Florida Senate to take up bill that prevents development of golf courses, pickleball courts in state parks
The Senate Fiscal Policy on Tuesday backed the bill (SB 80) after rejecting a proposed change by Republican Chairman Sen. Joe Gruters that some parks supporters and lawmakers said would have kept the door open for sports facilities.
Republican Sen. Gayle Harrell filed the bill after a controversy last year about the state Department of Environmental Protection's "Great Outdoors Initiative," a plan that called for adding golf courses, resort-style lodges and pickleball courts at state parks.
Original plan pulled back after a public outcry.
"This last summer was really a lesson in civics. It says the public does have a voice that counts," Harrell said. "The overwhelming rejection of the attempt to do what was being done was across the state of Florida."
A focus of last year's plan was adding golf courses in the 11,500-acre Jonathan Dickinson State Park in Martin County. It also included building lodges with up to 350 rooms at Anastasia State Park in St. Johns County and Topsail Hill Preserve State Park in Walton County.
Pickleball courts and disc golf were outlined for other parks.
Proposal to create loophole shut down
Under the bill, construction in parks could not harm natural resources, native habitats or historical sites.
Gruters' proposed change might have allowed facilities such as golf courses, tennis courts, ball fields and pickleball courts if they were found not to cause "substantial harm" to natural resources or native habitats.
Gruters said the proposed change would have required public hearings, and his goal was to provide more recreational activities for people who can't afford theme parks.
"The question is, do we trust ourselves, do we?" Gruters asked. "Do we trust the state government to make the right decisions?" he continued, which drew immediate responses of "no" from several lawmakers.
Travis Moore, a lobbyist for Friends of the Everglades, said the Gruters proposal addressed lodging issues, but the "substantial harm" provision remained subject to interpretation.
"I don't think the public this (past) summer was interested in setting a high hurdle, I think they were interested, as it came to golf courses, slamming the door," Moore said.
Beth Alvi, Audubon Florida's senior director of policy, said Harrel's bill would draw a clear line between allowed and prohibited uses of state parks.
"The (Gruters) amendment, however, makes it muddy, leaving an ambiguous standard for what's allowed and of course creates loopholes for bad ideas to be exploited," Alvi said.
Republican Sen. Don Gaetz encouraged Gruters to recraft the proposed change to allow "soft" maintenance needs at state parks, but to eliminate any "commercialization."
After the amendment was rejected, Republican Sen. Keith Truenow said more work is needed on the parks issue.
"I think there are some lands that we own today that probably shouldn't be state parks, they don't lend a real point to the mission," Truenow said. "And there's lands out in the state of Florida that need to be in the state parks."
The House unanimously supported its version of the bill (HB 209) last Wednesday. The House and Senate would have to work out any differences before the scheduled May 2 end of the legislative session.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The president vows to slash medication cost to an unachievable degree.
President Donald Trump has promised to reduce American drug prices by mathematically impossible figures of up to '1400 percent.' Speaking during a White House event attended by Republican members of Congress and his Cabinet, Trump said he would tackle the long-running issue of high medication costs in the U.S. But Trump did not set any achievable targets for that aim, instead outlining a range of percentages which would yield negative prices, meaning drug companies would have to pay people to take their medications.
Chicago Tribune
35 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Changes to federal student loans leave aspiring medical students scrambling to cover costs
Twenty-year-old Eric Mun didn't want to believe it: Only one kid in the family could make it to medical school — and it wasn't going to be him. Mun had done everything right. He graduated high school with honors, earned a scholarship at Northwestern University and breezed through his biology courses. He immigrated to Alabama from Korea as a toddler. From the quiet stretches of the South, he dreamed of helping patients in a pressed white coat. But dreams don't pay tuition. And with new borrowing limits, Mun's family can only support one child through school. 'My parents already implied that my older brother is probably going to be the one that gets to go,' Mun said. President Donald Trump's sweeping 'big, beautiful' tax and spending bill, signed into law earlier this month, imposes strict new caps on federal student loans, capping borrowing for professional schools at $50,000 per year. The measure particularly affects medical students, whose tuition often exceeds $300,000 over four years. Aspiring physicians like Mun have been thrown into financial uncertainty. Many members of the medical community say the measures will send shock waves through a system already laden with economic barriers, discouraging low-income students from pursuing a medical degree. 'It might mean there are people who want to be doctors that can't be doctors because they can't afford it,' said Richard Anderson, president of the Illinois State Medical Society. Before the passage of Trump's budget bill, the Grad PLUS loan program allowed graduate students to borrow their institution's total cost of attendance, including living expenses. The program was slashed as part of a broader overhaul to the federal student loan system. Now, beginning July 1, 2026, most graduate students will be capped at $20,500 in federal loans per year, with a total limit of $100,000. Students in professional schools, like medical, dental or law school, will face the $50,000 annual cap and a total limit of $200,000. Mun's parents work at an automobile assembly plant. Throughout high school, he knew he would have to rely on scholarships and federal loans to pay his way through college. Mun's voice faltered. 