06/11/2014 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Indian River County 1 Impact Fee Update Study In 2006, the Florida legislature passed the "Florida Impact Fee Act," which recognized impact fees as "an outgrowth of home rule power of a local government to provide certain services within its jurisdiction." § 163.31801(2), Fla. Stat. The statute — concerned with mostly procedural and methodological limitations — did not expressly allow or disallow any particular public facility type from being funded with impact fees. The Act did specify procedural and methodological prerequisites, most of which were common to the practice already. More recent legislation further affected the impact fee framework in Florida, including the following: • HB 227 in 2009: The Florida legislation statutorily clarified that in any action challenging an impact fee, the government has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the imposition or amount of the fee meets the requirements of state legal precedent or the Impact Fee Act and that the court may not use a deferential standard. • SB 360 in 2009: Allowed fees to be decreased without the 90 -day notice period required to increase the fees and purported to change the standard of legal review associated with impact fees. SB 360 also required the Florida Department of Community Affairs (now the Department of Economic Opportunity) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to conduct studies on "mobility fees," which were completed in 2010. • HB 7207 in 2011: Required a dollar -for -dollar credit, for purposes of concurrency compliance, for impact fees paid and other concurrency mitigation required. The payment must be reduced by the percentage share the project's traffic represents of the added capacity of the selected improvement (up to a maximum of 20% or to an amount specified by ordinance, whichever results in a higher credit). The courts have not yet taken up the issue of whether a local government may still charge an impact/mobility fee in lieu of proportionate share if the impact/mobility fee is higher that the calculated proportionate share contribution. • HB 319 in 2013: Applied mostly to concurrency management authorities, but also encouraged local governments to adopt alternative mobility systems using a series of tools identified in section 3180(5)(f), Florida Statutes, including: 1. Adoption of long-term strategies to facilitate development patterns that support multimodal solutions, including urban design, and appropriate land Tindale -Oliver & Associates, Inc. Indian River County June 2014 4 Impact Fee Update Study 3Q