The Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act: An Overview, Recent Developments, and What the Future May Hold

Florida has a law called the Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act that helps landowners when government actions affect their property. It has been amended to make it easier for landowners to file claims, but courts have been cautious in granting relief. There is still confusion about what is protected under the act and how it should be applied. New legislation and recent court cases may change how the act is handled in the judicial system. The Harris Act has strict time limits for filing a claim against a government regulation that impacts your property. You have one year from the time the regulation is first applied to your property to file a claim. The deadline can also start when you receive notice from the government about the impact of the regulation. If you seek relief through administrative or judicial proceedings, the deadline is extended. The impact of a regulation is considered readily ascertainable when it is clear how it affects your property. However, there are instances when the impact of a regulation cannot be determined until you apply for a development permit. In those cases, the deadline starts when your permit application is denied. It’s important to be mindful of these time limits when dealing with government regulations that affect your property. In the Smith case, a couple claimed that a fire station being built near their property was causing it to lose value. They said that a deed restriction was being violated. The court had to decide if they could make this claim, even though no law had been directly applied to their property. The majority of the court said no, but the dissenting judges said yes. The ruling could have a big impact, making it easier for people to sue the government over property issues. One of the bills passed in 2015 made changes to a law about property owners suing the government. The new law says that only property owners directly affected by the government action can sue, not neighbors or others nearby. This means that people like the Smiths, who were not the owners of the property affected by the government action, cannot sue. The Harris Act deals with claims about using real property. One issue is figuring out if a property owner has a “vested right” or an “existing use” of the property. The act gives some guidance, but the courts ultimately decide on a case-by-case basis. A vested right means the property owner has made big changes or spent a lot of money because they believed they had the right to use the property a certain way. An existing use is a current, actual use of the property or a use that is likely to happen and will increase the property’s value. In simple terms, the act tries to figure out if a property owner has a right to use their property in a certain way and if there is already a valuable use for the property. A time-limited permit doesn’t mean you can use the property forever. If the government and landowner make a mistake about the use of the property, and it’s not legal, then there’s no existing use. An inordinate burden is when a government action restricts the use of property so much that the owner can’t use it as they expected. Before filing a lawsuit, the property owner has to meet certain requirements, like submitting a claim and getting an appraisal. The government has to make a settlement offer or say they won’t do anything. If they don’t reach a settlement, the government has to say what uses are allowed on the property. If you don’t follow the rules for making a claim under the Harris Act, your claim will be denied. For example, in one case, the court didn’t accept a claim because the people making the claim didn’t provide a valid appraisal. In another case, a claim was denied because the people didn’t send a notice before filing the claim. Even if the rules are a little confusing, the courts still take them very seriously. It’s similar to the rules for filing a lawsuit against a local government. The act encourages parties to settle claims before going to court. During the 150-day notice period, the government must make a settlement offer that could involve things like adjusting land use or making payments. If a settlement contradicts the law, the court has to approve it. If no settlement is reached, the property owner can only sue for money. This limits the options for both the government and property owners. The 2015 amendment to the Harris Act made changes to how landowners can settle with local government. It allows for settlements during a 90-day notice period or after a court filing. The amendment also added a new section allowing property owners to bring claims against government actions that don’t have a good public reason. The courts are still figuring out how far the protection for landowners goes. The goal is to balance landowners’ rights with the needs of the local government. The Harris Act in Florida allows property owners to take legal action if a law, regulation, or ordinance directly restricts or limits the use of their property. However, there are specific time limits for filing a lawsuit under the Harris Act. A recent case, Smith v. [Defendant], showed that the property owner cannot file a Harris Act lawsuit if the law or regulation was not directly applied to their property. It’s important for property owners to be aware of these rules and time limits if they want to take legal action under the Harris Act. In this article, we learn about the process of settling claims against a city or local government in Florida. The authors, Amber Ketterer and Rafael Suarez-Rivas, explain the requirements and procedures for filing a claim, as well as the possibility of settling a claim before going to court. They also acknowledge the assistance of another attorney, J. Gigi Soliman, in preparing the article. This article was submitted by the City, County, and Local Government Section, with Mark CS Moriarty as the chair and David Miller as the editor.

This article explains the process of settling claims against a city or local government in Florida, written by Amber Ketterer and Rafael Suarez-Rivas, and acknowledges the assistance of attorney J. Gigi Soliman. It was submitted by the City, County, and Local Government Section, with Mark CS Moriarty as the chair and David Miller as the editor.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/the-bert-j-harris-jr-private-property-rights-protection-act-an-overview-recent-developments-and-what-the-future-may-hold/