2020 Legislative Session: Weeks 2 and 3

“Senators, if you’ll indulge me, I’m going to take a break from introductions and do a bill or two.”

– Senate President Bill Galvano on the Senate Floor

– Senate President Bill Galvano and Senate Appropriations Chair Rob Bradley talk after a meeting.
Things are moving fast in the 2020 Legislative Session, with both chambers having already released their preliminary budget proposals. The House is proposing a $91.3 billion budget with the Senate’s proposal coming in at $92.8. I’ll break the numbers down in terms of our priorities below but keep in mind these are just the starting positions of each chamber. Numbers will shift in the coming weeks as the House and Senate get closer to a budget deal.

GARD is Next Week!

Great American Realtor Days (GARD) kicks off this coming Monday, Feb. 3 and ends on Feb. 5. If you haven’t registered yet you can do so onsite when you get here. For those who haven’t been, not only is it a great time, but the power of your voice is absolutely critical in our efforts to advocate on your behalf. You can learn more about this event and complete your registration on the GARD website.

Budget Update

Affordable Housing
The Senate and House Appropriation Subcommittees have released their proposed budgets for FY 2020-2021. For affordable housing, the proposed Senate budget has full funding of the housing trust funds and matches the Governor’s proposed budget of $387 million. The House’s initial proposal calls for $147 million to be spent on housing programs. Although this number is lower than the Senate, their proposal is up from their initial proposal from last year by $24 million. As budget negotiations continue, we will be advocating for the House to increase its funding proposal for the affordable housing trusts funds, especially as it relates to SHIP allocations which help fund down payment and closing cost assistance programs.

Below is a chart with a further breakdown of the proposed budgets:

	Governor	Senate	House
SAIL	$119,800,000	$119,800,000	$48,800,000
SHIP	$267,200,000	$267,200,000	$73,200,000
Hurricane Housing Recovery Program	$0	$0	$25,000,000
Total Housing	$387,000,000	$387,000,000	$147,000,000

Environment
In terms of environmental funding, the House and Senate budget proposals both exceed the $625 million budget recommendation made by Gov. DeSantis. The Senate proposal would provide $125 million for Florida Forever during the 2020-2021 fiscal year, which exceeds the governor’s recommendation for the program by $25 million. The House proposes spending $20 million on the program. Additionally, the Senate is proposing $639 million for water-related projects, of which $322 million would be for ongoing Everglades restoration efforts. The House would spend $646.8 million, with $318.3 million dedicated to the Everglades.

Private Property Rights/Vacation Rentals

SB 1128 – Preempts the regulation of vacation rentals to the state and strikes a balance between addressing community concerns and preserving private property rights.
- Current status: Waiting to be placed on the Commerce and Tourism Committee agenda.
HB 1011 – Companion bill to SB 1128.
- Current status: Passed Workforce Development & Tourism Subcommittee on a 10 – 5 vote. Currently in Government Operations & Technology Appropriations Subcommittee waiting to be placed on the agenda.

Affordable Housing

SB 998 – Allows local governments to approve affordable housing development on any property zoned residential, commercial or industrial. Also, provides additional accountability and training for Affordable Housing Advisory Committees and Local Housing Assistance Plans.
- Current status: Waiting to be placed on the Infrastructure and Security Committee agenda.
HB 1339 – Companion bill to SB 998
- Current status: On the Local, Federal, & Veterans Affairs Subcommittee agenda for 2/3/20 at 3:00 p.m.

Emotional Support Animals (ESA)

HB 209 – Helps curb the abuse of ESA certificates related to housing. The bill does not address restaurants, airplanes, or other public places.
- Current status: Waiting to be placed on the agenda of its last committee stop, the Judiciary Committee. The bill was temporary postponed this week with HUD issuing new emotional animal support guidance. Committee staff must review the new rules to make sure the bill is in compliance.
SB 1084 – Companion bill to HB 209.
- Current status: On the Innovation, Industry, and Technology Committee agenda for 2/3/20 at 1:30 p.m.

