LTC 300-2023 Impact of Florida Senate Bill 718 on Referendum Requirements in City CharterM IAM I BEACH
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
LTC# LETTER TO COMMISSION
TO: Mayor Dan Gelber and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Rafael A. Paz, City Attorney
DATE: June 30, 2023
SUBJECT: Impact of Florida Senate Bill 718 on the Referendum Requirements in City
Charter Sections 1.03(c) and 1.06
The purpose of this Letter to Commission ("LTC") is to advise the City Commission of the impact
of Senate Bill 718, which Governor Ron Desantis signed into law on June 28, 2023 (the "New
Law"). A copy of the New Law, which takes effect on July 1, 2023, is attached to this L TC. The
New Law impacts the referendum requirements in the following City Charter provisions:
(1) Charter Section 1.03(c), which requires voter approval prior to any increase to the "zoned
floor area ratio" of any property within the City, and
(2) Charter Section 1.06, which requires voter approval prior to enacting any Ordinance that
reduces the powers and duties of the Historic Preservation Board, or creates less stringent
historic preservation standards or regulations.
The New Law, which, in pertinent part, comes down to a single sentence, is plain and
unambiguous in its simplicity:
An initiative or referendum process in regard to any land
development regulation is prohibited.
See Sec. 163.3167(b), Fla. Stat. (2023).
Under what circumstances is a referendum now prohibited?
• As explained in this L TC, the New Law, as applied to the City, broadly prohibits a
referendum process on any land development regulation that results in an FAR increase
(except for a map amendment, i.e., rezoning), or creates a less stringent historic
preservation standard or regulation. A referendum on a comprehensive plan amendment
that increases FAR would also be prohibited under existing State law, as the City Charter
contains no such requirement.
300-2023
2
Which referendum requirements in the City Charter remain enforceable?
• Under State law, and given that Charter Section 1.03(c) was adopted prior to June 1,
2011, referendum approval is still required for any map amendment (or rezoning) that
increases FAR.
• The New Law has no impact whatsoever on City Charter provisions requiring voter
referendum approval for the sale or lease of certain City-owned property, including the
referendum requirements set forth in Sections 1.03(b), 1.03(d), or 1.03(e) of the City
Charter.1
• The New Law will also have no impact on the referendum requirement, approved by the
voters in August 2022, for any vacation of a right-of-way that results in the aggregation of
floor area across unified abutting parcels.
As the sale or lease of City property, or a vacation of a City right-of-way, is not accomplished via
adoption of a land development regulation, the above-referenced Charter provisions, which
involve the City’s proprietary decisions regarding the disposition of City-owned property, are not
impacted by the New Law, and remain fully enforceable.
I. SUMMARY OF EXISTING LAW
A. City Charter Section 1.03(c), Requiring Voter Approval to Increase FAR
Floor area ratio (“FAR”) is the measure used by the City to regulate the overall size of a building.
Floor area ratio is defined in the City’s Resiliency Code as “the floor area of the building or
buildings on any lot divided by the area of the lot.” Generally speaking, the term “floor area” is
defined as “the sum of the gross horizontal areas of the floors of a building or buildings . . . ,”
subject to a list of enumerated exceptions. The Resiliency Code establishes a maximum FAR for
each zoning district in Miami Beach.
In 1997, following a petition drive by an advocacy group known as “Save Miami Beach,” the City’s
voters approved an amendment to the City Charter, requiring voter approval for future FAR
increases—specifically, for any property “adjacent to the waterfront.” See Resolution No. 97-
22413. In 2003, the City’s residents voted to expand the referendum requirement to include all
property within the City’s limits. See Resolution No. 2003-25441.
The current text of Charter Section 1.03(c) reads, in pertinent part, as follows:
The floor area ratio of any property or street end within the City of
Miami Beach shall not be increased by zoning, transfer, or any other
means from its current zoned floor area ratio as it exists on the date
1 For the sale or lease of 10 years or longer of any City property not specifically subject to a referendum
requirement, the Charter, at Section 1.03(b)(4), requires approval by 4/7ths of the Planning Board and
6/7ths of the City Commission. This provision is also not impacted by the New Law.
