Session Week 8

With two weeks remaining in the 2020 Legislative Session, the FHBA team is stepping back up to the plate on Tuesday at 1:00 p.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.  It is SB 1066’s last stop and from all indications, the last Senate Appropriations Committee meeting of the Session.  A committee strike-all will be presented during tomorrow’s hearing; we have provided updated talking points below.  As we enter the final days, FHBA continues to work around the clock in monitoring amendments to all pieces of legislation.


  • Ensures that impact fee increases do not apply to pending permit applications submitted before the effective date of the increase.
    • There are examples throughout the state and most recently in Volusia County; where an application for a building permit was submitted and during the review process of the permit application the County Government implemented an increase in their impact fee calculation and applied it to pending permit applications that had been budgeted for and submitted under the prior impact fee. 
  • Provides more flexibility for redeeming impact fee credits:  There are examples of developers providing infrastructure that surpasses the impacts generated by his or her development.  In return, some local governments provide impact fee credits to developers for providing additional capacity.  The “credit” given to developers for providing excess capacity reduces impact fees on future projects.  However, counties and cities use zones that limit where credits can be applied, hence preventing developers from using impact fee credits that they have earned once a zone has been built-out.  This language allows developers to move credits from one development or parcel to any other within the same impact fee zone or impact fee district or in an adjoining impact fee zone or impact fee district which receives benefits from the improvement or contribution. Credits must still be used for the same type of infrastructure.
  • In 2019 the Florida Legislature passed legislation which made clear the manner in which school boards must provide credit for non-impact fee contributions (Orange County and Greater Orlando Builders Association – Agreement). See:
    • Some local governments in the State with Charter provisions were inadvertently impacted by that change due to the way they were obligated via Charter provisions to fund school deficiencies (capacity enhancement fees).
    • This revision grandfathers those jurisdictions; however, it makes clear that the funds collected must be applied consistent with the dual rational nexus test and be based upon document per student cost data.
    • There are approximately 20 housing projects in Orange County that are currently at a standstill, this joint agreement puts those projects in motion again.  



  • The definition of “infrastructure” – which attempted to ensure impact fee calculations were only based on the true costs of infrastructure (not equipment and operational expenditures).
  • The requirement that gave teeth to the “most recent and localized data” statute for new or updated impact fee calculations; by requiring that the data be collected within the last 36-months.  Note: “Most recent and localized data” is still retained in current state statute.
  • The impact fee review committee – which attempted to ensure impact fees were going towards true infrastructure projects and not equipment and operational expenses.
  • Language that provided a ceiling for impact fees by tying them to the statutorily limit for elementary, middle, and high school student station costs; 1013.64(6).


Scroll to Top
Skip to content