This document does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill sponsor or House of Representatives.
STORAGE NAME: h1555z.DOCX
DATE: 3/15/2022
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF FINAL BILL ANALYSIS
BILL #: HB 1555 Private Property Rights to Prune, Trim, and Remove Trees
SPONSOR(S): McClain and others
TIED BILLS: IDEN./SIM. BILLS: CS/SB 518
FINAL HOUSE FLOOR ACTION: 116 Y’s
1 N’s GOVERNOR’S ACTION: Pending
SUMMARY ANALYSIS
HB 1555 passed the House on March 8, 2022, as CS/SB 518.
Local governments sometimes require property owners to obtain a permit or pay a fee before trimming,
pruning, or removing trees. To make the maintenance and removal of dead, dying, overgrown, or diseased
trees on residential properties easier, the Florida Legislature enacted s. 163.045, F.S., in 2019. The law
prohibits a local government from requiring notice, application, approval, permit, fee, or mitigation for the
pruning, trimming, or removal of a tree on a residential property when the property owner obtains
documentation from a certified arborist or a Florida-licensed landscape architect stating that the tree presents a
danger to persons or property. In addition, a local government may not require a property owner to replant a
tree that was pruned, trimmed, or removed in accordance with the law.
The bill amends s. 163.045, F.S., to clarify that a local government may not burden a property owner’s rights to
prune, trim, or remove trees on his or her own residential property if the tree “poses an unacceptable risk” to
persons or property. A tree poses an “unacceptable risk” if removal is the only means of practically mitigating
the risk below “moderate,” as defined by the tree risk assessment procedures in Best Management Practices
—Tree Risk Assessment, Second Edition (2017).
The bill also adds definitions for the terms “documentation” and “residential property.” The definition for
“documentation” requires that an onsite assessment be made in a certain manner by a specified type of
certified arborist or architect. The bill defines “residential property” as a single-family detached building located
on a lot that is actively used for single-family residential purposes. The building may either be a conforming use
or a legally recognized nonconforming use in accordance with the local jurisdiction’s land development
regulations.
The bill may have an indeterminate fiscal impact on local governments.
Subject to the Governor’s veto powers, the effective date of this bill is July 1, 2022.
STORAGE NAME: h1555z.DOCX PAGE: 2
DATE: 3/15/2022
I. SUBSTANTIVE INFORMATION
A. EFFECT OF CHANGES:
Background
Local Governments
The Florida Constitution grants local governments broad home rule authority. Specifically, non-charter
county governments may exercise those powers of self-government that are provided by general or
special law.
1
Counties operating under a county charter have all powers of self-government not
inconsistent with general law or special law approved by the vote of the electors.
2
Likewise,
municipalities have governmental, corporate, and proprietary powers that enable them to conduct
municipal government, perform municipal functions and provide services, and exercise any power for
municipal purposes except when expressly prohibited by law.
3
County governments have authority, to the extent not inconsistent with general or special law, to
prepare and enforce comprehensive plans for the development of the county and provide fire
protection, ambulance services, parks and recreation, libraries, museums and other cultural facilities,
waste and sewage collection and disposal, and water and alternative water supplies.
4
Municipalities are
afforded broad home rule powers with the exception of annexation, merger, exercise of extraterritorial
power, or subjects prohibited or preempted by the Federal or State Constitutions, county charter, or
statute.
5
Private Property Rights Protection
The Legislature has recognized that some laws, regulations, and ordinances may inordinately burden
private property rights, and that protecting the rights of individual private property owners is an
important state interest.
6
The Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act provides property
owners relief when a law, rule, regulation, or ordinance burdens private property but does not amount
to a constitutional taking but unfairly affects real property.
7
Additionally, Florida’s Land Use and
Environmental Dispute Resolution Act allows landowners to seek relief when a governmental entity’s
order or action is unreasonable or unfairly burdens the owner’s use of real property.
8
Local Tree Pruning, Trimming, and Removal Regulation
Local governments sometimes require property owners to obtain a permit or pay a fee before trimming,
pruning, or removing trees. Given the fact that Florida is a national leader in tropical storms and
hurricanes, tree damage is a common occurrence. To make the maintenance and removal of dead,
dying, overgrown, or diseased trees on residential property easier, the Legislature enacted s. 163.045,
F.S., in 2019. The law limits
9
the ability of local governments to regulate tree pruning, trimming, or
removal on residential property, when the property owner obtains documentation from a certified
arborist
10
or a Florida-licensed landscape architect that the tree presents a danger to persons or
property.
11
Specifically, the law prohibits a local government from requiring a notice, application,
1
Art. VIII, s. 1(f), Fla. Const.
2
Art. VIII, s. 1(g), Fla. Const.
