Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/03/2014

Home

March 25, 2014 I Volume 8 I Issue 6 Zoning Bulletin orders unless exempted by specific authorization (i.e., via a municipal charter) that existed before June 1, 2011. Since § 6.02 of the City's charter (which was in effect before June 1, 2011) did not expressly provide that development orders were subject to referendum, the court concluded that Ordinance 5203 was statutorily barred from referendum. In so concluding, the court looked at the legislative history of the 2012 Amendment. It had been enacted pursuant to a settlement agreement be- tween a municipality and the State's Department of Community Affairs. That settlement agreement was contingent upon the Legislature adopting the 2012 Amendment to "grandfather -in those charter provisions . . . that specifically provided for an initiative or referendum process relating to approval of any development order . . . . Further, the court "de- cline[d] to infer that the Legislature intended to radically expand the ref- erendum process through general charter provisions, where such provi- sions are commonplace throughout [Florida]." The court found its interpretation of the legislative intent of the 2012 Amendment was "cemented" by a 2013 amendment to the statute (§ 163.3167(8)). The 2013 Amendment specifically provided the following: "An initiative or referendum process in regard to any development order is prohibited. . . . However, an initiative or referendum process . . . is al- lowed if it is expressly authorized by specific language in a local govern- ment charter that was lawful and in effect on June 1, 2011. A general local government charter provision for an initiative or referendum process is not sufficient.... It is the intent of the Legislature that initiative and referen- dum be prohibited in regard to any development order. . .." Upon these findings, the appellate court remanded the matter to the trial court to enter a declaratory judgment in accordance with the appel- late court's opinion. See also: Preserve Patin Beach Political Action Committee v. Town of Palm Beach, 50 So. 3d 1176 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). See also: Connecticut Nat. Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249; ,112 S. Ct. 1146, 117 L. Ed. 2d 391, 22 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 1130, 26 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d (MB) 175, Bankr. L. Rep. (CCH) P-:174457A (1992)("[C]ourts must presume that a legislature says in a statute what it means and means in a statute what it.says there. '). Zoning News from Around the Nation FLORIDA Pending legislation (HB 307 and SB 356) advancing through the State Legislature "would lift a provision in a 2011 law that prohibits local 10 ©2014 Thomson Reuters 1