Sanford planning staff to document local impacts of Florida Senate Bill 180; city weighing participation in litigation
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Planning staff will collect and submit local data on the effects of Senate Bill 180 to national and regional groups; the city attorney said the input will inform whether Sanford joins litigation challenging the law, and staff noted the statute may limit updates to land-development regulations and comprehensive plans.
City planning staff told the Sanford City Commission on Aug. 11 that they will respond to requests for local data documenting practical impacts of Florida Senate Bill 180, and the city attorney said that information will help determine whether Sanford should join litigation challenging the statute.
Planning staff member Eileen said the American Planning Association and other groups have requested examples of problems municipalities are encountering under SB 180. "Some of the things that immediately come to mind for us would be things like updating our land development regulations," Eileen said, citing constraints on creating overlay districts, updating permitted-use tables and changing definitions that staff view as needed to adapt to current trends.
Eileen told the commission the city's comprehensive plan updates required under Florida law (she referenced statutory requirements related to comprehensive plans and land development regulations) would be affected, including elements involving seasonal and periodic flooding, drainage and stormwater management, and requirements that address adequate utilities and developer responsibilities.
City Attorney Green said staff feedback would be useful to data-driven litigation efforts. "Once you complete, Eileen, your assessment, then you and I can meet to talk about it, and then that will better assist me in advising as to where we go forward from here," he said. Green also said he is meeting with other municipalities to explore litigation options and noted he has seen inquiries about county-led lawsuits that asked other jurisdictions to join.
Commissioners were told the American Planning Association requested feedback by Aug. 22; staff said they do not have another commission meeting before that date and therefore planned to provide factual, department-level responses rather than a formal city position. Commissioner discussion indicated support for staff providing concrete, documented examples of local impacts; one commissioner said, "If everything that you're looking at is definitive enough that we can go back with real facts and real impacts, then I would wholeheartedly support doing that."
Attorney Green noted that costs and formal commitments for any litigation have not been determined; he said initial discussions with other groups and municipalities have begun but no final decision or funding commitment has been made. The mayor and commissioners asked staff to share any incoming outreach from regional groups so the commission stays informed.
No formal vote or resolution to join litigation was taken during the work session. Planning staff said they will submit factual feedback to requesters and coordinate with the city attorney on next steps if the collected data supports legal action.