Florida Senate - 2018                              CS for SB 174
       By the Committee on Appropriations; and Senators Hukill, Book,
       Hutson, Mayfield, and Taddeo
       576-02688-18                                           2018174c1
    1                        A bill to be entitled                      
    2         An act relating to coastal management; amending s.
    3         161.101, F.S.; revising the criteria to be considered
    4         by the Department of Environmental Protection in
    5         determining and assigning annual funding priorities
    6         for beach management and erosion control projects;
    7         specifying tiers for such criteria; requiring tiers to
    8         be given certain weight; requiring the department to
    9         update active project lists on its website; redefining
   10         the term “significant change”; revising the
   11         department’s reporting requirements; specifying
   12         allowable uses for certain surplus funds; revising the
   13         requirements for a specified summary; requiring that
   14         funding for certain projects remain available for a
   15         specified period; amending s. 161.143, F.S.;
   16         specifying the scope of certain projects; revising the
   17         list of projects that are included as inlet management
   18         projects; requiring that certain projects be
   19         considered separate and apart from other specified
   20         projects; revising the ranking criteria to be used by
   21         the department to establish certain funding priorities
   22         for certain inlet-caused beach erosion projects;
   23         revising provisions authorizing the department to
   24         spend certain appropriated funds for the management of
   25         inlets; deleting a provision authorizing the
   26         department to spend certain appropriated funds for
   27         specified inlet studies; revising the required
   28         elements of the department’s report of prioritized
   29         inlet management projects; revising the funds that the
   30         department must make available to certain inlet
   31         management projects; requiring the department to
   32         include specified activities on the inlet management
   33         project list; deleting provisions requiring the
   34         department to make available funding for specified
   35         projects; deleting a requirement that the Legislature
   36         designate a project as an Inlet of the Year; requiring
   37         the department to update and maintain a report
   38         regarding the progress of certain inlet management
   39         projects; revising the requirements for the report;
   40         deleting certain temporary provisions relating to
   41         specified appropriations; amending s. 161.161, F.S.;
   42         revising requirements for the comprehensive long-term
   43         management plan; requiring the plan to include a
   44         strategic beach management plan, a critically eroded
   45         beaches report, and a statewide long-range budget
   46         plan; providing for the development and maintenance of
   47         such plans; deleting a requirement that the department
   48         submit a certain beach management plan on a certain
   49         date each year; requiring the department to hold a
   50         public meeting before finalization of the strategic
   51         beach management plan; requiring the department to
   52         submit a 3-year work plan and a related forecast for
   53         the availability of funding to the Legislature;
   54         providing effective dates.
   56  Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
   58         Section 1. Effective July 1, 2019, subsection (14) of
   59  section 161.101, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
   60         161.101 State and local participation in authorized
   61  projects and studies relating to beach management and erosion
   62  control.—
   63         (14) The intent of the Legislature in preserving and
   64  protecting Florida’s sandy beaches pursuant to this act is to
   65  direct beach erosion control appropriations to the state’s most
   66  severely eroded beaches, and to prevent further adverse impact
   67  caused by improved, modified, or altered inlets, coastal
   68  armoring, or existing upland development. In establishing annual
   69  project funding priorities, the department shall seek formal
   70  input from local coastal governments, beach and general
   71  government interest groups, and university experts. The
   72  department shall adopt by rule a scoring system to determine
   73  annual project funding priorities. The scoring system must
   74  consist of the following criteria equally weighted within the
   75  following specified tiers criteria to be considered by the
   76  department in determining annual funding priorities shall
   77  include:
   78         (a) Tier 1 must account for 20 percent of the total score
   79  and consist of the tourism-related return on investment and the
   80  severity of erosion conditions, the threat to existing upland
   81  development, and recreational and/or economic impact of the
   82  project. The return on investment of the project is the ratio of
   83  the tourism-related tax revenues for the most recent year to the
   84  amount of state funding requested for the proposed project. The
   85  economic impact of the project is the ratio of the tourism
   86  related tax revenues for the most recent year to all county tax
   87  revenues for the most recent year. The department must calculate
   88  these ratios using state sales tax and tourism development tax
   89  data of the county having jurisdiction over the project area. If
   90  multiple counties have jurisdiction over the project area, the
   91  department must assess each county individually using these
   92  ratios. The department shall calculate the mean average of these
   93  ratios to determine the final overall assessment for the
   94  multicounty project benefits.