Also not impacted is Charter Sec. 1.03(f), which requires 4/7ths approval of the Planning Board and 6/7ths
approval of the City Commission for a management agreement or concession agreement, for a term of 10
years or longer, relating to City property.
3
of adoption of this Charter Amendment [November 7, 2001],
including any limitations on floor area ratios which are in effect by
virtue of development agreements through the full term of such
agreements, unless any such increase in zoned floor area ratio for
any such property shall first be approved by a vote of the electors
of the City of Miami Beach.
Section 1.03(c) requires a voter referendum prior to any legislative action that would result in an
increase to a property's zoned FAR as it existed on November 7, 2001. Since the initial adoption
of the referendum requirement in 1997, the City has submitted a total of 12 proposed FAR
increases to the voters. A summary of these measures is as follows:
• November 2022: Increase FAR to allow conversion of existing hotels in RPS-4 District
in the South of Fifth neighborhood to residential use (approved by the voters)
• November 2022: Increase FAR to incentivize office/residential in the First Street
Overlay, along 1st Street and Washington Avenue (approved by the voters)
• November 2022: Increase FAR for North Beach Oceanside Resort Overlay area
(Deauville Hotel) (rejected by the voters)
• August 2022: Increase FAR to incentivize conversion of apartment hotels to residential
use in RPS-1 and RPS-2 Districts in the South of Fifth neighborhood (approved by the
voters)
• August 2022: Increase FAR in Alton Road Gateway Overlay to facilitate community
health center (approved by the voters)
• November 2020: Increase FAR by allowing reconstruction of original floorplates in
historic buildings (approved by the voters)
• November 2020: Increase FAR for Wolfsonian Arts District (approved by the voters)
• November 2020: Increase FAR by excluding certain areas of building from calculation
of floor area (approved by the voters)
• November 2019: Increase FAR for CD-2 zoning districts along Washington Avenue
and Alton Road (rejected by the voters)
• November 2019: Allow new floor area within historic buildings for adaptive reuse
(rejected by the voters)
• November 2017: Increase FAR as part of rezoning the North Beach Town Center
(approved by the voters)
• November 2015: Increase FAR for Ocean Terrace Overlay (rejected by the voters)
4
B. The Community Planning Act (Chapter 163, Florida Statutes)
The Community Planning Act, formerly known as the Growth Management Act, governs the field
of comprehensive planning and land development regulation by cities and counties throughout
Florida. Among these provisions are certain restrictions on local initiatives or referenda
concerning specified land use matters (also known as “zoning by referendum”). See Sec.
163.3167(8), Fla. Stat.
The City Charter is not absolute, and a local ordinance or charter provision may not be
construed in a manner that would conflict with State law. See Sarasota Alliance for Fair
Elections, Inc. v. Browning, 28 So. 3d 880, 888 (Fla. 2010); see also City of Miami Beach v. Rocio
Corp., 404 So. 2d 1066, 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). As City Attorneys have advised since at least
1997, the “zoning by referendum” provisions of the Community Planning Act restrict the
application of the referendum requirement in Miami Beach Charter Section 1.03(c). The City may
not call a referendum ostensibly required by the City Charter if the referendum would be prohibited
by State law.
1. Initiative or Referendum on a Development Order
Even before the adoption of SB 718 this year, the "zoning by referendum" provisions of the
Community Planning Act have limited the City's authority to submit proposed FAR increases to
the voters. Section 163.3167(8)(a), Florida Statutes, broadly prohibits “[a]n initiative or
referendum process in regard to any development order.”2 As applied to the City, a “development
order” includes a building permit, design review approval (for properties outside of historic
districts), Certificate of Appropriateness (for properties within local historic districts or individually
designated historic sites), lot split approval, variance, Board of Adjustment order, or site-specific
rezoning. To hold a referendum on the City’s issuance on any of these approvals is strictly
prohibited under existing provisions of the Community Planning Act.
2. Initiative or Referendum on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment or Map
Amendments (i.e. Rezoning)
The Community Planning Act also prohibits an initiative or referendum process “in regard to any
local comprehensive plan amendment or map amendment.” However, the Act exempts, and
specifically permits, a referendum process on a “local comprehensive plan amendment or map
amendment” that is “expressly authorized by specific language in a local government charter that
was lawful and in effect on June 1, 2011.” See Sec. 163.3167(8)(b), Fla. Stat.
