Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...rences to specific portions and pages. .... 20. Review of Remedial Amendments and Notice of Intent. Within 45 days after receipt of the adopted remedial plan amendments and support documents, the Department shall issue a notice of intent pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, for the adopted amendments in accordance with this agreement....

...lenge in which it challenged the validity of "certain unadopted, illicit rules of the Administration Commission" concerning the sanctions for noncompliance and nonsubmission of local comprehensive plans. The petition also sought a determination that section 163.3184(11), Florida Statutes (1989), constituted an illegal delegation of legislative power. Pembroke and Village, as petitioners, and the DCA, as respondent, successfully sought to intervene. The petitioners asserted that the sanctions policies constituted rules under the definition of section 120.52(16), and that the policies and section 163.3184(11) were invalid delegations of legislative authority....

...The "noncompliance policy" constitutes an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority pursuant to Sec. 120.52(8)(C), Fla. Stat., by impermissibly imposing sanctions beginning with the date that the Department of Community Affairs issues a notice to find a plan not in compliance in contravention of Sec. 163.3184, Fla. Stat., which provisions contemplate that sanctions will not begin until after a local government has failed to complete remedial actions specified by the Administration Commission pursuant to Sec. 163.3184(11), Fla....

...The "noncompliance policy" constitutes an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority pursuant to Sec. 120.52(8)(C), Fla. Stat., because the provisions relating to when the sanctions begin to run contravene the clear legislative intent of Sec. 163.3184 by infringing upon a municipality's exercise of its statutory rights to a hearing before a hearing officer and the Administration Commission....

...by more than 90 days shall be subject to sanctions." VI. The "sanctions policies" constitute an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority pursuant to Sec. 120.52(8)(C), Fla. Stat., by mandating that revenue sharing be withheld in contravention of Sec. 163.3184(11), Fla. Stat., which allows the Commission to exercise discretion in whether to impose sanctions. VII. Florida Statutes, Sec. 163.3167(2) and 163.3184(11)(a) unlawfully delegate the uniquely legislative power of determining the nature and extent of fines which may be assessed....

...sion's action in which the municipalities have not been afforded the opportunity to present evidence and legal argument. II) The municipalities were never afforded a clear point of entry into the administrative process. III) Sections 163.3167(2) and 163.3184(11)(a), Florida Statutes, are unlawful delegations of legislative power....

...The rights afforded and compliance required are the product of the statutes. *407 The sanctions policy arguably "implements" or "interprets" law or policy as it sets forth the starting point for the Commission's consideration of the statutory penalties detailed in section 163.3184(11)(a)....

...es an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority as it imposes sanctions as of the date the DCA issues its notice of noncompliance, rather than waiting until after the local government has failed to complete remedial actions as specified in section 163.3184(11). We disagree. Section 163.3184(8) provides for the DCA to make a determination within 45 days of submission whether a plan is or is not in compliance. If the DCA finds the plan is not in compliance, section 163.3184(10) provides that the DCA issues a notice of intent to find the plan not in compliance which is forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings for a 120.57 hearing. The hearing officer's recommended order is then submitted to the Administration Commission for final agency action. At this point, if the Commission finds the plan not in compliance, under section 163.3184(11), it must specify remedial actions, and may impose sanctions. Section 163.3184(11)(a) provides: (11) ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION — (a) If the Administration Commission, upon a hearing pursuant to subsection (9) or subsection (10), finds that the comprehensive plan or plan amendment is not in compliance with this...

...Instead, appellants argue the statute represents a clear legislative intent to not impose any sanctions until the local government has failed to comply with the mandated remedial action set forth in the Administration Commission's final order. We do not find any support for this argument in the statute. Section 163.3184(10)(a) provides that during the administrative hearing held after the DCA has issued its notice of intent to find the plan not in compliance, "the local government's determination that the [plan] is in compliance is presumed to be co...

...an" by the due date. *409 Nothing in the statutes addresses from which point in time the sanctions imposed should be calculated. The manner of the imposition of sanctions is clearly a matter left to the discretion of the Administration Commission by section 163.3184(11)(a)....

...Assuming appellants have any standing to challenge the Commission's policy which has yet to be applied to any local government, we do not think appellants have shown that the policy constitutes an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. As the hearing officer found, section 163.3184(11)(a) clearly seems to contemplate that once the Commission determines a plan is not in compliance, it will issue one final order addressing remedial actions and sanctions....

...forward. The Administration Commission would be within its discretion in imposing sanctions for noncompliance as of the submittal date. The fact that the statute refers to the plan being presumed correct is a procedural, not a substantive directive. Section 163.3184(10)(a) merely sets forth the relative burdens of proof in the 120.57 hearing to be conducted upon the DCA's determination of noncompliance....

...We disagree. The pertinent portion of section 163.3167(2)(b) provides: Any county or municipality that fails to meet the schedule set for submission of *410 its proposed comprehensive plan by more than 90 days shall be subject to the sanctions described in s. 163.3184(11)(a) imposed by the Administration Commission....

...he hearing officer correctly found this posture to be reasonable, particularly given the mandatory nature of the Growth Management Act requirements. In their final point addressed to the rule challenge, appellants argue that sections 163.3167(2) and 163.3184(11)(a) are unconstitutional delegations of legislative authority as only the legislature can properly determine the nature and extent of the fines to be assessed....

...So long as the agency is following the legislative purpose, there is no invalid delegation. Solimena. See also McRae v. Robbins, 151 Fla. 109, 9 So.2d 284, 290-291 (1942) (Justice Whitfield concurring). In these cases the delegation of discretionary authority on the issues of sanctions was proper. Section 163.3184(11) specifies the general nature of the sanctions in subsection (a): "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 ..." Subsection (a)1....

