A decision by the Manatee County Commission to cancel scheduled adoption hearings for two comprehensive plan text amendments last week may have temporarily delayed legal challenges to the ordinances under SB 180, or potential punitive action from Tallahassee. However, the cancellations didn’t bring an end to the threat of legal action.
Shortly after Chairman George Kruse announced on Tuesday that he would exercise his right to direct staff to cancel Thursday's land use meeting, Samuel J. Salario, Jr. of the Lawson Huck Gonzalez law firm, sent commissioners a letter, demanding they go one step further and withdraw the proposed ordinances altogether.
“On behalf of our clients, we respectfully demand that the Commission withdraw the proposed comprehensive plan amendments no later than 14 days from the date of this letter,” Salario warned in the August 21 letter. “If they are not withdrawn within 14 days, our clients will file suit, seek a temporary injunction, and seek recovery of its attorneys’ fees and costs from the County. The better course is for the County to withdraw the proposals before then.”
Last week’s letter wasn’t the first such warning to the commission to reconsider moving forward with the reinstatement of the local wetland protections policy, or the repeal of Policy 2.1.2.8—a policy that weakened the Future Development Area Boundary (FDAB), which was established to contain urban sprawl and preserve agricultural land.
The Friday before the land use meeting was scheduled to be held, the Florida Department of Commerce sent two letters to commissioners, one relating to the two proposed comprehensive plan amendments (wetland buffers and 2.1.2.8), the other regarding a BOCC resolution approved on June 5, 2025, raising impact fees by 100%.
The letters reminded commissioners that multiple state agencies returned comments during the comp plan transmittal process, advising that the proposed ordinances for reinstating wetland protections and repealing 2.1.2.8 would violate a state law related to hurricane recovery.
A "comp plan transmittal" is a formal part of the comprehensive plan amendment process, which requires local governments to transmit any proposed ordinances amending the comp plan to relevant state agencies for state-level review and comments before the changes can be adopted.
The commissioners’ action on raising impact fees didn’t require transmittal to the state—as it does not amend the county’s comp plan—but FloridaCommerce Secretary Alex Kelly wrote in his letter that a law signed by the governor in June bars the board from raising impact fees.
The law Secretary Kelly was referring to is Senate Bill 180.
Titled the “Emergencies Act,” SB 180 was enacted to strengthen the provisions of an earlier bill (SB 250). The prior measure prohibited local governments impacted by Hurricanes Ian and Nicole in 2022 from implementing more “restrictive or burdensome” rules in their comprehensive land use plans.
SB 180’s provisions are broader than SB 250’s, with restrictions applying retroactively from Aug. 1, 2024, through Oct. 1, 2027, to all counties and municipalities statewide in the aftermath of Hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton.
Like its predecessor, SB 180 was ostensibly enacted to help communities recover and rebuild, but its provisions are having broad implications for local governments seeking to adopt policies that help manage growth and development and that promote environmental conservation—the exact sorts of policies that could help strengthen communities and make them more resilient to hurricanes.
In his first August 15 letter, Kelly advised in part, “Florida Commerce is aware that the Commission has scheduled a public hearing on August 21, 2025, to consider action on the proposed amendments without resolving the elements in conflict with state law and outlined in agency comments.
“If the Commission pursues this path, this could form the basis for a challenge to the validity of the amendment…. Please govern yourself accordingly.”
Kelly’s second August 15 letter struck a similar tone, cautioning that the county would face potential consequences if it enforced the collection of the approved higher impact fees.
“If the Board chooses to continue down this path, the consequences are inevitable. These consequences may include litigation, heightened public scrutiny, and becoming the example of the local government that caused a law to be clarified, amended, or enacted to ensure actions such as these do not happen in the future,” wrote Kelly.
He concluded the letter by advising that multiple other state agencies had been copied on the letter, adding, “Please rest assure that if the County continues down this path, all discretionary funding decisions by these agencies, including all grant awards and reimbursements, will be subject to heightened scrutiny and possible delays given the Board’s clear inability to understand and follow state law.”