The City Charter does not qualify for the exception as to comprehensive plan amendments,
because the Charter does not contain any language requiring referendum approval for a
comprehensive plan amendment. Therefore, the City is prohibited, under State law, from
submitting a comprehensive plan amendment to the voters.
2 State law defines a “[d]evelopment order” as “any order granting, denying, or granting with
conditions an application for a development permit.” “Development permit” is defined as “any building
permit, zoning permit, subdivision approval, rezoning, certification, special exception, variance, or any other
official action of local government having the effect of permitting the development of land.” Sec.
163.3164(15) and (16), Florida Statutes.
5
However, the City Charter does qualify for the exception as to map amendments. Charter
Section 1.03(c) requires voter approval to increase FAR by “zoning” (i.e. by adoption of a map
amendment or rezoning). By way of example, a map amendment to rezone a defined area of the
City from RM-1 (with an FAR of 1.25) to RM-2 (with an FAR of 2.0) would require voter approval.
This particular provision has been in place since November 7, 2001, i.e. prior to the June 1, 2011
cutoff date in the statute. Accordingly, Charter Section 1.03(c) qualifies for the exception in
Section 163.3167(8)(b) and, therefore, the City’s referendum requirement remains
enforceable, but solely as to map amendments or rezonings involving an increase in FAR.
C. City Charter Section 1.06, relating to the Historic Preservation Board and the City’s
Historic Preservation Ordinance
Charter Section 1.06 requires voter approval prior to the adoption of any Ordinance which
"reduces the powers and duties of the City's Historic Preservation Board, or creates less stringent
historic preservation standards or regulations . . . ." This provision was approved by the City's
voters on November 6, 2012, by a vote of 61.29%.
In the nearly 11 years since the adoption of this section, no measure has been submitted to the
voters which would reduce the powers and duties of the HPB or create a less stringent historic
preservation standard or regulation.
II. EFFECT OF SENATE BILL 718 ON THE CITY CHARTER
A. Impact on Charter Section 1.03(c), relating to FAR Increases
The New Law amends the Community Planning Act to provide that “[a]n initiative or referendum
process in regard to any land development regulation is prohibited.”
“Land development regulations” are defined in Section 163.3164, Florida Statutes, as “ordinances
enacted by governing bodies for the regulation of any aspect of development and includes any
local government zoning, rezoning, subdivision, building construction, or sign regulations or any
other regulations controlling the development of land, . . . .”
As summarized in Section I.A of this LTC, the vast majority of FAR increases submitted to the
City’s voters since the adoption of Charter Sec. 1.03(c) have involved the enactment of a land
development regulation (sometimes referred to informally as a “text amendment,” as opposed to
a map amendment or rezoning).
1. Overlays
One example of an FAR increase effectuated through a land development regulation is the
creation of an overlay. An overlay involves adopting narrowly tailored development standards for
a defined geographic area, without changing the underlying zoning district classification, and
accordingly, without changing any of the other requirements or allowances that apply to the zoning
district. Examples include FAR incentives for the First Street Overlay (adopted in November
2022), the Alton Road Gateway Overlay (August 2022), and the Wolfsonian Arts District (adopted
in November 2020). A referendum on the adoption of an overlay is now prohibited.
6
In contrast, a rezoning to a district with a greater FAR would generally permit more intense uses,
increased density (regulated as dwelling units per acre) and increased building height. As
explained in this LTC, a referendum on a rezoning that increases FAR remains required.
2. Specific, targeted incentives for specific uses, or developments meeting
defined benchmarks
FAR increases implemented as land development regulations also include incentives for
properties meeting certain geographic or use criteria (e.g., incentive for the conversion of existing
hotels in the RPS-4 district to residential use, or conversion of apartment hotels in RPS-1 and
RPS-2 to residential use).
To the extent that these overlays or targeted incentives have been effectuated as amendments
to the City’s land development regulations, the New Law, which prohibits a “referendum process
in regard to any land development regulation,” would now bar the City from submitting these
measures, or any future similar measure, to the voters by referendum.