...specifies additional particular grant programs for which eligibility may be terminated as a sanction. If the local government's plan was one of the ones required to contain a *411 coastal management element, subsection (b) provides an additional funding sanction under a particular statute. Section 163.3184(11) therefore sets forth the range of sanctions available with specificity. Section 163.3167(2)(b) further limits the imposition of any sanctions for late filing only to those local governments which fail to file their plans within 90 days of its due date. Section 163.3184(11)(a) mandates the Commission to specify remedial actions for any plan determined by the Commission to be not in compliance; the provision of remedial measures is not a matter of discretion....

...subject to state revenue loss indefinitely. However, the wording of the statutes sufficiently limit the duration of any sanctions imposed. With regard to late submissions, section 163.3167(2)(b) provides that sanctions may be imposed as described in section 163.3184(11)(a) if a plan is more than 90 days late....

...It is inherent in the statute that the sanctions will terminate once a plan is submitted. This is also what the sanctions policy adopted by the Commission provides. However, the statutes do not place any express limitation on the duration of sanctions for nonsubmission. With regard to sanctions for noncompliance, section 163.3184(11)(a) *412 clearly contemplates that such sanctions will be imposed only for the duration of the noncompliance....

...All reasonable doubt must be resolved in favor of constitutionality. Bunnell v. State, 453 So.2d 808 (Fla. 1984); Industrial Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Kwechin, 447 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 1983); Felts v. State . Applying this standard to sections 163.3167 and 163.3184, they are not an unlawful delegation of legislative authority....

...In their fourth point, the municipalities argue that the Administration Commission unlawfully exercised its statutory authority in applying its sanctions policy in several respects. First, they argue the Commission failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of section 163.3184(11)(a) and "specify remedial actions." We disagree....

...ermination whether the plans were or were not in compliance. The statute clearly requires the Commission to specify remedial actions for plans determined to be "not in compliance with this act," upon the conclusion of a 120.57 hearing as provided in section 163.3184(9) or (10)....

...In 1982, Martin County (County) adopted by ordinance a comprehensive plan for land use planning in the county. Subsequently, in 1990, the County replaced its earlier plan by adopting a comprehensive land use plan (Plan) pursuant to the 1985 Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act. See generally § 163.3184, Fla....

...After considering the different arguments on the proposal, a majority of the Board, by a vote of three to two, voted to begin the amendment-adoption process by transmitting a copy of the complete proposed amendment to the Department of Community Affairs (Department). See § 163.3184, Fla....

...Our conclusion that amendments to comprehensive plans are legislative decisions is further supported by the procedures for effecting such amendments under the Act. Amendments to comprehensive plans are evaluated on several levels of government to ensure consistency with the Act and to provide ordered development. See § 163.3184(8), Fla. Stat. The Act provides for a two-stage process for amending a comprehensive plan: transmittal and adoption. In the first stage, the local government determines whether to transmit the proposed amendment to the Department for further review. See § 163.3184(3) Fla....

...If the local government transmits the proposed amendment, the process moves into the second stage. The Department, after receiving the amendment, provides the local government with its objections, recommendations for modifications, and comments of any other regional agencies. See § 163.3184(4), Fla. Stat. At this point, the local government has three options: (1) adopt the amendment; (2) adopt the amendment with changes; or (3) not adopt the amendment. See § 163.3184(7), Fla. Stat. (1989). [7] Upon adoption of the amendment by the local government, the Department again reviews the amendment. See § 163.3184(8), Fla. Stat. (1989). After this review and an administrative hearing, if an amendment is determined not to be in compliance with the Act, the State Comprehensive Plan, and the Department's minimum criteria rule, see § 163.3184(1)(b), Fla. Stat., then the matter is referred to the Administration Commission. See § 163.3184(9)(b), (10)(b), Fla....

...The Administration Commission, composed of the Governor and the Cabinet, see § 163.3164(1), Fla. Stat., is then empowered to levy sanctions against a local government, including directing state agencies not to provide the local government with funding for future projects. See § 163.3184(11)(a), Fla....

...This is in contrast to a rezoning proceeding, which is only evaluated on the local level. See Snyder. Moreover, our conclusion today that amendments to a comprehensive plan are legislative decisions subject to the fairly debatable rule is consistent with section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (1989). As noted *1295 above, once a local government decides to adopt an amendment, the Department issues a notice of intent to find whether an amendment is in compliance with state law, see § 163.3184(9)(a), Fla. Stat., or is not compliance with state law, see § 163.3184(10)(a), Fla....

...actions in the circuit court. See Hirt v. Polk County Board of County Comm'rs, 578 So.2d 415, 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). One of the amicus briefs suggests that the trial court did not properly have subject-matter jurisdiction in the case, arguing that section 163.3184(13), Florida Statutes (1989) ("Exclusive Proceedings"), provides that proceedings under that section are the sole method for determining whether a plan amendment is in compliance with the Act. Accordingly, it is argued that Yusem should have pursued the administrative procedures outlined in section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, prior to initiating court review. See City of Jacksonville v. Wynn, 650 So.2d 182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). However, we note that section 163.3184 only expressly prescribes administrative proceedings to review decisions of the Department. See § 163.3184(9)(a), (10)(a), Fla....

...tions as an agency are subject to the Administrative Procedure Act. However, a county's actions are only subject to the Administrative Procedure Act to the extent the county is expressly made subject to the Act. See § 120.52(1)(c), Fla. Stat. Since section 163.3184 does not expressly subject a county's decision to deny a requested amendment to the comprehensive plan as "agency action," Yusem was not required to exhaust any additional administrative remedies prior to the filing of an action in the circuit court....

...NOTES [1] Neither party argues that this requested zoning change did not require an amendment to the Plan. [2] Chapter 163, part II, Florida Statutes (Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act), provides for a two-stage amendment-adoption process: transmittal and adoption. § 163.3184(3),(7), Fla....

