FloridaLandowners could approve a district to manage local drainage
If eligible landowners approve at a meeting, a new district would manage drainage and flood control for specified properties in Sarasota and Manatee Counties.
What it does
A new district would manage drainage and flood control in a defined area of Sarasota and Manatee Counties. It could charge assessments or service fees after a public hearing, but could not take property by condemnation or levy property-value taxes.
Landowners would elect a five-member board, with votes weighted by acreage. Only landowners with taxable property who are not exempt or immune could vote.
The district could charge assessments and issue bonds to pay for its projects. Assessments could become liens on the property, and voters would have to approve bonds backed by the district's full taxing power.
The board could remove commercial or multifamily land converted to residential condominiums, but only after recording the conversion and approving the change by a supermajority. Cities could not annex district land.
Argument forA local district could keep funding drainage and flood control work that protects businesses and nearby homes from flooding.
Argument againstThe district could charge property owners for services, and parcels under one acre would count as a full acre when assessments are calculated.
More detail
The act would create the University Town Center Improvement District, with authority to manage water and drainage, maintain flood-control works, and provide related services. The district would cover about 1,469.651 acres in Sarasota and Manatee Counties, with specified parcels excluded. The district cannot condemn property. It may not levy property-value taxes, though it may levy other assessments and charge for services after a public hearing. The act would take effect only if a majority of eligible landowners present at a meeting approve it; the meeting must occur within 20 days after the act becomes law.
Landowners would elect a five-member Board of Supervisors, with voting power based on acreage. The rules apply to landowners and supervisors of the proposed district. Only landowners with taxable acreage who are not exempt or immune from taxes or assessments may vote. The board would have to follow public meeting, disclosure, reporting, and records rules. Annual landowner meetings and elections would begin in June 2026.
The district could levy assessments, issue bonds, and borrow against expected assessment or revenue collections. These financing powers would apply to district projects and services. Assessments would be collected under state procedures and could become liens on the land assessed. Voter approval would be required for bonds backed by the district's full faith and credit and taxing power; other bond types described do not require elector approval.
The district could remove commercial or multifamily land converted to residential condominium use from its boundaries, and municipalities could not annex district land. The rules apply to land within the district's boundaries. A contraction would require the residential conversion to be recorded and approval by a supermajority of the board. The board would have to adopt and publish a resolution describing the changed boundary.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Jul 1Chapter No. 2026-222Latest
- Jun 16Approved by Governor Ron DeSantisBecame Law
- Jun 15Signed by Officers and presented to GovernorTo Governor
- Mar 11Ordered enrolledMinor
- Vote recorded Local Bills, Third Reading. Result: pass.Upper
- Mar 11In Messages
- Mar 11CS passed; YEAS 36 NAYS 0Passed Senate
- Mar 11Read 3rd timeMinor
- Mar 11Read 2nd timeMinor
- Mar 11Placed on Calendar, on 2nd reading
- Mar 11Withdrawn from RulesMajor
- Mar 9Placed on Local Calendar, 03/11/26
- Mar 4ReceivedMinor
- Vote recorded Passage, Third Reading. Result: pass.Lower
- Mar 4Referred to RulesMinor
- Mar 4In Messages
- Mar 4CS passed; YEAS 110, NAYS 0Passed House
- Mar 4Read 3rd timeMinor
- Mar 4Added to Third Reading Calendar
- Mar 4Read 2nd timeMinor
- Feb 261st Reading (Committee Substitute 2)Minor
- Vote recorded Favorable With Committee Substitute (State Affairs Committee). Result: pass.Lower
- Feb 26Bill added to Special Order Calendar (3/4/2026)
- Feb 26Bill referred to House Calendar
- Feb 26CS FiledMinor
- Feb 26Laid on Table under Rule 7.18(a)Minor
- Feb 26Reported out of State Affairs Committee
- Feb 26Favorable with CS by State Affairs CommitteeMinor
- Feb 24Added to State Affairs Committee agenda
- Feb 11Now in State Affairs Committee
- Feb 11Referred to State Affairs CommitteeMinor
- Feb 101st Reading (Committee Substitute 1)Minor
- Vote recorded Favorable With Committee Substitute (Ways & Means Committee). Result: pass.Lower
- Feb 10CS FiledMinor
- Feb 10Laid on Table under Rule 7.18(a)Minor
- Feb 10Reported out of Ways & Means Committee
- Feb 10Favorable with CS by Ways & Means CommitteeMinor
- Feb 6Added to Ways & Means Committee agenda
- Jan 28Now in Ways & Means Committee
- Vote recorded Favorable (Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee). Result: pass.Lower
- Jan 28Reported out of Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee
- Jan 28Favorable by Intergovernmental Affairs SubcommitteeMinor
- Jan 26Added to Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee agenda
- Jan 15Now in Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee
- Jan 15Referred to State Affairs CommitteeMinor
- Jan 15Referred to Ways & Means CommitteeMinor
- Jan 15Referred to Intergovernmental Affairs SubcommitteeMinor
- Jan 131st Reading (Original Filed Version)Minor
- Jan 9FiledIntroduced
Government & EthicsTaxes & BudgetEnvironment & Energy