Environment

SB 712 – Main environmental bill of the 2020 session. Contains the findings from the Blue-Green Algae Task Force and has a heavy focus on Onsite Treatment and Disposal Systems (septic tanks).
- Current status: In its last committee stop, the Appropriations Committee, waiting to be placed on the agenda.
HB 1343 – Companion bill to SB 712.
- Current status: In its second-to-last committee stop, the Appropriations Committee, waiting to be placed on the agenda.

Stay updated on all of the bills that the Public Policy Office is tracking through our Legislative Tracker.

Realtor.com: For-Sale Inventory Lowest in Two Years

The number listings on realtor.com in three U.S. cities are down over 30% year-to-year. In the Fla. cities listed, however, the drops range from 16.5% to 8.8%.

SANTA CLARA, Calif. – December had the largest year-over-year decline for housing inventory in almost three years, with a notable 12% decline. It pushed the number of homes for sale in the U.S. to its lowest level since January 2018, according to the December 2019 Housing Trends report released by realtor.com.

In the four Florida cities included in the realtor.com study, however, inventory drops were more modest. They ranged from a 16.5% inventory decline in Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater to 8.8% in Jacksonville.

Q&A: What If My Contractor’s Bill Is Higher than We Agreed?

Gary M. Singer

First piece of advice: Always have a written contract. Second: Try to work things out one-on-one. Third: At a minimum, pay all billed charges that you agree with.

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – Question: We hired a local company to help us with a project on our property. After the work was done, we received a bill for more than what was agreed. The bill also included work that was not performed. Do we need to pay it? – Karl

Answer: Whenever you hire someone to perform work on your home, you should have a written contract. The agreement should detail the work, its cost and when it will be complete. This will help avoid problems later by making sure everyone’s expectations are clear.

I hope that you did this for your project. If so, double-check your contract to see if it matches the bill and make sure that the mistake is not on your part.

Whether you have a written agreement or not, your first step is to pick up the phone and have a direct but polite conversation with the company. I have seen many cases where the problem began with a simple misunderstanding or billing error and turned into a nightmare because neither party bothered to try to communicate with the other.

More than one contractor client has told me that he would have taken care of the issue at his cost if his customer had not immediately accused him of being a crook. Polite but firm conversations can solve many problems.

If this does not solve the dispute, you should pay the parts of the invoice that you agree with and send a letter describing which charges you are disputing. In my experience, most people will pay nothing when they get a bill with a small mistake. This causes a minor issue that is quickly resolved to spiral into a much larger problem.

I know of one case where a homeowner lost her house to foreclosure because she refused to pay her association anything until they cleared up a $10 error. By the time the late charges and litigation costs were added to the balance, she simply could not afford to save her condo.

When disputing the charges that you do not agree with, make sure to document all of your communication. If you still cannot work things out and your contractor decides to sue you, being able to show your paper trail will help your lawyer defend your case.

About the writer: Gary M. Singer is a Florida attorney and board-certified as an expert in real estate law by the Florida Bar. He practices real estate, business litigation and contract law from his office in Sunrise, Fla. He is the chairman of the Real Estate Section of the Broward County Bar Association and is a co-host of the weekly radio show Legal News and Review. He frequently consults on general real estate matters and trends in Florida with various companies across the nation.

Buyers May Purchase a Second Home First

Some buyers see real estate as a sound investment, but they can’t afford homes locally and buy a second home, hoping it will build equity to pay for their first home.

ATLANTA – Some first-time buyers are opting to buy the vacation home before their first home. They’re being priced out of their current area – such as in cities like New York and San Francisco – so they’re opting to buy a vacation home in more affordable towns.

“I’m seeing this more and more,” Svetlin Krastev, an investment advisor with Black Sea Gold Advisors in Kingston, N.Y., told CNN.com. “People want to have exposure to real estate, but it would take all of their assets to get a residence in the city.”

For example, Bart Higgins rents a four-bedroom converted warehouse in Brooklyn, N.Y., with his wife and twin five-year-old children. They pay $5,300 a month. The property would cost between $2 million to $3 million to buy. So the couple purchased a vacation home near Kingston, N.Y., a unit with three buildings on 33 acres with a lake. They bought it for $300,000.