...ectly related to proposed small-scale development activities. Ch. 95-396, § 5, Laws of Fla. We do not make any findings concerning the appropriate standard of review for these small-scale development activities. [7] In 1993, the legislature amended section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, to require the Department to review a plan amendment if it determines that this review is necessary or if it is requested to do so by a regional planning council, affected person, or local government transmitting the plan....

...al Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975' (Section 163.3161, et seq., Florida Statutes). 5. That said zoning change relating to the Plaintiff's property from R-3 to R-1 is invalid, and Plaintiff's property is and remains zoned R-3." [3] See, § 163.3184, Fla....

...Development in conservation (Limited Development) will be permitted at a density no greater than 1 unit per 5 acres with permitted density clustered on the upland portion of the parcel. . . ."). [5] In order for a local government to amend its comprehensive plan, it must follow the procedure set out in section 163.3184(2), Florida Statutes....

...An administrative hearing before a properly designated hearing officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings is, by statute, the sole proceeding or action for the determination of whether a local government's plan, or an element thereof, is in compliance with the Act. § 163.3184(13), Fla. Stat. The Department of Community Affairs, as the legislatively designated state planning agency, section 163.3164(20), Florida Statutes, must make an initial determination whether a local plan or amendment is in compliance with the Act. § 163.3184(8)(a), Fla....

...days after publication of the notice. Such affected person is then entitled to a hearing at which the comprehensive plan in question "shall be determined to be in compliance if the local government's determination of compliance is fairly debatable." § 163.3184(9), Fla....

...ompliance with the Act, the matter is immediately forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings for a hearing which may be participated in by the local government, the Department of Community Affairs, and "any affected person who intervenes." § 163.3184(10)(a), Fla. Stat. Any intervenor challenging the local plan's compliance is then required to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the comprehensive plan is not in compliance. Id. The language of section 163.3184(13) is explicit....

...t the correct administrative remedy. The order also does not acknowledge the "fairly debatable" standard applicable to an administrative compliance challenge where the Department *186 of Community Affairs has found a plan in compliance with the Act. § 163.3184(9)(a), Fla. Stat. In their attempt to counter the apparent exclusivity provision of section 163.3184(13), appellees direct us to section 163.3194(4)(a), providing, "A court, in reviewing local governmental action or development regulations under this act, may consider, among other things, the reasonableness of the comprehensive plan, or element or elements thereof, relating to the issue justiciably raised......

...which are essentially executive action, conform to a legislated plan; and (3) avoid arbitrary "spot zoning" change that permits the use of individual parcels to depart from a plan. Accordingly, in specific deference to the legislative directives of section 163.3184, we hold that a circuit court is not vested with subject matter jurisdiction to consider in the first instance whether a comprehensive plan, as applied to a given parcel of property, is in compliance with Chapter 163, part II, Florida Statutes....

...nt to the plan to permit more intensive use or submit a plan of proposed development. Neither did landowners intervene as interested parties after the Department of Community Affairs's Notice of Intent during the time the plan was being adopted. See § 163.3184(10)(a), Fla....

...as not being ripe for judicial review. WARNER, J., and SMITH, FREDERICKA, Associate Judge, concur. NOTES [1] Under the Act, failure to meet the schedule for submission of a comprehensive plan subjects the governmental entity to sanctions pursuant to section 163.3184(11)(a), Florida Statutes (1989), which include cut-off of funds to increase capacity of roads, bridges, water and sewer systems and ineligibility for grants under various state programs....

...ion of that comprehensive plan was likewise legislative in nature. See id. at 1294. Second, the integrated review process by several levels of government indicates that an action on a comprehensive plan amendment is a policy decision. See id. Third, section 163.3184(10)(a) mandates that the fairly-debatable standard of review applies in an administrative hearing to determine compliance with the Act....

...See Coastal Development of North Florida, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville Beach, No. 97-000079-AP (Fla. 4th Cir. Ct., order dated June 30, 1998). [7] See § 163.3164(20), Fla. Stat. (1995). [8] See §§ 163.3161-.3243, Fla. Stat. (1995), et. seq. [9] See § 163.3184(15)(b), Fla....

...hensive plan and denied the request to establish a new ACUSA urban services district. Actually, the county simply refused to engage the steps mandated by the Growth Management Act which would be necessary to amend its adopted comprehensive plan. See § 163.3184, Fla....

...is consistent with the statewide growth management plan. Following receipt of a report and recommendation from the Department of Community Affairs, the local government then decides whether it should adopt the amendment to its comprehensive plan. §§ 163.3184(9)-(10) & 163.3187, Fla....

...In contrast, when amending a comprehensive land use plan, a governmental entity must follow procedures mandated by uniform state guidelines pursuant to the Growth Management Act which are similar to the process for adoption of the comprehensive plan. See generally § 163.3184, Fla....

...At the transmittal stage, the local government considers whether a proposed amendment should be submitted to the state planning agency, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), for its review to determine whether the change is consistent with the statewide growth management plan. § 163.3184(3), Fla....

...d to the adoption stage. At this second stage, following receipt of a report from the DCA, including its recommendations, objections and comments, the local county government decides whether it should adopt the amendment to its comprehensive plan. §§ 163.3184(9)-(10) and 163.3187....

...The failure of the governmental entity to comply with these procedures and the recommendations of the DCA may result in adverse consequences to the local government including potential loss of funding for roads, bridges, or water and sewer systems and lack of eligibility for certain grants. § 163.3184(11)....

...be "in compliance." On October 30, 1997 an administrative law judge issued a Final Order finding the adopted amendments in compliance and dismissing a challenge by Robbins, who had argued certain amendments had not been "in compliance" as defined in Section 163.3184(1) Florida Statutes (1995)....

