Effective July 1, 2025, Florida’s construction industry began operating under a significant new legal requirement that directly impacts how change orders are processed on public projects. Chapter 2025-140, Laws of Florida—titled the “Act Relating to Construction Regulations”—enacted House Bill 683 and created section 218.755 of the Florida Statutes. This new “Prompt Processing” provision establishes strict deadlines and consequences for local government entities responding to contractor-submitted change order price quotes. Unlike the prior Local Government Prompt Payment Act, which did not address how quickly a government entity must act on a change order price quote, section 218.755 fills that gap by mandating timely action.
Under the new law, when a contractor submits a price quote in response to a local government–requested change order, and that quote complies with all contractual and statutory requirements, the local government must approve or deny the quote in writing within 35 days of receipt. If the government denies the quote, it must clearly identify the specific deficiencies and explain what actions are required to cure them. If the government fails to issue a timely written approval or denial, the price quote and corresponding change order are deemed approved by operation of law, and the government becomes liable for the full amount stated in the quote upon completion of the work. The statute further provides that local governments may not waive or alter these prompt processing requirements by contract; any agreement attempting to do so is unenforceable.
This change is particularly significant in light of sovereign immunity principles recognized in County of Brevard v. Miorelli Engineering Inc., which generally prohibit oral or implied modifications to public contracts and require express written change orders. Public construction contracts therefore customarily require written change orders for modifications to the work and often permit—but do not obligate—public owners to accept contractor pricing proposals. Historically, contractors could incur substantial costs preparing change order pricing without assurance of timely review or approval. Section 218.755 addresses this imbalance by imposing a structured processing deadline similar in concept to the payment timelines found elsewhere in the Local Government Prompt Payment Act.
For local governments, the statute introduces new compliance obligations and financial risks. Agencies must implement internal procedures to ensure that conforming change order price quotes are reviewed and either approved or denied within the 35-day window. Denials must include detailed, actionable explanations of deficiencies. Governments cannot rely on contractual provisions to extend deadlines or avoid the statute’s requirements. Because approval authority for change orders may be limited by dollar thresholds or require board approval at a public meeting, local governments must ensure that quotes are escalated promptly for consideration. While section 218.755 does not define “receipt” in the same manner as section 218.735 does for invoices, local governments may consider clarifying receipt procedures by contract or ordinance—provided they do not effectively extend the statutory deadline.
Contractors, in turn, must ensure their change order submissions strictly comply with contractual pricing requirements and applicable law. Only fully compliant quotes trigger the 35-day deadline. Incomplete, improperly formatted, or nonconforming submissions may be denied and may not receive the statute’s protections. Contractors should also anticipate that agencies—particularly larger municipalities and airports—may adopt stricter definitions of what constitutes a “complete” submittal. When used properly, however, the statute has the potential to reduce change order backlogs, limit cost disputes, and create greater predictability in public construction projects.
In addition to these prompt processing reforms, Florida has recently enacted substantial changes to its construction defect laws. Senate Bill 360, effective April 13, 2023, amended section 95.11(3)(b), Florida Statutes, by reducing the statute of repose for construction defect claims from ten years to seven years and clarifying the triggering events that start the repose period. The clock now begins upon the earliest of several defined events, such as issuance of a temporary or permanent certificate of occupancy, a certificate of completion, or project abandonment. Contract provisions that reference outdated trigger events—such as “actual possession” or general completion of the contract—may no longer align with the revised statute and could create unintended liability exposure.
Florida’s Chapter 558 pre-suit notice and opportunity-to-cure procedures also remain critically important. For construction contracts entered into after October 1, 2009, the agreement must include a conspicuous notice referencing Chapter 558 unless the parties expressly opt out in writing. Contracts that lack proper notice language or contain ambiguous opt-out provisions may undermine enforceability or expose parties to additional risk. Limitation-of-liability clauses that extend beyond the revised seven-year repose period, outdated statute references, or tolling provisions tied to superseded trigger events should all be carefully reviewed and updated.
These legislative changes carry significant practical consequences. Claims filed after July 1, 2024, based on projects where the triggering event occurred more than seven years earlier, will generally be barred—even if the defect is latent. Similarly, under section 218.755, a local government’s failure to timely and properly respond to a compliant change order price quote can result in automatic approval and financial liability. Contractors and public entities alike should review internal procedures, contract templates, approval thresholds, and documentation standards to ensure compliance with the current statutory framework.
In short, what may once have been standard protective language in public construction contracts may no longer provide adequate protection under Florida’s updated laws. Careful review and proactive revision of procurement processes and contract provisions are essential to align with the evolving legal landscape and to avoid unintended financial exposure.
