The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XI
COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS

Chapter 163
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 163.3184

163.3184 Process for adoption of comprehensive plan or plan amendment.—

(1) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section, the term:

(a) “Affected person” includes the affected local government; persons owning property, residing, or owning or operating a business within the boundaries of the local government whose plan is the subject of the review; owners of real property abutting real property that is the subject of a proposed change to a future land use map; and adjoining local governments that can demonstrate that the plan or plan amendment will produce substantial impacts on the increased need for publicly funded infrastructure or substantial impacts on areas designated for protection or special treatment within their jurisdiction. Each person, other than an adjoining local government, in order to qualify under this definition, shall also have submitted oral or written comments, recommendations, or objections to the local government during the period of time beginning with the transmittal hearing for the plan or plan amendment and ending with the adoption of the plan or plan amendment.

(b) “In compliance” means consistent with the requirements of ss. 163.3177, 163.3178, 163.3180, 163.3191, 163.3245, and 163.3248, with the appropriate strategic regional policy plan, and with the principles for guiding development in designated areas of critical state concern and with part III of chapter 369, where applicable.

1. The state land planning agency;

2. The appropriate regional planning council;

3. The appropriate water management district;

4. The Department of Environmental Protection;

5. The Department of State;

6. The Department of Transportation;

7. In the case of plan amendments relating to public schools, the Department of Education;

8. In the case of plans or plan amendments that affect a military installation listed in s. 163.3175, the commanding officer of the affected military installation;

9. In the case of county plans and plan amendments, the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services; and

10. In the case of municipal plans and plan amendments, the county in which the municipality is located.

(2) COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS.—

(a) Plan amendments adopted by local governments shall follow the expedited state review process in subsection (3), except as set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c).

(b) Plan amendments that qualify as small-scale development amendments may follow the small-scale review process in s. 163.3187.

(c) Plan amendments that are in an area of critical state concern designated pursuant to s. 380.05; propose a rural land stewardship area pursuant to s. 163.3248; propose a sector plan pursuant to s. 163.3245 or an amendment to an adopted sector plan; update a comprehensive plan based on an evaluation and appraisal pursuant to s. 163.3191; propose a development that is subject to the state coordinated review process pursuant to s. 380.06; or are new plans for newly incorporated municipalities adopted pursuant to s. 163.3167, must follow the state coordinated review process in subsection (4).

(3) EXPEDITED STATE REVIEW PROCESS FOR ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS.—

(a) The process for amending a comprehensive plan described in this subsection shall apply to all amendments except as provided in paragraphs (2)(b) and (c) and shall be applicable statewide.

(b)1. The local government, after the initial public hearing held pursuant to subsection (11), shall transmit within 10 working days the amendment or amendments and appropriate supporting data and analyses to the reviewing agencies. The local governing body shall also transmit a copy of the amendments and supporting data and analyses to any other local government or governmental agency that has filed a written request with the governing body.

2. The reviewing agencies and any other local government or governmental agency specified in subparagraph 1. may provide comments regarding the amendment or amendments to the local government. State agencies shall only comment on important state resources and facilities that will be adversely impacted by the amendment if adopted. Comments provided by state agencies shall state with specificity how the plan amendment will adversely impact an important state resource or facility and shall identify measures the local government may take to eliminate, reduce, or mitigate the adverse impacts. Such comments, if not resolved, may result in a challenge by the state land planning agency to the plan amendment. Agencies and local governments must transmit their comments to the affected local government such that they are received by the local government not later than 30 days after the date on which the agency or government received the amendment or amendments. Reviewing agencies shall also send a copy of their comments to the state land planning agency.

3. Comments to the local government from a regional planning council, county, or municipality shall be limited as follows:

a. The regional planning council review and comments shall be limited to adverse effects on regional resources or facilities identified in the strategic regional policy plan and extrajurisdictional impacts that would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan of any affected local government within the region. A regional planning council may not review and comment on a proposed comprehensive plan amendment prepared by such council unless the plan amendment has been changed by the local government subsequent to the preparation of the plan amendment by the regional planning council.

b. County comments shall be in the context of the relationship and effect of the proposed plan amendments on the county plan.

c. Municipal comments shall be in the context of the relationship and effect of the proposed plan amendments on the municipal plan.

d. Military installation comments shall be provided in accordance with s. 163.3175.

4. Comments to the local government from state agencies shall be limited to the following subjects as they relate to important state resources and facilities that will be adversely impacted by the amendment if adopted:

a. The Department of Environmental Protection shall limit its comments to the subjects of air and water pollution; wetlands and other surface waters of the state; federal and state-owned lands and interest in lands, including state parks, greenways and trails, and conservation easements; solid waste; water and wastewater treatment; and the Everglades ecosystem restoration.

b. The Department of State shall limit its comments to the subjects of historic and archaeological resources.

c. The Department of Transportation shall limit its comments to issues within the agency’s jurisdiction as it relates to transportation resources and facilities of state importance.

d. The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission shall limit its comments to subjects relating to fish and wildlife habitat and listed species and their habitat.

e. The Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services shall limit its comments to the subjects of agriculture, forestry, and aquaculture issues.

f. The Department of Education shall limit its comments to the subject of public school facilities.

g. The appropriate water management district shall limit its comments to flood protection and floodplain management, wetlands and other surface waters, and regional water supply.

h. The state land planning agency shall limit its comments to important state resources and facilities outside the jurisdiction of other commenting state agencies and may include comments on countervailing planning policies and objectives served by the plan amendment that should be balanced against potential adverse impacts to important state resources and facilities.

