Growth Management
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 1766 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 1766.
You're tracking SB 1766
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 1766 — Growth Management
Last action — Died in Rules
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed House
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Growth Management; Revising notice of claim requirements for property owners; specifying that property owners retain the option to have a court determine awards of compensation; authorizing property owners to bring actions to declare prohibited exactions invalid; requiring the Department of Transportation to afford a right of first refusal to the previous property owner before disposing of property in certain circumstances, etc.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
381 added · 427 removed381 line(s) added, 427 removed.
Florida Senate - 2020 CS for SB 1766 By Senatorthe LeeCommittee 20-00931C-20on 20201766__Judiciary; A bill to be entitled An act relating to growth management;
and Senators Lee and Perry 590-03113-20 20201766c1 A bill to be entitled An act relating to growth management;
revising legislative intent;
creating a presumption that certain settlements of claims apply to all similarly situated residential properties within a political subdivision under certain circumstances;
specifying when properties are considered similarly situated;
2924 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
3126 Section 1. Subsections (1), (4), (5), and (6) and paragraph (a) of subsection (11) of section 70.001, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
70.001 Private property rights protection.— (1) This(4)(a) Not actless maythan be90 cited150 asdays before prior to filing an action under this section against a governmental entity, a property owner who seeks compensation under this section must present the “Bertclaim J.in writing to the head of the governmental entity, except that if the property is classified as agricultural pursuant to s.
Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act.” The Legislature recognizes that some laws, regulations, and ordinances of the state and political entities in the state, as applied, may inordinately burden, restrict, or limit private property rights without amounting to a taking under the State Constitution or the United States Constitution.
The Legislature determines that there is an important state interest in protecting the interests of private property owners from such inordinate burdens.
The Legislature further recognizes that it is in the public interest to ensure that all similarly situated residential properties are subject to the same rules and regulations.
Therefore, it is the intent of the Legislature that, as a separate and distinct cause of action from the law of takings, the Legislature herein provides for relief, or payment of compensation, when a new law, rule, regulation, or ordinance of the state or a political entity in the state, as applied, unfairly affects real property.
(4)(a) Not less than 90 150 days before prior to filing an action under this section against a governmental entity, a property owner who seeks compensation under this section must present the claim in writing to the head of the governmental entity, except that if the property is classified as agricultural pursuant to s.
10381 If the property owner accepts a settlement offer, either before or after filing an action, the governmental entity may implement the settlement offer by appropriate development agreement;
3. When109 aThis residentialparagraph propertyapplies ownerto submitsany asettlement claimreached underbetween this section which is based on a governmentalproperty entity’sowner applicationand of a regulation or ordinance to more than one residential parcel, and the governmental entity reachesregardless a settlement of suchwhen claim or the propertysettlement owneragreement secureswas aentered judgmentso declaringlong an inordinate burden under paragraph (6)(a), there shall be a presumption, rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence, that similarly situated residential parcels, as evaluatedthe onagreement afully parcel-by-parcelresolves basis,all haveclaims beenasserted inordinatelyunder burdenedthis andsection. are entitled to equivalent terms of settlement or a judicial determination of an inordinate burden.
In such cases, the similarly situated residential property owners must submit the appraisal specified in paragraph (a) not less than 120 days before a trial on the merits of the damages portion of the proceedings pursuant to paragraph (6)(b).
During the 90-day-notice period of such claims, the governmental entity shall negotiate terms of settlement consistent with settlement agreements for similarly situated residential parcels.
For the purposes of this subparagraph, properties are similarly situated only if improvements authorized under zoning code and use restrictions have been constructed on the property and the governing body has issued a certificate of occupancy and if the properties are proximate in location and are subject to identical zoning code and use restrictions.
155 This paragraph applies to any settlement reached between a property owner and a governmental entity regardless of when the settlement agreement was entered so long as the agreement fully resolves all claims asserted under this section.
View plain text versions (2)
- S 1766 c1 View text Current html
- Introduced S 1766 Filed html
Action History
-
Died in Rules
-
Indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration
-
On Committee agenda-- Rules, 03/02/20, 12:00 pm, 110 Senate Building --Not Considered
-
Now in Rules
-
Favorable by Community Affairs; YEAS 5 NAYS 0
-
CS by Judiciary read 1st time
-
On Committee agenda-- Community Affairs, 02/10/20, 4:00 pm, 301 Senate Building
-
Now in Community Affairs
-
Pending reference review under Rule 4.7(2) - (Committee Substitute)
-
CS by Judiciary; YEAS 6 NAYS 0
-
On Committee agenda-- Judiciary, 02/04/20, 12:30 pm, 110 Senate Building
-
Introduced
-
Referred to Judiciary; Community Affairs; Rules
-
Filed
Sponsors
- Lee · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 163 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Lee
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (163)
163 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 163 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No Party Affiliation | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (5)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Broxson | — | Yea |
| Simmons | — | Yea |
| Farmer | — | Yea |
| Flores | — | Yea |
| Pizzo, Jason W. B. | No Party Affiliation | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (6)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Baxley | — | Yea |
| Gibson | — | Yea |
| Hutson | — | Yea |
| Stargel | — | Yea |
| Simmons | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez, Ana Maria | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 1766 do?
- Growth Management; Revising notice of claim requirements for property owners; specifying that property owners retain the option to have a court determine awards of compensation; authorizing property owners to bring actions to declare prohibited exactions invalid; requiring the Department of Transportation to afford a right of first refusal to the previous property owner before disposing of property in certain circumstances, etc.
- Who sponsors SB 1766?
- SB 1766 is sponsored by Lee.
- What is the current status of SB 1766?
- This bill died with 2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 1766?
- Track SB 1766 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 1766
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 1766
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →