Q&A of the Day – The Florida Dept. Of Environmental Protection & Johnathan Dickinson State Park 

Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.      

Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com     

Social: @brianmuddradio    

iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.       

Today’s Entry: @brianmuddradio What I don’t understand is how the state’s environmental arm could be involved in developing golf courses in the first place? 

Bottom Line: Yeah, that’s a good question. I’m going to breakdown what’s going on with the Johnathon Dickenson State Park proposal, how we got here, and what next steps look like in the process. First though, this is one of many notes I’ve received about this topic and the feedback has been unanimous. No one I’ve heard from thinks the idea of creating golf courses or various other developments inside Johnathan Dickinson or the other state parks is a good idea. Neither do I. We’d just recently received the news that after several years of hard-fought battles to reduce east-west Lake Okeechobee discharges, the Army Corps of Engineers finally adopted the new operating manual that will make it happen. Now, only a week later there’s this. As a conservationist, it’s a reminder of the constant challenges that exist in preserving/restoring the natural environment, that’s the crux of what makes Florida a wonderful state. So, let’s break this story down. 

On Monday, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection announced the launch of its 2024-25 Great Outdoors Initiative. As stated in the press release: The initiative will work to expand public access, increase outdoor activities and provide new lodging options across Florida’s state parks—reinforcing the state’s dedication to conservation, the outdoor recreation economy and a high quality of life for Floridians. When the release first dropped it didn’t immediately set off the firestorm that it quickly become in part because the Great Outdoors Initiative isn’t a new program, and it hadn’t previously been controversial. For example, last year’s Great Outdoors Initiative offered Floridians annual passes at state parks for 50% off and included free entry to state parks around designated state holidays. When the press release dropped, I don’t think many interpreted “increase outdoor activities and provide new lodging options across Florida’s state parks”. As building golf courses and lodging inside of Florida’s state parks. But once the details were released that’s exactly what the plans showed.  

Florida currently has 175 state parks. Johnathan Dickinson State Park is one of nine parks selected for an Amended Conceptual Land Use Plan as part of the State Department of Environmental Protection’s Great Outdoors Initiative. Under the state’s proposal, the park would have two 18-hole golf courses, one 9-hole course and a clubhouse built within the existing footprint. Now, as much as this proposal may seem as though it’s come out of left field. It hasn’t. It actually is part of an effort that was first attempted in 2011. Thirteen years ago, Jack Nicklaus spoke with state leaders about an idea he had to design golf courses inside of Florida state parks. Johnathan Dickinson was one of those parks. Following conversations, state representative Patrick Rooney proposed legislation entitled: Jack Nicklaus Golf Trail of Florida, that if passed would have had the state park’s service, under Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection, develop the series of golf courses as proposed by Nicklaus. The language of the bill stated: (that courses) shall be designed and built in an environmentally sensitive manner but also may include a hotel. That sounds awfully similar to what’s been proposed by the state’s DEP this week. For those seeking to stop the current effort from taking place, the road map as to how to do so is the same as what stopped the bill 13 years ago from becoming law. Significant public backlash.  

The bill was withdrawn by Rooney in the house, as was its companion in the senate, after Floridians made their voices heard. In the words of Rooney: After much consideration and listening to the citizens of Florida, I have decided to withdraw HB 1239. Floridians spoke very clearly over the past several days on this proposal, and they are the reason I’m in office. I appreciate their concerns and hope this decision allays some of their fears. Well, on this issue anyway, it did for 13 years but now a similar plan is being advanced by a state agency as opposed to the legislature. Rooney also said this at the time: Please understand that my sole intention in filing this bill was one of economic development, my main objective in deciding to run for the state House last year. For those wondering why what may seem like such a wrongheaded decision to attempt this latest park development plan has taken place. That’s it. It’s an economic argument. But while it may be true that more tourism and more revenue may potentially be derived from the development of the parks, balance is also important. The state under the DeSantis administration has done a terrific job setting this state up for economic success. We don’t need to be developing our state parks to continue making economic progress.  

Like the ill-fated proposal in the state legislature 13 years ago, this proposal too should be relegated to the dustbin of history. As for those who do want to make their voices heard on this issue. A meeting with public comments will be held next Tuesday, August 27th, at The Flagler of Stuart at 3 pm. I’ve been told that the meeting area can hold 150 people, and that public comment is scheduled for 1 hour. I’d love to see an overflow crowd that would force the hand of those attempting to push forward with this proposal to take notice. In the meantime, you also can contact your state representative and state senator and ask them to advocate to the state DEP on your behalf. Already, Congressman Brian Mast, has stepped in on his constituent’s behalf – sending a letter to the state demanding greater transparency and responsiveness to concerned citizens. This type of proposal has been stopped once. It can be stopped again. The final decision in this process is a vote that’s to be held by the DEP’s Acquisition and Restoration Council.  

When Anya Cook’s water broke in 2022, she was 16 weeks pregnant and the Broward County doctor told her she would lose the fetus. But Florida’s abortion laws meant that she would have to go back home until her situation got worse.

“I needed care, but my state’s abortion restrictions kept it from me,” the Coral Springs woman said on the United Center stage on Day 4 of the Democratic National Convention. “I miscarried in a bathroom.

“I’ll never forget my husband’s face as he tried to stop the bleeding, trying to do what doctors should have been doing,” she said. Next to her, Cook’s husband Derick stood holding their infant daughter Anaya.

“When I reached the hospital, I lost nearly half the blood in my body,” she said.

Since then, Florida has tightened the abortion limits even further, to just 6 weeks, before many people know they’re pregnant.

What are Florida’s abortion laws?

As of May this year, nearly all abortions are illegal in Florida after six weeks, before most people know they’re pregnant.

The state’s previous 15-week ban passed in 2022 went into effect a month previous, when the Florida Supreme Court overruled a 34-year-old decision that said a privacy provision in the state constitution protected a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. But that ruling also triggered a more restrictive 6-week ban passed by the Florida Legislature last year to go into effect 30 days later.

Florida also requires a 24-hour waiting period, so that means two appointments at the state’s overcrowded clinics before the deadline.

However, while the law reduces the amount of time pregnant people have to get an abortion, it does provide some exemptions for rape and incest that the 15-week ban lacked, something that drew criticism even from some supporters.

Florida law does include exceptions in the case of physical danger to the pregnant person but only in extreme cases and certified in writing by two physicians, something many hospitals have been loathe to do. Physicians must be willing to risk possible fines, loss of license and even imprisonment by going on record against oversight committees and the state.

Abortions are permitted in the case of rape, incest or human trafficking but only up to 15 weeks, and only if the pregnant person has copies of “a restraining order, police report, medical record, or other court order or documentation” to provide evidence that they are a victim of rape or incest.

A constitutional amendment to legalize abortion until fetal viability, which is generally considered to be around 23-24 weeks will be on the ballot this November.

What will Florida’s abortion amendment do?

Amendment 4, Abortion Access, says, “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

If this amendment passes, abortion would be legal until fetal viability, which is generally considered to be around 23-24 weeks. It would also allow abortions when necessary to protect a patient’s health, as determined by a health care provider. 

Gov. Ron DeSantis, Florida Republicans and anti-abortion groups are strongly against this amendment, claiming it is too vague and will lead to an unregulated abortion industry. Supporters say it will put control over the pregnant person’s body back where it belongs, with the person and their healthcare provider.

In a recent survey of likely Florida voters from the University of North Florida’s Public Opinion Research Lab, 69% of those surveyed said they’d vote yes compared to only 23% saying no.