“We bought our first home as a second home as a way to relieve the pressure and buy us some time,” Higgins told CNN. They use Airbnb to offer short-term rentals of the property to help supplement expenses when they’re not there.

Downsides to a second-home-first plan

Financial planners, however, warn that buying a second home first could take up all of a person’s assets and delay them from being able to purchase a “first” home or a main residence. “Having a loan commitment on a second home will make it that much more difficult to buy what will be used as a first home,” JP Geisbauer, a certified financial planner at Centerpoint Financial Management, told CNN.

Others disagree and say that for urban professionals, it can pay off buying the second home first. A smaller mortgage on a vacation home may be more manageable than a larger mortgage in the city. Also, “the ability to rent out the property easily on home sharing sites makes it a more affordable way to grow equity,” says Malissa Marshall, a certified financial planner with Soaring Wealth.

Source: “Why People Are Buying Vacation Homes – Before They’ve Even Bought a First Home,” CNN.com (Jan. 7, 2020)

NAR Survey: 4Q 2019 a Good Time to Buy and Sell Home

Almost 2 in 3 Americans (63%) think it’s a good time to buy a home; 1 in 3 (33%) strongly believe that. On the flipside, 3 out of 4 (74%) think it’s a good time to sell.

WASHINGTON – It’ a good time to buy a home – and also sell one – according to Americans polled in the National Association of Realtors® (NAR) latest consumer survey.

The 2019 fourth-quarter survey found that 63% of people believe it’s a good time to buy a home, with 33% saying they strongly believe that it’s a good time to buy. But even more think it’s a good time to sell. When asked in the survey, 74% of those polled believe that now is a good time to sell.

Lawrence Yun, NAR’s chief economist, said the positive sentiments can be linked to the strong job market and favorable economic conditions.

“The mobility rate has been very low as many (homeowners) have opted to stay put for longer,” says Yun. “However, this latest boost – Americans saying now is a good time to move – is good news. With mortgage rates low, the timing is indeed ideal for those who want to enter into homeownership and for those looking to move on to their next home.”

Respondents from the silent generation (born between 1925 and 1945) were most likely to state that now is a good time to buy (73%), while younger boomers (born between 1945 and 1964) also overwhelmingly viewed the market favorably in terms of being a good time to buy (70%).

NAR’s fourth quarter Housing Opportunities and Market Experience (HOME) survey found that 82% of those who earn $100,000 or more said it’s a good time to sell a home, with 81% of those in the West region agreeing.

“The Western region has seen home prices increase to the point that costs have outpaced income,” says Yun. “So, it is no wonder that those living in the West would think that now is a perfect time to place a home on the market. California especially is seeing some of the highest prices ever.”

The NAR study also asked about local home prices over the past year, and 64% said they believe prices have increased, 30% believe prices have remained about the same, and 6% believe prices have decreased.

Respondents were also asked to share their expectations for local home prices over the next six months: 41% predicted that prices will remain the same in their communities, 48% said they believe prices will rise and 11% expected prices to fall.

At 47%, millennials were most likely to believe prices will increase in their communities. Out of the four major regions, the South had the highest number of residents who said home prices would climb over the next six months.

In general, 52% of the people polled by NAR believe the U.S. economy is improving, which is consistent with the third quarter of 2019. Optimism was highest among individuals who earn $100,000 or more, as well as for those who reside in rural areas compared to other locations.

Less than half (47%) of millennials believe the economy is improving, however – the lowest of all age groups – and only 41% of Floridians in urban areas believe the economy is improving compared to 66% in rural areas.

“Whether it’s a reflection of politics or true economic conditions, there is a difference of views between rural and urban areas,” Yun says.

Fla. Chamber Survey: Bullish on Doing Business Here

Ongoing international crises and a possible minimum-wage hike haven’t dampened the Florida Chamber Foundation’s upbeat outlook, economist Jerry Parrish said Thursday.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Florida’s business community is optimistic about the state’s economy in 2020, despite potentially ominous issues on the horizon. Ongoing international crises and the possibility of a minimum-wage hike haven’t dampened the Florida Chamber Foundation’s upbeat outlook for the Sunshine State, the organization’s chief economist Jerry Parrish said Thursday.