(c)1. The local government shall hold its second public hearing, which shall be a hearing on whether to adopt one or more comprehensive plan amendments pursuant to subsection (11). If the local government fails, within 180 days after receipt of agency comments, to hold the second public hearing, the amendments shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended by agreement with notice to the state land planning agency and any affected person that provided comments on the amendment. The 180-day limitation does not apply to amendments processed pursuant to s. 380.06.

2. All comprehensive plan amendments adopted by the governing body, along with the supporting data and analysis, shall be transmitted within 10 working days after the second public hearing to the state land planning agency and any other agency or local government that provided timely comments under subparagraph (b)2.

3. The state land planning agency shall notify the local government of any deficiencies within 5 working days after receipt of an amendment package. For purposes of completeness, an amendment shall be deemed complete if it contains a full, executed copy of the adoption ordinance or ordinances; in the case of a text amendment, a full copy of the amended language in legislative format with new words inserted in the text underlined, and words deleted stricken with hyphens; in the case of a future land use map amendment, a copy of the future land use map clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation, and its adopted designation; and a copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate.

4. An amendment adopted under this paragraph does not become effective until 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, an amendment does not become effective until the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance.

(4) STATE COORDINATED REVIEW PROCESS.—

(a) Coordination.—The state land planning agency shall only use the state coordinated review process described in this subsection for review of comprehensive plans and plan amendments described in paragraph (2)(c). Each comprehensive plan or plan amendment proposed to be adopted pursuant to this subsection shall be transmitted, adopted, and reviewed in the manner prescribed in this subsection. The state land planning agency shall have responsibility for plan review, coordination, and the preparation and transmission of comments, pursuant to this subsection, to the local governing body responsible for the comprehensive plan or plan amendment.

(b) Local government transmittal of proposed plan or amendment.—Each local governing body proposing a plan or plan amendment specified in paragraph (2)(c) shall transmit the complete proposed comprehensive plan or plan amendment to the reviewing agencies within 10 working days after the first public hearing pursuant to subsection (11). The transmitted document shall clearly indicate on the cover sheet that this plan amendment is subject to the state coordinated review process of this subsection. The local governing body shall also transmit a copy of the complete proposed comprehensive plan or plan amendment to any other unit of local government or government agency in the state that has filed a written request with the governing body for the plan or plan amendment.

(c) Reviewing agency comments.—The agencies specified in paragraph (b) may provide comments regarding the plan or plan amendments in accordance with subparagraphs (3)(b)2.-4. However, comments on plans or plan amendments required to be reviewed under the state coordinated review process shall be sent to the state land planning agency within 30 days after receipt by the state land planning agency of the complete proposed plan or plan amendment from the local government. If the state land planning agency comments on a plan or plan amendment adopted under the state coordinated review process, it shall provide comments according to paragraph (d). Any other unit of local government or government agency specified in paragraph (b) may provide comments to the state land planning agency in accordance with subparagraphs (3)(b)2.-4. within 30 days after receipt by the state land planning agency of the complete proposed plan or plan amendment. Written comments submitted by the public shall be sent directly to the local government.

(d) State land planning agency review.—

1. If the state land planning agency elects to review a plan or plan amendment specified in paragraph (2)(c), the agency shall issue a report giving its objections, recommendations, and comments regarding the proposed plan or plan amendment within 60 days after receipt of the proposed plan or plan amendment. Notwithstanding the limitation on comments in sub-subparagraph (3)(b)4.g., the state land planning agency may make objections, recommendations, and comments in its report regarding whether the plan or plan amendment is in compliance and whether the plan or plan amendment will adversely impact important state resources and facilities. Any objection regarding an important state resource or facility that will be adversely impacted by the adopted plan or plan amendment shall also state with specificity how the plan or plan amendment will adversely impact the important state resource or facility and shall identify measures the local government may take to eliminate, reduce, or mitigate the adverse impacts. When a federal, state, or regional agency has implemented a permitting program, a local government is not required to duplicate or exceed that permitting program in its comprehensive plan or to implement such a permitting program in its land development regulations. This subparagraph does not prohibit the state land planning agency in conducting its review of local plans or plan amendments from making objections, recommendations, and comments regarding densities and intensities consistent with this part. In preparing its comments, the state land planning agency shall only base its considerations on written, and not oral, comments.

2. The state land planning agency review shall identify all written communications with the agency regarding the proposed plan amendment. The written identification must include a list of all documents received or generated by the agency, which list must be of sufficient specificity to enable the documents to be identified and copies requested, if desired, and the name of the person to be contacted to request copies of any identified document.

(e) Local government review of comments; adoption of plan or amendments and transmittal.—

1. The local government shall review the report submitted to it by the state land planning agency, if any, and written comments submitted to it by any other person, agency, or government. The local government, upon receipt of the report from the state land planning agency, shall hold its second public hearing, which shall be a hearing to determine whether to adopt the comprehensive plan or one or more comprehensive plan amendments pursuant to subsection (11). If the local government fails to hold the second hearing within 180 days after receipt of the state land planning agency’s report, the amendments shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended by agreement with notice to the state land planning agency and any affected person that provided comments on the amendment. The 180-day limitation does not apply to amendments processed pursuant to s. 380.06.