'I'm just trying to remain hopeful,' Mun said. Also folded into the bill: the elimination of several Biden-era repayment plans, cuts to Pell Grants and limits to the Parent PLUS loans program, which allows parents of dependent undergraduates to borrow. Proponents of the Republican-backed bill said the curbed borrowing will incentivize medical schools and other graduate programs to lower tuition. The tuition of most Chicago-area medical schools is nearly $300,000 for four years, not including cost-of-living expenses. Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine has a $465,000 price tag after accounting for those indirect costs, according to the school's website. Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science trails closely behind at nearly $464,000. 'One of the main concerns about the Grad PLUS program is money that is going to subsidize institutions rather than extending access to students,' said Lesley Turner, an associate professor at the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. Still, many medical professionals expressed doubt that schools will adjust their costs in response to the bill. Tuition for both private and public schools has been steadily climbing for decades, up 81% from 2001 after adjusting for inflation, according to the Association of American Medical some evidence that Grad PLUS may have contributed to those tuition hikes. A study co-authored by Turner in 2023 found that prices increased 65 cents per dollar after the program's introduction in 2006. There was also little indication that Grad PLUS had fulfilled its intended goal of expanding access to underrepresented students. But Turner cautioned against the abrupt reversal of the program. After accounting for inflation, the lifetime borrowing limits now placed on graduate students are lower than they were in 2005, she said. Many students may turn to private loans to cover the gap, often at higher interest rates. More than half of medical students relied on Grad PLUS loans, according to AAMC. The median education debt for indebted medical students is around $200,000, with most repayment plans lasting 10 to 20 years. The median stipend for doctors' first year post-MD was just $65,100 in 2024. 'I think for many reasons, it would have been reasonable to put some sort of limit on Grad PLUS loans, but I think this is a very blunt way of doing it,' Turner said. In a high-rise on Northwestern's downtown campus last week, 20 undergraduate students and alums from local colleges gathered for the Chicago Cancer Health Equity Collaborative Fellows program. The eight-week summer intensive offers aspiring medical professionals a deep dive into cancer health disparities information and research. Participants like Mun have been left reeling after the flurry of federal cuts. Alexis Chappel, a 28-year-old graduate of Northeastern Illinois University, watched her dad struggle with addiction growing up. She was deeply moved by the doctors who supported his recovery, and it inspired her to pursue medicine. But she has no idea how she'll cover tuition. 'I feel like it's in God's hands at this point,' Chappel said. 'I just felt like it's a direct attack on Black and brown students who plan on going to medical school.' Just 10% of medical students are Black and 12% are Latino, according to AAMC enrollment data. Socioeconomic diversity is also limited: A 2018 analysis found that 24% of students came from the wealthiest 5% of U.S. Pendergrast, who graduated from Feinberg in 2023, relied entirely on Grad PLUS loans to fund her medical education. Juggling classes and clinicals, she had little money saved and no steady stream of income. Pendergrast was so strapped for cash that she enrolled in SNAP benefits — a program also cut under Trump's budget bill. Now an anesthesiologist at University of Michigan Health, she's documented her concerns on TikTok for her 48,000 followers. 'It's not going to improve representation, and it's not going to improve access,' Pendergrast said. 'It's going to act as a deterrent for people who otherwise would be excellent physicians.' For low-income students, the application process is already fraught with economic obstacles, Pendergrast said. Metrics like GPA and the Medical College Admissions Test, or MCAT, are heavily weighted in admissions, and may disadvantage students from underresourced schools. Many students also lack mentorships or networks to guide them through the process, she noted. 'I think the average medical student is going to be richer and whiter, and not from rural areas and not from underserved communities,' Pendergrast said. The elimination of Grad PLUS loans comes amid a mounting nationwide physician shortage. A recent AAMC report predicted a shortfall of 86,000 physicians by 2036. Meanwhile, a significant portion of the workforce is poised to enter retirement: The U.S. population aged 65 and older is expected to grow 34.1% over the next decade. The shortage is particularly concentrated in primary care. In practice, that means longer waiting times for patients, and an increased caseload on physicians, who may already suffer from burnout. 'If the goal is truly to make America healthy again, then we need to have a strong physician workforce … We should be coming up with ideas to make it more accessible for people who want to be doctors as opposed to hindering that,' Anderson said. Sophia Tully, co-president of the Minority Association of Pre-Med Students at Northwestern, said she and her peers have struggled to reconcile with a system that often feels stacked against them. The 21-year-old plans on taking an extra gap year before medical school in an effort to save money. Tully summed up the environment on campus: 'For lack of a better word, people are panicking.'
