Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' Administration Tells Gainesville To Abandon Zoning Reform
The state's Republican administration comes out against property rights and local control.

Across the country, a growing number of state politicians are proposing or passing laws that override localities' ability to say no to new development. In Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration is actively urging cities to knock off zoning reforms that legalize more housing.
Last week, Florida's Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) sent a comment letter to Lauren Poe, Gainesville's mayor, recommending that the city withdraw a provisionally approved zoning amendment that allows two-, three-, and four-unit homes to be built in neighborhoods that were once zoned exclusively for single-family homes.
The legalization of this so-called "missing middle" housing "results in a scattered, unplanned, unfocused, and untenable approach to providing affordable housing," reads the department's letter, first reported by The Independent Florida Alligator. "This approach may result in fewer opportunities for providing access to affordable housing."
"I find it interesting that probably the most progressive [city] commission in the state of Florida is pushing to allow more property rights to bring down housing prices," counters Gainesville City Commissioner Adrian Hayes-Santos, who supported the city's zoning reforms. "A Republican executive branch under DeSantis is trying to stop people having more property rights."
In a tight 4–3 vote last month, Gainesville passed a zoning code amendment that allows up to four homes to be built on residential land citywide. The amendment also shrank the city's minimum lot size and setback rules, meaning newly legalized units can take up more land on smaller lots.
Proponents argue that allowing more housing units on individual parcels will grow supply and allow renters and homebuyers to split the increasing costs of land among more families. Both should make housing more affordable. After all, Gainesville's population is growing faster than its housing stock.
This same logic has undergirded "missing middle" reforms in states like Oregon, California, and Maine, along with cities like Minneapolis.
DEO raised a number of criticisms of Gainesville's approach. It argued that new rental housing stock would all be snatched up by the growing student population at the University of Florida, without benefiting city residents.
It also said the city hadn't done the necessary analysis of the strain increased citywide density would put on infrastructure, schools, and other public resources. The department said Gainesville had failed to study the impact of multifamily housing on the "character" and "stability" of single-family neighborhoods.
The letter echoes criticisms made by Gainesville neighborhood activists who've vocally opposed zoning reform, and who are threatening to sue the city if it moves ahead with a second, finalizing vote on the reforms.
The DEO's letter seems intent on bolstering that impending lawsuit, saying that if Gainesville fails to resolve the department's comments, then those comments "could form the basis of a challenge to the amendment."
Hayes-Santos argues that the DEO letter has numerous inaccuracies and conceptual flaws. The University of Florida's student population has remained flat for a decade, meaning new housing won't just benefit college students, he says. The idea that allowing more housing supply will make housing affordability worse just doesn't make sense, he adds.
"I believe this is a politically motivated thing," says Hayes-Santos.
Zoning reform is becoming a bipartisan movement, and it's not hard to see why. Free market advocates and conservatives see in it the promise of less regulation and enhanced property rights. Liberals and progressives like the idea of denser housing leading to more environmentally friendly, inclusive neighborhoods.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, has endorsed a slew of YIMBY ("yes in my backyard") reforms and beefed up state departments tasked with cracking down on anti-development jurisdictions that thwart state housing laws. Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, has fired rhetorical broadsides against restrictive zoning laws and the local governments that enforce them.
The federal YIMBY Act, a modest bill that requires jurisdictions receiving some federal grants to report on barriers to new housing construction, has managed to attract co-sponsors like conservative Sen. Tom Cotton (R–Ark.) and progressive Sen. Brian Schatz (D–Hawaii).
The flip side is that opposition to zoning reform also appears to cut across partisan lines. Florida's Republican-run state government is offering the same critiques of fourplex legalization that you might hear from progressive and socialist activists in Berkeley or San Francisco.
Hayes-Santos says the state's opposition isn't going to force the city to change course. He says they'll move ahead with a required second vote on the zoning amendment.
Next month, Gainesville is set to vote on abolishing requirements that new developments come with a minimum number of parking spaces—another prized YIMBY reform.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Nobody wants “affordable “ housing next to their nice house.
