The Florida Senate
BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Committee on Rules
BILL: CS/SB 60
INTRODUCER: Community Affairs Committee and Senator Bradley
SUBJECT: County and Municipal Code Enforcement
DATE: March 9, 2021 REVISED:
ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION
1. Hackett Ryon CA Fav/CS
2. Ponder McVaney GO Favorable
3. Hackett Phelps RC Favorable
Please see Section IX. for Additional Information:
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE - Substantial Changes
I. Summary:
CS/SB 60 prohibits county and municipal code inspectors from initiating an investigation into
violations of city or county codes or ordinances based upon an anonymous complaint. It also
requires that an individual making a complaint of a potential violation provide his or her name
and address to the local government body before an investigation may occur.
The prohibition does not apply if the code inspector has reason to believe the alleged violation
presents an imminent threat to public health, safety, or welfare or imminent destruction of habitat
or sensitive resources.
The bill takes effect July 1, 2021.
II. Present Situation:
County and Municipal Code Enforcement
Code enforcement is a function of local government and affects people's daily lives. Its purpose
is to enhance the quality of life and economy of local government by protecting the health,
safety, and welfare of the community.1 Local governments possess a constitutional right to self-
1
Section 162.02, F.S.
BILL: CS/SB 60 Page 2
government.2 Local codes and ordinances allow local governments to enforce regulations on a
variety of matters ranging from zoning, tree cutting, nuisances, and excessive noise. 3
Chapters 125, 162, and 166 of the Florida Statutes4 provide counties and municipalities with a
mechanism to enforce its codes and ordinances. These statutes are offered as permissible code
enforcement mechanisms, but are not binding to local governments, which may use any
enforcement mechanism they choose, or combination thereof.5
In each statutory mechanism, a local government designates code inspectors or code enforcement
officers, tasked with investigating potential code violations, providing notice of violations, and
issuing citations for noncompliance. Beyond these specified duties, the statutory scheme makes
clear that code inspectors lack the authority to perform the functions or duties of a law
enforcement officer.6
Code Enforcement Boards Act (Part I, Ch. 162, F.S.)
The Local Government Code Enforcement Boards Act (Act), located in Part I of ch. 162, F.S.,
allows each county and municipality to create by ordinance one or more local government code
enforcement board. A code enforcement board is an administrative board made up of members
appointed by the governing body of a county or municipality with the authority to hold hearings
and impose administrative fines and other noncriminal penalties for violations of county or
municipal codes or ordinances. Members of the enforcement boards7 must be residents of the
respective municipality or county and, whenever possible, must include an architect, a
businessperson, an engineer, a general contractor, a subcontractor, and a realtor.8
Code enforcement boards have the power to:
 Adopt rules for the conduct of its hearings;
 Subpoena alleged violators, witnesses, and evidence to its hearings;
 Take testimony under oath; and
 Issue orders that have the force of law to command steps necessary to bring a violation into
compliance.9
Section 162.06, F.S., establishes the procedures for local governments to address violations of
various codes using a code enforcement board. It begins with the county or municipal code
inspector10 who initiates code enforcement procedures by notifying the violator and giving him
2
Art. VIII, Fla. Const.
3
Violations of the Florida Building Code, however, are enforced pursuant to ss. 553.79 and 553.80, F.S., and not within the
scope of this bill or the sections of law analyzed herein. See s. 125.69(g), F.S.
4
Chapter 125 Part II (county self-government), Chapter 162 Part 1 (the Code Enforcement Boards Act), Chapter 162 Part 2
(supplemental procedures), and s. 166.0415, F.S. (city ordinance enforcement).
5
Sections 125.69(4)(i), 162.13, 162.21(8), and 166.0415(7), F.S.
6
Section 125.69(4)(f), F.S.;
7
Code enforcement boards are either five-member or seven-member boards. If a local government has a population over
5,000 persons, the board must be a seven-member board.
8
Section 162.05(2), F.S.
9
Section 162.08, F.S.
10
Section 162.04(2), F.S., defines the term “code inspector” to mean “any authorized agent or employee of the county or
municipality whose duty it is to assure code compliance.”