   95         (b) Tier 2 must account for 45 percent of the total score
   96  and consist of the following criteria:
   97         1. The availability of federal matching dollars,
   98  considering federal authorization, the federal cost-share
   99  percentage, and the status of the funding award;.
  100         2.The storm damage reduction benefits of the project based
  101  on the following considerations:
  102         a.The current conditions of the project area, including
  103  any recent storm damage impact, as a percentage of volume of
  104  sand lost since the most recent beach nourishment event or most
  105  recent beach surveys. If the project area has not been
  106  previously restored, the department must use the historical
  107  background erosion rate;
  108         b.The overall potential threat to existing upland
  109  development, including public and private structures and
  110  infrastructure, based on the percentage of vulnerable shoreline
  111  within the project boundaries; and
  112         c.The value of upland property benefiting from the
  113  protection provided by the project and its subsequent
  114  maintenance. A property must be within one-quarter mile of the
  115  project boundaries to be considered under the criterion
  116  specified in this sub-subparagraph; and
  117         3.The cost-effectiveness of the project based on the
  118  yearly cost per volume per mile of proposed beach fill
  119  placement. The department shall also consider the following when
  120  assessing cost-effectiveness pursuant to this subparagraph:
  121         a.The existence of projects with proposed structural or
  122  design components to extend the beach nourishment interval;
  123         b.Existing beach nourishment projects that reduce upland
  124  storm damage costs by incorporating new or enhanced dune
  125  structures or new or existing dune restoration and revegetation
  126  projects;
  127         c.Proposed innovative technologies designed to reduce
  128  project costs; and
  129         d.Regional sediment management strategies and coordination
  130  to conserve sand source resources and reduce project costs.
  131         (c) Tier 3 must account for 20 percent of the total score
  132  and consist of the following criteria: The extent of local
  133  government sponsor financial and administrative commitment to
  134  the project, including a long-term financial plan with a
  135  designated funding source or sources for initial construction
  136  and periodic maintenance.
  137         1.(d) Previous state commitment and involvement in the
  138  project, considering previously funded phases, the total amount
  139  of previous state funding, and previous partial appropriations
  140  for the proposed project;
  141         2.The recreational benefits of the project based on:
  142         a.The accessible beach area added by the project; and
  143         b.The percentage of linear footage within the project
  144  boundaries that is zoned:
  145         (I)As recreational or open space;
  146         (II)For commercial use; or
  147         (III)To otherwise allow for public lodging
  148  establishments;.
  149         (e)The anticipated physical performance of the proposed
  150  project, including the frequency of periodic planned
  151  nourishment.
  152         3.(f) The extent to which the proposed project mitigates
  153  the adverse impact of improved, modified, or altered inlets on
  154  adjacent beaches; and.
  155         (g)Innovative, cost-effective, and environmentally
  156  sensitive applications to reduce erosion.
  157         (h)Projects that provide enhanced habitat within or
  158  adjacent to designated refuges of nesting sea turtles.
  159         (i) The extent to which local or regional sponsors of beach
  160  erosion control projects agree to coordinate the planning,
  161  design, and construction of their projects to take advantage of
  162  identifiable cost savings.
  163         4.(j) The degree to which the project addresses the state’s
  164  most significant beach erosion problems as a function of the
  165  linear footage of the project shoreline and the cubic yards of
  166  sand placed per mile per year.
