S0260 creates a new framework for the removal, storage, and cleanup of damaged or submerged electric vehicles in Florida. It requires counties and municipalities to establish a “daily administration storage fee” for properly storing certain electric vehicles that have visible battery damage or have been submerged in salt water, with the fee capped at up to three times the existing storage-related amount referenced in current law. The fee applies in situations where the owner or operator is incapacitated, unavailable, leaves towing decisions to law enforcement, or otherwise does not consent to removal, and it may only be charged when the vehicle is stored in a manner that meets the bill’s “proper storage” standards, such as being separated from combustibles by 50 feet or enclosed by a protective barrier.
The bill also requires wrecker services and towing-storage operators to collect and submit data on stored damaged or submerged electric vehicles to the Division of State Fire Marshal from January 1, 2027 through December 31, 2028. The State Fire Marshal must create a reporting form, compile the data, and submit a report to the Legislature by March 1, 2029 assessing fire risks associated with storing battery-damaged electric vehicles and recommending best practices to reduce those risks. In addition, the bill creates a new statute stating that motor vehicle insurers are not required to pay costs beyond those covered under their contracts with insureds, and it amends existing towing lien law to expressly include the new daily administration storage fee as a recoverable towing-related charge.
The bill’s impact on state law is to authorize local governments to regulate and recover costs associated with the specialized storage of electric vehicles that pose fire hazards, while also limiting the fee to properly stored vehicles and setting a temporary data-collection and reporting program. It affects county and municipal ordinances under the state’s price-control provisions, towing and storage lien practices under s. 713.78, and insurance payment obligations under the new s. 324.0222. The measure is also time-limited in part, with the data-collection/reporting provisions expiring July 1, 2029.
The general sentiment reflected in the available voting history is strongly supportive. The bill passed the Senate Transportation Committee unanimously, then the Senate Community Affairs Committee unanimously, and later the Senate Rules Committee by a wide margin, indicating broad agreement on the need to address electric vehicle storage safety and towing cost recovery. No committee transcripts were provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to suggest significant opposition in the available materials.
The main points of contention implied by the bill’s structure are cost allocation and local regulatory authority. The bill permits higher storage fees for certain electric vehicles, which may concern vehicle owners, insurers, or towing customers, while the insurer provision appears designed to prevent local storage rules from expanding insurer liability beyond policy terms. Another potential issue is the requirement that local governments and towing operators adopt and comply with specific storage standards and reporting obligations, which could raise implementation and administrative concerns for counties, municipalities, and wrecker services.
The bill amends Florida’s county and municipal price-control statutes to allow local governments to impose a specialized daily administration storage fee for damaged or submerged electric vehicles, and it amends towing lien law to make that fee a recoverable charge. It also creates a new insurance-related statute clarifying that insurers are not required to pay storage-related costs beyond what their policies cover. The bill imposes a temporary data-reporting program on towing and storage operators and directs the State Fire Marshal to study fire risks and report recommendations to the Legislature.
Available committee votes show unanimous or near-unanimous support at each stage, suggesting the bill was viewed favorably as a public-safety and cost-recovery measure. The absence of recorded transcript debate limits insight into detailed arguments, but the voting pattern indicates little visible opposition in committee. Overall, the bill appears to have been treated as a practical response to electric vehicle fire hazards and storage challenges.
The likely areas of disagreement are who should bear the added costs of specialized EV storage and how much authority local governments should have to set those fees. Towing operators and local governments may support the fee authority as a way to cover the added expense of safe storage, while vehicle owners and insurers may object to higher charges or expanded administrative burdens. The insurer limitation suggests lawmakers were attentive to concerns that local storage rules could otherwise shift costs to insurance carriers beyond contract terms.