Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff briefs commissioners on YIGBY and Live Local bill that would change local discretion
Summary
Sarasota County planning staff updated the commission on the "Yes In God’s Backyard" provision within the Live Local Act and the 2026 House Bill 1389 proposal, which would shift local approval from optional to mandatory for qualifying sites and raise affordability and ownership requirements if signed into law (effective 07/01/2026).
Matt Osterhout, director of the county’s Planning and Development Services Department, told the Board this was only an informational update and that no action was required at the meeting.
“The current law is a ‘may’: a local government may approve affordable housing on property owned by a religious institution, including contiguous parcels,” Osterhout said, reading the statute on the screen. He said the 2025 Live Local Act sets a baseline of 10% of units meeting affordability criteria under current law.
Osterhout described House Bill 1389 as enrolled in 2026 and moving to the governor; if signed, he said, it would take effect July 1, 2026. Under the enrolled language he reviewed, qualifying developments could be sited on property owned by a county, municipality, or school district, or on religious‑institution property of more than 3 acres that has contained a house of public worship for at least 10 years. The proposal would require at least 40% of residential units to be affordable at up to 120% of area median income (AMI) and place affordability covenants for a minimum of 30 years.
Osterhout cautioned the board that the change would move the provision from a permissive local option to a state requirement for qualifying parcels, which he said would be another example of a Live Local preemption of local land‑use authority. He also said the bill contains language that could grandfather applicants who notify the county before July 1, 2026 and elect to proceed under the 2025 standards.
Commissioners pressed staff on unresolved technical questions, including whether a religious institution must retain ownership or be a co‑applicant, how existing special exceptions or binding development plans would interact with the statute, and whether some zoning districts would be ineligible despite the bill’s “regardless of zoning” language. Osterhout said those questions require further review with the Office of the County Attorney and that staff will return with clarifying guidance.
Osterhout reported that the county has received one YIGBY‑era proposal so far (4631 South Lockwood Road), and that staff had informed the prospective applicant the board wanted a briefing before further action. “We don’t know whether the governor has it on the desk yet,” he said, but he reiterated that no formal action by the commission was required at the meeting.
Next steps: staff will consult the County Attorney for legal interpretation, monitor the governor’s actions, and return to the board with policy recommendations and potential implementation options if the bill becomes law.