  167         (d)Tier 4 must account for 15 percent of the total score
  168  and consist of the following criteria:
  169         1.Increased prioritization of projects that have been on
  170  the department’s ranked project list for successive years and
  171  that have not previously secured state funding for project
  172  implementation;
  173         2.Environmental habitat enhancement, recognizing state or
  174  federal critical habitat areas for threatened or endangered
  175  species which may be subject to extensive shoreline armoring or
  176  recognizing areas where extensive shoreline armoring threatens
  177  the availability or quality of habitat for such species. Turtle
  178  friendly designs, dune and vegetation projects for areas with
  179  redesigned or reduced fill templates, proposed incorporation of
  180  best management practices and adaptive management strategies to
  181  protect resources, and innovative technologies designed to
  182  benefit critical habitat preservation may also be considered;
  183  and
  184         3.The overall readiness of the project to proceed in a
  185  timely manner, considering the project’s readiness for the
  186  construction phase of development, the status of required
  187  permits, the status of any needed easement acquisition, the
  188  availability of local funding sources, and the establishment of
  189  an erosion control line. If the department identifies specific
  190  reasonable and documented concerns that the project will not
  191  proceed in a timely manner, the department may choose not to
  192  include the project in the annual funding priorities submitted
  193  to the Legislature.
  195  If In the event that more than one project qualifies equally
  196  under the provisions of this subsection, the department shall
  197  assign funding priority to those projects shown to be most that
  198  are ready to proceed.
  199         Section 2. Subsection (20) of section 161.101, Florida
  200  Statutes, is amended to read:
  201         161.101 State and local participation in authorized
  202  projects and studies relating to beach management and erosion
  203  control.—
  204         (20) The department shall maintain active project lists,
  205  updated at least quarterly, listings on its website by fiscal
  206  year in order to provide transparency regarding those projects
  207  receiving funding and the funding amounts, and to facilitate
  208  legislative reporting and oversight. In consideration of this
  209  intent:
  210         (a) The department shall notify the Executive Office of the
  211  Governor and the Legislature regarding any significant changes
  212  in the funding levels of a given project as initially requested
  213  in the department’s budget submission and subsequently included
  214  in approved annual funding allocations. The term “significant
  215  change” means a project-specific change or cumulative changes
  216  that exceed the project’s original allocation by $500,000 or
  217  that exceed those changes exceeding 25 percent of the a
  218  project’s original allocation.
  219         1.Except as provided in subparagraph 2., if there is
  220  surplus funding, the department must provide a notification and
  221  supporting justification shall be provided to the Executive
  222  Office of the Governor and the Legislature to indicate whether
  223  surplus additional dollars are intended to be used for inlet
  224  management projects pursuant to s. 161.143 or for beach
  225  restoration and beach nourishment projects, offered for
  226  reversion as part of the next appropriations process, or used
  227  for other specified priority projects on active project lists.
  228         2.For surplus funds for projects that do not have a
  229  significant change, the department may use such funds for the
  230  same purposes identified in subparagraph 1. The department shall
  231  post the uses of such funds on the project listing web page of
  232  its website. No other notice or supporting justification is
  233  required before the use of surplus funds for a project that does
  234  not have a significant change.
  235         (b) The department shall prepare a summary of specific
  236  project activities for the current fiscal year, their funding
  237  status, and changes to annual project lists for the current and
  238  preceding fiscal year. shall be prepared by The department shall
  239  include the summary and included with the department’s
  240  submission of its annual legislative budget request.
  241         (c) Funding for specific projects on annual project lists
  242  approved by the Legislature must remain available for such
  243  projects for 18 months. A local project sponsor may at any time
  244  release, in whole or in part, appropriated project dollars by
  245  formal notification to the department. The department, which
  246  shall notify the Executive Office of the Governor and the
  247  Legislature of such release and. Notification must indicate in
  248  the notification how the project dollars are recommended
  249  intended to be used after such release.