3. Map amendments or rezonings
However, the New Law leaves intact the exception for local charter provisions which, as of June
1, 2011, contain express language as to “map amendments.” Therefore, to the extent a proposed
map amendment would result in an FAR increase, the referendum requirement in Charter Section
1.03(c) would continue to apply.
As noted above, a rezoning to a more intense district classification not only involves an increase
in FAR, but also an increase in intensity (including additional allowable uses) and density
(regulated as dwelling units per acre). For instance, in 2017, the City’s voters approved an FAR
increase for the North Beach Town Center, which was effectuated as a rezoning of TC-1, TC-2,
and TC-3 districts to the newly created TC-C, "Town Center Core" district. Because this measure
was effectuated as a “map amendment,” even after the adoption of SB 718, referendum approval
would still be required for a similar measure.
Given that the New Law broadly prohibits a referendum on the adoption of a land development
regulation, the foregoing interpretation as to map amendments may be subject to challenge. Any
such challenge is one we would take on in good faith, as we will continue to give effect to the City
Charter to the fullest extent permitted under State law. Specifically, based on the statutory
exception set forth in Section 163.3167(8)(c), it is our opinion that the new provision in Section
163.3167(8)(b) does not preempt Charter Section 1.03(c) in its entirety, as the new prohibition in
subsection 8(b) must be read in pari materia with the existing provisions of subsection (8)(c),
which expressly permit a “referendum process in regard to any . . . map amendment” that is
“expressly authorized by specific language in a local government charter that was lawful and in
effect on June 1, 2011.” The City Charter was adopted prior to 2011 and qualifies for this
exception, and accordingly, referendum approval remains intact, but solely for any map
amendment that would result in an increase to a property’s zoned FAR.
B. Impact on Charter Section 1.06, relating to Historic Preservation
As the City’s historic preservation standards and regulations meet the definition of “land
development regulations” in Chapter 163, a referendum to adopt a less stringent amendment is
now prohibited. However, with respect to the “powers and duties” of the HPB, the City Attorney’s
Office would need to carefully review any future amendment to determine whether a referendum
7
would be required, as an amendment to the powers or duties of a land use board is unlikely to
satisfy the statutory definition of a “land development regulation.” To this end, it must be noted
that not a single amendment to reduce the powers and duties of the HPB or create a less stringent
historic preservation standard or regulation has been presented to the voters for consideration
since this Charter requirement was adopted nearly 11 years ago. Accordingly, we will evaluate
this issue further if the City Commission ever desires to enact any such ordinance.
At the request of Commissioner Steven Meiner and Commissioner Alex Fernandez, the City
Commission has recently referred items to the Land Use and Sustainability Committee, Planning
Board, and Charter Review Board to consider amending the Resiliency Code to require a 6/7ths
vote prior to any future FAR increase. In light of these referrals, the City Commission may also
wish to consider adopting a 6/7ths vot ing requirement for any Ordinance that would reduce the
powers and duties of the HPB, or enact a less stringent historic preservation standard or
regulation.
III. CONCLUSION
The New Law further limits the City's authority to call a referendum on land use or zoning matters
beyond existing provisions of the Community Planning Act, which prohibit an initiative or
referendum on a development order and, as applied to the City, on a comprehensive plan
amendment.
Effective July 1, 2023, and except as specified herein, the City is barred from calling a
referendum on any land development regulation, including a land development regulation
that increases a property’s FAR or creates a less stringent historic preservation standard
or regulation.
The New Law does not, however, render invalid the entirety of Sections 1.03(c) or 1.06 of the
City Charter. Because Charter Section 1.03(c) has been in place since before June 1, 2011,
referendum approval is still required for any map amendment (or rezoning) that would result in
an increase to a property’s zoned FAR. In addition, to the extent an amendment to the powers
and duties of the HPB is not a land development regulation, then Charter Sec. 1.06 would still
require voter approval. However, except in these two limited circumstances, the City Charter
must yield to State law, and a referendum process in regard to a land development regulation is
otherwise prohibited.
