There has always been a certain tension in cities between local businesses and the local government.

Local retail operations quite understandably want a clean, safe and attractive business district. Cities want a strong, vibrant business area that attracts residents and visitors.

Downtown businesses and those in other business regions of a city pay pretty hefty taxes for the privilege of operating in that particular neighbourhood. The city's obligation is to keep the municipal services top-notch and to encourage the overall community's development.

Sometimes these desires and obligations clash. The most obvious example is when a municipality closes a street or block to replace a sewer, or repave a portion of downtown, or tear up sidewalks, or other civic improvement.

Local business owners argue, with some justification, that if customers can't park in the vicinity and walk into their businesses, then their on-going viability is in jeopardy. Of course, on-line shopping is changing that equation for some.

The local government argues, with some justification, that in order to provide a safe and modern infrastructure, once in a while a street has to be closed for major repairs or upgrades. Sometimes that timeframe can stretch into months or even years if it is a major subway extension, for example.

The nexus of disagreement is who is responsible for the financial burden to the private enterprise.

Canadian municipalities (and other orders of government) have generally expressed considerable sympathy but no dollars. They will try to aid local businesses with signage, even advertising, and other forms of support. But hard dollars? Not so much.

Enter the Florida legislature.

Never hesitant to make life more difficult for their municipal partners', the Florida legislature has recently passed a bill that will allow businesses to sue their local government for damages if their revenue declines by 15% or more because of a local ordinance.

A local citizen's initiative could also trigger a lawsuit in Florida; (these do not generally occur in Canada). An example would be residents of the Florida Keys voting to restrict the size of passenger liner that could dock in their community; the new bill would presumably allow a cruise ship to sue for lost revenue.

The bill does not appear to limit emergency or local improvement measures that a city must take, such a sewer repair.

Proponents of the new legislation argue that this is a pro-business bill that will protect private property rights.

Opponents argue this measure will encourage frivolous lawsuits, cost local taxpayers a lot of money, and will be a burden to city councils.

The bill is complicated (a business must be open at least three years, etc) and contains a number of conditions and limitations.

According to the Miami Herald, "Florida TaxWatch, the business-backed research organization, has estimated that the legislation will "lead to a number of financially motivated and malicious lawsuits, costing local governments over $900 million annually" because local governments will be forced to increase taxes or reduce services to cover legal fees."

I have a vague recollection of talk in Quebec a few years ago about compensation for retail businesses in case of street closings or other issues, but my research could not confirm details. If any of my municipal friends in Quebec have knowledge of that, it would be interesting to get an update on that situation.

The issue runs deep and creates a sharp and difficult divide for mayors and councillors. Would there be a reluctance to enact local ordinances or capital projects if there is a risk of being sued? Would more frivolous lawsuits against a municipality increase costs to taxpayers? What bureaucracy will be needed to handle such situations? What is a fair policy for all?

These are profound questions that local councils will have to confront in Florida's towns and cities. One also wonders whether once that litigious ball has started rolling, will there be a growing demand for similar legislation in Canadian provinces in the future.