HB 1363 revises Florida filing-fee statutes administered by the Department of State and makes a related conforming change to the cable/video franchise law. In section 607.0122, the bill adds explicit authority for a person to request expedited services from the Department of State by submitting an expedited service request form, and it limits those requests to in-person or electronic submission; expedited requests could not be made by mail. The bill otherwise leaves the existing schedule of corporate filing and certificate fees in place.
The bill also amends section 610.104 to conform a cross-reference and to update the fee language for state-issued cable or video service franchise certificates. It requires certificateholders to update their franchise information every five years and pay a $1,000 processing fee, with failure to comply potentially resulting in cancellation after notice and a 30-day cure period. The bill directs these fees into specified trust funds and preserves the existing fee structure tied to corporate filing fees for applications, amendments, and information updates. The act would take effect only if HB 1365 or similar legislation is enacted in the same session.
HB 1363 would affect Florida business filing and franchise administration by formalizing a process for expedited Department of State services and by aligning cable/video franchise fee provisions with the corporate fee schedule. It would amend sections 607.0122 and 610.104, Florida Statutes, but it does not create a new regulatory program; instead, it clarifies filing procedures, fee collection, and cross-references, and it conditions its own effectiveness on passage of related legislation. The practical impact would be on businesses and other filers that use Department of State services, as well as cable or video service certificateholders subject to periodic updates and processing fees.
The available record suggests limited public controversy or debate, as no committee transcripts or recorded votes are provided. The bill ultimately died in the Industries & Professional Activities Subcommittee, which indicates it did not advance, but the absence of recorded opposition or support statements makes the overall sentiment difficult to gauge beyond a procedural lack of momentum. The measure appears largely administrative and technical in nature, which often draws less visible public attention than substantive policy bills.
The main points of potential contention are the expedited-service limitation to in-person or electronic requests, which may be viewed as burdensome for some filers, and the continued imposition of fees and cancellation risk for cable/video franchise certificateholders who miss the five-year update deadline. Another possible issue is the bill’s contingent effective date, which ties its operation to the passage of HB 1365 or similar legislation, suggesting the measure was part of a broader legislative package. No specific opposing or supporting stakeholders are identified in the provided materials.