUMBER: 2006-121
BACKGROUND and DESCRIPTION:
In 1988, the Legislature enacted the Solid Waste Management Act. This
comprehensive act mandated waste minimization, conservation of landfill space, litter
control, and recycling. In 1992, the Senate Natural Resources Committee conducted an
interim project study to review the 1988 act and recommended comprehensive changes.
The act was substantially rewritten in 1993.
Since that time, there have been several amendments to the statutory provisions
relating to solid waste management; however, these amendments have been piecemeal
and the issues were not addressed in a comprehensive manner. The act needs to be
updated to remove obsolete provisions and address concerns that have arisen in the past
few years regarding recycling and disposal of vegetative and construction and demolition
debris.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S):
The project will review the act's provisions to remove the obsolete and outdated
provisions and determine if legislative changes are needed to address current recycling
concerns and disposal of certain debris in a manner other than placing such materials in a
landfill. The problem was exacerbated last year when Florida was hit by four major
hurricanes and counties became overwhelmed by the amount of debris and materials that
required disposal.
MEmODOLOGY:
Staff will review past interim project reports on the various aspects of the Solid
Waste Management Act, and will work with staff of the Department of Environmental
Pwtcction, local solid waste management officials, the League ()f Cities, the ~A.:sseeiation
of Counties, recyclers, waste haulers, the environmental community, and other interested
persons to identify the obsolete provisions and develop any needed legislation.
C. INTERIM MONITOR PROJECT: Infrastructure Planning and Funding for
Water Supplies, Protection, and Sustainability
DATE DUE: N/A
PROJECT NUMBER: 2006-349
BACKGROUND and DESCRIPTION:
The 2005 Legislature passed CS/CS/CS/SB 444 (SB 444) which made numerous
changes to laws governing statewide water supply and restoration programs. In addition,
the Legislature passed CS/CS/CS/SB 360 which provides $100 million in recurring and
$100 million in non-recurring funds for the programs created or amended in SB 444. The
water programs are currently administered by the Department of Environmental
Protection, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the state's five
water management districts.
SB 444 creates the Water Protection and Sustainability Program to provide
funding for a new alternative water supply program and to also fund existing state water
programs. These programs include surface water improvement and management, total
maximum daily loads, and the disadvantaged small community wastewater grant
program. In addition, SB 444 makes substantial changes to guide the development of
alternative water supplies and establishes a goal for the water management districts to
match state funds 100 percent. The bill allocates state funds to the water management
districts on a percentage basis.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S):
The objective of the project will be to monitor the implementation of the new
alternative water supply program and changes to the existing program required by the
legislation and to ensure the timely allocation of the $200 million in state resources
provided in the 2005-06 fiscal year for the various water programs.
METHODOLOGY:
Staff of the committee along with staff of the General Government
Appropriations committee will monitor agency and water management districts on the
allocation of funds provided in FY 2005-2006 for the various water programs. A
quarterly progress report will be initiated by the Department of Environmental Protection
and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for the review of program
criteria, specific projects to be funded, match requirements, and federal funds
maximization.
An OctoberlNovember progress report from the water management districts will
be requested to coincide with their annual budget submission to the Governor.