BILL: CS/SB 60 Page 3
or her reasonable time to correct the violation. If the violation continues to exist after such time
period as specified by the code inspector,11 then the inspector will notify the code enforcement
board and request a hearing.12
In each case heard before a code enforcement board, the case is presented, and testimony is taken
from both the code inspector and alleged violator.13 At the conclusion of the hearing, the board
issues findings of fact and provides an order stating the proper relief granted.14 If a violator fails
to abide by an order of the code enforcement board, the board may order the violator to pay a
fine for each day that the repeat violation occurs.15 All final administrative orders of the code
enforcement board may be appealed to the circuit court 30 days after execution of the order.16
As an alternative to a code enforcement board, the Act allows counties and municipalities to
adopt an alternate code enforcement system that gives code enforcement officials or special
magistrates the authority to hold hearings and assess fines against violators of respective codes or
ordinances.17 Each of these methods are offered by statute as devices to be used at the local
governments’ discretion, but a local government may use any method they choose to enforce
codes and ordinances.18
Supplemental Code Enforcement Procedures (Part II, Ch. 162, F.S.)
Part II of ch. 162, F.S., presents local governments with supplemental methods for enforcing
codes and ordinances without establishing a code enforcement board. The statutes allow counties
and municipalities to designate some of its employees or agents as code enforcement officers19
authorized to enforce county or municipal codes or ordinances.
A code enforcement officer may issue a citation to a person when, based upon personal
investigation, the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the person has committed a civil
infraction in violation of a duly enacted code or ordinance and that the county court will hear the
charge.20 However, prior to issuing a citation, a code enforcement officer must provide notice to
the person that the person has committed a violation of a code or ordinance and provide a
11
The code inspector does not need to provide the violator reasonable time to remedy the violation if it is a repeat violation;
the violation presents a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare; or the violation is irreparable or irreversible in
nature.
12
A hearing may also be called by written notice signed by at least three members of a seven-member enforcement board or
signed by at least two members of a five-member enforcement board.
13
Section 162.07(2)-(3), F.S.
14
Section 162.07(4), F.S.
15
Section 162.09(1), F.S. Such fines may not exceed $250 per day for a first violation and may not exceed $500 per day for a
repeat violation. However, a county or municipality may pass an ordinance to increase the fine thresholds if approved by a
majority plus one vote.
16
Section 162.11, F.S.
17
Section 162.03, F.S.
18
The Attorney General has opined that “once a municipality has adopted the procedures of ch. 162, F.S., to enforce its
municipal codes and ordinances, it may not alter or amend those statutorily prescribed procedures but must utilize them as
they are set forth in the statutes.” Opp. Atty Gen. 2000-53. A local government may, however, maintain a chapter 162 code
enforcement board and still decide to enforce a particular violation by bringing a charge in county court, or any other means
provided by law. Goodman v. County Court in Broward County, Fla. 711 So.2d 587 (Fla 4th DCA 1998).
19
Section 162.21(1), F.S., defines the term “code enforcement officer” to mean “any designated employee or agent of a
county or municipality whose duty it is to enforce codes and ordinances enacted by the county or municipality.”
20
Section 162.21(3)(a), F.S.
BILL: CS/SB 60 Page 4
reasonable time period, no more than 30 days, within which the person must correct the
violation. If, upon personal investigation, a code enforcement officer finds that the person has
not corrected the violation within the time period, the officer may issue a citation.21
Counties and municipalities that choose to enforce codes or ordinances under the provisions of
Part II must enact an ordinance establishing the code enforcement procedures. The ordinance,
among other requirements, must provide procedures for the issuance of a citation by a code
enforcement officer. A violation of a code or an ordinance enforced under Part II is a civil
infraction and carries a maximum civil penalty of $500.22
Part II further allows counties and municipalities to enforce code violations by filing a civil
action in the county or circuit court, in the absence of a magistrate or code enforcement board.
Enforcement of County Ordinance Violations (s. 125.69, F.S.)
Section 125.69, F.S., sets forth a process counties may use to enforce county ordinances. Under
this statute, violations of ordinances shall be prosecuted in the same manner as misdemeanors: in
county court, punishable by a fine up to $500, imprisonment up to 60 days, or both. The statute
also allows counties to designate code enforcement officers, who may investigate violations and
issue citations in a manner similar to s. 162.21, F.S., discussed above.
Enforcement of City Ordinance Violations (s. 166.0415, F.S.)