Indeed. I certainly don’t want a bunch of scumbags in my neighborhood. And ‘affordable housing’ always brings throngs of scumbags. I certainly didn’t work harder to afford a house in a decent neighborhood for a bunch of goddamn d eco rats to come take a cosmic sized shit in my neighborhood.
In a tight 4–3 vote last month, Gainesville passed a zoning code amendment that allows up to four homes to be built on residential land citywide. The amendment also shrank the city's minimum lot size and setback rules, meaning newly legalized units can take up more land on smaller lots.
Do I have to actually read this to find out if it really opens up property rights?
My Robles with these articles anymore it’s that Reason either withholds important parts of the story or or just doesn’t do their homework. I don’t trust articles where they criticize DeSantis, Trump, etc. because of their obvious bias and palpable hatred for these people.
Reason is just not credible anymore.
++
With #TrumpDocuments guaranteeing Drumpf will be in prison by 2024, the nomination is essentially a two-person contest: terrifying fascist Ron DeSantis vs. heroic patriot Liz Cheney. It's important for Koch-funded libertarians to spend as much energy as possible tearing down DeSantis since Charles Koch desperately wants to revive the early 2000s neocon GOP that a Cheney candidacy would represent.
#LizCheney2024
Outside City Hall, protestors rallied to express their opposition, some donning orange dots on their clothing to represent their cause. Public comments were mostly against the zoning change, with speakers pointing to numerous organizations who were in opposition: unanimous opposition from Alachua County Commission, 1,000 Friends of Florida and three city advisory boards.
While I'm not going to judge the broad public sentiment based on a noisy crowd at city hall, it sounds like the opinion of the... *clears throat* local control is somewhat divided.
Hmm, might have to put a post-it note on the old monitor and see how these city commissioners fare during the next election.
Unfortunately, the linked article doesn't seem to have anything about the text of the zoning changes. Mostly just "McGuffin journalism": The bad/good guys want this thing, the good/bad guys are trying to keep it away from them.
Ok, found this link and getting more detail.
I will admit, this looks promising:
I'm very focused on the fact that there was a lady named Arreola protesting. I'd like to see Arreola in person.
Both of them
>>Liberals and progressives like the idea of denser housing
liberals and progressives won't live there but they like the idea
I find it difficult to believe a "progressive" city council has its citizens best interests in mind, other than "what's good for them even if they don't know it".
If the town hall meeting was any indication, they appeared to be shoving this down their throats. As I say, it'll be interesting to see how the next election pans out.
it is entertaining an enlightening to see Britches trying to pretend that the government of Alachua County - home of the University of Florida - is any sort of libertarian.
Suppose we read:
Across the country, a growing number of state politicians are proposing or passing laws that override localities' ability to say no to new development. In [state], [party] Gov. [name]'s administration is actively urging cities to knock off zoning reforms that legalize more housing.
Reason posters: "How do I know whether I support or oppose this if I don't know whether the governor is a Republican or a Democrat?"
Zoning should be a local neighborhood issue, not state or federal, or even citywide. In my town zoning changes have to pass citywide and in the ward of about 5000 people.
TDS-addled moronic lefty shits:
"Reason posters: "How do I know whether I support or oppose this if I don't know whether the governor is a Republican or a Democrat?""
Eat shit and die, asshole.
Oh fuck off, you syphilitic cracker.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Why do you leftists come here? Wouldn’t you be more at home at. Vox or WaPo?
Remember when Republicans were the party of reform and small government? The party that did not want to micro-manage the economy? Pepperidge Farm remembers!
We can all agree that Brandyshit's brains leaked out when Trump was elected.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Please. You guys are reaching so hard to find ways to impugn DeSantis every time.
He's clearly the best and most libertarian member of the Uniparty and yet hes WOrSe tHan hItLeR!!!
Every damn time with you guys.
Stuff your TDS up your ass, shitpile.