Business leaders think there’s only a 1 in 5 chance (21.1%) that the state will slip into a recession during the next nine months. That’s down from September’s 38.1% prediction, said Parrish.

The improved economic climate is based on an upgraded forecast on the return on long-term Treasury bonds and “an increase in Florida’s consumer sentiment,” Parrish said during a webcast. “Florida has been growing manufacturing jobs at nearly three times faster than the U.S. as a whole.” The “strong job creation numbers” and “improved economic diversification” were achieved by luring new businesses to the state and expanding companies already based here, he added.

“We know that Florida has become a destination for people from other states and countries who are looking for opportunity, a great quality of life … as well as companies that are looking for a great place to do business,” Parrish said.

The foundation’s chief economist is also bullish that 200,000 jobs will be created in Florida this year, up from an estimated 157,500 in 2019.

But not all is rosy for leaders of the business lobby.

Parrish and Florida Chamber President and CEO Mark Wilson both voiced support for maintaining Visit Florida, the tourism agency which has drawn fierce opposition from Republican House leaders. And the duo are opposed to a proposed constitutional amendment, slated to go before voters in November, that would gradually raise Florida’s minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2026.

“Increases in the minimum wage sound like a good idea to many people, but what happens in a lot of cases is that it ultimately hurts the very people its supporters claim that it will help,” Parrish said. “Many people get cut from full-time down to part-time hours, and they lose their benefits. There are also definitely jobs lost and some businesses will definitely close.”

Florida’s minimum wage rose from $8.46 to $8.56 per hour with a minimum wage of at least $5.54 an hour for tipped employees on Jan. 1.

In addition, lingering international trade disputes and tariffs have resulted in a reduction in trade, which has caused businesses to hold off on making investments. “Nobody wants a trade war, and I’m hoping that we can get these issues solved,” Parrish said.

It’s too early to make predictions on the latest crises developing in the Middle East, but Parrish also said they need to be watched.

“Florida has 20 military bases, three combatant command centers and 1.5 million veterans,” he said. “A lot of families could be impacted by these events.”

Fla. Supreme Court Bumps Energy Amendment from Ballot

A proposed constitutional amendment for a “competitive” Fla. electricity market won’t go before voters. The court did not rule on its merits; instead, it called it confusing because the ballot summary voters see includes a right to “sell electricity” while the complete proposal does not.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – The Florida Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have overhauled and deregulated the state’s electric-utility industry, saying part of the proposal’s wording would mislead voters.

The ruling was a victory for state leaders, business groups and utilities that fought the amendment, which was proposed for the November ballot by a political committee known as Citizens for Energy Choices.

The proposal called for creating a “competitive” electricity market that would have made dramatic changes in the heavily regulated industry in which much of the state receives electricity from Florida Power & Light, Duke Energy Florida, Tampa Electric Co. and Gulf Power.

Amendment supporters, including companies that want to supply electricity in Florida, pointed to a similar competitive structure that Texas has used for nearly two decades.

But the Supreme Court, which must sign off on proposed constitutional amendments, issued an 11-page ruling that focused on wording in the ballot summary. The summary, which is what voters would see when they go to the polls, said the amendment would grant “customers of investor-owned utilities the right to choose their electricity provider and to generate and sell electricity.”

Justices said the full proposal does not back up the summary’s claim that it would give customers the right to “sell electricity.”

“The question is not whether a person has the right to sell electricity if the initiative is adopted, but whether, as the ballot summary claims, the initiative grants that right,” the Supreme Court opinion said. “It does not, and the ballot summary is therefore affirmatively misleading.

“The proponents argue that, notwithstanding this discrepancy, the ballot summary is an accurate statement of the initiative’s effects because the initiative necessarily implies a right to sell electricity. We reject this argument. We do not find any such implicit right in the proposed amendment. The ballot summary expressly states that the initiative grants the right to sell electricity, and the initiative does not do so. Because the ballot summary is affirmatively misleading, it does not satisfy the clarity requirements of (a section of state law). Consequently, the initiative should not be placed on the ballot.”