CHAPTER 2023-305
Committee Substitute for
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No.718
An act relating to local government;amending s.163.3167,F.S.;prohibiting
an initiative or referendum process in regard to any land development
regulation;reordering and amending s.171.031,F.S.;defining the term
“feasibility study”;amending s.171.0413,F.S.;specifying the measure-
ment of land during annexation procedures;amending s.171.042,F.S.;
replacing the term “report”with the term “feasibility study”;amending s.
171.051,F.S.;revising contraction procedures when qualified voters
desire to be excluded from municipal boundaries;prohibiting contraction
under certain circumstances;providing construction and applicability;
amending s.171.204,F.S.;conforming a cross-reference;providing an
effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
Section 1.Subsection (8)of section 163.3167,Florida Statutes,is
amended to read:
163.3167 Scope of act.—
(8)(a)An initiative or referendum process in regard to any development
order is prohibited.
(b)An initiative or referendum process in regard to any land develop-
ment regulation is prohibited.
(c)(b)An initiative or referendum process in regard to any local
comprehensive plan amendment or map amendment is prohibited unless
it is expressly authorized by specific language in a local government charter
that was lawful and in effect on June 1,2011.A general local government
charter provision for an initiative or referendum process is not sufficient.
(d)(c)It is the intent of the Legislature that initiative and referendum be
prohibited in regard to any development order or land development
regulation.It is the intent of the Legislature that initiative and referendum
be prohibited in regard to any local comprehensive plan amendment or map
amendment,except as specifically and narrowly allowed by paragraph (c)
(b).Therefore,the prohibition on initiative and referendum stated in
paragraphs (a)and (c)(b)is remedial in nature and applies retroactively
to any initiative or referendum process commenced after June 1,2011,and
any such initiative or referendum process commenced or completed there-
after is deemed null and void and of no legal force and effect.
Section 2.Section 171.031,Florida Statutes,is reordered and amended
to read:
1
CODING:Language stricken has been vetoed by the Governor
171.031 Definitions.—As used in this chapter,the following words and
terms have the following meanings unless some other meaning is plainly
indicated:
(1)“Annexation”means the adding of real property to the boundaries of
an incorporated municipality,such addition making such real property in
every way a part of the municipality.
(4)(2)“Contraction”means the reversion of real property within muni-
cipal boundaries to an unincorporated status.
(7)(3)“Municipality”means a municipality created pursuant to general
or special law authorized or recognized pursuant to s.2 or s.6,Art.VIII of
the State Constitution.
(8)(4)“Newspaper of general circulation”means a newspaper printed in
the language most commonly spoken in the area within which it circulates,
which is readily available for purchase by all inhabitants in its area of
circulation,but does not include a newspaper intended primarily for
members of a particular professional or occupational group,a newspaper
whose primary function is to carry legal notices,or a newspaper that is given
away primarily to distribute advertising.
(9)(5)“Parties affected”means any persons or firms owning property in,
or residing in,either a municipality proposing annexation or contraction or
owning property that is proposed for annexation to a municipality or any
governmental unit with jurisdiction over such area.
(6)“Feasibility study”means an analysis conducted by qualified staff or
consultants of the economic,market,technical,financial,and management
feasibility of the proposed annexation or contraction,as applicable.
(10)“Qualified voter”means any person registered to vote in accordance
with law.
(11)(7)“Sufficiency of petition”means the verification of the signatures
and addresses of all signers of a petition with the voting list maintained by
the county supervisor of elections and certification that the number of valid
signatures represents the required percentage of the total number of
qualified voters in the area affected by a proposed annexation.
(12)(8)“Urban in character”means an area used intensively for
residential,urban recreational or conservation parklands,commercial,
industrial,institutional,or governmental purposes or an area undergoing
development for any of these purposes.
(14)(9)“Urban services”means any services offered by a municipality,
either directly or by contract,to any of its present residents.
(13)(10)“Urban purposes”means that land is used intensively for
residential,commercial,industrial,institutional,and governmental
Ch.2023-305 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch.2023-305
2
CODING:Language stricken has been vetoed by the Governor
purposes,including any parcels of land retained in their natural state or
kept free of development as dedicated greenbelt areas.
