Tallahassee, FL – On June 29, 2026, Governor Ron DeSantis formally signed Florida’s $117.6 billion state budget for the fiscal year 2026-27, marking a pivotal moment for the state’s environmental landscape. Despite robust state revenue and a backdrop of rising operational costs, the finalized spending plan is notably leaner than its predecessor, a strategic move legislative leaders have framed as a commitment to fiscal prudence, aiming to maintain low taxes, reduce state debt, and bolster future financial preparedness. This budget, along with a series of legislative actions during the recent session, presents a complex and often contradictory picture for Florida’s natural resources, offering significant victories in some areas while introducing concerning vulnerabilities in others.
A Pillar of Progress: Unprecedented Funding for Everglades Restoration
One of the undeniable highlights for environmental proponents within the new budget is the full allocation of $645 million for Everglades restoration projects. This substantial investment underscores Florida’s enduring commitment to the ecological health of its iconic "River of Grass," a vast wetland ecosystem vital to the state’s water supply, wildlife, and economy. The funding targets critical initiatives designed to restore the flow of water, improve water quality, and rebuild natural habitats across south Florida.
Key projects slated to benefit from this allocation include the EAA Reservoir, a cornerstone of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) aimed at reducing harmful discharges to coastal estuaries and sending clean water south. Also receiving robust support are the Lower Kissimmee Basin Stormwater Treatment Area, crucial for purifying water entering Lake Okeechobee; the Western Everglades Restoration Project, focusing on hydrological restoration in the ecologically sensitive western fringes of the Everglades; the Northern Everglades and Estuaries Protection Program, addressing pollution sources upstream of Lake Okeechobee; and the Lake Okeechobee Watershed Restoration Plan, a comprehensive effort to improve water quality and ecological function throughout the lake’s vast drainage basin.
This sustained investment in the Everglades is not merely a budgetary line item; it represents a decades-long bipartisan effort to rectify past environmental damage and secure the future of one of the world’s most unique ecosystems. The Everglades restoration program, often dubbed the largest hydrological restoration project globally, has historically relied on a strong partnership between the state and federal government. The consistent state funding reflects a recognition of the Everglades’ intrinsic value, not only as a biodiversity hotspot but also as a critical natural infrastructure protecting south Florida’s freshwater supply and coastal communities. Environmental advocates have consistently championed these allocations, viewing them as essential for the long-term ecological and economic resilience of the state.
Beyond the Everglades, the broader Agriculture and Environment budget totals approximately $8.9 billion, indicating significant statewide investments in clean water infrastructure, various restoration efforts, and diverse conservation programs. These initiatives span a wide range of needs, from improving municipal wastewater treatment plants to supporting local land preservation efforts, reflecting a holistic approach to environmental management in several key sectors.
Legislative Advances: Enhancing Transparency and Coastal Resilience
The 2026 legislative session also saw the passage and signing of several bills poised to positively impact Florida’s environment, demonstrating a legislative willingness to address specific conservation challenges.
Conservation Lands Bill (HB 441/SB 546): Increasing Public Oversight
One such significant piece of legislation is the Conservation Lands Bill, HB 441, sponsored by Rep. Kendall (R-St. Johns), with its Senate companion, SB 546, by Sen. Mayfield (R-Melbourne). Signed into law in April, this bill was a direct response to public outcry over a controversial proposal in the previous year to swap land at the Guana River Wildlife Management Area. The legislation is designed to enhance transparency when the state considers selling or exchanging conservation lands. It mandates that the state provide the public with at least 30 days’ notice before finalizing any such transaction. Furthermore, it requires key information—including details of the lands involved, their valuation, and a clear explanation of how the transaction benefits conservation—to be publicly posted online.
Environmental organizations and public interest groups widely lauded this bill as a crucial step towards greater accountability and public trust. Critics of previous land deals had argued that a lack of transparency could lead to rushed decisions, potentially compromising vital natural areas for short-term gains or private interests. This new law ensures that the public, who ultimately owns these conservation lands, has ample opportunity to review and comment on proposed changes, preventing "behind-the-scenes" deals that could irrevocably alter Florida’s natural heritage. The legislation reinforces the principle that decisions impacting publicly owned conservation assets should be made openly and with clear justification.