...(1) The procedure for amendment of an adopted comprehensive plan or plan element which has been found to be in compliance shall be solely as prescribed by this section. (2) A local government which has a comprehensive plan that has been found to be in compliance may amend its comprehensive plan as set forth in s. 163.3184, with the following exceptions: (a) Plan amendments shall not become effective until the state land planning agency issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance in accordance with s. 163.3184(9), or until the Administration Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance in accordance with s. 163.3184(10).

...tatewide growth and redevelopment policy. The statutes specify processes for the adoption and amendment of a comprehensive plan and a redevelopment code. For example, in part II, titled "Process for adoption of comprehensive plan or plan amendment," section 163.3184(13) states that 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." Part III contains similar provisions....

...S & B Partners could have then argued that this amendment to the map would not be sufficient because the rezoning application would require an amendment to the entire growth management policy, and amending the policy is a much more difficult process that cannot be accomplished at one hearing. See section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (1987)....

...We disagree with Appellants that the law on standing is so fact specific and subjective that such a dispute can never be the subject of sanctions. Although Appellants presented admissible evidence below that a few of their members had legitimate environmental interests in challenging the comprehensive plan amendments under section 163.3184(1), Florida Statutes, they failed to present any competent evidence that the amendments, if implemented, would adversely affect them....

...(1999) (emphasis added). In implementing the legislative mandate, the Department, acting in its role as the state land planning agency, is required to review local governments' proposed plans for the purpose of determining whether they are in compliance with the Act. § 163.3184(8), Fla....

...163.3177(6)(a), I would reverse. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent in part. NOTES [1] No issue has been raised as to the standing of appellants to bring this appeal. [2] §§ 163.3161-.3245, Fla. Stat. (1999). [3] § 380.06, Fla. Stat. (1999). [4] § 163.3184, Fla....

...ocal comprehensive plans. In accordance with this directive, DCA promulgated Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, to aid the DCA in making a determination whether a local comprehensive plan is in compliance with the statutory requirements. See § 163.3184(1)(b), Fla....

...In June 1990, the hearing officer entered his recommended order finding the Plan in compliance. Environmental Coalition did not file any exceptions to the recommended order. On July 26, 1990, following a formal administrative hearing held pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (1989), the Department entered a final order adopting without modification the hearing officer's recommended order....

...Stat. (1987). [2] The Act requires local governments to submit their proposed plans so the Department may elicit objections, recommendations, and comments from within the Department and from other state agencies prior to adoption of the proposed plan. § 163.3184(3) and (4), Fla....

...f intent to find a comprehensive plan in compliance with the Act, and a § 120.57 hearing is held, at that hearing the Department shall determine the plan to be in compliance if the local government's determination of compliance is fairly debatable. § 163.3184(9)(a), Fla....

...virtually all of the elements of its plan, including the intergovernmental coordination element. From the outset, Martin County challenged the plan amendments. In short, the County contended that the amendments were not "in compliance" as defined in section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes, that the amendments failed to discourage urban sprawl, that the amendments were not consistent with the County's comprehensive plan, that the intergovernmental coordination element was inadequate to meet the...

...equirements, and a process of review by multiple government agencies. At various stages of the process, votes are required by the local government's "governing body," including the final vote either approving or rejecting any proposed amendment. See § 163.3184, Fla....

...like those operated by 3 See Citrus Cnty. v. Halls River Dev., Inc., 8 So. 3d 413, 420–21 (Fla. 5th Dist. Ct. App. 2009). 4 The general procedures for amending a comprehensive plan are found in Fla. Stat. § 163.3184....

...Any assurances by town officials that the Comprehensive Plan would be amended so as to authorize Pacetta’s development plans could not be relied upon in good faith by Pacetta, since town officials lacked the authority to unilaterally amend the Comprehensive Land-Use Plan. See § 163.3184(4),(15), Fla....

...We hold that the Department acted within its discretion in finding the plan to be in compliance with the Act and affirm the appealed order. On October 30, 1989, Redington Beach's Board of Commissioners (hereinafter, Commissioners) adopted the Town's comprehensive land use plan by ordinance. Pursuant to section 163.3184(8)(b), Florida Statutes, the Department of Community Affairs reviewed the plan and issued a notice of intent to find it in compliance with the Act....

...ment), and 163.3191 (identifying ongoing reporting requirements); (2) the state comprehensive plan and appropriate regional policy plan; and (3) rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, "where such rule is not inconsistent with chapter 163, part II." § 163.3184(1)(b), Fla. Stat. The Act contemplates that a local government's formal adoption of a plan constitutes its determination that the plan is in compliance as defined in section 163.3184(1)(b)....

...*1365 Where, as in this case, the Department of Community Affairs has issued a notice of intent to find the plan in compliance, in subsequent administrative proceedings challenging that conclusion, the plan "shall be determined to be in compliance if the local government's determination of compliance is fairly debatable." § 163.3184(9)(a), Fla....

...proposed plan to the Commissioners renders the plan finally adopted by that body inconsistent with rule 9J-5.005(8)(b) & (c). They reason that because a plan must be "consistent with" rule 9J-5 in order to be in compliance with the Act as defined in section 163.3184(1)(b), and the Town's plan is inconsistent with rule 9J-5.005(8), said plan cannot be in compliance with the Act, and the Department abused its discretion in concluding otherwise. We note that, in determining whether the plan is "consistent with" rule 9J-5 so as to be in compliance as defined in section 163.3184(1)(b), the hearing officer made use of the definition of "consistency" and the consistency analysis found in section 163.3177(10)(a)....

...manner.") Given the planning board's active role in the Town's plan adoption process, and the public's unfettered and significant participation in that process, we affirm the Department's order determining the plan to be in compliance as defined in section 163.3184(1)(b)....

