{"id":1984,"date":"2025-10-14T09:46:08","date_gmt":"2025-10-14T09:46:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/1984\/"},"modified":"2025-10-14T09:46:08","modified_gmt":"2025-10-14T09:46:08","slug":"growth-law-draws-another-challenge-tallahassee-reports","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/1984\/","title":{"rendered":"Growth Law Draws Another Challenge \u2013 Tallahassee Reports"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"fb-share-icon\"<\/a>
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Tweet\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n

By Jim Saunders, The News Service of Florida<\/p>\n

TALLAHASSEE \u2014 The growth-management group 1000 Friends of Florida and an Orange County resident Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a new state law that blocks cities and counties from approving \u201cmore restrictive or burdensome\u201d changes to growth plans.<\/p>\n

The lawsuit, filed in Leon County circuit court, came after 25 cities and counties filed a similar legal challenge last week. Also, Ocoee last month filed a case at the state Division of Administrative Hearings after the Florida Department of Commerce rejected the city\u2019s revised comprehensive plan because of the law.<\/p>\n

The prohibition on growth-plan changes was included in a wide-ranging bill (SB 180) that lawmakers said would help the state recover from the 2024 hurricanes. The law, signed in June by Gov. Ron DeSantis, effectively freezes local land-development regulations and comprehensive plans through Oct. 1, 2027, and was made retroactive to Aug. 1, 2024.<\/p>\n

The lawsuit filed Tuesday raises a series of issues, including arguing that the prohibition violates due-process rights because it is \u201carbitrary and capricious\u201d and that the overall bill violates part of the Florida Constitution limiting legislation to single subjects.<\/p>\n

\u201cSB 180 contains various matters that are not connected to and are unrelated to emergencies, including the total ban \u2026 on any \u2018more restrictive or burdensome\u2019 land-use and zoning regulations, and (one section\u2019s) prohibition on moratoria on construction, reconstruction, and redevelopment of property, even if the property is intact and was not damaged by a hurricane or other emergency,\u201d the lawsuit said. \u201cThis is particularly arbitrary as applied to counties with a large geographic area, and as it applies to the ability of all cities and counties to plan for and regulate all future growth and development \u2014 as opposed to the repair and rebuilding of existing development.\u201d<\/p>\n

The lawsuit also said SB 180 purports to be an \u201cact relating to emergencies\u201d but that it is not limited to emergencies.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt invalidates both past and future comprehensive plan and land-development code measures that have no logical connection to the main purpose of the act (the overall bill), emergency management,\u201d the lawsuit said. \u201cIt changes the law regarding post-storm rebuilding and emergency management, but also changes the substantive law concerning every single issue that is addressed in a local government comprehensive plan and land-development regulation, including dozens of issues wholly unrelated in any way to emergency management and post-storm rebuilding of structures damaged by storms.\u201d<\/p>\n

During recent county delegation meetings, local officials have urged lawmakers to revisit the law during the 2026 legislative session, which will start in January. But it remains unclear whether that will happen.<\/p>\n

The lawsuit said, for instance, that 1000 Friends of Florida members in Brevard, Manatee, St. Johns and Orange counties had been affected by the law because the Department of Commerce had rejected comprehensive-plan amendments because of the prohibition. The department has authority over comprehensive plans, which local governments have long used as growth blueprints.<\/p>\n

The lawsuit names as defendants Department of Commerce Secretary J. Alex Kelly, Division of Emergency Management Director Kevin Guthrie, Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson, Department of Revenue Executive Director Jim Zingale and state Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia. Those are the same defendants named in the lawsuit filed last week by cities and counties.<\/p>\n

Both lawsuits say those state officials have roles in carrying out the law or in local-government money.<\/p>\n

The named plaintiff in the lawsuit filed Tuesday, Rachel Hildebrand, lives in a rural area of Orange County. The lawsuit said the Department of Commerce on July 28 rejected a comprehensive-plan amendment that affected the area.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe character and quality of life of Hildebrand\u2019s land, home, and rural community are directly harmed by the invalidation of these comprehensive plan protections as a result of the department\u2019s action,\u201d the lawsuit said. \u201cSB 180 undermines the protections afforded her by the Orange County Comprehensive Plan against mounting development pressures in the region, including more crowded and dangerous roads, increased flooding and wildlife deaths and loss of rural character.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"fb-share-icon\"<\/a>
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Tweet\"
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>
\n\t\t\t\t