Stop Overdevelopment
Floridians uniformly hate overdevelopment. Floridians who feel that way also know that growth is not inevitable, that growth is more an economic generator of extreme wealth, not a generator of jobs and security for working people, as promised.
Rural Floridians see agricultural and rural lands destroyed by overdevelopment. People who enjoy the outdoors in any capacity, or earn their living by fishing or tourism hate overdevelopment.
Conservationists hate development they term “urban sprawl”, which destroys native plant and animal habitat, and are causing the destruction of our ecosystem. Those who understand the consequences of climate change and pollution see developers knocking down carbon capturing trees, destroying greenspace, then paving over those areas with impermeable concrete, worsening flooding and pollution.
The most extreme of all overdevelopments are Hyperscale A.I. Data Center developments because in states where they have gotten a foothold, they are literally causing the destruction of human habitat. The consequences for humans living next to these huge data centers have been so dire, that AOC and MAGA supporters are joining arm in arm in local government meetings, pleading with their local governments to stop them before they get started in their neighborhoods.
Floridians are unaware that over development is a major cause of inflated housing costs, hidden mostly in higher utility rates.
If it is so obvious that overdevelopment is a bad word, why is it that the Florida legislature and DeSantis have systematically removed the ability of local governments to regulate development? Why are so many of our local governments eager to approve any new development that comes along? How do they get away with making decisions so opposed by their constituents?
It is the same answer. Voters no longer control who gets elected, special interests do. It is well known that real estate developers fund the local, and state legislative and gubernatorial campaigns of people who will govern in their interests, regardless of what the majority of Floridians want.
It means our governor and state legislators constitute a supermajority in Tallahassee, and easily pass legislation that allows developers to overbuild in all the ways Floridians hate. And too often, it means local governments welcome new development, and block citizen input into how those developments are built.
Land use policy is complex. The complexity causes Democratic state legislators to often vote for bills that greenlight unnecessary and environmentally destructive development. The reasons – either the bills are deceptively labeled and written, or Democrats are afraid of being labeled as supporting over-regulation, or being labeled as against job growth, particularly when we are in a legislative superminority as we are in Florida.
One way to deny voter and local government regulation of developer plans are “preemption” bills. This legislation strategy preempts, or prevents local governments from regulating development plans. Other bills punish and intimidate Floridians or local governments from appealing developer plans before the building process even begins. Local governments and citizens who try to seek redress face insurmountable hurdles, significant financial sanctions, or bullying and threats.
It keeps coming back to the same solutions. First, end the ability of special interests to fund all political campaigns, restore the governmental checks and balances that protect us against allowing profits over people.
- Ending real estate developer control over Tallahassee – campaign finance reform
- State legislative strategies that greenlight overdevelopment
- How local governments make development decisions in the dark
- Is growth really inevitable?
1. Ending real estate developer control over Tallahassee – campaign finance reform
Once again, refer to our Platform plank on this website, titled Break the Grip of Special Interests: Get Money out of Politics and Restore Democracy. Break The Grip Of Special Interests – Democratic Environmental Caucus of Florida
Our federal legislative candidates have a role, as set out in that platform plank, and many of us can support national groups working on state legislative solutions.
In our elections, we can get started successfully fighting developer financing of campaigns and overdevelopment on a state or local level, and that is, grassroots organizing, supporting candidates who take no money from any special interests.
Become a grassroots Democratic candidate who will champion this issue, engage with people who are energized by your priorities, and together, reach out to all voters. Grassroots volunteers and candidates who door knock or make phone calls will beat glossy mailers or paid canvassers every time. The issue of overdevelopment, in Florida, is a huge issue for Florida voters, and an opportunity for Democrats to make headway with voters soured on Florida Republican leadership.
2. State legislative strategies that greenlight overdevelopment
One way to deny local citizen and local government redress and control over development plans are “preemption” bills that preempt, or prevent local governments from regulating developments, using deceptive language that purports to address a legitimate issue. Democratic lawmakers are fooled into supporting bills that hurt our constituents.
Two glaring examples of this are SB 180 and the Live Local Act.
