Florida Legislature – pending bills – two on my bad list (there are more) – these two bills preempt local regulation of Home Based Businesses – (anti-Neighborhood Protection)

There are good bills and then there are bad bills – it is often based upon your specific political views and I do not expect that we will agree on all, or even most.

I was one of the original founders of Palmetto Bay in order to have greater control over local decisions. Unfortunately, the Florida Legislature far too often is hard at work eroding that control by enacting laws that create what they may term ‘statewide, uniform, laws’ – others call it preempting local rights and the ability to plan our local communities, one size does not fit all. 

Palmetto Bay originally enacted a Home Based Business Ordinance in 2007: Sec. 30-60.14. - Home-office. of the Palmetto Bay Code (Ord. No. 07-31).(CLICK HERE). You may follow the link provided to see the rules established for operating a business out of a home in Palmetto Bay.

Here is an alert to an effort to preempt local zoning on Home Based businesses. There are bills pending in both houses of the Florida Legislature: HB 403 (Giallombardo) and SB266 (Perry)

Both bills provide that local governments may not enact or enforce any ordinance, regulation or policy or take any action to license or otherwise regulate a home-based business in a manner that is different from other businesses in a local government’s jurisdiction. The bill authorizes business owners to challenge local government actions and authorizes the prevailing party to recover specified attorney fees and costs.

The house bill provides* that:

In order to be considered a home-based business, the bill requires that:
· the business operates, in whole or in part, from a residential property;
· the employees of the home-based business reside in the residence, except for up to two employees that do not reside at the residence. However, employees of the home-based business that do not primarily work at the residential dwelling are not required to reside in the dwelling;
· parking for the business activities of the home-based business complies with local zoning requirements;
· as viewed from the street, the use of the residential property is consistent with the uses of the residential areas that surround the property, but incidental and short term business uses and activities are permitted; and
· the activities of the home-based business are secondary to the property’s use as a residential dwelling.

Note: * Information is accurate as of time of this post. All legislative bills are subject to amendments. Neither bills may pass, or if they do pass, it may be after significant amendment.

WHO WINS?: This is a great bill for the legal professional who loves to challenge local zoning codes! It also allows for greater use of homes for businesses, potentially the the detriment of the quiet enjoyment of a neighborhood.

WHO LOSES: Those who want to reside in a residential area that is used just for that: residential or set reasonable restrictions on how any home based business operates.

FAIR QUESTION: There are several bills pending in the Legislature addressing (controlling/reducing) attorney fee exposure in litigation against Insurance Carriers. Why reduce fees when consumers have to take their Insurance carriers to court, but provide for attorney’s fees for those challenging government. Isn’t that a bit inconsistent?

FUN QUOTE ON POINT:

"No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session."
Gideon j. Tucker (February 10, 1826 – July 1899)