“As a reminder,” he continued, “whether or not the Board agrees with state law, each of you took an oath to follow it nonetheless….Please govern yourselves accordingly.”
Last month, the East County Observer reported that commissioners had also received a letter from the Moore Bowman & Reese law firm, informing them that the firm would be representing Freedom Housing Alliance Inc., a newly formed nonprofit, in legal action against the county regarding its impact fee rate policy.
Since the case’s initial filing in July, Aqua One Builder, Inc. and local developer Pat Neal have joined the Freedom Housing Alliance as additional parties to the complaint against the county, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.
According to the Florida Division of Corporations, the registered agent of the Freedom Housing Alliance is the CEO of the Suncoast Builders Association (formerly known as the “BIA”), Jon Mast.
Mast’s name may ring familiar even to those who have only loosely followed the goings-on of Manatee County Government in recent years. In 2023, Mast was caught up in stories related to a white paper containing suggested revisions to the local land and development code, the subject of an alleged plan of a pair of commissioners who wanted him installed as a deputy county administrator, and a subsequent (abandoned) attempt at his being appointed to lead the county organization.
Many of the parties and entities applying legal or political pressure on Manatee County Commissioners are familiar names to the general public; however, the Lawson Huck Gonzalez law firm is undoubtedly less well-known locally.
Founded in Tallahassee in 2023, the firm has expanded to include offices in Miami, Orlando, and Tampa. Law.com reports that the firm has also been a major recipient of state legal contracts during DeSantis’ second term.
When Attorney Salario sent his August 21 letter after Commissioner Kruse canceled the land use meeting, another associate of the same firm had already issued an earlier public warning to commissioners regarding their intention to adopt the two comp plan text amendments.
Attorney Jason Gonzalez posted on Facebook during the week preceding the scheduled meeting, “Manatee County Commission – You’ve been warned. We have excellent courts in Florida that follow the law. If you violate the laws of the State of Florida, you will hear from the Lawson Law Firm, and it will not end well.”
Gonzalez—a founding shareholder of the firm—reportedly has close professional ties to Gov. Ron DeSantis. In June 2025, Gonzalez received the governor’s appointment to the Supreme Court Judicial Nominating Commission.
Based on the conditions as laid out in last week’s letter from the Tallahassee firm, regardless of no date being scheduled for the adoption of either comp plan text amendment, if commissioners do not take action to formally withdraw both proposed measures (wetland buffers and policy 2.1.2.8) by September 4, 2025, the firm will bring suit against the county.
Per the letter, “Our firm represents Freedom Housing Alliance, Inc. and other interested business owners and residents in Manatee County. We write to place the County on notice that two proposed comprehensive plan amendments—Plan Amendment 25-01/Ord. No. 24-14 and Plan Amendment 25-02/Ord. No. 25-17—violate Section 28 of Chapter 2025-190, also known as SB 180. On behalf of our clients, we demand that the County formally withdraw the proposed comprehensive plan amendments within 14 days of this letter, failing which our clients will file suit for declaratory and injunctive relief and for recovery from the County of its attorneys’ fees and costs.”
Not Just Manatee
SB 180, which was sponsored by Republican Senator Nick DiCeglie, is not only negatively impacting Manatee County, but elected officials and residents of various local governments are feeling the measure’s threat to home rule.
At least a dozen local governments across Florida have faced challenges due to the bill’s provisions, with a growing number of elected officials speaking out publicly about their opposition and some choosing to defy the measure outright.
Most recently, in the City of Edgewater, officials voted to keep temporary development moratoriums despite legal threats from developers and warnings from the city attorney.
In Orange County, officials have received notification from the Florida Department of Commerce that their “Vision 2050”—a comprehensive long-term land use plan designed to guide the county's growth over the next decades—is “null and void” due to SB 180.
Orange County Commissioners have thus far refused to repeal the plan, prompting a lawsuit to be brought against them by a local developer.
Next week, the Orange County Commission will hold a vote on authorizing the county’s legal staff to participate in a lawsuit seeking to challenge the legality of SB 180.