  250         Section 3. Subsections (2) through (5) of section 161.143,
  251  Florida Statutes, are amended to read:
  252         161.143 Inlet management; planning, prioritizing, funding,
  253  approving, and implementing projects.—
  254         (2) The department shall establish annual funding
  255  priorities for studies, activities, or other projects concerning
  256  inlet management. Such inlet management projects constitute the
  257  intended scope of this section and s. 161.142 and consist of
  258  include, but are not limited to, inlet sand bypassing,
  259  improvement of infrastructure to facilitate sand bypassing,
  260  modifications to channel dredging, jetty redesign, jetty repair,
  261  disposal of spoil material, and the development, revision,
  262  adoption, or implementation of an inlet management plan.
  263  Projects considered for funding pursuant to this section shall
  264  be considered separate and apart from projects reviewed and
  265  prioritized in s. 161.101(14). The funding priorities
  266  established by the department under this section must be
  267  consistent with the requirements and legislative declaration in
  268  ss. 161.101(14), 161.142, and 161.161(1)(b). In establishing
  269  funding priorities under this subsection and before transmitting
  270  the annual inlet project list to the Legislature under
  271  subsection (4) (5), the department shall seek formal input from
  272  local coastal governments, beach and general government
  273  associations and other coastal interest groups, and university
  274  experts concerning annual funding priorities for inlet
  275  management projects. In order to maximize the benefits of
  276  efforts to address the inlet-caused beach erosion problems of
  277  this state, the ranking criteria used by the department to
  278  establish funding priorities for studies, activities, or other
  279  projects concerning inlet management must include equal
  280  consideration of:
  281         (a) An estimate of the annual quantity of beach-quality
  282  sand reaching the updrift boundary of the improved jetty or
  283  inlet channel.
  284         (b) The severity of the erosion to the adjacent beaches
  285  caused by the inlet and the extent to which the proposed project
  286  mitigates the erosive effects of the inlet.
  287         (c) The overall significance and anticipated success of the
  288  proposed project in mitigating the erosive effects of the inlet,
  289  balancing the sediment budget of the inlet and adjacent beaches,
  290  and addressing the sand deficit along the inlet-affected
  291  shorelines.
  292         (d) The extent to which existing bypassing activities at an
  293  inlet would benefit from modest, cost-effective improvements
  294  when considering the volumetric increases from the proposed
  295  project, the availability of beach-quality sand currently not
  296  being bypassed to adjacent eroding beaches, and the ease with
  297  which such beach-quality sand may be obtained.
  298         (e) The cost-effectiveness of sand made available by a
  299  proposed inlet management project or activity relative to other
  300  sand source opportunities that would be used to address inlet
  301  caused beach erosion The interest and commitment of local
  302  governments as demonstrated by their willingness to coordinate
  303  the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of an inlet
  304  management project and their financial plan for funding the
  305  local cost share for initial construction, ongoing sand
  306  bypassing, channel dredging, and maintenance.
  307         (f) The existence of a proposed or recently updated The
  308  previous completion or approval of a state-sponsored inlet
  309  management plan or a local-government-sponsored inlet study
  310  addressing concerning the inlet addressed by the proposed
  311  project, the ease of updating and revising any such plan or
  312  study, and the adequacy and specificity of the plan’s or study’s
  313  recommendations concerning the mitigation of an inlet’s erosive
  314  effects on adjacent beaches.
  315         (g) The degree to which the proposed project will enhance
  316  the performance and longevity of proximate beach nourishment
  317  projects, thereby reducing the frequency of such periodic
  318  nourishment projects.
  319         (h) The project-ranking criteria in s. 161.101(14) to the
  320  extent such criteria are applicable to inlet management studies,
  321  projects, and activities and are distinct from, and not
  322  duplicative of, the criteria listed in paragraphs (a)-(g).
  323         (3) The department may pay from legislative appropriations
  324  up to 75 percent of the construction costs of an initial major
  325  inlet management project component for the purpose of mitigating
  326  the erosive effects of the inlet to the shoreline and balancing
  327  the sediment budget. The remaining balance of such construction
  328  costs must be paid from other funding sources, such as local
  329  sponsors. All project costs not associated with an initial major
  330  inlet management project component must be shared equally by
  331  state and local sponsors in accordance with, pursuant to s.