SB 180 purported to remedy local government overregulation that stood in the way of those affected by hurricane disasters from rebuilding in any timely manner. The actual effect of SB180 was removing much of local government’s ability to update local building codes to require rebuilding in a way that protects green space, incentivizes incorporating energy efficiency and clean energy options, and provides updated resiliency standards.
Instead developers could rebuild in ways that exacerbates flooding, water pollution, and climate change, while protecting developer profits.
The Live Local Act is a preemption bill that purports to be an affordable housing bill. The Live Local Act is designed to help essential workers; its affordability thresholds and implementation focus mean it primarily benefits higher-income “workforce” households. Lower-income renters and homeowners remain largely priced out of the housing market, especially in high-demand areas, because the law’s incentives and supply targets don’t fully address the needs of those earning below 80% AMI.
Bottom line, the Live Local Act does not deliver truly affordable housing. What it does is preempt local governments from being able to stop urban sprawl.
Other legislative strategies punish and intimidate Floridians or local governments from appealing developer plans even before the building process begins. Local governments and citizens who try to seek redress through the courts, or through local governments, face insurmountable hurdles, significant financial sanctions, or bullying and threats.
SB 540 is an example of one such bill, signed by DeSantis in 2023 that threatens ordinary Floridians with financial ruin by forcing citizens to pay legal fees of developers, if citizens exercise their right to legally challenge land use change requests that conflict with their communities’ comprehensive plans.
This is the same strategy, by the way, that discourages citizens from suing homeowner’s insurance companies for their failure to pay a valid claim, a tool that effectively denies citizens access to the courts.
Republican governors appoint agency leaders who remove the ability of state agencies to set environmental protection standards, which would allow them to deny permits to developments that violate those standards. Agencies like the Florida DEP, or Fish and Wildlife, could refuse to permit a development if given that authority. See the Environmental Platform Section, Restore Regulatory Agencies.
3. How local governments make development decisions in the interests of developers, why the FDP “Take Back Local” is critical
Local governments are run by administrative staff. Decisions are based upon working commissions and boards that meet outside of board meetings, and make their recommendations and report to the governing boards. Are those people independent from developers, or do they have conflicts of interest and unable to do their jobs independently?
County planning commissions, municipal planning boards, and special district boards, advisory boards and other special committees meet, and make recommendations to city councils or county commissions on land use matters. The meetings are open to the public, allow public comment and input.
The key to how those working groups continue to make land use policy decisions in the interests of developers, is knowing who makes the appointments to those groups. It is the governing body, often made up of people whose campaigns have been supported by developers and who then will appoint people who believe that growth and profit should be the priority consideration when regulating development.
That same governing body hires the city or county manager, who then hires administrative staff. That means if the local governing body makes their decisions based upon the interests of real estate developers, it means that they will hire a manager and staff who will recommend what experts are consulted to perform studies and review development plans.
It all goes back to who the voters choose to represent them in local government, and why fighting special interest control over our governments is so critical.
4. Is growth really inevitable?
Most Americans believe that economics of growth and profit make the U.S. strong. U.S. economic strength is measured by profit – stock market indexes, and growth, the GDP.
Stock market growth and the GDP does not measure the economic wellbeing of Americans. Our wellbeing is measured by our health and wellbeing.
It is measured by whether we can afford housing, utilities, food, medical care, transportation, education, or whether we are living in areas safe from increased flooding, pollution, extreme heat, or climate disasters.
Too often, those of us who are part of the Democratic ecosphere, regardless of whether we are active in our party or in non-partisan groups, accept the notion that growth and profit are irrevocably built into our governing system and economic strategies, and are inevitable.
Floridians who hate overdevelopment have come to believe that growth in the form of overdevelopment is not inevitable. Rural groups have developed tag lines: “growing, growing, gone”, “Don’t move to Florida”, “Stop Paving over Florida”, “Rural Florida should be run by residents, not developers”, “I ain’t afraid of the gators, I’m afraid of no gators”, and so on….
The key for environmentalists: Land use policy should no longer be based on growth and profit. Rather, land use policy should be based upon the ability of our environment to sustain healthy life.
Democratic candidates, their volunteers and supporters, should listen to Floridians, and base their campaigns and governing goals on what they are hearing, so that Democratic lawmakers have the tools to govern in the interests of all Floridians.