Thursday’s decision came after Citizens for Energy Choices spent at least $5.5 million trying to get the proposal on the ballot, with most of that money going toward gathering petition signatures. Along with needing Supreme Court approval of the wording, the committee also needed to meet a Feb. 1 deadline for submitting 766,200 valid petition signatures to the state. As of mid-day Thursday, the state Division of Elections had tallied 642,300 signatures.

Supporters of the proposal included Infinite Energy, Inc., NRG Energy, Inc., and Vistra Energy Corp.

Much of Florida’s electric market is highly regulated, with “investor-owned utilities” FPL, Duke, Tampa Electric and Gulf serving specific areas of the state. The proposed amendment, however, sought changes such as creating “competitive wholesale and retail markets” and dramatically limiting the roles of the investor-owned utilities.

As an example, the amendment would have limited those utilities to building, operating and repairing electrical-transmission and distribution systems – effectively preventing them from selling power directly to customers.

During Supreme Court arguments in August, Ken Sukhia, an attorney for Citizens for Energy Choices, said the measure would help do away with utility monopolies in many parts of the state.

“The case involves simply a matter of bringing to a particular industry a free and open choice in a free-market society where a monopoly is no longer needed,” said Sukhia, a former United States attorney. “And I ask you, your honors (the justices), to look closely at the ballot initiative and ask yourselves how else could you accomplish this end?”

But the proposal faced opposition from Attorney General Ashley Moody, state House and Senate leaders, powerful business groups and utilities, including municipal utilities and electric cooperatives. They urged the Supreme Court to keep the proposal off the ballot.

Barry Richard, an attorney for FPL and Gulf Power, said during the August hearing that the Supreme Court has never “faced an amendment that would so radically change an industry of such importance to Floridians. And never before has this court allowed an amendment on the ballot that contained multiple subjects as disparate as does this one.”

Trump Admin. Proposes Rule to Ease Construction Regulations

The plan would ease environmental rules for some projects, set time limits for federal reviews and allow regulators to assess “cumulative” effects on climate change.

WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump revived the political battle between businesspeople and environmentalists Thursday, proposing to reduce federal regulations on construction projects, which critics said would worsen climate change.

“From day one, my administration has made fixing this regulatory nightmare a top priority,” Trump said during a ceremony at the White House. “And we want to build new roads, bridges, tunnels, highways, bigger, better, faster, and we want to build them at less cost.”

Environmental groups said the plan benefits corporate interests at the expense of public health.

Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters, said Trump’s proposed changes would undercut the National Environmental Policy Act, the nation’s landmark environmental law that turned 50 years old last week.

“The implications for access to clean air and clean water and for public input, especially among the low-income communities and communities of color most impacted by climate change and toxic pollution, could be dire,” Karpinski said.

The plan would basically ease environmental rules for construction projects that do not have significant federal funding. It would set time limits on the length of federal reviews of these projects and would not allow regulators to assess a project’s “cumulative” effects on climate change.

The proposals are likely to be published in the federal register this week, and they will undergo a process of public comment and hearings. The government is likely to issue final regulations in the fall.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Trump’s plan means “more polluters will be right there next to the water supply of our children. That’s a public health issue.”

At the White House, Trump said the approval process should boil down to “one federal decision,” rather than a series of approvals. He said the changes are designed to “slash job-killing regulations” and shrink “endless delays” in approval for necessary projects.

He called the current regulations “big government at its absolute worst.”

Members of the oil, gas, agriculture and trucking industries, as well as trade union groups, have long advocated for changes to environmental regulations, saying they are cumbersome and used by environmentalists to block projects.

Jay Timmons, president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, applauded the proposed changes, saying, “Our hope is that these improvements will modernize infrastructure permitting” for highways, bridges, power lines, and cell towers.

Critics said the changes will enable supporters of construction projects to discount the impact on climate change when seeking permits from the government. The results, they said, will be a worse environment with more deadly ramifications from climate change.

Realtor.com: For-Sale Inventory Lowest in Two Years

The number listings on realtor.com in three U.S. cities are down over 30% year-to-year. In the Fla. cities listed, however, the drops range from 16.5% to 8.8%.