Coastal Resilience Bill (SB 302/HB 1035): Adapting to a Changing Climate
Another legislative win for the environment is the Coastal Resilience Bill, SB 302, championed by Sen. Garcia (R-Miami), and HB 1035, by Rep. Mooney (R-Key Largo), which the Governor also signed into law. This bill aims to fortify Florida’s aquatic preserves against the escalating threats of sea-level rise and increasing storm intensity, while concurrently enabling limited restoration work vital for improving coastal resilience. Florida, with its extensive coastline and low-lying topography, is exceptionally vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, making proactive coastal resilience strategies imperative.
The bill imposes stricter limitations on dredging and filling activities within sensitive aquatic preserves, recognizing the ecological damage these can inflict. Crucially, it expands the utilization of nature-based shoreline projects, such as living shorelines, which employ natural elements like oysters, mangroves, and salt marshes to protect coasts from erosion and storm surge, often proving more effective and environmentally friendly than traditional hardened structures like seawalls. Furthermore, the legislation directs the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to develop a comprehensive set of statewide rules for nature-based coastal resilience projects by 2027, ensuring a consistent and scientifically sound approach across the state.
An important amendment introduced by Sen. Boyd (R-Bradenton) adds specific protection for the Terra Ceia Aquatic Preserve in Tampa Bay, prohibiting dredging or filling there unless it is absolutely necessary for a public purpose or to improve water quality. The bill also carves out specific allowances for limited dredging in the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve when such actions are deemed essential for restoring natural systems and strengthening coastal resilience. These targeted protections acknowledge the unique ecological significance and vulnerability of these specific aquatic ecosystems. The bill’s passage signals a legislative recognition of the urgent need for adaptation strategies that leverage, rather than destroy, Florida’s natural coastal defenses.
Legislative Setbacks: Water Quality and Land Use Under Scrutiny
While the budget and some bills brought positive news, other legislative actions and a significant gubernatorial veto have raised substantial concerns among environmental groups, signaling potential setbacks for water quality and conservation land management.
The Vetoed Biosolids Bill (SB 1294/HB 1245): A Missed Opportunity for Water Quality
One of the most disappointing outcomes for environmental advocates was Governor DeSantis’s veto of the Biosolids Bill, SB 1294, sponsored by Sen. Bradley (R-Fleming Island), and its House counterpart, HB 1245, by Rep. Shoaf (R-Quincy). This bill was widely seen as a "very necessary" step to update Florida’s regulations concerning the use of Class AA biosolids—treated sewage sludge often employed as fertilizer on agricultural lands.
The issue of biosolids application is a growing environmental challenge in Florida. As the state phases out the application of Class B biosolids, there has been a concerning increase in the use of Class AA biosolids. While Class AA is treated to a higher standard, critics argue that it can still carry many of the same nutrient pollution risks as Class B if not properly managed. The current regulatory framework for Class AA biosolids has been described as having "little regulatory control," creating a loophole that could exacerbate Florida’s ongoing nutrient pollution crisis, which manifests as harmful algal blooms and red tide events in various waterways.
The vetoed bill would have implemented several crucial safeguards:
- Agronomic Rates: It would have mandated that biosolids be applied only at agronomic rates, meaning in amounts that crops can actually utilize, preventing over-application and subsequent runoff of excess nutrients into water bodies.
- Prohibition of Over-application: Directly addressing a major source of pollution, the bill would have explicitly prohibited applying more biosolids than necessary.
- Record Keeping: Operators of bulk biosolids application sites would have been required to maintain records for five years detailing the type, amount, and timing of biosolids applied, enhancing accountability and data collection.
- DEP Rule Development: The bill would have directed the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to develop new rules specifically for the distribution and marketing of these materials, closing existing regulatory gaps.
