The Florida Roundup - Florida’s gubernatorial candidates debate issues, not each other & other weekly news

Episode Date: September 25, 2026

This week on The Florida Roundup, we heard from Florida’s gubernatorial candidates on the top issues in this election including the property tax amendment (00:00). Then, we checked their claims with PolitiFact’s Samantha Putterman (13:22). Plus, longtime political analyst Susan MacManus weighed on the lack of state candidate debates in this election cycle (20:30) and looked at how Florida’s Live Local Act has been implemented with Ashon Nesbitt, CEO of the Florida Housing Coalition (26:20). And later, some health news including an update on Florida’s rise in dengue cases (37:20) and a look at what might happen when we find life beyond Earth (46:52).

This is the Florida Roundup. I'm Carlton Gillespie. Believe it or not, the November midterm election is upon us. Some mail-in ballots have already been cast for Florida's next governor and U.S. senator, plus U.S. representatives and a host of state and local races. But something's missing this cycle. Where are the debates? It's part of a growing trend among political contests in the Sunshine State. Democrat David Jolly has said, he's a big. he will not debate his opponent, Republican Byron Donald's, in the gubernatorial race. Donald's, for his part, says he's agreed to three debates, but if Jolly won't budge, we'd have the first race for the governor's mansion without a debate in 50 years. However, we have the next best thing.

This week in Fort Lauderdale at the Sunshine Economy Summit hosted by our partner station WLRN, Jolly and Donald spoke in the same room. Now, it wasn't a debate, but the candidates' got to make their case in back-to-back one-on-one conversations. We'll hear from them on key issues facing Floridians like affordability, insurance, and the impacts of Florida's Ballad Amendment 3, which seeks to reduce property taxes on homestead of properties, but would drastically change how cities and counties collect tax revenue.

And later, we'll hear from our partners at Politifact about what they got right and what they got wrong. But what about you? What do you think about the lack of debate? in this election cycle. Are debates going out of style? What are voters missing out on when politicians won't debate? Is this a permanent shift in the way political campaigns are run? Call us 305-995-1800 or email radio at the Florida Roundup.org. We'll start with Jolly, just like the summit did. And first, in elementary, but no doubt important question, why do you want to be governor of Florida? politics 10 years, long enough to tell the truth. The reality is I think we're a nation

that's broken. I think we're a state that's broken. You can see it sure in a culture that's more divided than ever before. Our politicians tell us if we hate each other just enough, our lives will get better, and I think it's wrong. But we also know the economy is slipping away from too many people. My wife and I have two young kids, seven and five, and I think this is a moment when history is watching saying, what are you doing? Look, I want the economy to continue to grow in the state of Florida. I think economic growth is fantastic. We should let the private sector lead. But we've got a K-shaped economy that's calcifying and leaving too many people behind. And so whether it is an economy that's breaking or whether it is a culture that is now more divided

than ever before, look, I do think we all are called to do what's within reach to try to fix the problems in front of us. You don't take on running for governor lightly, and frankly, you don't take it on if kind of the pathway doesn't open for you, right? A lot of people consider running for office and that pathway just doesn't open. Somewhere between your convictions and I believe in the hand of Providence, the moment arrived about a year and a half ago to consider running and the doors just kind of kept opening. And I believe for our family, for my wife and I, for our kids, we're doing what's within reach right now to try to make a difference in a state and a nation that, again, I just, I think we're broken. This is bigger than politics right now. He also talked about

his plan to lower insurance costs. Jolly had to be a different. Jolly had to be a different nation. Jolly had touted a state-back catastrophe insurance fund. There is already a Florida hurricane catastrophe fund. It's known as the cat fund. Jolly described why his plan is different and pushed back on a Donald's attack ad that's called it a $1,000 hurricane tax. It's very different and let me hit something right on the head despite the commercials. I don't support a thousand dollar hurricane tax and it's an absolute lie. And in fact, I will tell you, that tax is part of current Florida law that my opponent supports and that has been on the books for a long time. My plan would actually repeal the $1,000 hurricane tax, but truth isn't a convenient currency in politics these days.

