Start of Footnotes fn 1. The fairly debatable standard of review is a highly deferential standard requiring approval of a planning action if reasonable persons could differ as to its propriety. In other words, an ordinance may be said to be fairly debatable when for any reason it is open to dispute or controversy on grounds that make sense or point to a logical deduction that in no way involves its constitutional validity. It appears that pursuant to procedures in the Fourth Judicial Circuit, a single circuit judge presides over first-tier certiorari review. The number of circuit judges presiding over first-tier certiorari review is not uniform throughout Florida's circuit courts.
Some circuits have three-judge panels for such review.
We recently referred the question of whether there should be a uniform procedure for first-tier certiorari review to the Rules of Judicial Administration Committee of The Florida Bar. Laws of Fla. We do not make any findings concerning the appropriate standard of review for these small-scale development activities. This Court in Snyder stated that strict scrutiny in the land use context must be distinguished from constitutional strict scrutiny. In the land use context, strict scrutiny generally means strict compliance with the comprehensive plan.