...Servs., 553 So.2d 1351, 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), and cases referenced therein. AFFIRMED. ERVIN and SMITH, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] The Act requires the chief governing body of each local government to transmit a proposed plan to the Department of Community Affairs. §§ 163.3184(3)(a); 163.3164(8), Fla....

...The Department then elicits comments upon the proposed plan from various state agencies and the appropriate regional planning council and, upon review of those comments, prepares a report containing objections, recommendations for plan modifications and comments. § 163.3184(4)-(6), Fla. Stat. The Department's report is sent to the local government which then has sixty days to adopt, or adopt with changes, the proposed plan. § 163.3184(7), Fla....

...ief by unpublished order. We now explicate our reasons for issuing the writ of prohibition. Petitioner, the Department of Community Affairs (Department), issued a notice of intent to find the Escambia County Comprehensive Plan not in compliance with section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (Supp....

...Schulz, 180 So.2d 367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965). Section 120.52(1)(b) defines "agency" as each state officer and each state department, commission and authority, including those described in chapter 163. Here, the Department and the County are proceeding under chapter 163. 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 in the affected local *1239 jurisdiction....

...Rule 28-39.005(4) states that "[f]inal orders of the Commission shall be subject to judicial review pursuant to Chapter 120, Florida Statutes." This rule references as specific authority sections 14.202 and 120.53. 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)....

determined to be in compliance as defined in § 163.3184(l)(b) (2005).” Id. OUR REVIEW Proceedings in

...The ALJ issued a Recommended Order to the Department, recommending entry of a final order finding *675 the amendments in compliance. After considering the Exceptions to the Recommended Order, the Department accepted the order with minor changes and found the amendments in compliance pursuant to section 163.3184(1)(b) of the Florida Statutes....

...rehensive plan to rezone the Bakery Centre property to a less intense use. After a public hearing the city commission transmitted the proposed amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (FDCA) for further proceedings in accordance with section 163.3184, Florida Statutes....

...y. This was enough to give Melzer and the Alliance standing to participate below. Under the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, any "affected person" may file a petition to initiate an administrative hearing. § 163.3184(9), Fla. Stat. (2002). The definition of "affected person" includes "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." § 163.3184(1)(a), Fla....

...Johns County had agreed to reimburse DOT for the cost of installing the water and sewer lift stations and force mains. In addition, appellants/petitioners alleged the St. Johns County Comprehensive Plan is silent on the extension of these public services; no public hearings were held by St. Johns County pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (1997), to discuss extension of the public facilities; no plan amendment was proposed by St....

...3d DCA 1984), we affirm the Department’s ruling. The memorandum upon which Friends sought to be heard was prepared by the Department, a state land planning agency, after its review of the Proposed Local Comprehensive Plan of Monroe County, Florida. As required by statute, see § 163.3184, Fla....

...Section 163.3189, Florida Statutes, sets forth the process for amending an adopted comprehensive plan. The same basic procedures are utilized for amending an adopted comprehensive plan as are used in the initial adoption of a comprehensive plan as set forth in section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. See § 163.3189(2), Fla. Stat. 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. A notice of intent must be published in a sufficient newspaper, in a prescribed format. See § 163.3184(8), Fla. Stat. The local governing body must hold at least two advertised public hearings on the proposed plan amendment. See § 163.3184(15), Fla....

...zoning or PUD in a manner consistent with its—not the County's—comprehensive plan. The contrary interpretation adopted by the circuit court effectively skips and by-passes the public hearing process attendant to Comprehensive Plan amendments. See § 163.3184(15), Fla....

(2) the constitutionality of provisions of section 163.3184, which authorize the Administration Commission

...r a final hearing on the merits unnecessary as the parties agreed to waive any right to appeal. The county adopted the plan agreements, which satisfied the Department, but not all *274 the intervenors. Three new petitions were filed commencing three section 163.3184(9) proceedings....

...For these reasons, we grant the Town’s petition and quash the circuit court’s decision. GUNTHER and WARNER, JJ., concur. . McLeod and others filed a petition for formal administrative hearing with the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, pursuant to section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes (2000)....

...County Attorney County of Monroe Post Office Box 1680 Key West, Florida 33040 Dear Mr. Proby: This is in response to your request for an Attorney General's Opinion regarding substantially the following question: ARE ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS OR HEARINGS HELD IN ACCORDANCE WITH ss. 125.66 , 163.205, 163.210, 163.215, 163.3184 and 163.3187 , F.S., REQUIRED TO BE HELD AFTER 5:00 P.M....

...the local government's comprehensive plan and that during the interim period prior to such amendment, the provisions of the most recently adopted comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof shall govern any action taken for a development order. Section 163.3184 , F.S., as amended by s....

...by this subsection. Each local government shall adopt the comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof by ordinance. The statutory requirements for public hearings on the proposed comprehensive plan, plan element, or plan amendment contained in s. 163.3184 (15)(b), F.S., as amended, are substantially similar to the provisions of s....

...The second hearing shall be held approximately 2 weeks after the first hearing and shall be advertised approximately 5 days prior to the public hearing. The day, time, and place at which the second public hearing will be held shall be announced at the first public hearing. (e.s.) Section 163.3184 (15)(b), F.S., as amended by s. 8, Ch. 85-55, Laws of Florida. And see, s. 163.3184 (15)(c), supra, setting forth requirements for newspaper advertisements to be published as notice of a change of land use if the proposed comprehensive plan, plan element, or plan amendment changes the permitted uses of land or changes land-use categories....