  332  161.101 and notwithstanding s. 161.101(15), pay from legislative
  333  appropriations provided for these purposes 75 percent of the
  334  total costs, or, if applicable, the nonfederal costs, of a
  335  study, activity, or other project concerning the management of
  336  an inlet. The balance must be paid by the local governments or
  337  special districts having jurisdiction over the property where
  338  the inlet is located.
  339         (4) Using the legislative appropriation to the statewide
  340  beach-management-support category of the department’s fixed
  341  capital outlay funding request, the department may employ
  342  university-based or other contractual sources and pay 100
  343  percent of the costs of studies that are consistent with the
  344  legislative declaration in s. 161.142 and that:
  345         (a) Determine, calculate, refine, and achieve general
  346  consensus regarding net annual sediment transport volumes to be
  347  used for the purpose of planning and prioritizing inlet
  348  management projects; and
  349         (b) Appropriate, assign, and apportion responsibilities
  350  between inlet beneficiaries for the erosion caused by a
  351  particular inlet on adjacent beaches.
  352         (4)(5) The department shall annually provide an inlet
  353  management project list, in priority order, to the Legislature
  354  as part of the department’s budget request. The list must
  355  include studies, projects, or other activities that address the
  356  management of at least 10 separate inlets and that are ranked
  357  according to the criteria established under subsection (2).
  358         (a) The department shall designate for make available at
  359  least 10 percent of the total amount that the Legislature
  360  appropriates in each fiscal year for statewide beach management
  361  for the three highest-ranked projects on the current year’s
  362  inlet management project list, in priority order, an amount that
  363  is at least equal to the greater of:
  364         1.Ten percent of the total amount that the Legislature
  365  appropriates in the fiscal year for statewide beach management;
  366  or
  367         2.The percentage of inlet management funding requests from
  368  local sponsors as a proportion of the total amount of statewide
  369  beach management dollars requested in a given year.
  370         (b) The department shall include inlet monitoring
  371  activities ranked on the inlet management project list as one
  372  aggregated subcategory on the overall inlet management project
  373  list make available at least 50 percent of the funds
  374  appropriated for the feasibility and design category in the
  375  department’s fixed capital outlay funding request for projects
  376  on the current year’s inlet management project list which
  377  involve the study for, or design or development of, an inlet
  378  management project.
  379         (c) The department shall make available all statewide beach
  380  management funds that remain unencumbered or are allocated to
  381  non-project-specific activities for projects on legislatively
  382  approved inlet management project lists. Funding for local
  383  government-specific projects on annual project lists approved by
  384  the Legislature must remain available for such purposes for a
  385  period of 18 months pursuant to s. 216.301(2)(a). Based on an
  386  assessment and the department’s determination that a project
  387  will not be ready to proceed during this 18-month period, such
  388  funds shall be used for inlet management projects on
  389  legislatively approved lists.
  390         (5)(d)The Legislature shall designate one of the three
  391  highest projects on the inlet management project list in any
  392  year as the Inlet of the Year. The department shall update and
  393  maintain an annual annually report on its website to the
  394  Legislature concerning the extent to which each inlet project
  395  designated by the Legislature as Inlet of the Year has succeeded
  396  in balancing the sediment budget of the inlet and adjacent
  397  beaches and in, mitigating the inlet’s erosive effects on
  398  adjacent beaches. The report must provide an estimate of the
  399  quantity of sediment bypassed, transferred, and transferring or
  400  otherwise placed placing beach-quality sand on adjacent eroding
  401  beaches, or in such beaches’ nearshore area, for the purpose of
  402  offsetting the erosive effects of inlets on the beaches of this
  403  state.