Los Angeles Times
35 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Gavin Newsom is threatening to end-run California voters. It reflects a terrible trend
In 2010, California voters drove the foxes from the henhouse, seeing to it that lawmakers in Washington and Sacramento would no longer have the power to draw congressional districts to suit themselves. It wasn't close. Proposition 20 passed by a lopsided 61%-to-38% margin, giving congressional line-drawing authority to an independent mapmaking commission and thus ending decades of pro forma elections by injecting much-needed competition into California's House races. Now, Gov. Gavin Newsom is talking about undoing voters' handiwork. Newsom said he may seek to cancel the commission, tear up the boundaries it drew and let Democratic partisans draft a new set of lines ahead of next year's midterm election — all to push back on President Trump and Texas Republicans, who are attempting a raw power grab to enhance the GOP's standing in 2026. The threatened move is a long shot and, more than anything, a ploy to boost Newsom's White House ambitions. It's also highly presumptuous on his part, reflecting an increased arrogance among lawmakers around the country who are saying to voters, in effect, 'Thank you for your input. Now go away.' Take what just happened in Missouri. Last year, 58% of voters approved a ballot measure increasing the state minimum wage and requiring employers to provide paid sick leave. This month, Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe signed legislation that limited the minimum wage increase and scrapped the sick leave requirement altogether. In two other states, Alaska and Nebraska, lawmakers similarly tried but failed to, respectively, overturn voter-passed measures on paid sick leave and a hike in the minimum wage. 'It's a damning indictment of representative democracy when elected officials are scared of the will of their own voters,' said Alexis Magnan-Callaway of the Fairness Project, a union-backed advocacy group that focuses on state ballot measures. It is indeed. But it's part of a pattern in recent years of lawmakers, mainly in Republican-led states, undercutting or working to roll back voter-designed measures to enshrine abortion rights, expand Medicare and raise the minimum wage. To be clear, those measures were passed by voters of all stripes: Democrats, Republicans, independents. 'People are transcending party lines to vote for issues that they know will impact their communities,' said Chris Melody Fields Figueredo, executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, a progressive organization. By ignoring or working to nullify the result, she said, lawmakers are helping contribute 'to what we're seeing across the country, where people are losing faith in our institutions and in government.' And why wouldn't they, if politicians pay no mind save to ask for their vote come election time? In a direct attack on the initiative process, at least nine state legislatures passed or considered laws in their most recent session making it harder — and perhaps even impossible — for citizens to place measures on the ballot and seek a popular vote. There can be issues with direct democracy, as Sean Morales-Doyle of the Brennan Center for Justice pointed out. 'There can be times when systems can be abused to confuse voters,' he said, 'or where voters do things without maybe fully understanding what it is they're doing, because of the way ballot measures are drafted or ballot summaries are offered.' But it's one thing to address those glitches, Morales-Doyle said, and 'another thing to just basically say that we, as the representatives of voters, disagree with what voters think the best policy is and so we're going to make it harder for them to enact the policy that they desire.' In Texas, Republicans are wielding their lopsided power in hopes of erasing as many as five Democratic-leaning congressional seats, boosting the GOP's chances of keeping control of the House in the 2026 midterm election. Trump, staring at the prospect of an emboldened, subpoena-wielding Democratic House majority, is backing the effort whole-hog. That, Newsom said, is the fighting-fire-with-fire reason to tear up California's congressional map and gerrymander the state for Democrats just as egregiously as Texas Republicans hope to do. 'We can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be. Or, we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment,' the governor asserted. It's awfully hard to argue against corralling the errant Trump and his Republican enablers. Still, that's no reason to ignore the express will of California voters when it comes to reining in their own lawmakers. Taking Newsom's gerrymander threat at face value, there are two ways he could possibly override Proposition 20. He could break the law and win passage of legislation drawing new congressional districts, face an inevitable lawsuit and hope to win a favorable ruling from the California Supreme Court. Or he could call a costly special election and ask voters to reverse themselves and eliminate the state's nonpartisan redistricting commission, at least for the time being. It's a hard sell. One presumes Newsom's message to Californians would not be: 'Let's spend hundreds of millions of your tax dollars so you can surrender your power and return it to politicians working their will in the backrooms of Washington and Sacramento.' But that's the gist of what they would be asked to do, which bespeaks no small amount of hubris on Newsom's part. If elections are going to matter — especially at a time our democracy is teetering so — politicians have to accept the results, whether they like them or not. Otherwise, what's the point of having elections?
