Editorial: Don't shred Florida's remaining, tattered growth management laws

Yahoo

24-04-2025

Again and again, Floridians have made it clear: They want state and local leaders to stop giving in to developers' every whim. They expect respect for our state's natural environment, and consideration to the congestion and public expense caused by irresponsible growth.
Unfortunately, those priorities seem to come under assault whenever the Legislature is in session. This year is no different, with dangerous bills flying under the radar that would further shred the state's fragile growth-management controls, and budget proposals that fail to honor voter mandates and leadership's pledges to fund environmental priorities.
One of the more troublesome bills (HB 991) would strip counties and cities of one of their best tools to bolster and revitalize flagging communities and neighborhoods by banning so-called community redevelopment agencies. These districts are intended to focus local resources on reviving blighted communities by re-investing increases in property tax revenue back into the district that the agency serves. Under the dictates of the House legislation, local governments would be immediately banned from creating new CRAs, and forced to wind down existing ones within 20 years. Fortunately, the Senate version of that legislation (SB 1242) was amended Tuesday to be much less restrictive, but lawmakers really should back away from this concept entirely. There's no good reason to take away this tool. Without it, developers will have less incentive to redevelop troubled areas, which could push them to sprawl into rural lands instead.
Another bill (SB 1264) would kill off an already-weakened but still important layer of review for big developments that impact multiple governments at once. Florida has 10 Regional Planning Councils, which oversee coordination of services including transportation, utilities and emergency response — as well as reviewing development proposals to ensure they are consistent with existing comprehensive plans. At one point, planning-council review was an important step for megadevelopments that often matched the size of new cities. Their oversight role has been considerably weakened, but SB 1264 would do away with them altogether. It doesn't have a viable House companion, but there are several House bills that could be easily amended to include this language. That would be a mistake.
The worst bill, however, is one that many growth-management advocates describe as a 'sleeper.' It would allow development — sometimes intensive development — of some rural land properties that are adjacent to already developed lands, without any public hearing before elected or even appointed officials. 'It will just be approved with the stroke of a pen by someone sitting in an office,' says Paul Owens, president of 1000 Friends of Florida, who is among those watching the legislation. (HB 579, SB 1080). In this case, the worse of the two bills is in the Senate, but either would force cities and counties to move more rapidly, and could sever critical links between sections of the Florida Wildlife Corridor, Owens says.
After all these warning signs, there's one bright spot to note. The Legislature seems likely to adopt a bill (SB 80/HB 209) that would safeguard Florida's parks from ridiculous developmental proposals that would allow golf courses, hotels and other despoiling 'amenities.' It's a direct response to a much-derided effort by Gov. Ron DeSantis that would have targeted a handful of state parks for inappropriate development into profit-making enterprises. The response to that plan was heartening — it drew near-universal derision and was quickly shut down. This legislation would stamp 'never again' on any future attempts. It should get easy passage, by enough of a margin to let DeSantis know he'd be wasting his time with a veto.
There's one more gap to work out, and it's in the budget. The Senate's budget proposal includes $100 million in the coming year for Florida Forever, the state's popular, voter-endorsed program to purchase and preserve environmentally sensitive land. The House? Not a penny.
That breaks a promise legislative leaders made two years ago, a move intended to take Florida Forever off the bargaining table with annual funding of at least $100 million — honoring the wishes of voters and ensuring that the state keeps moving on conservation efforts that, all too often, represent a race to save sensitive land before it is overtaken by pressure to develop it.
The Senate should stand firm. Funding Florida Forever won't strip money from other priorities: It's backed by a tax on real-estate sales that was set aside for this purpose. Using that money to patch other holes in the budget will only perpetuate long-term funding problems elsewhere.
The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Executive Editor Roger Simmons and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at [e-mail]