You expand property rights by getting rid of zoning laws not by adding new regulation that favors progressive goals.
In much of the country, if you own a home in an area zoned for single-family housing, you are legally prohibited from doing things like converting the space above your garage into an apartment, building a new structure on your property to rent as an apartment, or to convert your existing house into a multi-family property (to say nothing of tearing it down and building a slightly larger, multifamily structure).
The kinds of "missing middle" zoning reforms the story here is talking about are trying to address a legal obstacle that is preventing economically beneficial development across the country. We're talking about communities where there is demand for residences in neighborhoods, but where we don't have sufficient demand to get a big-time real estate developer interested in bulldozing a neighborhood to build some kind of luxury tower. For a long time, we've had this zoning code that has prevented people from engaging in small-scale, incremental development.
Shit-for-brains SRG:
"...We're talking about communities where there is demand for residences in neighborhoods, but where we don't have sufficient demand to get a big-time real estate developer interested in bulldozing a neighborhood to build some kind of luxury tower..."
Yep, it's the government's job to force people to meet a demand which the government thinks is important.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Hey fuckwit - I didn't write that.
My apologies, you're right, asswipe. It's that other steaming pile of lefty shit SimonP.
Have a hard time keeping you assholes straight without a program.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
This is a really demented way to understand and explain property rights. Property rights have never meant that you can build anything you want anywhere you want. This is how farming communities prevent developers from buying up land.
The way you explained it Britschgi, you said my property rights end where your feelings begin.
Imagine saying that workers cannot form unions because they use their collective bargaining to create union shops where you can't work without being part of the union. There's already a free market solution to this: you don't work there. If the workers push away good people or the company hurts itself because of their choices, that is called dealing with the consequences of your own actions. That's what a free market allows for.
If you want to build something that local zoning doesn't permit, build it somewhere where people are okay with it. If they aren't okay with it, go somewhere else. If that ultimately hurts a city, they will deal with the consequences. If anarchy in zoning produces more optimal outcomes, minimal zoning cities will replace San Francisco and the like.
If you buy a property with a set of zoning laws the gov should not be able to change the zoning of your property without compensation- it’s a taking of your value.
Zoning was created in Manhattan to prevent "undesirable" people from moving uptown. At its core, land use zoning is taking of property rights without compensation. Close comparison of Houston to Los Angeles reveals that the principal difference between unzoned and zoned jurisdictions is the absence in unzoned jurisdictions of anyone to bribe to spot zone a land use. In almost every other respect, land use patterns follow identical trends.
libertarians in favor of zoning laws that control what you can do with your property. Now ive seen it all
Pragmatic libertarians like me would not cavil at modest zoning that prevented someone from, say, converting his house to a tannery.
"Pragmatic" pile of TDS-addled lefty shit tries to make a funny, exposes his idiocy.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
"libertarians in favor of zoning laws that control what you can do with your property. Now ive seen it all"
Brain-dead TDS-addled shit confusing changing zoning regulations with reducing regulations.
Not at all surprising; this moron make a point of demonstrating his lack of intellect.
> It argued that new rental housing stock would all be snatched up by the growing student population at the University of Florida, without benefiting city residents.
Good lord. While they are there, they absolutely are city residents. And housing is to some degree fungible -- any unit they take in new housing means more vacant units of existing housing.
Unlike other attempts - many successful - of DeSantis substituting his will for that of local officials - see removal of twice elected DA in Tampa, dissolution of Disney special district governance which impacts 2 counties (both of these actions were because the governor did not like what the DA and Disney said and were thus clear violations of 1st amendment rights), forcing UF to hire his quack surgeon general, forcing school boards to adhere to his quack medical theories or be punished, politicizing school board races across the state, unilaterally redistricting 2 black dominat congressional districts away while increasing purple Florida congressional seats to about favored 24-16 GOP to 32-8, and passing laws mandating private business policy on political issues and private business Covid policy (cruise ships were forced to not require vaccines for instance), in this case the procedure for this local comprehensive plan change was already part of Florida law and in the recent election, those who voted for it got thrown out on their ass. For once the Fl GOP is not out of step with Gainesville, at least on this issue.