3. The state land planning agency shall notify the local government of any deficiencies within 5 working days after receipt of a plan or plan amendment package. For purposes of completeness, a plan or plan amendment shall be deemed complete if it contains a full, executed copy of the adoption ordinance or ordinances; in the case of a text amendment, a full copy of the amended language in legislative format with new words inserted in the text underlined, and words deleted stricken with hyphens; in the case of a future land use map amendment, a copy of the future land use map clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation, and its adopted designation; and a copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate.

4. After the state land planning agency makes a determination of completeness regarding the adopted plan or plan amendment, the state land planning agency shall have 45 days to determine if the plan or plan amendment is in compliance with this act. Unless the plan or plan amendment is substantially changed from the one commented on, the state land planning agency’s compliance determination shall be limited to objections raised in the objections, recommendations, and comments report. During the period provided for in this subparagraph, the state land planning agency shall issue, through a senior administrator or the secretary, a notice of intent to find that the plan or plan amendment is in compliance or not in compliance. The state land planning agency shall post a copy of the notice of intent on the agency’s Internet website. Publication by the state land planning agency of the notice of intent on the state land planning agency’s Internet site shall be prima facie evidence of compliance with the publication requirements of this subparagraph.

5. A plan or plan amendment adopted under the state coordinated review process shall go into effect pursuant to the state land planning agency’s notice of intent. If timely challenged, an amendment does not become effective until the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance.

(5) ADMINISTRATIVE CHALLENGES TO PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS.—

(a) Any affected person as defined in paragraph (1)(a) may file a petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to ss. 120.569 and 120.57, with a copy served on the affected local government, to request a formal hearing to challenge whether the plan or plan amendments are in compliance as defined in paragraph (1)(b). This petition must be filed with the division within 30 days after the local government adopts the amendment. The state land planning agency may not intervene in a proceeding initiated by an affected person.

(b) The state land planning agency may file a petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to ss. 120.569 and 120.57, with a copy served on the affected local government, to request a formal hearing to challenge whether the plan or plan amendment is in compliance as defined in paragraph (1)(b). The state land planning agency’s petition must clearly state the reasons for the challenge. Under the expedited state review process, this petition must be filed with the division within 30 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete according to subparagraph (3)(c)3. Under the state coordinated review process, this petition must be filed with the division within 45 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete according to subparagraph (4)(e)3.

1. The state land planning agency’s challenge to plan amendments adopted under the expedited state review process shall be limited to the comments provided by the reviewing agencies pursuant to subparagraphs (3)(b)2.-4., upon a determination by the state land planning agency that an important state resource or facility will be adversely impacted by the adopted plan amendment. The state land planning agency’s petition shall state with specificity how the plan amendment will adversely impact the important state resource or facility. The state land planning agency may challenge a plan amendment that has substantially changed from the version on which the agencies provided comments but only upon a determination by the state land planning agency that an important state resource or facility will be adversely impacted.

2. If the state land planning agency issues a notice of intent to find the comprehensive plan or plan amendment not in compliance with this act, the notice of intent shall be forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings of the Department of Management Services, which shall conduct a proceeding under ss. 120.569 and 120.57 in the county of and convenient to the affected local jurisdiction. The parties to the proceeding shall be the state land planning agency, the affected local government, and any affected person who intervenes. No new issue may be alleged as a reason to find a plan or plan amendment not in compliance in an administrative pleading filed more than 21 days after publication of notice unless the party seeking that issue establishes good cause for not alleging the issue within that time period. Good cause does not include excusable neglect.

(c) An administrative law judge shall hold a hearing in the affected local jurisdiction on whether the plan or plan amendment is in compliance.

1. In challenges filed by an affected person, the comprehensive plan or plan amendment shall be determined to be in compliance if the local government’s determination of compliance is fairly debatable.

2.a. In challenges filed by the state land planning agency, the local government’s determination that the comprehensive plan or plan amendment is in compliance is presumed to be correct, and the local government’s determination shall be sustained unless it is shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the comprehensive plan or plan amendment is not in compliance.

b. In challenges filed by the state land planning agency, the local government’s determination that elements of its plan are related to and consistent with each other shall be sustained if the determination is fairly debatable.

3. In challenges filed by the state land planning agency that require a determination by the agency that an important state resource or facility will be adversely impacted by the adopted plan or plan amendment, the local government may contest the agency’s determination of an important state resource or facility. The state land planning agency shall prove its determination by clear and convincing evidence.

(d) If the administrative law judge recommends that the amendment be found not in compliance, the judge shall submit the recommended order to the Administration Commission for final agency action. The Administration Commission shall make every effort to enter a final order expeditiously, but at a minimum within the time period provided by s. 120.569.

(e) If the administrative law judge recommends that the amendment be found in compliance, the judge shall submit the recommended order to the state land planning agency.

1. If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment should be found not in compliance, the agency shall make every effort to refer the recommended order and its determination expeditiously to the Administration Commission for final agency action, but at a minimum within the time period provided by s. 120.569.