What I have proposed and understand in Congress, I introduced a national catastrophic fund. They called it socialism then. I've introduced a state catastrophic fund. It's called the same thing. And let me tell you what we currently have. Folks, we currently have a state hurricane fund with about $12 billion in it, and it's used to reinsure and bail out insurance companies. We already have a hurricane fund. What I'm proposing is actually a hurricane fund that absorbs the risk of hurricanes and natural disasters,

takes wind coverage out of the private market, cuts insurance by 60 to 70%. We are not going to solve this without government taking on a larger role in backing this. Otherwise, people are going to be priced out of their homes. Jolly does not support Amendment 3. He says he realizes that Floridians are looking for relief, but that the cost to cities and counties would be too great. I respect what voters will decide on this, because I think people are begging for property tax relief.

I don't think the math works, and I think we know that because even Ronda Santis now won't campaign for Amendment 3, and our sheriffs have come out and said, please don't do this. It's going to defund services. I think Miami-Dade will lose maybe $480 million, close to $500 million. by year two, that's going to defund critical services. Even Ronda Santis, when he introduced this idea, said we're going to need a backfill

revenue provision, and the legislature didn't put it forward. I will respect whatever voters decide. It will create a crisis, and the question is, who do you trust to manage that crisis when it happens? Here's what I would like to consider. Two things, you know, very briefly. Before Amendment 3, I was proposing, and I still support, it's just been sidelined in this race by Amendment 3. I think we need a first-time homebuyer, home-setting.

exemption. Because understand 25 years into save our homes, we've so artificially imbalanced the tax rates between the long-time homeowner and the first-time homebuyer, that new homebuyer has a tax bill that jumps by 400 or 500 percent. Between that and insurance, there's a reason first-time home buying age is now 40 years old compared to about 28. He does have another idea for how to achieve some property tax relief. But here's the second area I would like to lead the state into a conversation. It's going to sound a little wild here. What have we considered local control of homestead exemptions? Hear me out here. Keep the baseline at the state. Don't repeal the current state homestead exemption. But understand what a $250,000 homestead exemption does to Miami-Dade wreaks havoc, but can a large

county survive? Sure, you're going to feel the pain, but it survives. But Levy, Lafayette, Putnam, or rural counties are bankrupted, bankrupted within the next few years. So if we currently trust counties to consider millage and taxes on the front end, spending on the back end, what if we actually return to local control of exemptions and give the counties greater discretion to determine where to scale up exemptions, which properties to qualify it for, what occupations, what homesteads, whether it's business, commercial, rents. And for anyone still holding a candle that a debate might happen? No, I am not going to debate, and that's my final decision, and here's why. I think there is an immense amount of bad faith and dishonesty in our politics today writ large.

I'll give Byron grace and not lay this at his feet. The amount of bad faith and vitriol is real. Our politics are broken. We're more divided than ever before. Our politicians just seem to tell us every day if we hate each other enough that somehow our life will get better. That doesn't help the state. I'm asking to be the leader of the spade, and I want to lead with my actions what I'm saying with my words. I don't want to further devolve our conversation now that has led to this point of bad faith and toxicity

and even further bad faith in toxicity. Donald's has called Jolly's decision on debates silly and said we could do it right here in the room. We could have set up a third chair and done it, but it is what it is. At this point, I think what's important for the people of Florida is that they just hear the contrast between both of us. I think also with social media being what it is today, voters have an opportunity to hear very clear. clearly from just about any candidate they want to hear from. On our campaign, we post all of our events live in real time. You can see them.

You can hear the contrast. I think it's important for a candidate to be there and take that incoming from all voters about the issues they care about. I think specific to the debates, he should stop running. We can do it anytime, any place, anywhere. I've agreed to three. Let's do it. But after that settled down, he was asked why he wants the job.