He just wants to keep leftist filth from destroying more towns. Especially since the feds are dangling money in front of communities with strings attacked that are designed to turn good red towns blue so as to flip districts to your party. That’s the thing with your kind. You never do anything without some evil leftist ulterior motive behind it.
God bless DeSantis for stand king up to this bullshit, and God damn Biden for trying to do it.
PS Nowhere else in the state is there as similar law or movement to one. If Libertarians want to grab this issue and favor eliminating de-zoning, you'll lose enough times to bounce. Those who passed the bill in Gainesville were woke readers of left leaning urban planning journals, not libertarians.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
Fuck off and die, Asshole.
Hey, it's king snowflake, once again saying nothing of value.
I see that Joe made a point and you made a poopie. Change your diaper.
None of you cunts has ever made a point, and you talk big shit for such a little bitch. The only thing you accomplish is showcasing your inane and treasonous drivel.
Government so small it overrules the smaller government.
"It also said the city hadn't done the necessary analysis of the strain increased citywide density would put on infrastructure, schools, and other public resources."
What kind of fucking dumbass actually writes this? It's been proven time and again (and is very self evident) that density is far more efficient in terms of resources.
But what else would we expect from fascists?
This article is a prime example of what "libertariansm" is in practice. That being as a cudgel to protect the actions of leftist.
Because I seriously doubt Britches is going to make any effort to track or discuss the decidedly unlibertarian actions and aspects of Alachua County government.
Please also note that we do not have any of the Utilitarian arguments so popular among other so called 'libertarian' writers here being trotted out to highlight the fact that the State government is acting to protect the property rights of many more small landholders against these actions. Which are not being done to eliminate zoning, instead merely wielding zoning the benefit of a few number of wealthier landowners & developers.
Can’t really have proper libertarianism u till the Marxists are wiped out.
So not being able to decide what your neighbor is allowed to do or not do with his land and home, is a libertarian talking point now?
"The only result is nice neighborhoods becoming dysfunctional black neighborhoods, and we have all seen that play out countless times across the country."
So, maybe only allow poor, dysfunctional whites to move in? Would that make you happier?
It seems to be coming from a position of wokeness, but a rezoning plan that maximizing freedom and property rights should be relatively simple: You can build what you want on your property.
Unfortunately, when "progressives" show up on your doorstep with complex rezoning plan in a spiffy 3 ring binder, then that's when you want to knuckle up. And that's why I'm suspicious of this plan. I just downloaded a PDF of it but I don't have time to read it now.
The other issue is this plan has... at least as stated... two goals. "Maximize property rights" (don't trust progressives on anything related to property rights because at a certain point, progressives don't even believe in property) and "lower
property valueshousing costs" (those things are one in the same, but that's another complex subject).The second is more of a political/policy goal.
I am not convinced that 'upzoning' or allowing higher density housing will automatically achieve the latter. In fact, it could have the opposite effect.
From the simple supply-and-demand argument, it logically flows that it would. But from a lone-biker-of-the-apocalypse standpoint, it might not.
Oh, and for the record, the monikers they're putting on these things do make this plan stink to high heaven. "inclusionary/exclusionary"... Mmkay. Define that.
When a progressive tells you "this space is for everyone" what they mean is, this space is not for everyone.
zoning is anti freedom and anti libertarian. Whenever a government entity at any level wants to lessen zoning regulations, I am happy.
Reality is that Republican states tend to be poorly educated, economically inadequate, parasitic, can't-keep-up backwaters, and that Republicans tend to be superstitious, gullible, roundly bigoted culture war losers.
None of these is a problem replacement won't solve, though.
Carry on, clingers. So far as your betters permit, and only until replacement.
"Reality is a bitter pill to swallow, I know."