  404         (e) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b), and for the
  405  2016-2017 fiscal year only, the amount allocated for inlet
  406  management funding is provided in the 2016-2017 General
  407  Appropriations Act. This paragraph expires July 1, 2017.
  408         Section 4. Effective July 1, 2019, subsection (1) and
  409  present subsection (2) of section 161.161, Florida Statutes, are
  410  amended, a new subsection (2) is added to that section, and
  411  present subsections (2) through (7) are redesignated as
  412  subsections (3) through (8), respectively, to read:
  413         161.161 Procedure for approval of projects.—
  414         (1) The department shall develop and maintain a
  415  comprehensive long-term beach management plan for the
  416  restoration and maintenance of the state’s critically eroded
  417  beaches fronting the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, and Straits
  418  of Florida. In developing and maintaining this the beach
  419  management plan, the department shall:
  420         (a) Address long-term solutions to the problem of
  421  critically eroded beaches in this state.
  422         (b) Evaluate each improved, modified, or altered inlet and
  423  determine whether the inlet is a significant cause of beach
  424  erosion. With respect to each inlet determined to be a
  425  significant cause of beach erosion, the plan shall include:
  426         1. the extent to which such inlet causes beach erosion and
  427  recommendations to mitigate the erosive impact of the inlet,
  428  including, but not limited to, recommendations regarding inlet
  429  sediment bypassing; improvement of infrastructure to facilitate
  430  sand bypassing; modifications to channel dredging, jetty design,
  431  and disposal of spoil material; establishment of feeder beaches;
  432  and beach restoration and beach nourishment; and
  433         2. Cost estimates necessary to take inlet corrective
  434  measures and recommendations regarding cost sharing among the
  435  beneficiaries of such inlet.
  436         (c) Evaluate Design criteria for beach restoration and
  437  beach nourishment projects, including, but not limited to,:
  438         1. dune elevation and width and revegetation and
  439  stabilization requirements,; and
  440         2. beach profiles profile.
  441         (d) Consider Evaluate the establishment of regional
  442  sediment management alternatives for one or more individual
  443  beach and inlet sand bypassing projects feeder beaches as an
  444  alternative to direct beach restoration when appropriate and
  445  cost-effective, and recommend the location of such regional
  446  sediment management alternatives feeder beaches and the source
  447  of beach-compatible sand.
  448         (e) Identify causes of shoreline erosion and change,
  449  determine calculate erosion rates, and maintain an updated list
  450  of critically eroded sandy beaches based on data, analyses, and
  451  investigations of shoreline conditions and project long-term
  452  erosion for all major beach and dune systems by surveys and
  453  profiles.
  454         (f) Identify shoreline development and degree of density
  455  and Assess impacts of development and coastal protection
  456  shoreline protective structures on shoreline change and erosion.
  457         (g) Identify short-term and long-term economic costs and
  458  benefits of beaches to the state of Florida and individual beach
  459  communities, including recreational value to user groups, tax
  460  base, revenues generated, and beach acquisition and maintenance
  461  costs.
  462         (h) Study dune and vegetation conditions, identify existing
  463  beach projects without dune features or with dunes without
  464  adequate elevations, and encourage dune restoration and
  465  revegetation to be incorporated as part of storm damage recovery
  466  projects or future dune maintenance events.
  467         (i) Identify beach areas used by marine turtles and develop
  468  strategies for protection of the turtles and their nests and
  469  nesting locations.
  470         (j) Identify alternative management responses to preserve
  471  undeveloped beach and dune systems and, to restore damaged beach
  472  and dune systems. In identifying such management responses, the
  473  department shall consider, at a minimum, and to prevent
  474  inappropriate development and redevelopment on migrating
  475  beaches, and consider beach restoration and nourishment,
  476  armoring, relocation and abandonment, dune and vegetation
  477  restoration, and acquisition.
  478         (k) Document procedures and policies for preparing post
  479  storm damage assessments and corresponding recovery plans,
  480  including repair cost estimates Establish criteria, including
  481  costs and specific implementation actions, for alternative
  482  management techniques.
  483         (l) Identify and assess Select and recommend appropriate
  484  management measures for all of the state’s critically eroded
  485  sandy beaches in a beach management program.