I think Florida, we are in a position of being the best state in America. I truly believe that. I think if you look at the movement of feat, Milton Friedman always said that you can judge public policy by the movement of feet. People go to a jurisdiction where public policy is at its best. Conversely, people leave a jurisdiction where public policies at its worse. This is why you've seen more Americans move to Florida than any other state in the country. Conversely, they're leaving California, leaving Minnesota, leaving New York, leaving New Jersey. There's a reason for that.

We've had consistent common sense leadership in our state for really going on 30 years now, and that's actually also led the transformation into why Americans are choosing to relocate, not just their families, but their companies, why young kids like myself are choosing to come to college in this state to get educated, because it's widely viewed as the best one state. My mission is to make sure that Florida remains number one while addressing some of the key issues impacting everybody, insurance, housing costs, making sure young people can get into the game, not just of homeownership, but having a high-paying job where they can put food on a table and a roof over their head. And that just doesn't happen by accident. It takes consistent

leadership over time to see those things become a reality. I love this state. I've lived here now for 30 years. I want it to continue to be the best state in America. And that's my mission and running for governor. On insurance, he says there's a legislative fix to the cat fund that could bring down premiums for Floridians. Right after Hurricane Wilma, about 20 years ago, the legislature put in a 25% surcharge on top of the premiums that are paid into Florida's cat fund. We put it in in place during that time because the cat fund was almost empty and Tallahassee moved quickly to make sure that the cat fund was shored up. Today, once we get through, this hurricane season, and the cat fund is estimated to have somewhere between 13 and 13 and a half

billion dollars. So why do we have a 25% kicker on top to keep filling a cat fund whose statutory limit is $17 billion? My view is get rid of the kicker. That would lower premiums for every policyholder in the state. Because they're not having to pay it into the cat fund, so you want to see that be borne out in people's premiums. By the way, that's what would happen anyway, because the additional kicker is paid for by policyholders. So we want to make sure. that we pass those savings on to the people of Florida. Get rid of that kicker. You don't really need that.

If you're thinking about what happens if the cat fund ever got depleted again, we can come up with some other solutions to deal with that. That's one of the many solutions we're going to bring to reforming insurance in Florida. Unlike his opponent, Donald supports Amendment 3. Property tax revenue has gone up due to new homes being built and existing property values going up.

But Donald says local government should have adjusted their rates to flatten this increase. Local governments had an opportunity over the last six years to go to a rollback rate to actually smooth out the increases. Most municipalities and counties did not do that. What they said was we didn't raise your taxes while property values were going up.

So while your budgets did not adjust, or quite frankly, especially over the last four years or so, inflation was almost double digits through most products that people were buying every single day, county government and city government said, we're just going to keep taxes the same, even though values rose on everybody, and they collected more tax revenue. The people of Florida do need relief.

He also said there are ways for cities and counties to raise money outside of Advilorum revenue. One of the revenue streams that very quietly county managers and city managers are talking out, let me just give you a preview. What they're talking about right now, and especially in a larger counties like Miami-Dade County, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Orange, Hillsborough, Duval. they're already talking about non-ad Valorum assessments. They have that ability to do that under state law today. They just have never really done that

because Advilorum has just given them the money that they've needed, so they haven't really worried about doing that. So if Amendment 3 passes, I would assume that a lot of these counties are going to go into a special hearing, and there's going to be some non-avolorum assessments that are going to be passed. That being said, he doesn't support those efforts.

Yeah, we would focus in on it because I don't think that it's okay just to say, well, we can't get our money this way, so now we're going to get our money that way. What we need to be thinking about is budgetary restraint while making sure that key services are provided. So now that you've heard from the candidates, it's time to separate political fact from fiction. Helping us to do just that through our partnership with Politifact is Sam Putterman. Sam, you were in the room when Jolly and Donald spoke yesterday. You heard Jolly make this claim about how Floridians feel about data centers. 75% of the state is saying, please don't do this right now. Give us more time.