3
Art. VIII, s. 2(b), Fla. Const.; see also s. 166.021(1), F.S.
4
S. 125.01, F.S.
5
S. 166.021, F.S.
6
S. 70.001, F.S.
7
Id.
8
S. 70.51, F.S.
9
This section does not apply to the exercise of specifically delegated authority for mangrove protection pursuant to ss. 403.9321-
403.9333, F.S. S. 163.045(3), F.S.
10
The arborist must be certified by the International Society of Arboriculture. S. 163.045(1), F.S.
11
S. 163.045(1), F.S.
STORAGE NAME: h1555z.DOCX PAGE: 3
DATE: 3/15/2022
approval, permit, fee, or mitigation in such instance.
12
Additionally, a local government may not require
a property owner to replant a tree that was pruned, trimmed, or removed in accordance with the
section.
13
“Residential” Property
When s. 163.045, F.S., was enacted, no definition of “residential property” was included in law. In 2019,
a Tampa mobile home park owner was fined $420,000 for cutting down trees on his property, despite
the fact that he had obtained the requisite documentation from a certified arborist.
14
The tree-cutting
firm’s arborist who signed off on the tree removal was fined the $420,000 amount as well.
15
The City of
Tampa claimed that s.163.045, F.S., did not apply to the mobile home park because the property was
zoned commercial, not residential, even though it was divided into residential mobile home lots.
16
Effect of the Bill
The bill amends s. 163.045, F.S., to modify the standard of what level of danger or risk a tree must
present to satisfy the statutory requirements. Specifically, the bill requires that the documentation
complying with the statute must exhibit that the tree “poses an unacceptable risk” to persons or
property. The bill provides that a tree presents an “unacceptable risk” if removal is the only means of
practically mitigating the risk below “moderate,” as defined by the tree risk assessment procedures in
Best Management Practices—Tree Risk Assessment, Second Edition (2017).
17
The bill defines the terms “documentation” and “residential property” for purposes of the section. The
bill defines “documentation” as “an onsite assessment performed in accordance with the tree risk
assessment procedures outlined in Best Management Practices—Tree Risk Assessment, Second
Edition (2017)” by a certified arborist
18
or a Florida-licensed landscape architect, and signed by the
arborist or architect. By adding this definition, the bill provides more detail and clarity as to what
documentation is required to disallow local government from requiring action of a property owner.
Under this definition, the assessment must be performed onsite and must be signed by the arborist or
architect performing the assessment.
The bill defines “residential property” as “a single-family, detached building located on a lot that is
actively used for single-family residential purposes and that is either a conforming use or a legally
recognized nonconforming use
19
in accordance with the local jurisdiction’s applicable land development
regulations.” The bill also changes statutory language so that a property owner must “possess” instead
of “obtain” the appropriate documentation from a certified arborist
18
or Florida licensed landscape
architect.
The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2022.
12
Id.
13
S. 163.045(2), F.S.
14
Charlie Frago, Tampa Seeks to Fine Gandy Tree Cutters a Record $840,000, Tampa Bay Times (Sept. 18, 2019),
https://www.tampabay.com/news/tampa/2019/09/18/tampa-seeks-to-fine-gandy-tree-cutters-a-record-840000/ (last visited March 8,
2022).
15
Id.
16
Id.
17
The International Society of Arboriculture developed a series of Best Practices for the purpose of interpreting tree care standards and
providing guidelines of practice for arborists, tree workers, and the people who employ their services. ISA, in Best Management
Practices—Tree Risk Assessment, Second Edition (2017), available at https://wwv.isa-arbor.com/store/product/324, (last visited March
8, 2022).
18
The arborist must be certified by the International Society of Arboriculture.
19
A nonconforming use or structure is one in which the structure was legally permitted prior to a change in law, and the change in law
no longer permits the re-establishment of such structure or use. Mark A. Rothenberg, The Status of Nonconforming Use Law in Florida,
Florida Bar Journal (March 2005), https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/the-status-of-nonconforming-use-law-in-
florida/#:~:text=definition%2C%20a%20nonconforming%20use%20or%20structure%20is%20one,So.%202d%20751%2C%20754%20
%28Fla.%205th%20DCA%201985%29%3A (last visited March 8, 2022).
STORAGE NAME: h1555z.DOCX PAGE: 4
DATE: 3/15/2022
II. FISCAL ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT
A. FISCAL IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT:
1. Revenues:
None.
2. Expenditures:
None.
B. FISCAL IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
1. Revenues:
The bill may have an insignificant negative fiscal impact on local governments due to reduced fines
caused by the bill’s modification of the ability of certain residential property owners to cut down,
trim, or prune their trees without the need for local government approval.
2. Expenditures:
None.
C. DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT ON PRIVATE SECTOR:
None.
D. FISCAL COMMENTS:
None.