...85-55, Laws of Florida, which inter alia, provides that amendments to comprehensive plans may be made no more than twice a year except in the case of emergencies. With regard to the time and frequency of public hearings as prescribed by s. 125.66 , F.S., and ss. 163.3184 and 163.3187 , F.S., as amended by Ch. 85-55, Laws of Florida, the provisions of ss. 163.3184 and 163.3187 would appear to control to the extent of any conflict in instances in which such hearings are scheduled for purposes of adopting a comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof, or the adoption of an amendment to a previously adopted comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof....

...f county commissioners. In cases involving a proposed rezoning of 5 percent or more of the total land area of the county, s. 125.66 (5)(b), F.S., requires more than one advertised public hearing to be held on a weekday after 5 p.m. The provisions of s. 163.3184 (15), F.S., as amended by s....

...roughout the entire area in which the notice is intended to be read— would be adding a requirement to the statute which does not exist. We disagree. In our view, the interpretation advanced by the appellants gives plain meaning to all the words in section 163.3184(15)(c)....

of the unincorporated area of the county. Section 163.3184(1), F.S., is a general provision relating

...Since the Department issued a notice of intent to find the plan in compliance, in subsequent administrative proceedings challenging that conclusion, the plan “shall be determined to be in compliance if the local government’s determination of compliance is fairly debatable.” § 163.3184(9)(a), Fla....

...r amending a Comprehensive Land- Use Plan under chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Martin Cty. v. Yusem, 690 So. 2d 1288, 1294 (Fla. 1997). First, the local government determines whether to transmit the proposed amendment for further review. Id. (citing § 163.3184(3), Fla. Stat. (1989)). If transmitted to the DCA, the DCA, after receiving the amendment, provides the local government with its objections, recommendations for modifications, and comments from any other regional agencies. Id. (citing § 163.3184(4), Fla. Stat. (1989)). The local government then has three options: (1) adopt the amendment; (2) adopt the amendment with changes; or (3) not adopt the amendment. Id. (citing § 163.3184(7), Fla....

...Plan would be amended so as to authorize Pacetta’s development plans could not be relied upon in good faith by Pacetta, since town officials lacked the authority to unilaterally amend the Comprehensive Land-Use Plan. See § 163.3184(4), (15), Fla....

...We conclude that 1000 Friends should not have been allowed to participate as an intervenor, and that this was a material error in procedure which may have impaired the fairness of the proceeding. *28 The administrative hearing was held pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a), Florida Statutes, which identifies the parties to the proceeding as including "any affected person who intervenes." Section 163.3184(1)(a) defines "affected person" to include "persons owning property, residing, or owning or operating a business within the boundaries of the local government" which adopted the plan....

...Noting that 1000 Friends had participated in the local planning process by commenting on the proposed plan and attending public hearings, the Commission concluded that this was a sufficient basis upon which to grant 1000 Friends standing to intervene. The hearing pursuant to section 163.3184(10)(a) is a section 120.57, Florida Statutes proceeding....

...Bayshore Homeowners Association, 418 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), rev. denied, 430 So.2d 451 (Fla. 1983); Agrico Chemical v. Department of Environmental Regulation, 406 So.2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), rev. denied, 415 So.2d 1359 and 415 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 1982). Section 163.3184(1)(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)....

...pation in the comprehensive planning process, as recited in section 163.3181(1), Florida Statutes, this legislative edict is made in connection with a statutory directive for local governmental units to adopt procedures to ensure such participation. Section 163.3184(7) further requires the local government to review written comments submitted by any person. By contrast, however, section 163.3184(10)(a) specifies that a person must be an "affected person" in order to participate in the section 120.57 proceeding. By suggesting that 1000 Friends qualified as an affected person because it had participated in the local planning process, the Commission failed to accord proper effect to the requirement in section 163.3184(1)(a) that the described persons (apart from an adjoining government) must have submitted comments or objections during the local process....

...d deference, such an interpretation must comport with the pertinent legislation and may not vitiate a portion of the statute. See Palm Harbor Special Fire Control District v. Kelly, 516 So.2d 249 (Fla. 1987). The Commission's unilateral expansion of section 163.3184(1)(a) does not accord with the statutory catalog of affected persons, which appears to be a comprehensive listing and which should not be altered without clear authorization and direction from the legislature....

...The Commission did not predicate 1000 Friends' standing on this theory, but 1000 Friends notes that it did participate in the local planning process and that such involvement is within the declared purpose for its corporate existence. In this context, such participation may constitute a business *29 activity. But the section 163.3184(1)(a) definition is not satisfied merely by conducting some business activity in connection with the comprehensive planning process, as the statute specifies that one must be "owning or operating a business within the boundaries of the local government" to qualify as an affected person in this regard. Even though representatives of 1000 Friends physically appeared in Walton County during the local planning process, such incidental and transient presence does not suffice under section 163.3184(1)(a)....

...business potentially subject to the constraints of the local comprehensive plan. 1000 Friends' involvement in the planning process does not meet this standard, and does not qualify as the operation of a business within the county, as contemplated by section 163.3184(1)(a)....

declared the amendment “in compliance” under section 163.3184(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1995). Its decision

...Potiris filed a petition for a formal administrative hearing to challenge a land use change approved by the Village of Wellington. Potiris is a land planner who does not live, own property, or have a business address or business license in Wellington. He asserted that he was an affected person as is defined in section 163.3184(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2004), be *599 cause he was a person “owning or operating a business within the boundaries of the local government whose plan is the subject of the review.” If Potiris was such a person he would have standing to challenge the consistency of the comprehensive plan amendment in a section 120.57 administrative hearing. § 163.3184(9), Fla....

also repealed by Ch. 77-331, Laws of Florida. Section 163.3184 dealing with adoption of comprehensive plans

...ded. As provided in the plan, the determination of “need” is to be “through the plan review and amendment process.” After the amendment was codified, the County transmitted the amendment to the Department of Community Affairs, as required by section 163.3184(7), Florida Statutes....