By vetoing this bill, the Governor rejected what many considered a practical and much-needed step toward stronger oversight of a significant source of nutrient pollution. Environmental groups have criticized this decision as short-sighted, arguing that it leaves Florida’s vital water resources, including springs, rivers, and coastal estuaries, as well as nearby communities, vulnerable to continued nutrient loading from inadequately regulated land-applied biosolids. This veto underscores the ongoing tension between agricultural practices and environmental protection in a state grappling with pervasive water quality issues.
The 2026 Florida Farm Bill (SB 290): A Shift in Conservation Land Policy
Another contentious piece of legislation signed by the Governor is the 2026 Florida Farm Bill, SB 290, sponsored by Sen. Truenow (R-Tavares). While making various changes to programs within the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS), several provisions in the bill are seen as significantly weakening key protections for Florida’s environment and altering the long-standing approach to conservation land management.
One of the most alarming aspects for conservationists is the provision allowing certain conservation lands acquired after 2023—specifically those other than state parks, state forests, and wildlife management areas—to be reviewed for "agricultural suitability." If deemed suitable, these lands could potentially be sold off for farm use, with the state retaining a Rural and Family Lands easement to prevent future development. The proceeds from such sales would then be directed to fund FDACS’s Rural and Family Lands Protection Program (RFLPP) instead of being returned to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) Florida Forever program, which traditionally acquires lands for broad public conservation purposes.
This creates a concerning "pipeline" where lands initially acquired in fee simple title under the Florida Forever program—intended for permanent public conservation and access—could be converted to agricultural use. While RFLPP easements protect against future development, they often exclude public access and prioritize working agricultural landscapes over pristine natural habitats. Critics argue this permanently weakens Florida’s overarching conservation system, diminishes the public estate, and prioritizes one form of land use over broader ecological and recreational benefits.
Additionally, SB 290 includes an amendment by Sen. Harrell (R-Stuart) that prevents lands necessary for Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan projects from being considered "surplus" to agriculture, a small but important safeguard. However, the bill also loosens some biosolids regulations, allowing for Class AA applications with less clear permits and reduced DEP oversight, which further compounds the water quality concerns raised by the vetoed biosolids bill. Audubon, a prominent environmental organization, specifically called attention to these harmful provisions, urging greater scrutiny.
On a positive note, sponsors of the bill in both the House and Senate made floor statements during debates, clarifying that any decisions to surplus conservation lands for agricultural conversion would undergo review by the Acquisition and Restoration Council (ARC) and require approval by a public vote of the Governor and Cabinet. While this provides a layer of public oversight, environmental advocates remain wary of the underlying policy shift.
Local Land Planning and Development Bill (SB 208/HB 399): Eroding Home Rule
Signed by the Governor, the Land Use and Development Regulations bill, SB 208 by Sen. McClain (R-Ocala) and HB 399 by Rep. Borerro (R-Miami), introduces significant changes to Florida’s growth management and land-use review processes. The legislation is designed to accelerate housing development and, critically, limit the discretion of local governments in development decisions. It mandates that local governments clearly define how they evaluate compatibility between residential uses in their comprehensive plans and land development regulations, a move intended to streamline approvals for certain housing types.
Florida has experienced unprecedented population growth in recent decades, leading to increased demand for housing and infrastructure. While proponents argue the bill addresses housing affordability and supply issues, environmental and planning advocates have raised serious concerns. They contend that the measure further limits the ability of local governments to manage growth effectively and address the cumulative impacts of development. By restricting how communities can evaluate compatibility and requiring approval of certain housing types in single-family areas, the bill could make it more difficult for local governments to consider crucial factors such as existing infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints (e.g., wetlands, floodplains), and broader community planning goals when reviewing new developments.
Helpful amendments adopted in the Senate did blunt some of the bill’s most controversial aspects, clarifying compatibility review standards, outlining procedures for documenting mitigation measures during development review, and reinforcing zoning parity for off-site constructed housing. However, the core concern remains that the bill tips the balance further away from local control and towards state-mandated development, potentially leading to increased sprawl, strain on public services, and degradation of natural areas if growth is not managed with sufficient local flexibility and environmental sensitivity.
Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Bill (SB 698/HB 589): A Risk to Groundwater
Another bill signed into law with significant environmental implications is the Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Permits bill, SB 698 by Sen. Martin (R-Ft. Myers) and HB 589 by Rep. Nix (R-Port Charlotte). This legislation alters how septic systems are permitted for single-family homes in Florida, a state particularly vulnerable to groundwater pollution due to its porous karst geology.
Under the new law, local governments can no longer require homeowners or builders to obtain a state septic system construction permit from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection before issuing building or plumbing permits. Instead, applicants only need to show proof that they have applied for the septic permit. This change raises immediate alarms for environmentalists.
Critics warn that this modification could allow home construction to proceed significantly before septic systems are fully reviewed or approved, increasing the risk of poorly sited or inadequately designed systems being installed. Given Florida’s direct connection between groundwater and many of its iconic springs, rivers, and coastal areas, poorly functioning or improperly permitted septic systems are a known major contributor of nutrients and other pollutants. The bill also clarifies that local septic inspection programs cannot require repairs or upgrades unless a system is demonstrably failing, and it provides a 90-day grace period before new state septic rules apply to permit applications. These provisions are seen as further eroding oversight and potentially exacerbating Florida’s existing water quality challenges, threatening groundwater, springs, and other vital waterways.
The "Ugly" Truth: Florida Forever’s Neglect
Perhaps the most significant and contentious aspect of the 2026-27 budget for the conservation community is the notable absence of any new dedicated funding for Florida Forever. This program, established in 2001 as the successor to the highly successful Preservation 2000, is the state’s premier land acquisition initiative. Its primary mission is to create new state parks, forests, and wildlife management areas, thereby preserving Florida’s natural resources for ecological protection, public recreation, and future generations. For decades, Florida Forever has enjoyed strong bipartisan support and has been instrumental in protecting millions of acres of environmentally sensitive lands.
Instead of funding Florida Forever, the budget provides a hefty $200 million line item to the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program (RFLPP), a program administered by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. RFLPP focuses on purchasing conservation easements on working farms and ranches to prevent future development and protect agricultural landscapes. While RFLPP serves a valuable purpose in preserving agricultural heritage and open space, it typically does not provide for public access or the same level of ecological management as fee-simple acquisitions under Florida Forever.
Further exacerbating the concern, Section 151 of the budget sweeps unspent land acquisition funds from prior Florida Forever appropriations. This practice, often referred to as "sweeping," diverts funds that were previously designated for specific conservation purposes to other areas of the budget or to alternative programs.
Environmental advocates have voiced profound disappointment and alarm over this budgetary decision. They contend that by pitting Florida Forever and RFLPP against each other, and by denying Florida Forever new dedicated funding while sweeping existing funds, the Legislature has "broken faith with the people of Florida." This move is seen as an abandonment of a longstanding bipartisan commitment to balanced conservation, which has historically recognized the need for both agricultural land preservation and the acquisition of pristine natural areas for public benefit. The implications are significant: a stagnation of new land acquisition for critical habitats and public access, and a shift in the state’s conservation priorities away from comprehensive ecological protection and towards agricultural easements as the primary tool.
The broader impact of these decisions is profound. Protecting these lands through programs like Florida Forever is not only vital for Florida’s unique wildlife and natural heritage but also underpins the state’s economy (through tourism and outdoor recreation), safeguards water quality (by protecting watersheds and aquifer recharge areas), enhances resilience against natural disasters, and improves the overall quality of life for future generations.
As the state moves forward, environmental organizations and conservation partners have committed to continuing their work with elected officials and agency leaders ahead of the next legislative session. Their goal is to ensure that Floridians fully understand what is at stake with these policy shifts, advocating for a renewed and balanced commitment to conservation that recognizes the multifaceted value of Florida’s irreplaceable natural resources.
This article was published in the Summer 2026 Naturalist.