2. If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment should be found in compliance, the agency shall make every effort to enter its final order expeditiously, but at a minimum within the time period provided by s. 120.569.

3. The recommended order submitted under this paragraph becomes a final order 90 days after issuance unless the state land planning agency acts as provided in subparagraph 1. or subparagraph 2. or all parties consent in writing to an extension of the 90-day period.

(f) Parties to a proceeding under this subsection may enter into compliance agreements using the process in subsection (6).

(g) The prevailing party in a challenge filed under this subsection is entitled to recover attorney fees and costs in challenging or defending a plan or plan amendment, including reasonable appellate attorney fees and costs.

(6) COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT.—

(a) At any time after the filing of a challenge, the state land planning agency and the local government may voluntarily enter into a compliance agreement to resolve one or more of the issues raised in the proceedings. Affected persons who have initiated a formal proceeding or have intervened in a formal proceeding may also enter into a compliance agreement with the local government. All parties granted intervenor status shall be provided reasonable notice of the commencement of a compliance agreement negotiation process and a reasonable opportunity to participate in such negotiation process. Negotiation meetings with local governments or intervenors shall be open to the public. The state land planning agency shall provide each party granted intervenor status with a copy of the compliance agreement within 10 days after the agreement is executed. The compliance agreement shall list each portion of the plan or plan amendment that has been challenged, and shall specify remedial actions that the local government has agreed to complete within a specified time in order to resolve the challenge, including adoption of all necessary plan amendments. The compliance agreement may also establish monitoring requirements and incentives to ensure that the conditions of the compliance agreement are met.

(b) Upon the filing of a compliance agreement executed by the parties to a challenge and the local government with the Division of Administrative Hearings, any administrative proceeding under ss. 120.569 and 120.57 regarding the plan or plan amendment covered by the compliance agreement shall be stayed.

(c) Before its execution of a compliance agreement, the local government must approve the compliance agreement at a public hearing advertised at least 10 days before the public hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the area in accordance with the advertisement requirements of chapter 125 or chapter 166, as applicable.

(d) The local government shall hold a single public hearing for adopting remedial amendments.

(e) For challenges to amendments adopted under the expedited review process, if the local government adopts a comprehensive plan amendment pursuant to a compliance agreement, an affected person or the state land planning agency may file a revised challenge with the Division of Administrative Hearings within 15 days after the adoption of the remedial amendment.

(f) For challenges to amendments adopted under the state coordinated process, the state land planning agency shall issue a cumulative notice of intent addressing both the remedial amendment and the plan or plan amendment that was the subject of the agreement within 20 days after receiving a complete plan or plan amendment adopted pursuant to a compliance agreement.

1. If the local government adopts a comprehensive plan or plan amendment pursuant to a compliance agreement and a notice of intent to find the plan amendment in compliance is issued, the state land planning agency shall forward the notice of intent to the Division of Administrative Hearings and the administrative law judge shall realign the parties in the pending proceeding under ss. 120.569 and 120.57, which shall thereafter be governed by the process contained in paragraph (5)(a) and subparagraph (5)(c)1., including provisions relating to challenges by an affected person, burden of proof, and issues of a recommended order and a final order. Parties to the original proceeding at the time of realignment may continue as parties without being required to file additional pleadings to initiate a proceeding, but may timely amend their pleadings to raise any challenge to the amendment that is the subject of the cumulative notice of intent, and must otherwise conform to the rules of procedure of the Division of Administrative Hearings. Any affected person not a party to the realigned proceeding may challenge the plan amendment that is the subject of the cumulative notice of intent by filing a petition with the agency as provided in subsection (5). The agency shall forward the petition filed by the affected person not a party to the realigned proceeding to the Division of Administrative Hearings for consolidation with the realigned proceeding. If the cumulative notice of intent is not challenged, the state land planning agency shall request that the Division of Administrative Hearings relinquish jurisdiction to the state land planning agency for issuance of a final order.

2. If the local government adopts a comprehensive plan amendment pursuant to a compliance agreement and a notice of intent is issued that finds the plan amendment not in compliance, the state land planning agency shall forward the notice of intent to the Division of Administrative Hearings, which shall consolidate the proceeding with the pending proceeding and immediately set a date for a hearing in the pending proceeding under ss. 120.569 and 120.57. Affected persons who are not a party to the underlying proceeding under ss. 120.569 and 120.57 may challenge the plan amendment adopted pursuant to the compliance agreement by filing a petition pursuant to paragraph (5)(a).

(g) This subsection does not prohibit a local government from amending portions of its comprehensive plan other than those that are the subject of a challenge. However, such amendments to the plan may not be inconsistent with the compliance agreement.

(h) This subsection does not require settlement by any party against its will or preclude the use of other informal dispute resolution methods in the course of or in addition to the method described in this subsection.

(7) MEDIATION AND EXPEDITIOUS RESOLUTION.—

(a) At any time after the matter has been forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings, the local government proposing the amendment may demand formal mediation or the local government proposing the amendment or an affected person who is a party to the proceeding may demand informal mediation or expeditious resolution of the amendment proceedings by serving written notice on the state land planning agency if a party to the proceeding, all other parties to the proceeding, and the administrative law judge.