...nt to find the amendment “not in compliance” with certain policies in the County’s plan, administrative rules applicable state-wide, the state comprehensive plan set forth in the Florida Statutes, and the South Florida Strategic Regional Plan. § 163.3184(8), Fla. Stat. In accordance with section 163.3184(10), Florida Statutes, the matter was then submitted to an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) for proceedings under sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes....

...After eight days of evidentiary hearings, during which evidence was submitted by Miami-Dade County, the Department, and the interve-nors aligned with each of them, the ALJ submitted a second corrected recommended order to the Administration Commission. § 163.3184(10)(b), Fla....

...d the second corrected recommended order with modifications prompted by some of the exceptions, and stated with particularity its reasons for modifying conclusions of law where applicable. This final order was the conclusion of the proceedings under section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and was appealable to this court as provided by section 120.68, Florida Statutes....

...hensive plan and denied the request to establish a new ACUSA urban services district. Actually, the county simply refused to engage the steps mandated by the Growth Management Act which would be necessary to amend its adopted comprehensive plan. See § 163.3184, Fla.Stat....

...is consistent with the statewide growth management plan. Following receipt of a report and recommendation from the Department of Community Affairs, the local government then decides whether it should adopt the amendment to its comprehensive plan. §§ 163.3184(9)-(10) & 163.3187, Fla....

...lement or portion thereof, "other than for a future land use plan element or portion thereof involving less than 5 percent of the total land area of the local governmental unit," and further specified that the procedure for amendment was governed by s. 163.3184 , F.S., except with respect to amendments involving less than 5 percent of the total land area of the local governmental unit, where the procedure provided in s. 163.3184 (7)(b), F.S., controlled. Section 163.3184 (1), F.S., required submission of plans and amendments thereto to the state land planning agency and further operated to require that local planning agencies, such as the Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission, hold a public hearing on such plans and amendments. See, s. 163.3184 (1)(e), F.S. But see, AGO 83-15, concluding that submission of amendments to a future land use element involving less than 5 percent of a local governmental unit's land area to the state land planning agency was not required pursuant to s. 163.3184 (1)(a), F.S., since s. 163.3187 specified that s. 163.3184 (7)(b) controlled the adoption procedure for such amendments....

...75-390, supra, as amended, should be read together and harmonized with the provisions of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975 since both statutes were enacted by the 1975 Legislature and should be considered to be in pari materia. See also, s. 163.3184 (7)(a), F.S....

...75-390, Laws of Florida, as to specific and comprehensive amendments to adopted comprehensive plans or elements or portions thereof. Section 9 of Ch. 85-55, supra, deletes the provision for an alternative procedure for amendments of land use elements or portions thereof pursuant to s. 163.3184 (7)(b), F.S. 1983, and now specifies that "[t]he procedure for amendment of an adopted comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof shall be as for the original adoption of the comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof set forth in s. 163.3184 ." Section 163.3184 , F.S., as amended by s....

...and no longer includes in subsection (7)(b), an adoption procedure (made applicable to amendments by s. 163.3187 , F.S.) for a portion of a land use element involving less than 5 percent of the total land area of the local government unit. Instead, s. 163.3184 (15), F.S., as amended, now provides for adoption of comprehensive plans (and amendments, pursuant to s. 163.3187 ) "in the manner prescribed by this subsection" (e.s.) and further requires the local governing body to "hold at least two advertised public hearings on the proposed comprehensive plan, plan element, or plan amendment." (e.s.) And see, s. 163.3184 (1)(a), F.S., as amended by s....

...an or element or portion thereof, the governing body shall . . . [t]ransmit 5 copies of the proposed comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof to the state land planning agency for written comment." (e.s.) Moreover, in view of the deletion of s. 163.3184 (7)(b), F.S. 1983, and the specific reference thereto in s. 163.3187 , it would appear that the provisions of s. 163.3184 (1) are now applicable to all amendments to previously adopted comprehensive plans or elements or portions thereof, including the provision in s. 163.3184 (1)(c), F.S., as amended, that the governing body shall determine that the local planning agency has held a public hearing thereon....

...of s. 163.3161 , F.S., declaring legislative intent and brought forward pursuant to s. 20 of Ch. 85-55, supra. More particularly, legislative intent is discernible from the amendments to statutory law enacted therein, especially s. 8, which amended s. 163.3184 , F.S., to provide in subsection (15) thereof that the procedure for adoption of a comprehensive plan, element, or portion thereof (as made applicable to amendments generally by s....

requesting such for their review and comments. Section 163.3184(2), (3), and (4), F. S., grants each of these

...p series (FLUM). In relevant part, the Ordinance adds four new land use categories for the area on St. James Island, in eastern Franklin County: Rural Village, Conservation Residential, Marina Village Center, and Carrabelle East Village. Pursuant to section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, which details the process through which the State reviews and adopts a county comprehensive plan or plan amendment, Franklin County transmitted Ordinance 2005-20 and the proposed amendments to the State of Florida for review....

...On May 26, 2005, appellee State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, published a Notice of Intent to find the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan "in compliance." "In compliance" means the amendments are consistent with requirements set forth in section 163.3177, Florida Statutes (2006). See § 163.3184(1)(b), Fla....

...Florida Administrative Code Rule 9J-5.003(23). We agree. Initially, we note that the reliance on the definitions provided in Florida Administrative Code Rule 9J-5.003 was proper because the Plan does not define the term “compatible,” and because section 163.3184(l)(b) defines “in compliance” in pertinent part as “consistent with the requirements of ss....

...lief that the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) is barred by statute from contesting the amendment. 1 We have jurisdiction. See State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs v. Escambia County, 582 So.2d 1237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Pursuant to section 163.3184(8)(b), Florida Statutes (1991), DCA has 45 days from receipt of formally adopted amend *887 ments to a comprehensive plan to determine whether those amendments are in compliance with the Growth Management Act....