Section 166.0415, F.S. provides a mechanism specific to municipalities wishing to enforce their
ordinances and codes using code inspectors. This statute is functionally identical to s. 162.21,
F.S., discussed above. The statute allows municipalities to designate code enforcement officers
authorized to enforce municipal codes or ordinances, following the investigation, notice, and
citation scheme set out in s. 162.21, F.S.
Anonymous and Identified Complaints
Investigations usually begin with a complaint or tip from the public - typically by phone or
online form - or a code enforcement officer personally observing an alleged violation while
performing his or her duties. As code enforcement is inherently an exercise in home rule by local
governments, procedures for collecting complaints vary throughout the state. In most areas,
complaints may be made anonymously, while in some jurisdictions, a complainant must identify
themselves.23 Code inspectors accept any information given to them in the complaints and,
generally using their own judgment, may investigate the allegations made.
21
Section 162.21(3)(b), F.S.
22
Section 162.21(5), F.S.
23
For one such example, Collier County changed their code enforcement regulations to require that a name and phone
number must be provided along with a complaint “unless the concern is an emergency that immediately threatens the public
health and safety or could cause catastrophic consequences.” Collier County, Report a Code Violation
https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-a-e/code-enforcement/report-a-code-violation (accessed
December 28, 2020).
BILL: CS/SB 60 Page 5
Florida has extensive public records laws, known as Sunshine Laws.24 Any document held by an
agency, including local governments, is public record and therefore must be produced for
inspection upon request by anyone. Any information given by a complainant to the local
government, including their name, address, and contact information, is public record barring an
individual’s exercise of an exemption that applies to them, such as those for state attorneys,
judges, and guardians ad litem.25
III. Effect of Proposed Changes:
The bill amends the county and municipal code enforcement statutes to address the transparency
of complaints made to code inspectors working for local governments and local code
enforcement boards alleging violations of city and county codes and ordinances. Specifically, the
bill prohibits code inspectors and code enforcement officers from initiating a code enforcement
investigation based upon an anonymous complaint. Additionally, an individual making a
complaint of a potential violation must provide his or her name and address to the local
government body before an investigation may occur.
The prohibition in the bill does not apply if the code inspector has reason to believe the alleged
violation presents an imminent threat to public health, safety, or welfare or imminent destruction
of habitat or sensitive resources.
The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2021.
IV. Constitutional Issues:
A. Municipality/County Mandates Restrictions:
Not applicable. The bill does not require counties or municipalities to take an action
requiring the expenditure of funds, reduce the authority that counties or municipalities
have to raise revenue in the aggregate, nor reduce the percentage of state tax shared with
counties or municipalities.
B. Public Records/Open Meetings Issues:
None.
C. Trust Funds Restrictions:
None.
D. State Tax or Fee Increases:
None.
24
See, generally, s. 119.01(1), F.S., the Public Records Act. “[i]t is the policy of this state that all state, county, and municipal
records are open for personal inspection and copying by any person. Providing access to public records is a duty of each
agency.”
25
See ss. 119.071(4) and (5), F.S.
BILL: CS/SB 60 Page 6
E. Other Constitutional Issues:
None identified.
V. Fiscal Impact Statement:
A. Tax/Fee Issues:
None.
B. Private Sector Impact:
None.
C. Government Sector Impact:
Local governments may experience a minor cost in updating codes and ordinance
enforcement mechanisms to comply with this bill, but this cost will in most cases be
absorbed by current operations.
Local governments may experience a reduction in complaints filed due to individuals not
wanting to provide personal identifying information. Thus, this may lead to less resources
being utilized by local code enforcement.
VI. Technical Deficiencies:
None.
VII. Related Issues:
Chapter 119 prohibits the public disclosure of certain personal identifying information relating to
code enforcement officers including. Specifically, the following information related to current or
former code enforcement officers is exempt:
 Home addresses;
 Telephone numbers;
 Social Security numbers; and
 Photographs.26
In the statement of public necessity for this exemption the Legislature found that:
The responsibilities of these employees regularly take them into areas of
neglect, abuse, and personal danger. Citations issued in response to
26
Section 119.071(4)(d)1.i, F.S. The exemption also extends to the In addition, the exemption extends to the names, home
addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, photographs, and places of employment of the spouses and children
of such personnel. Finally, the names and locations of schools and day care facilities attended by the children of such
personnel are also included within the scope of th