Well, then rest assured. Most of these folks moving into nicer digs will be white, since the number of whites living in poverty in Florida (10,910,869) is over three times that of blacks (3,149,614).
https://www.welfareinfo.org/poverty-rate/florida/#by-race
Liberals and progressives like the idea of denser housing leading to more environmentally friendly, inclusive neighborhoods.
Welcome to higher density, more inclusive and affordable neighborhoods.
Maximizing freedom and property rights is decidedly not the goal. Equity is the goal, which is more or less expressly stated on the second page of the zoning proposal to which you linked.
Agreed. And as typical of progressives, I suspect (somehow) that neither goal will be achieved. They will not necessarily increase property rights (by much) and they definitely won't diversify and affordify their neighborhoods (or so I suspect).
An 1100 dollar a month HOA fee, huh? So, not only would a mortgage be about 7000k a month you also have permanent rent of over a thousand dollars.
I guess the socialization of Seattle got us what socialism always does.
I use that link because it speaks to a real world example of what I'm alluding to.
I'm familiar with that property. It's close to my house. Up through the late 1990s, that section was entirely populated by ramshackle single family homes along the beach. As property values went up, they got "upzoned" and developers swooped in, started razing the single-family homes and put more diverse, inclusionary high-end condos. Now, a multti-unit condo complex that might span... at most 2-3 former single family homes, now sells 1 bedroom , 1160 sq ft condos for $1.7 MILLION apiece.
I have no "libertarian" beef with that. The property owners were able to do what they wanted. But housing didn't become "more affordable" and "inclusive".
I will note, that in suburban Colorado we've seen more houses that near precisely fit to the boundary of the small lot. So, bigger single-family houses with no yards to maximize internal space. These are, in turn, more expensive houses.
I don't know if there is any regulatory issue at play there, so much as just land is expensive, but it's an interesting shift I have definitely seen.
Really? Based on what?
No, I understand. I'm not really clear on a solution to the current housing cost questions in the US. Not the least of which because it is seemingly focused on a few cities that a lot of people want to move to.
So, for example, Phoenix is getting kind of bubbly. Arizona in general, and I think there is strong evidence that there is a housing bubble here.
Now here's a house in Iowa City:
https://www.redfin.com/IA/Iowa-City/304-Ronalds-St-52245/home/81783819
Near downtown, right next to a river, in a nice University town, in a nice city overall. But, people aren't basing their decision on where to live entirely on housing. So, people don't move there.
So, I'm still pretty anti-zoning. But I don't know if it's a panacea. I become less convinced over time that it is. I increasingly think if the expectation that everyone should be a homeowner is as much a problem as anything. That's a pretty recent shift, historically.
One thing I've noticed, even with myself, is an increasing baseline expectation of acceptable housing. When I go to old parts of town I see houses that are maybe 200 sq/ft. Someone lives in it, but it's pretty ramshackle. I get the sense that as a society we've generally seen an inflation in both expected size and niceties for a house and an apartment. We've also seen a move towards it being viewed as very substandard to have roommates, and certainly that each roommate must have their own room.
So, I'm still pretty anti-zoning. But I don't know if it's a panacea. I become less convinced over time that it is.
From a capitalism standpoint, letting people do with their property what they want doesn't necessarily lead to aesthetically pleasing outcomes for the current residents of a given neighborhood, nor does it necessarily lead to more affordable housing. It's good for the absolute meta freedom, but the existing people in the neighborhood might not like the results.
Also, more housing nominally leads to lower prices because of the increase in demand. Overall, this is going to be true. But there are barriers, roadblocks and guardrails that keep "more housing" overall from being built. For instance, no one is demanding we open up the Yellowstone National Monument to commercial development. No one is demanding Central Park in Manhattan be bulldozed for apartments. (Well, someone might be, but I haven't heard of it).
So you end up with a mixed bag. Developer is free to buy up a few old single-family middle class homes, build a high - end multi-unit condo tower on it, and sell them for ~$1.7m a piece. If it's in a nice city with a great view, he'll get it. Housing prices haven't gone down, they've gone UP. Whereas if your goal is to keep housing costs low, sometimes limiting what you can do with the property will do exactly that.