The City of Deltona, in Volusia County, voted last week to join the same statewide coalition suit that Orange County is considering. Edgewater, which is also in Volusia County, is also considering joining the coalition.
Lake County may also consider joining the legal action. Just last week, Lake County Commissioner Anthony Sabatini announced on Facebook, “As a member of the Lake County Commission, I SUPPORT our county joining the lawsuit to challenge Senate Bill 180 as unconstitutional and invalid on several grounds… We will be voting to join the legal effort at our August 26 County Commission meeting.”
Additional Florida cities have also signed onto the lawsuit, including the City of Weston, the City of Delray Beach, and the City of Windermere. The cities of Maitland, New Smyrna Beach, Islamorada, Naples, and Stuart are reportedly exploring the option.
Each participating city or county is expected to pay a flat fee of $10,000 to join the class action lawsuit to help fund the legal action. The fee is intended to be a collective cost to defend against potential lawsuits from developers who could recover legal fees of up to $250,000 from municipalities under provisions of SB 180.
Manatee County is not a party to the class action lawsuit that Orange County is considering and that multiple cities have already joined. However, the commissioners have authorized legal staff to explore the option. The board is anticipated to hold a vote in early September on whether it will officially join the coalition to challenge SB 180.
Earlier this month, Manatee County Commissioners voted to authorize staff to work with staff of Pasco and Pinellas Counties on an effort to propose a legislative policy “fix” for the troublesome language in SB 180 during an upcoming Florida Association of Counties (FAC) Legislative Policy Conference.
Dawn Kitterman is a staff reporter and investigative journalist for The Bradenton Times, covering local government news. She can be reached at dawn.kitterman@thebradentontimes.com.
10 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
Dianna
It’s time for commissioners to relieve us of the administration that is looking out for developers over citizens and join the class action lawsuit. It will be money well spent.
Saturday, August 23 Report this
Dave
It's time for the commissioners to live up to their campaign rhetoric. File suit or join the Orange County litigation.
Commissioner Kruse is worried that the Governor will dump him and other commission that don't bend to the developer's demands. I can’t help but think that keeping his job is the main driver of his capitulation. The Commission isn’t acting responsibly, why should I care if they are thrown out and some developer cronies don’t act responsibly? From a good government point of view, I lose either way.
Manatee County should not give into the state’s and developers' bullying. Bullies don’t stop bullying when their victim gives in, they just demand more and then more (see eg. Donald Trump and his minions).
Saturday, August 23 Report this
David Daniels
It was on Friday May 9th, 3 months ago, that the County commission first received agency opinions that SB180 prevented the board from reinstating wetland protection and a rural boundary line. The same day, the board received a threat to sue from developer lawyer Ed Vogler over SB180. The letters prompted outrage from Tal, Siddique, who called them “bullshit!…this is what I think of this letter” and ripped it in half. The point is that the threats from the state and developers are not new. There has been no changes that strengthens or weakens anyone's position. The issue in conflict remains the same - interpreting the vague language of the bill.
After reviewing the threats, on July 10th, the George Kruse that I campaigned for wrote on his substack: “SB180 has caused Manatee County to *temporarily* delay reinstating your wetlands…because unelected agency bureaucrats are “interpreting” the language differently than how our elected representatives are “implying” it’s intended to be....Rest assured, the Manatee County BOCC is working to continue moving ALL of these policies forward in spite of the new statutes. We WILL make these happen.. Too many elected officials shrink from their duties. I will not sit quietly.”
On July 29, the George Kruse that I stood in the hot sun 4 times for wrote on his substack: “I can confidently surmise that the legislature clearly intends for the “burdensome” section to pertain exclusively to redevelopment and repair of existing properties damaged during a storm... (Agencies) said our proposal was null and void. However, none of these agencies have authority to opine on this… their comments are merely suggestions, not law…Too many counties and cities are being held hostage by the poorly written, vague language in this bill. The citizens are tired of preemptions and losing local control. The only way to get around Senate Bill 180 is to force the courts to set the case law for our county and for our whole state.” He continued...