(b) Upon receipt of a notice pursuant to paragraph (a), the administrative law judge shall set the matter for final hearing no more than 30 days after receipt of the notice. Once a final hearing has been set, no continuance in the hearing, and no additional time for post-hearing submittals, may be granted without the written agreement of the parties absent a finding by the administrative law judge of extraordinary circumstances. Extraordinary circumstances do not include matters relating to workload or need for additional time for preparation, negotiation, or mediation.

(c) Absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances, the administrative law judge shall issue a recommended order, in a case proceeding under subsection (5), within 30 days after filing of the transcript, unless the parties agree in writing to a longer time.

(d) For a case following the procedures under this subsection, absent written consent of the parties or a showing of extraordinary circumstances, if the administrative law judge recommends that the amendment be found not in compliance, the Administration Commission shall issue a final order within 45 days after issuance of the recommended order. If the administrative law judge recommends that the amendment be found in compliance, the state land planning agency shall issue a final order within 45 days after issuance of the recommended order. If the state land planning agency fails to timely issue a final order, the recommended order finding the amendment to be in compliance immediately becomes the final order.

(8) ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION.—

(a) If the Administration Commission, upon a hearing pursuant to subsection (5), finds that the comprehensive plan or plan amendment is not in compliance with this act, the commission shall specify remedial actions that would bring the comprehensive plan or plan amendment into compliance.

(b) The commission may specify the sanctions provided in subparagraphs 1. and 2. to which the local government will be subject if it elects to make the amendment effective notwithstanding the determination of noncompliance.

1. The commission may direct state agencies not to provide funds to increase the capacity of roads, bridges, or water and sewer systems within the boundaries of those local governmental entities which have comprehensive plans or plan elements that are determined not to be in compliance. The commission order may also specify that the local government is not eligible for grants administered under the following programs:

a. The Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program, as authorized by ss. 290.0401-290.048.

b. The Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program, as authorized by chapter 375.

c. Revenue sharing pursuant to ss. 206.60, 210.20, and 218.61 and chapter 212, to the extent not pledged to pay back bonds.

2. If the local government is one which is required to include a coastal management element in its comprehensive plan pursuant to s. 163.3177(6)(g), the commission order may also specify that the local government is not eligible for funding pursuant to s. 161.091. The commission order may also specify that the fact that the coastal management element has been determined to be not in compliance shall be a consideration when the department considers permits under s. 161.053 and when the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund considers whether to sell, convey any interest in, or lease any sovereignty lands or submerged lands until the element is brought into compliance.

3. The sanctions provided by subparagraphs 1. and 2. do not apply to a local government regarding any plan amendment, except for plan amendments that amend plans that have not been finally determined to be in compliance with this part, and except as provided in this paragraph.

(9) GOOD FAITH FILING.—The signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certificate that he or she has read the pleading, motion, or other paper and that, to the best of his or her knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, it is not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay, or for economic advantage, competitive reasons, or frivolous purposes or needless increase in the cost of litigation. If a pleading, motion, or other paper is signed in violation of these requirements, the administrative law judge, upon motion or his or her own initiative, shall impose upon the person who signed it, a represented party, or both, an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay to the other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses incurred because of the filing of the pleading, motion, or other paper, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

(10) EXCLUSIVE PROCEEDINGS.—The proceedings under this section shall be the sole proceeding or action for a determination of whether a local government’s plan, element, or amendment is in compliance with this act.

(11) PUBLIC HEARINGS.—

(a) The procedure for transmittal of a complete proposed comprehensive plan or plan amendment pursuant to subparagraph (3)(b)1. and paragraph (4)(b) and for adoption of a comprehensive plan or plan amendment pursuant to subparagraphs (3)(c)1. and (4)(e)1. shall be by affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the members of the governing body present at the hearing. The adoption of a comprehensive plan or plan amendment shall be by ordinance. For the purposes of transmitting or adopting a comprehensive plan or plan amendment, the notice requirements in chapters 125 and 166 are superseded by this subsection, except as provided in this part.

(b) The local governing body shall hold at least two advertised public hearings on the proposed comprehensive plan or plan amendment as follows:

1. The first public hearing shall be held at the transmittal stage. It shall be held on a weekday at least 7 days after the day that the first advertisement is published pursuant to the requirements of chapter 125 or chapter 166.

2. The second public hearing shall be held at the adoption stage. It shall be held on a weekday at least 5 days after the day that the second advertisement is published pursuant to the requirements of chapter 125 or chapter 166.

(c) Nothing in this part is intended to prohibit or limit the authority of local governments to require a person requesting an amendment to pay some or all of the cost of the public notice.

(12) CONCURRENT ZONING.—At the request of an applicant, a local government shall consider an application for zoning changes that would be required to properly enact any proposed plan amendment transmitted pursuant to this section. Zoning changes approved by the local government are contingent upon the comprehensive plan or plan amendment transmitted becoming effective.

(13) AREAS OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN.—No proposed local government comprehensive plan or plan amendment that is applicable to a designated area of critical state concern shall be effective until a final order is issued finding the plan or amendment to be in compliance as defined in paragraph (1)(b).