Also, more housing nominally leads to lower prices because of the increase in supply*
Hence opposition to gentrification.
I am making $80 dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I have not ever thought like it would even achievable however my confidant mate got 13k us dollars only in four weeks easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail. Look extra details
going this article... https://libertyinc0me.neocities.org/
Christ. The morons here.
"Inclusionary" and "exclusionary" are not woke-labels. They are fairly common ways of describing different approaches to zoning. "Exclusionary" zoning is designed to prevent certain kinds of desired development from happening in a given area. "Inclusionary" zoning is designed to permit it.
Not everything is part of the culture war. Zoning reform is a necessary part of dealing with escalating housing costs throughout the country. You'd be surprised at the kinds of things that single-family zoning simply prohibits you from doing with your own property.
Given that single-family zoning has explicitly anti-Black, racist roots, you're perhaps playing the role a bit too well, here.
You're the one going off on this proposal like it's a salvo in the culture war. I am simply pointing out that you're a racist idiot. There are good reasons to support zoning reform, and it is absolutely true that the reforms being discussed here would remove limits on what people can do with their property.
J Ghost, those are the population numbers, not poverty.
Black poverty is 24.8% of that, about 800,000.
White poverty is 10.9% , or about 1,200,000.
Ghost,
The entire state population of Florida is 21 million, maybe 13 or 14 million are white. So you're saying that 80 to 85% of whites in Florida live in poverty? You're full of shit. I knew that already; this is just confirmation.
McMansions ain’t for po folks.
I’ve seen this, too. I think moving people indoors has largely facilitated that change. Every family member with a tv and computer, space gets taken up. Cheaper goods, a wider range of people can accumulate things and need more indoor space for it.
I miss the days of big families on one property. We’ve tossed ideas around about communal living concepts with family and friends. Family Community living can make for better life satisfaction in sharing work loads, chores, and child supervision.
Zoning laws prevent that kind of thing, though.
But I know that zoning laws can also be used to ensure that affordable housing, single family housing, and high end condos can co-exist in the same city.
I see nothing in the original article re the rezoning which ties it to any particular program at all. Note: I am aware that there are housing programs which seem to be designed to target neighborhoods with a majority of non-white folks for, if you will, "priority" over those neighborhoods with mostly white folks, and of which I disapprove (it is my default position is to disapprove of ANY government "program.") But this, at least at this point, seems to be rezoning.
Thanks. My mistake. I thought the numbers seemed high.
Lol posted before refresh. My bad lol.
Yawn. I read the column numbers wrong. I have no idea, nor do I care a whit what the population of Florida actually is. As far as "what you know" I might be full of, or,, more accurately, what you "think" you know about me, I care even less.
Noted.
The fact is, I probably DO seem fos to some folks, at least sometimes. But hey, I can usually tell when I am "intellectually constipated."
Usually.
And sometimes I just make stupid mistakes.
Where the F is the delete button?????
Ok maybe you're not fos. Retracted.
Yep. Good ol reason comments section. Indelible... Refresh before reply. Sry.
++
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but (anu-07) my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://smartpay21.pages.dev
SimonP
September.13.2022 at 4:57 pm
"Christ. The morons here..."
Fuck off and die, steaming pile of lying lefty shit.
Uh huh. Democrats like Obama and Biden use this shit to move democrat voters into red suburban congressional districts.
"zoning is anti freedom and anti libertarian. Whenever a government entity at any level wants to lessen zoning regulations, I am happy."
"changing" zoning regulations =/= "lessening" zoning regulations. You are exactly the sort of simplistic thinker on which they are relying.
Let’s move a homeless camp next door to your house, and you can report back and regale us about all the ‘freedom’.
That commenter read the change, and determined it's a lessening. Just because change isn't always lessening doesn't mean it never is.