Florida inventory year-to-year declines

Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater: 16.5%; median days on market up by 4 days to 64
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford: 14%; median days on market down by 2 days to 68
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach: 8.9%; median days on market up by 1 day to 89
Jacksonville: 8.8%; median days on market down by 5 days to 73

The realtor.com analysis, which considers only listings advertised on realtor.com’s website, found that the national inventory decline accelerating across all price levels, including the luxury market.

In December, inventory of homes priced under $200,000 declined by 18.1% year-over-year – higher than the 16.5% drop in November. Mid-tier housing priced between $200,000 and $750,000 also declined at an accelerated pace, up 10.2% year-over-year compared to November’s decline of 7.4%. Listings of homes priced over $1 million shrunk by 4.4% year-over-year, up from nearly 2% in November.

“The market is struggling with a large housing undersupply just as 4.8 million millennials are reaching 30-years of age in 2020, a prime age for many to purchase their first home,” says realtor.com Senior Economist George Ratiu. “The significant inventory drop we saw in December is a harbinger of the continuing imbalance expected to plague this year’s markets, as the number of homes for sale are poised to reach historically low levels.”

The inventory shortage gripping the U.S. housing market is showing no signs of slowing anytime soon. December’s 12% year-over-year inventory decline is an acceleration from November’s drop of 9.5% and equates to a loss of nearly 155,000 listings compared to December 2018. Additionally, new listings are failing to restore the market to equilibrium as the volume of newly listed properties also declined by 11.2% year-over-year.

Nationally, homes sold in 79 days in December 2019 – two days more quickly than December 2018.

Buy Vs. Rent: U.S. Evenly Divided but Buy Is Better in Fla.

ATTOM: In 47% of U.S. markets, it’s better to rent than buy – but buying is better in most Fla. high-population counties, including Miami-Dade, Broward and Hillsborough.

IRVINE, Calif. – Jan. 9, 2020 – ATTOM Data Solutions’ 2020 Rental Affordability Report finds a fairly even split nationally on whether it’s better to buy or rent a median-priced, three-bedroom home. Of 855 counties analyzed, buying is more affordable than renting in 455 (53%)

In Florida’s largest counties, however, buying a home continues to be a better option. The report includes Miami-Dade, Broward and Hillsborough counties in its list of “counties with a population of at least one million where buying a home is more affordable than renting.”

Overall, ATTOM’s analysis found a split between different-sized markets, with ownership more affordable mainly in lightly populated counties and renting more affordable in more populous suburban or urban areas.

“Homeownership is a better deal than renting for the average wage earner in a slim majority of U.S. housing markets. However, there are distinct differences between different places, depending on the size and location from core metro areas,” says Todd Teta, chief product officer with ATTOM Data Solutions. He calls the cost of housing a “financial stretch … for individual wage earners throughout most of the country … But with interest rates falling, owning a home can still be the more affordable option, even as prices keep rising.”

Other study insights

Renting is more affordable than buying a home in 94 (69%) of the 136 counties in the report that have a population of at least 500,000 or more
Renting is the more affordable option in 36 of the 43 counties with a population of at least 1 million or more (84%)
Counties with a population of at least one million where it’s more affordable to buy include Miami-Dade County; Broward County; Wayne County, Mich. (Detroit); Philadelphia County, Pa.; Hillsborough County; Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), Ohio and Allegheny County, Pa. (Pittsburgh)
Renting a three-bedroom property requires an average 37.6% of weekly wages across the 855 counties analyzed
The least affordable markets for renting are largely in California, Hawaii and Colorado
The most affordable rental markets are in Tennessee, New York, Alabama and Ohio
Median home prices rose faster than average fair-market rents in 575 of the 855 counties analyzed in the report (67.3%)
Average rents rose faster than median prices in 280 counties (32.7%)
Median home prices rose faster than average weekly wages in 567 of the 855 counties analyzed in the report (66.3%), including Miami-Dade County
Wages rose faster than average fair market rents in 484 counties (56.6%)
Average rents rose faster than average wages in 371 (43.4%)