“Manatee County’s new Board of County Commissioners promised changes in how we manage our growth and our environment during the 2024 elections. We are going to honor those promises…If some developer wants us to defend your rights against their frivolous lawsuits, then that’s just what we’ll do.”
On August 10, the George Kruse that so many of us fought to get re-elected posted on his official FB page: “On Thursday, August 21, the Manatee County BOCC will vote to restore your wetland buffers and remove Policy 2.1.2.8 to protect our rural development boundary… I believe we have every right to do so in spite of SB180”
And on August 12, on his official FB page, Commissioner Kruse wrote about “Manatee County's decision to retain local control over growth management for the citizens in spite of the constitutionally-questionable SB180” in the past tense, as if it was a done deal and had already been voted on.
So what changed on August 19th to cause not only a complete 180, but to cancel the entire August 21 meeting and agenda? (did the board vote on that?) Why not debate and vote?
The city of Edgewater in Volusia County voted to keep their building moratorium despite getting the same threats that Manatee has received. During their public debate (as reported by the Daytona Beach News Journal) councilman Eric Rainbird gestured toward the audience and said “I work for you. I’ll never forget I work for you. If I get removed, I’ll walk through this town with my head held high,”
In Manatee, instead of a public debate and a vote, we viewed the courage of 7 empty seats.There was no need to remove our County Commissioners, by backing down in fear, our commissioners removed themselves
Saturday, August 23 Report this
graumli22
It's time for the commissioners to grow a set and join the law suit. If they're suspended and replaced by pro-state stand ins, wouldn't anything they enact be nulified once we win the lawsuit? It's time for all "home rule" cherishing municipalities to ban together to represent the constituents who voted for them.
Sunday, August 24 Report this
Cat L
Yes, this is organized crime... SB 180 needs to be challenged. I'm sick of mega-business self-entitled thugs wrecking Florida (and America) and reshaping it into a system they benefit from, only.
F*** that.
Sunday, August 24 Report this
CTBradenton
For all our commissioners who repeatedly quoted scripture during their campaigns, please read Job 38:8-11:
"Or who shut in the sea with the doors,
When it burst forth and issued from the womb;
When I made the clouds its garment,
And thick darkness its swaddling band;
When I fixed My limit for it,
And set bars and doors;
When I said,
This far you may come, but no farther,
And here your proud waves must stop!"
Sunday, August 24 Report this
GCDUBBAU
There is an entire body of state legislation that vests authority and guides local governments to act in the best interests of its resident tax payers given the unique circumstances in their respective communities. HB180 is written purposely as a temporary measure and it does not usurp other relevant legislation, and it seems to me at least that there is a legal argument to be made on that point, in addition to others that legal advisors would advocate. Manatee County voters elected this BOCC with the specific intent that the Board reclaim the development process, including more protective wetland buffers and higher impact fees. It’s highly likely the voters would support the legal actions necessary by the Board to fight the developer cabal and its legal minions in court. I would urge the Board to join the other counties in challenging HB180.
Sunday, August 24 Report this
RRICH69176
Spend taxpayer money and join the lawsuit to fight "developer controlled government" and protect the environment. Sitting back will enable further control of local government--the big developers have made millions in the county-but apparently is not enough..........pure greed.
Sunday, August 24 Report this
writerlynn9717
Join in a partnership with the other counties in fighting SB 180 and go to court. I would pay money to see what our courts decide. Let the courts decide if the developers win over the people's decisions in their own counties. We need to know how far the developers' hold over the courts and us goes.
Sunday, August 24 Report this
rayfusco68
The commissioners need to join the other Counties that have initiated the lawsuit. However, the voters in all of the Counties need to accept responsibility for putting Senators, House members and a Governor in place that want to usurp local authority. If you really want to change things stop voting party line and start voting the issues. We changed things here. Now all of Florida needs to change things in Tallahassee. We can start in our County by voting out the current crop of developer enabling representatives that we send to Tallahassee just like we did in the County.
Sunday, August 24 Report this