‘Loud and clear’: Lawmakers approve bill to prevent development on state park lands

Ron DeSantis managed to do what no one thought possible — unify Republicans and Democrats in opposition to the development of state parks.

After some back-and-forth, the Legislature has agreed on language to more clearly prevent development on state park lands.

The House originally approved the measure (HB 209) in mid-April. But the Senate added amendments to the language of the bill in that chamber Wednesday, which sent it back to the House.

House lawmakers agreed Thursday to accept that language.

Rep. John Snyder, a Hobe Sound Republican, sponsored the bill and said the Senate amendments were “minor” and that the measure is still essentially intact from when the House first approved it.

Rep. Robin Bartleman, a Weston Democrat, asked Snyder for assurances that the bill would prohibit the “takeover” of state parks by golf courses.

Snyder said there’s no doubt that golf courses will not be added to state parks under the wording in the bill.

“That piece is very much in there loud and clear and did not change,” Snyder said.

The Senate Wednesday added technical amendments to the House bill, along with language that parks must maintain wildlife views and exclude the addition of sporting facilities, other than existing facilities.

The bill is the result of massive public demonstrations against a 2024 move proposing additions to parks such as golf courses, hotels and pickleball courts. Those proposals prompted widespread protests by residents when the Gov. Ron DeSantis administration pitched increasing development on protected park land. The plans were abandoned as a result of the outcry.

Sen. Gayle Harrell, a Stuart Republican, sponsored the original Senate bill (SB 80), called “The State Park Preservation Act.” It would require “public hearings for all updated conservation and non-conservation land management plans; requiring the Division of Recreation and Parks of the Department of Environmental Protection to comply with specified provisions when granting certain privileges, leases, concessions, and permits.”

The measure now heads to the Governor, who will decide whether to sign it.