Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 180.03 (2025)

Resolution or ordinance proposing construction or extension of utility; objections; study and report; use of revenue from operation of central sewage system.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

180.03 Resolution or ordinance proposing construction or extension of utility; objections; study and report; use of revenue from operation of central sewage system.—

(1) When it is proposed to exercise the powers granted by this chapter, a resolution or ordinance shall be passed by the city council, or the legislative body of the municipality, by whatever name known, reciting the utility to be constructed or extended and its purpose, the proposed territory to be included, what mortgage revenue certificates or debentures if any are to be issued to finance the project, the cost thereof, and such other provisions as may be deemed necessary.

(2) Any objections to any of the provisions of said resolution or ordinance shall be in writing and filed with the governing body of the municipality, and hearing thereupon shall be held within 30 days after the passage of the resolution by the legislative body of said municipality.

(3) For the construction of a new proposed central sewerage system or the extension of an existing central sewerage system that was not previously approved, the report shall include a study that includes the available information from the Department of Environmental Protection on the history of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems currently in use in the area and a comparison of the projected costs to the owner of a typical lot or parcel of connecting to and using the proposed central sewerage system versus installing, operating, and properly maintaining an onsite sewage treatment and disposal system that is approved by the Department of Environmental Protection and that provides for the comparable level of environmental and health protection as the proposed central sewerage system; consideration of the local authority’s obligations or reasonably anticipated obligations for water body cleanup and protection under state or federal programs, including requirements for water bodies listed under s. 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, Pub. L. No. 92-500, 33 U.S.C. ss. 1251 et seq.; and other factors deemed relevant by the local authority. The results of such a study shall be included in the resolution or ordinance required under subsection (1).

(4) A municipality is authorized to utilize revenue generated by the municipality from operation of the municipality’s central sewage system for expansion of the central sewage system.

History.—s. 1, ch. 17118, 1935; CGL 1936 Supp. 3100(6); s. 4, ch. 2006-252; s. 29, ch. 2020-150; s. 1, ch. 2025-117.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1968–2017 · leading case: City of Key West v. Florida Keys Cmty. Coll., 81 So. 3d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Key West v. Florida Keys Cmty. Coll., 81 So. 3d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). · cites it 5× “Alternatively, the City contends that even if stormwater utility services were not originally included in Chapter 180, the 2006 addition of section 180.03(3) brought stormwater utilities within the purview of Chapter 180, and, therefore, section 180.”

Contractors & Builders Ass'n v. City of Dunedin, 329 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1976). · cites it 2× “The statutes refer to "powers granted by this chapter," Fla. Stat. §§ 180.03 (1), .21 (1973), whereas, under the 1968 Constitution, the provisions of Chapter 180 are restrictions on the exercise of power the constitution itself confers, rather than the grant of powers these…”

City of Ocala v. Red Oak Farm, Inc., 636 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). · cites it 4× “Specifically, Red Oak argued that by failing to pass a proper resolution proposing construction or extension of the utility pursuant to section 180.03, Florida Statutes (1991), or by passing an ordinance *83 or resolution authorizing construction or extension of the utility…”

City of Pinellas Park v. Cross-State Utils. Co., 205 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968). · cites it 2× “, as required by § 180.03, Fla. Stats., F.S.A. The court also found that Cross-State Utilities Company had constructed and was operating and maintaining its own water and sewer systems in the territory immediately adjacent to the municipality, City of Pinellas Park.”

Lake Util. Servs., Inc. v. City of Clermont, 727 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). · cites it 4× “§ 180.03(1), Fla. Stat. (1991). An objection to any resolution or ordinance must be filed in writing with the municipality’s governing body and a hearing held within 30 days after its passage.”

Madden v. Midland Funding, LLC, 237 F. Supp. 3d 130 (Fla. 2017). “Penal Law § 180.03 ), I grant summary judgment in Defendants’ favor on Plaintiffs usury claims under § 5-501 and § 190.”

City of Hallandale Beach v. Smith, 853 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). · cites it 2× “” § 180.03(1), Fla. Stat. A second ordinance or resolution is then required in order to authorize construction or extension of the utility.”

— 180.03(1) — 2 cases

Lake Util. Servs., Inc. v. City of Clermont, 727 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). “§ 180.03(1), Fla. Stat. (1991). An objection to any resolution or ordinance must be filed in writing with the municipality’s governing body and a hearing held within 30 days after its passage.”

City of Hallandale Beach v. Smith, 853 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). “” § 180.03(1), Fla. Stat. A second ordinance or resolution is then required in order to authorize construction or extension of the utility.”

— 180.03(2) — 1 case

— 180.03(3) — 1 case

City of Key West v. Florida Keys Cmty. Coll., 81 So. 3d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). “Alternatively, the City contends that even if stormwater utility services were not originally included in Chapter 180, the 2006 addition of section 180.03(3) brought stormwater utilities within the purview of Chapter 180, and, therefore, section 180.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.