(3)(11)“Contiguous”means that a substantial part of a boundary of the
territory sought to be annexed by a municipality is coterminous with a part
of the boundary of the municipality.The separation of the territory sought to
be annexed from the annexing municipality by a publicly owned county park;
a right-of-way for a highway,road,railroad,canal,or utility;or a body of
water,watercourse,or other minor geographical division of a similar nature,
running parallel with and between the territory sought to be annexed and
the annexing municipality,may shall not prevent annexation under this act,
provided the presence of such a division does not,as a practical matter,
prevent the territory sought to be annexed and the annexing municipality
from becoming a unified whole with respect to municipal services or prevent
their inhabitants from fully associating and trading with each other,socially
and economically.However,nothing in this subsection may herein shall be
construed to allow local rights-of-way,utility easements,railroad rights-of-
way,or like entities to be annexed in a corridor fashion to gain contiguity;
and when any provision or provisions of any special law prohibits or laws
prohibit the annexation of territory that is separated from the annexing
municipality by a body of water or watercourse,then that law shall prevent
annexation under this act.
(2)(12)“Compactness”means concentration of a piece of property in a
single area and precludes any action which would create enclaves,pockets,
or finger areas in serpentine patterns.Any annexation proceeding in any
county in this the state must shall be designed in such a manner as to ensure
that the area will be reasonably compact.
(5)(13)“Enclave”means:
(a)Any unincorporated improved or developed area that is enclosed
within and bounded on all sides by a single municipality;or
(b)Any unincorporated improved or developed area that is enclosed
within and bounded by a single municipality and a natural or manmade
obstacle that allows the passage of vehicular traffic to that unincorporated
area only through the municipality.
Section 3.Subsection (5)of section 171.0413,Florida Statutes,is
amended to read:
171.0413 Annexation procedures.—Any municipality may annex con-
tiguous,compact,unincorporated territory in the following manner:
(5)If more than 70 percent of the acres of land in an area proposed to be
annexed is owned by individuals,corporations,or legal entities which are
not registered electors of such area,such area may shall not be annexed
unless the owners of more than 50 percent of the acres of land in such area
consent to such annexation.Such consent must shall be obtained by the
Ch.2023-305 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch.2023-305
3
CODING:Language stricken has been vetoed by the Governor
parties proposing the annexation before prior to the referendum to be held
on the annexation.
Section 4.Subsections (1)and (2)of section 171.042,Florida Statutes,
are amended to read:
171.042 Prerequisites to annexation.—
(1)Before Prior to commencing the annexation procedures under s.
171.0413,the governing body of the municipality shall prepare a feasibility
study report setting forth the plans to provide urban services to any area to
be annexed,and the feasibility study must report shall include the following:
(a)A map or maps of the municipality and adjacent territory showing the
present and proposed municipal boundaries,the present major trunk water
mains and sewer interceptors and outfalls,the proposed extensions of such
mains and outfalls,as required in paragraph (c),and the general land use
pattern in the area to be annexed.
(b)A statement certifying that the area to be annexed meets the criteria
in s.171.043.
(c)A statement setting forth the plans of the municipality for extending
to the area to be annexed each major municipal service performed within the
municipality at the time of annexation.Specifically,such plans must shall:
1.Provide for extending urban services except as otherwise provided in
this subsection herein to the area to be annexed on the date of annexation on
substantially the same basis and in the same manner as such services are
provided within the rest of the municipality before prior to annexation.
2.Provide for the extension of existing municipal water and sewer
services into the area to be annexed so that,when such services are provided,
property owners in the area to be annexed will be able to secure public water
and sewer service according to the policies in effect in such municipality for
extending water and sewer lines to individual lots or subdivisions.
3.If extension of major trunk water mains and sewer mains into the area
to be annexed is necessary,set forth a proposed timetable for construction of
such mains as soon as possible following the effective date of annexation.
4.Set forth the method under which the municipality plans to finance
extension of services into the area to be annexed.
