Growth-law panelists predict legislative tinkering in years ahead

Some panelists discussing state growth management law on Wednesday said they expect developers and their legislative allies to seek new law changes in the coming years despite a growth management overhaul passed this year.

The Legislature passed bills that eliminated the Florida Department of Community Affairs and sharply reduced state oversight of growth management law. Gov. Rick Scott labeled DCA a “job-killer” as Republican legislators said law changes were needed to return local control over growth management.

Five months after Scott signed the legislation, the Florida State University College of Law panel was asked to discuss what happens next with land-use management in Florida.

The discussion was chaired by former Department of Community Affairs Secretary Tom Pelham, who left the department as Scott took office in January. Pelham said the law changes included changing the definition and test in state rules for urban sprawl, eliminating need as a requirement for new development and making transportation concurrency optional for local governments under strict guidelines.

David Theriaque, a Tallahassee lawyer who represents cities and residents challenging growth decisions, said the poor economy was a “ruse”  used to push through growth law changes that favor developers. And he said it was similarly misleading to argue that the changes provide more authority to local government.

If local governments interfere with development interests, “how many people will bet that we will have a bill in the next session that also mandates how local governments handle those issues?” Theriaque said.

Nancy Linnan, a lawyer who represents developers and cities, said she doesn’t expect substantial proposed law changes in the next year or two, only a glitch bill and legislation to address a legal challenge on referendums that was filed by Yankeetown.

“This is a reapportionment year in the Legislature,” Linnan said. “They do not like to have food fights on other issues while they are doing [reapportionment]. They are going to have gaming anyway. They certainly don’t want to see growth management up there again.”

But developers eventually may want changes in how sector plans, developments of regional impact, transportation concurrency and impact fees are dealt with by local governments. She said there is disagreement among large developers and home-builders on how to approach issues.

Charles Pattison, president of 1000 Friends of Florida, said resources that must be protected by the state under the law changes have yet to be defined along with the “adverse impacts” that the state must intervene to prevent.

He also said resident involvement should be improved, especially in light of a 1st District Court of Appeal ruling that orders his group must pay attorney fees for Martin County and a developer. And he said the important regional state resources that require state protection have yet to be defined along with the “adverse impacts” that the state must work to prevent.

“We will work continue to work with the new law,” Pattison said. “But I think it will be difficult to motivate the public to mount challenges in particular with the expectation they could be successful in the end and avoid [paying] attorneys fees.”

Pelham said the growth bill passed this past session represents a Legislature that is “vehemently anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-planning,” he said. 

“They don’t like it [planning] when it is done by anybody,” Pelham said. “They want to tell local governments how to do it.”

“So I agree with David Theriaque about the ruse that it is all about local control. This legislation itself places handcuffs on local government in numerous ways.

“I agree with Nancy they will be back. And they will be back to keep tying the hands of local government.”

Find this article here:  http://www.thefloridacurrent.com/article.cfm?id=25349870