...y remedy of prohibition is not justified. Southern Neurosurgical Associates, P.A. v. Fine, 591 So.2d 252 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). 2 Even in the absence of this factual controversy, however, we would be disinclined to intervene at this juncture. Although section 163.3184(8)(b) is indeed strongly worded, employing at all significant points the word “shall,” it does not necessarily follow that Caliente should benefit from departmental inaction. Explicit “default” provisions, which can be found in some other regulatory statutes, are absent from section 163.3184(8)(b). 3 Furthermore, DCA’s obligatory decision under the statute does not put an end to the compliance question. Instead, their decision then triggers the right of “affected parties” to petition for an administrative hearing. See §§ 163.3184(9), (10)....

...isions. See § 163.-3181(1), Fla.Stat. (1991). And see Benson v. City of Miami Beach, 591 So.2d 942 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), rev. denied, 601 So.2d 551 , 601 So.2d 553 (Fla.1992), wherein the court found insufficient publication of the notice required by § 163.3184(15)(c) because too few residents of Dade County could be expected to have read the newspaper in question....

...2d DCA 1991). . An overview of the somewhat labyrinthine plan approval process does belie any claim that the public has no voice until after DCA has made its final decision. No plan or amendment can issue from the local government without a public hearing. §§ 163.3184(3)(a); 163.-3184(15)(b). The plan then travels to DCA for “intergovernmental review” during which time numerous agencies may submit comments. §§ 163.3184(4), (5), and (6). Next, the plan, with any agency comments, returns to the local government for further consideration and (if so voted) formal adoption, again after public hearing. § 163.3184(7)....

...h state law. [15] Their argument has the county board electing which plan designation to apply. Pursuant to the Act, however, that choice is made by the local government's governing body, and only after the procedures required by the Act. See, e.g., § 163.3184, Fla....

...Delegal: You have asked substantially the following questions: 1. May a newspaper which satisfies the criteria set forth in ss. 50.011 and 50.031 , F.S., be utilized for the publication of notices of proposed municipal ordinances as required in s. 166.041 (3)(a), F.S.? 2. When a statute such as ss. 171.031 (4), 163.3184 (15)(c), or 166.041 (3)(c)2., F.S., specifically refers to a "newspaper of general circulation," may a newspaper which satisfies the requirements of ss....

...pre-scribed by Ch. 50 , F.S. These additional requirements are not inconsistent with the provisions of Ch. 50 , F.S., but satisfy the need for greater due process protections for citizens when local governments undertake particular actions. Thus, in section 163.3184 (15)(c), F.S., certain advertisements relating to proposed comprehensive plans or plan amendments must satisfy additional statutory requirements and must be published "pursuant to chapter 50." In s....

...dinances and resolutions that cannot be lessened or reduced by any municipality in the state." 3 Thus, the requirements contained in ss. 50.011 and 50.031 , F.S., provide a base upon which additional requirements have been added by statutes such as ss. 163.3184 (15)(c), and 166.041 (3)(c)2., F.S....

...onsideration of amendments to the local comprehensive plan.... * * * * * * 2. a. A local government that proposes to consider a plan amendment pursuant to this paragraph is not required to comply with the procedures and public notice requirements of s. 163.3184(15)(c) for such plan amendments if the local government complies with the provisions in s....

...than the local government, public notice is required. * * * * * * 3. Small scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this paragraph require only 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 to have them subject to those requirements....

...tion of a public hearing are required to all affected property owners under section 125.66(4)(a), Florida Statutes, and more than one public hearing may be held. Further, a small-parcel amendment is designated as an adoption hearing held pursuant to section 163.3184(7), and is subject to the limitations, restrictions and review processes applicable to all comprehensive plans....

...Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act” (“Bert Harris Act”). Because the circuit court approved the settlement without “ensur[ing] that the relief granted [by the settlement agreement] protects the public interest served by the statute at issue [section 163.3184, Florida, Statutes (2012) ] and is the appropriate relief necessary to prevent the governmental regulatory effort from inordinately burdening the real property,” section 70.001(4)(d)2., Florida Statutes (2012), we reverse and remand for further proceedings....

...development standards controlling the property by permitting development in areas (and -densities) not allowed under either the 20.01 or 2007 City of Dunnellon comprehensive plan. Recognizing that the agreement would have the effect of contravening section 163.3184, -Florida Statutes (2012), by essentially amending the comprehensive plan without following the notice, public participation and state, review requirements in that statute for local comprehensive plan amendments, the parties to the agreement sought circuit court approval, as required by section 70.001(4)(d)2. The Intervenors opposed approval of the agreement, arguing that it did not protect the public interests served by section 163.3184 and provided far more relief to the Property Owners than necessary to prevent an inordinate burden on the property from the City’s 2007 comprehensive plan amendment....

...The Property Owners argued that no hearing was necessary because the court was required to accept the stipulation of the settling parties that the agreement met the requirements for circuit court approval. In support of this position, the Property Owners argued that the only public interest served by section 163.3184 is the interest in enabling state and local government to guide, and control future development....

...In addition, as stated in the DEO’s own motion to intervene below, “[t]he Growth Management Act requires that local government comprehensive plans protect and conserve natural resources, including rivers, fisheries, wildlife and marine habitat.” Section 163.3184 sets forth part of the process designed to serve these broader interests by establishing notice, public participation and state review requirements for adoption or amendment of local comprehensive plans. In addition, as also recognized by the DEO in its motion to intervene below, section 163.3184 directly serves the public interest in assuring “robust public participation” in the land planning process and in ensuring compliance of all local plan amendments with state law. These interests are intertwined because section 163.3184 relies upon active public participation to ensure local plan amendment compliance with státe law....