History.—s. 9, ch. 75-257; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 4, ch. 77-331; s. 7, ch. 83-308; s. 8, ch. 84-254; s. 8, ch. 85-55; s. 9, ch. 86-191; s. 7, ch. 92-129; s. 77, ch. 92-279; s. 55, ch. 92-326; s. 10, ch. 93-206; s. 34, ch. 94-356; s. 1445, ch. 95-147; s. 5, ch. 95-181; s. 11, ch. 95-310; s. 2, ch. 95-322; s. 26, ch. 96-410; s. 16, ch. 97-99; s. 2, ch. 97-253; s. 3, ch. 98-146; s. 12, ch. 98-176; s. 15, ch. 2000-158; s. 34, ch. 2001-254; s. 7, ch. 2002-296; s. 2, ch. 2004-384; s. 6, ch. 2005-290; s. 19, ch. 2006-1; s. 3, ch. 2007-198; s. 7, ch. 2009-96; s. 6, ch. 2011-14; s. 17, ch. 2011-139; s. 15, ch. 2012-5; s. 1, ch. 2012-75; s. 8, ch. 2012-99; s. 3, ch. 2015-30; s. 3, ch. 2016-148; s. 1, ch. 2023-115.

F.S. 163.3184 on Google Scholar

F.S. 163.3184 on Casetext

Amendments to 163.3184

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 163.3184

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 163.3184.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

TOWN OF PONCE INLET, a v. PACETTA, LLC, a a a, 226 So. 3d 303 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . (citing § 163.3184(3), Fla. Stat. (1989)). . . . (citing § 163.3184(4), Fla, Stat. (1989)). . . .

RAINBOW RIVER CONSERVATION, INC. v. RAINBOW RIVER RANCH, LLC,, 189 So. 3d 312 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . [by the settlement agreement] protects the public interest served by the statute at issue [section 163.3184 . . . Recognizing that the agreement would have the effect of contravening section 163.3184, -Florida Statutes . . . Section 163.3184 sets forth part of the process designed to serve these broader interests by establishing . . . In addition, as also recognized by the DEO in its motion to intervene below, section 163.3184 directly . . . These interests are intertwined because section 163.3184 relies upon active public participation to ensure . . .

TOWN OF PONCE INLET, v. PACETTA, LLC,, 120 So. 3d 27 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . See § 163.3184(4),(15), Fla. . . .

D. WEISS, v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA, a, 462 F. App'x 898 (11th Cir. 2012)

. . . Section 163.3184 of Florida Statutes provides the process for adoption of comprehensive plan amendments . . . Id. § 163.3184(3). . . . Stat. § 163.3184 and Fla. . . . amended without following the comprehensive plan amendment procedures required by Florida Statutes § 163.3184 . . . Coastal Development thus does no more for Weiss than reiterate what § 163.3184 of Florida Statutes provides . . .

MARTIN COUNTY CONSERVATION ALLIANCE v. MARTIN COUNTY, LLC, LC,, 73 So. 3d 856 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . had legitimate environmental interests in challenging the comprehensive plan amendments under section 163.3184 . . .

ATWATER, v. CITY OF WESTON, S., 64 So. 3d 701 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See also §§ 163.3184(6), 380.032, Fla. Stat. . . .

JACKSONVILLE PROPERTY RIGHTS ASSOCIATION, INC. a a d. b. a. a d. b. a. v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, FL, a, 635 F.3d 1266 (11th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 163.3184. . . .

MIAMI- DADE COUNTY, v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 54 So. 3d 633 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . the County transmitted the amendment to the Department of Community Affairs, as required by section 163.3184 . . . comprehensive plan set forth in the Florida Statutes, and the South Florida Strategic Regional Plan. § 163.3184 . . . In accordance with section 163.3184(10), Florida Statutes, the matter was then submitted to an administrative . . . of them, the ALJ submitted a second corrected recommended order to the Administration Commission. § 163.3184 . . . This final order was the conclusion of the proceedings under section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and . . .

KATHERINE S BAY, LLC, v. J. FAGAN, 52 So. 3d 19 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Rule 9J-5.003 was proper because the Plan does not define the term “compatible,” and because section 163.3184 . . .

PAYNE a a v. CITY OF MIAMI, a LLC, a, 53 So. 3d 258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . FLUM”) amendment to the comprehensive plan adopted by Ordinance No. 12761 is not in compliance with §§ 163.3184 . . . compliance criterion,’ because it is not required by the definition of ‘in compliance’ with Subsection 163.3184 . . .

PAYNE a a v. CITY OF MIAMI, a LLC,, 52 So. 3d 707 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . comprehensive plan amendment adopted by [the City was] determined to be in compliance as defined in § 163.3184 . . . compliance criterion,’ because it is not required by the definition of ‘in compliance’ with Subsection 163.3184 . . . compliance criterion,’ because it is not required by the definition of ‘in compliance’ under Subsection 163.3184 . . .

NASSAU COUNTY, v. G. WILLIS T. H. Jr. D. Co- G. T. u d o G. LLC, a LLC, a v., 41 So. 3d 270 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . a local government to amend its comprehensive plan, it must follow the procedure set out in section 163.3184 . . .

ASHLEY, v. STATE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION, St., 976 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, which details the process through which the State reviews . . . See § 163.3184(l)(b), Fla. Stat. (2006). . . .

POTIRIS v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, 947 So. 2d 598 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . He asserted that he was an affected person as is defined in section 163.3184(l)(a), Florida Statutes . . . challenge the consistency of the comprehensive plan amendment in a section 120.57 administrative hearing. § 163.3184 . . .

CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE GROWTH, a v. CITY OF ST. PETE BEACH, a, 940 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . example, in part II, titled “Process for adoption of comprehensive plan or plan amendment,” section 163.3184 . . .

SEMINOLE COUNTY, v. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS,, 935 So. 2d 521 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . See § 163.3184, Fla. Stat. (2005). . . .

ST. JOHNS ST. AUGUSTINE, COMMITTEE, v. CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE,, 909 So. 2d 575 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . These procedures include regional, county and municipal reviews, see section 163.3184(5), Florida Statutes . . . , and state planning agency reviews, see section 163.3184(6), Florida Statutes. . . . See § 163.3184(8), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 163.3184(15), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 163.3184(15), Fla. Stat. . . .

MELZER a v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 881 So. 2d 623 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . . § 163.3184(9), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . . .” § 163.3184(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

O CONNELL a v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 874 So. 2d 673 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Department accepted the order with minor changes and found the amendments in compliance pursuant to section 163.3184 . . .

TOWN OF JUNO BEACH, a v. T. McLEOD,, 832 So. 2d 864 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . administrative hearing with the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, pursuant to section 163.3184 . . .

LORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION v. COLLIER COUNTY, A. Jr., 819 So. 2d 200 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . . § 163.3184(8), Fla. Stat. (1999). . . . Stat. (1999). . § 163.3184, Fla. Stat. (1999). . . .

COASTAL DEVELOPMENT OF NORTH FLORIDA, INC. v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE BEACH,, 788 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 2001)

. . . Third, section 163.3184(10)(a) mandates that the fairly-debatable standard of review applies in an administrative . . . See § 163.3184(15)(b), Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1996). . See § 163.3187(1), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). . . . .

MARTIN COUNTY v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, 771 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . In short, the County contended that the amendments were not “in compliance” as defined in section 163.3184 . . .

BAKER, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a k a a Of BMS, 774 So. 2d 14 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See, e.g., § 163.3184, Fla. Stat. (1999). . . .

SUMTER CITIZENS AGAINST IRRESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT T. v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, 730 So. 2d 370 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . .” § 163.3184(9)(a), Fla. Stat. . . .

FLEEMAN, v. CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE BEACH,, 728 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . to this paragraph is not required to comply with the procedures and public notice requirements of s. 163.3184 . . . one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184 . . . (7), and are not subject to the requirements of s. 163.3184(3)-(6) unless the local government elects . . . Further, a small-parcel amendment is designated as an adoption hearing held pursuant to section 163.3184 . . .

CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, v. ROBBINS,, 702 So. 2d 1329 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . challenge by Robbins, who had argued certain amendments had not been "in compliance” as defined in Section 163.3184 . . . comprehensive plan that has been found to be in compliance may amend its comprehensive plan as set forth in s. 163.3184 . . . agency issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance in accordance with s. 163.3184 . . . Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance in accordance with s. 163.3184 . . .

VILLAGE OF KEY BISCAYNE, v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 696 So. 2d 495 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . very substantial — the Department erroneously declared the amendment “in compliance” under section 163.3184 . . .

MARTIN COUNTY, v. R. YUSEM,, 690 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 1997)

. . . See § 163.3184, Fla. Stat. (1989). . . . See § 163.3184(8), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 163.3184(3) Fla. Stat. . . . See § 163.3184(4), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 163.3184(7), Fla. Stat. (1989). . . .

MARTIN COUNTY, a v. SECTION PARTNERSHIP, LTD. a, 676 So. 2d 532 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . See § 163.3184, Fla. Stat. (1993). . . . the local government then decides whether it should adopt the amendment to its comprehensive plan. §§ 163.3184 . . .

FLORIDA EAST COAST INDUSTRIES INC. v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 677 So. 2d 357 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Sections 163.3184(9) and (10), Florida Statutes. . . .

MARTIN COUNTY, a v. SECTION PARTNERSHIP, LTD. a, 668 So. 2d 672 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . See § 163.3184, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . . the local government then decides whether it should adopt the amendment to its comprehensive plan. §§ 163.3184 . . .

MARTIN COUNTY, v. R. YUSEM,, 664 So. 2d 976 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . See generally § 163.3184, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . . its review to determine whether the change is consistent with the statewide growth management plan. § 163.3184 . . . local county government decides whether it should adopt the amendment to its comprehensive plan. §§ 163.3184 . . . funding for roads, bridges, or water and sewer systems and lack of eligibility for certain grants. § 163.3184 . . .

CITY OF RIVIERA BEACH, a v. T. SHILLINGBURG B., 659 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . See § 163.3184(10)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . . submission of a comprehensive plan subjects the governmental entity to sanctions pursuant to section 163.3184 . . .

SANTA ROSA COUNTY, v. ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS,, 661 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1995)

. . . amendments and support documents, the Department shall issue a notice of intent pursuant to Section 163.3184 . . .

ST. JOE PAPER COMPANY St. v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 657 So. 2d 27 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . The administrative hearing was held pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a), Florida Statutes, which identifies . . . Section 163.3184(l)(a) defines “affected person” to include “persons owning property, residing, or owning . . . The hearing pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a) is a section 120.57, Florida Statutes proceeding. . . . Section 163.3184(l)(a) provides a more expansive definition of an affected person who may participate . . . in the section 120.57 proceeding held pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a). . . .