  486         (m) Establish a list of beach restoration and beach
  487  nourishment projects, arranged in order of priority, and the
  488  funding levels needed for such projects.
  489         (2)The comprehensive long-term management plan developed
  490  and maintained by the department pursuant to subsection (1) must
  491  include, at a minimum, a strategic beach management plan, a
  492  critically eroded beaches report, and a statewide long-range
  493  budget plan. The long-range budget plan must include a 3-year
  494  work plan for beach restoration, beach nourishment, and inlet
  495  management projects that lists planned projects for each of the
  496  3 fiscal years addressed in the work plan.
  497         (a) The strategic beach management plan must identify and
  498  recommend appropriate measures for all of the state’s critically
  499  eroded sandy beaches and may incorporate plans be prepared at
  500  the regional level, taking into account based upon areas of
  501  greatest need and probable federal and local funding. Upon
  502  approval in accordance with this section, such regional plans,
  503  along with the 3-year work plan identified in subparagraph
  504  (c)1., shall be components of the statewide beach management
  505  plan and shall serve as the basis for state funding decisions
  506  upon approval in accordance with chapter 86-138, Laws of
  507  Florida. In accordance with a schedule established for the
  508  submission of regional plans by the department, any completed
  509  plan must be submitted to the secretary of the department for
  510  approval no later than March 1 of each year. These regional
  511  plans shall include, but shall not be limited to,
  512  recommendations of appropriate funding mechanisms for
  513  implementing projects in the beach management plan, giving
  514  consideration to the use of single-county and multicounty taxing
  515  districts or other revenue generation measures by state and
  516  local governments and the private sector. Prior to finalizing
  517  the strategic beach management presenting the plan to the
  518  secretary of the department, the department shall hold a public
  519  meeting in the region areas for which the plan is prepared or
  520  through a publicly noticed webinar. The plan submission schedule
  521  shall be submitted to the secretary for approval. Any revisions
  522  to such schedule must be approved in like manner.
  523         (b)The critically eroded beaches report must be developed
  524  and maintained based primarily on the requirements specified in
  525  paragraph (1)(e).
  526         (c)The statewide long-range budget plan must include at
  527  least 5 years of planned beach restoration, beach nourishment,
  528  and inlet management project funding needs as identified, and
  529  subsequently refined, by local government sponsors. This plan
  530  shall consist of two components:
  531         1.A 3-year work plan that identifies beach restoration,
  532  beach nourishment, and inlet management projects viable for
  533  implementation during the next 3 fiscal years, as determined by
  534  available cost-sharing, local sponsor support, regulatory
  535  considerations, and the ability of the project to proceed as
  536  scheduled. The 3-year work plan must, for each fiscal year,
  537  identify proposed projects and their current development status,
  538  listing them in priority order based on the applicable criteria
  539  established in ss. 161.101(14) and 161.143(2). Specific funding
  540  requests and criteria ranking, pursuant to ss. 161.101(14) and
  541  161.143(2), may be modified as warranted in each successive
  542  fiscal year, and such modifications must be documented and
  543  submitted to the Legislature with each 3-year work plan. Year
  544  one projects shall consist of those projects identified for
  545  funding consideration in the ensuing fiscal year.
  546         2.A long-range plan that identifies projects for inclusion
  547  in the fourth and fifth ensuing fiscal years. These projects may
  548  be presented by region and do not need to be presented in
  549  priority order; however, the department should identify issues
  550  that may prevent successful completion of such projects and
  551  recommend solutions that would allow the projects to progress
  552  into the 3-year work plan.
  553         (3)(2)Annually, The secretary shall annually present the
  554  3-year work plan to the Legislature. The work plan must be
  555  accompanied by a 3-year financial forecast for the availability
  556  of funding for the projects recommendations for funding beach
  557  erosion control projects prioritized according to the criteria
  558  established in s. 161.101(14).
  559         Section 5. Except as otherwise provided in this act, this
  560  act shall take effect July 1, 2018.