(2)Not fewer than 15 days before prior to commencing the annexation
procedures under s.171.0413,the governing body of the municipality shall
file a copy of the feasibility study report required by this section with the
board of county commissioners of the county in which wherein the
municipality is located.Failure to timely file the feasibility study report
as required in this subsection may be the basis for a cause of action to
invalidate invalidating the annexation.
Ch.2023-305 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch.2023-305
4
CODING:Language stricken has been vetoed by the Governor
Section 5.Subsections (2)and (4)of section 171.051,Florida Statutes,
are amended,and subsection (11)is added to that section,to read:
171.051 Contraction procedures.—Any municipality may initiate the
contraction of municipal boundaries in the following manner:
(2)A petition of 15 percent of the qualified voters in an area desiring to
be excluded from the municipal boundaries,filed with the clerk of the
municipal governing body,may propose such an ordinance.The municipality
to which such petition is directed shall immediately undertake a feasibility
study of the feasibility of such proposal and the governing body shall,within
6 months,evaluate the feasibility study of such proposal and either initiate
proceedings under subsection (1)by introducing a contraction ordinance or
reject the petition as a legislative decision,specifically stating the facts upon
which the rejection is based.
(4)If,at the meeting held for the such purpose of considering the
contraction ordinance introduced by the governing body,a petition is filed
and signed by at least 15 percent of the qualified voters resident in the area
proposed for contraction requesting a referendum on the question,the
governing body shall,upon verification,paid for by the municipality,of the
sufficiency of the petition,and before passing such ordinance,submit the
question of contraction to a vote of the qualified voters of the area proposed
for contraction,or the governing body may vote not to contract the municipal
boundaries.
(11)If more than 70 percent of the acres of land in an area proposed to be
contracted is owned by individuals,corporations,or legal entities that are
not registered electors of such area,such area may not be contracted unless
the owners of more than 50 percent of the acres of land in such area consent
to such contraction.
Section 6.The amendments made by this act to s.171.051,Florida
Statutes,are intended to be prospective in nature and apply only to petitions
filed on or after July 1,2023.
Section 7.Section 171.204,Florida Statutes,is amended to read:
171.204 Prerequisites to annexation under this part.—The interlocal
service boundary agreement may describe the character of land that may be
annexed under this part and may provide that the restrictions on the
character of land that may be annexed pursuant to part I are not restrictions
on land that may be annexed pursuant to this part.As determined in the
interlocal service boundary agreement,any character of land may be
annexed,including,but not limited to,an annexation of land not contiguous
to the boundaries of the annexing municipality,an annexation that creates
an enclave,or an annexation where the annexed area is not reasonably
compact;however,such area must be “urban in character”as defined in s.
171.031 s.171.031(8).The interlocal service boundary agreement may not
allow for annexation of land within a municipality that is not a party to the
Ch.2023-305 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch.2023-305
5
CODING:Language stricken has been vetoed by the Governor
agreement or of land that is within another county.Before annexation of
land that is not contiguous to the boundaries of the annexing municipality,
an annexation that creates an enclave,or an annexation of land that is not
currently served by water or sewer utilities,one of the following options
must be followed:
(1)The municipality shall transmit a comprehensive plan amendment
that proposes specific amendments relating to the property anticipated for
annexation to the Department of Economic Opportunity for review under
chapter 163.After considering the department’s review,the municipality
may approve the annexation and comprehensive plan amendment concur-
rently.The local government must adopt the annexation and the compre-
hensive plan amendment as separate and distinct actions but may take such
actions at a single public hearing;or
(2)A municipality and county shall enter into a joint planning agree-
ment under s.163.3171,which is adopted into the municipal comprehensive
plan.The joint planning agreement must identify the geographic areas
anticipated for annexation,the future land uses that the municipality would
seek to establish,necessary public facilities and services,including
transportation and school facilities and how they will be provided,and
natural resources,including surface water and groundwater resources,and
how they will be protected.An amendment to the future land use map of a
comprehensive plan which is consistent with the joint planning agreement
must be considered a small scale amendment.
Section 8.This act shall take effect July 1,2023.
Approved by the Governor June 28,2023.
Filed in Office Secretary of State June 28,2023.
Ch.2023-305 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch.2023-305
6
CODING:Language stricken has been vetoed by the Governor