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, a v. M. WYNN, D. W., 650 So. 2d 182 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . § 163.3184(13), Fla.Stat. . . . . § 163.3184(8)(a), Fla.Stat. . . . The language of section 163.3184(13) is explicit. . . . In their attempt to counter the apparent exclusivity provision of section 163.3184(13), appellees direct . . . Accordingly, in specific deference to the legislative directives of section 163.3184, we hold that a . . .

SANTA ROSA COUNTY, v. ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS, W., 642 So. 2d 618 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . discourage urban sprawl and achieve other land use goals; (2) the constitutionality of provisions of section 163.3184 . . . element requirements of Rule 9J — 5; (3) the validity and constitutionality of Rule 9J-5 and sections 163.3184 . . . amendments and support documents, the Department shall issue a notice of intent pursuant to Section 163.3184 . . . still be rejected by the Administration Commission and found “not in compliance.” § 163.3164(1); § 163.3184 . . .

RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, a a v. MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, a, 633 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . the Florida Department of Community Affairs (FDCA) for further proceedings in accordance with section 163.3184 . . .

BATTAGLIA PROPERTIES, LTD. v. FLORIDA LAND AND WATER ADJUDICATORY COMMISSION,, 629 So. 2d 161 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . . §§ 163.3184, 163.3194, Fla.Stat. (1991); Gardens Country Club Inc. v. . . .

CALIENTE PARTNERSHIP, a v. J. JOHNSTON,, 604 So. 2d 886 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Pursuant to section 163.3184(8)(b), Florida Statutes (1991), DCA has 45 days from receipt of formally . . . Although section 163.3184(8)(b) is indeed strongly worded, employing at all significant points the word . . . “default” provisions, which can be found in some other regulatory statutes, are absent from section 163.3184 . . . See §§ 163.3184(9), (10). . . . No plan or amendment can issue from the local government without a public hearing. §§ 163.3184(3)(a); . . .

B H TRAVEL CORPORATION, a d b a v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, 602 So. 2d 1362 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Pursuant to section 163.3184(8)(b), Florida Statutes, the Department of Community Affairs reviewed the . . . -5, Florida Administrative Code, “where such rule is not inconsistent with chapter 163, part II.” § 163.3184 . . . adoption of a plan constitutes its determination that the plan is in compliance as defined in section 163.3184 . . . must be “consistent with” rule 9J-5 in order to be in compliance with the Act as defined in section 163.3184 . . . body of each local government to transmit a proposed plan to the Department of Community Affairs. §§ 163.3184 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, v. DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS, LEE COUNTY, d b a, 588 So. 2d 272 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Three new petitions were filed commencing three section 163.3184(9) proceedings. . . .

ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION OF FLORIDA, INC. v. BROWARD COUNTY, 586 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . On July 26, 1990, following a formal administrative hearing held pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida . . . from within the Department and from other state agencies prior to adoption of the proposed plan. § 163.3184 . . . plan to be in compliance if the local government’s determination of compliance is fairly debatable. § 163.3184 . . .

FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES, INC. v. ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK, v. STATE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION, VILLAGE OF VIRGINIA GARDENS, v. STATE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION, TOWN OF PEMBROKE PARK, v. STATE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION,, 586 So. 2d 397 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . The petition also sought a determination that section 163.3184(11), Florida Statutes (1989), constituted . . . Section 163.3184(8) provides for the DCA to make a determination within 45 days of submission whether . . . At this point, if the Commission finds the plan not in compliance, under section 163.3184(11), it must . . . Section 163.3184(10)(a) provides that during the administrative hearing held after the DCA has issued . . . Section 163.3184(11) specifies the general nature of the sanctions in subsection (a): “The commission . . .

HOME BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION OF BREVARD, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 585 So. 2d 965 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . See § 163.3184(1)(b), Fla.Stat. . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, v. ESCAMBIA COUNTY P., 582 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . issued a notice of intent to find the Escambia County Comprehensive Plan not in compliance with section 163.3184 . . . Section 163.3184 governs the process for adoption of comprehensive plans. . . . Sections 163.3184(9)(b) and (10)(a) state that a proceeding under section 120.-57 shall be conducted . . . The rule also states that the law being implemented is section 163.3184(11), which governs the final . . . order issued by the Administrative Commission pursuant to section 163.3184(9) or (10). . . .

BENSON, B. v. CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, N. V., 591 So. 2d 942 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . view, the interpretation advanced by the appellants gives plain meaning to all the words in section 163.3184 . . .

B. B. McCORMICK SONS, INC. a J. T. M. Jr. F. R. J. T. St. v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE,, 559 So. 2d 252 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Sections 163.3184, 163.3187. . . .

FIRST CITY SAVINGS CORPORATION OF TEXAS, v. S B PARTNERS,, 548 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (1987). . . .

L. MACHADO, v. MUSGROVE,, 519 So. 2d 629 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . .-3167, 163.3177, and 163.3184, Florida Statutes (Supp.1986), mandate that local comprehensive plans . . .

FRIENDS OF THE EVERGLADES, INC. v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,, 495 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . As required by statute, see § 163.3184, Fla. . . .

CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, v. MOSHER,, 467 So. 2d 468 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . See, § 163.3184, Fla.Stat. (1983). . . . .