1997 Update on the Bert Harris Private Property Protection Act

The Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act allows property owners to sue the government if they feel that the government’s actions have unfairly restricted the use of their property. Before suing, the property owner must submit a written claim and get an appraisal of the property’s value. Within six months, the government must respond with a settlement offer or a decision not to resolve the claim. In a case called Villasol Realty C. v. St. Johns Water Management District, a developer filed a claim after his plans for 27 lots were reduced to 10 due to wetlands and drainage concerns. In one case, a property was appraised before and after environmental constraints, and the owner tried to get compensation, but the claim was rejected because the rules were in place before a certain date. In another case, a property owner claimed that new land regulations made his property nonconforming, and another owner claimed that the city’s rules on historic buildings limited his property’s use. The city said the rules were constitutional and also claimed that the cases were not ready for court yet because the owners hadn’t been denied permission to develop their properties under the new rules. The city is arguing that USA Express doesn’t have a valid claim for compensation under the historical district act because the ordinance in question was enacted before the cutoff date. They also say that the historical district designation didn’t burden the properties in question and may have even increased their value. As of now, USA Express hasn’t taken any legal action. In another case, a landowner is claiming that a new county plan is burdening his property, but the county says his claim isn’t valid because it’s not a permanent taking of property. Settlement discussions are happening. The City of West Palm Beach had a rule that buildings near the waterfront could be a maximum of 15 stories tall. But in 1996, the citizens asked for this to change to only 5 stories. The city held a special vote, and the citizens agreed to the change. Before the vote, a bank applied to build two 15-story buildings, but the city put a hold on their request until after the vote. After the vote, the city said no to the bank’s request. Now there are three legal cases against the city because of this. Fidelity, a company, and Holy Trinity Church and First Church of Christ Scientist filed claims against the City of West Palm Beach because of a new height restriction. West Palm Beach said the restriction was not their fault because it came from a citizen vote. Fidelity was offered a compromise but didn’t respond. The two churches also made claims, but West Palm Beach argued that they hadn’t even applied to build anything over five stories, so the law didn’t apply to them yet. The city of West Palm Beach is saying that a new law violates the Florida Constitution because it takes power away from local governments and makes it easier for people to get compensation for their property being taken. In one case, a man wanted to change his property to have more rental units, but the city said no. He tried to claim that the city’s decision hurt the value of his property, but the city said he didn’t have the right to make that claim. Another person is upset because the city told him to stop his business because the area was being changed to residential. The new act in Florida has some limitations. It only applies to actions taken after May 11, 1995 and only protects direct restrictions on real property, not personal property. It also only covers permanent losses to real property and does not apply to federal agencies. Additionally, there are strict timelines for filing a claim and affected neighbors must be notified. If a government entity loses a claim, they can appeal, but a landowner cannot. The government can recover their costs and attorneys’ fees if they win a court case against a property owner who rejected a reasonable settlement offer. The property owner can also recover their costs and attorneys’ fees if they win and the government’s offer was not fair. The law does not apply to cases involving transportation facilities or traditional eminent domain laws related to transportation. This law has been a long time coming for Floridians and is a good start. The Dispute Resolution Act is a law that helps landowners if they think a development order is unfair or unreasonable. They can ask for a review by a special master, who will make a recommendation to the government. The landowner must file a request within 30 days of getting the order, and the government has to respond within 45 days. It’s a way to solve problems without going to court. The Supreme Court of Florida ruled that a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution about property rights was not allowed because it violated a rule about having only one main topic in a proposed amendment. The rule is meant to make sure that amendments are clear and easy to understand. The court also had concerns about unclear parts of the proposal, like who is considered an “owner” and what exactly counts as a “fair market value” loss. Overall, the court said the proposal wasn’t clear enough and didn’t follow the rules, so it couldn’t be added to the constitution. Ronald L. Weaver is a lawyer in Tampa who specializes in land use, environmental, and real estate law. He has a lot of experience and has written articles about these topics. This column is written on behalf of the Environmental and Land Use Law Section.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/1997-update-on-the-bert-harris-private-property-protection-act/