Let's study it. We don't want data centers. 75% of the state says don't do it. The job of elected officials is to listen to voters. What can you tell us about that claim? Yeah, so that's mostly true. While researchers warn that, you know, public opinion on a fast developing issue can be a moving target, most recent polls show surging dissatisfaction among Floridian.

Floridians about data centers. So for example, a July University of North Florida poll found that 68% of Floridians surveyed, opposed building new data centers in their areas, and other state polls typically found more Floridians against new data centers than were for them, with opposition, ranging from about 50% to 79%. And we also heard earlier, but Jolly touched on his state fund that would take wind insurance off the private market in the state. And what he says could cut insurance costs by 60 to 70 percent. Are those numbers accurate? Yeah, so experts told us that, you know, the savings are unlikely to be as much as Jolly says. You know, his campaign calculated that removing wind coverage on a $300,000 home where owners were paying around $7,100 a year in insurance,

their bill would decrease by about $2,500 a year, which is about 64% in savings. And experts did say that removing wind coverage from the private market would decrease consumers, bills, at least initially, and could also produce savings by removing private profit, which is baked into premiums. But the fund would also require operating expenses to process claims, experts said, who also added that if private wind coverage is completely removed, the risk would then be borne by all consumers, not just homeowners. And that's because having one state backed insurer could create a risk, a redistribution of costs. And that's via emergency assessments if the fund required a bailout, right, after a catastrophic storm. And these

fees currently, at least under current law, can be levied on nearly all Florida insurance policy. So that's auto insurance, home insurance, business insurance. So it's kind of difficult to know exactly how much savings Floridians would see when there's all these other factors of play. For Donald's, when he was touting the successes of the state of Florida, he said you can judge public policy by the movement of feet and that more of those feet, more people are moving to Florida than any other state in the country. Did he get that right? Yeah, so we found that Donald's is close, but Florida is no longer the number one state for net in migration. That distinction now belongs to Texas.

With Florida coming in second, as new data shows the state's migration boom kind of starting to trail off, a June University of Florida report found that migration to Florida kind of cooled in 2025, particularly in high-cost areas. So researchers said that new in migration dropped to about 201,000 residents last year. that's down from the state's migration peak in 2022 when we saw nearly 599,000 new residents. And growth really shifted to mid-sized counties, such as, you know, Polk, Pasco, Marion, which continued to gain residence while several larger metro counties like Miami-Dade and Broward saw population losses. And researchers said those findings really illustrate changing housing demand in Florida. Finally, Donald's defended his support of President Donald Trump's tariffs. A report from the conservative-leaning national taxpayers union said Trump's tariffs are costing the average Florida household about $1,300 per year.

Donald's countered that with this claim, saying recent tax cuts have saved Floridians more than tariffs have cost them. Tax refunds are at the highest level they've ever been in the history of the United States. So when you take the tariff number of $1,300, I will take your number, but I will cede you the $3,200 that the average Floridian has paid less. in taxes, meaning $3,200 more in their pocket today. And that does help a Floridian be able to afford their life. Sam, what can you tell us about that math? Right. So when he was talking about, you know, seeing tax refunds,

and we looked at him saying they're the highest level they've ever been in history of United States. He also said the average Floridian was paying about 3,200, right, less in taxes. And that part is accurate, though it does rely on payroll withholding that may not last. So Americans received an average of $3,034. refund on their taxes in 2025. In 2006, that increased to about $3,273, so $3,273, which is about an 8% jump. And one analysis did find that Florida residents received the highest refunds in the U.S. this year, among any state, averaging around $4,400 per taxpayer after adjusting for inflation.

And that is, of course, as you mentioned, from President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which passed in July 2025, that permanently lowered individual tax rates and raise the standard deduction, which resulted in these larger refunds. But because the law took effect months after, most employees withholding rates were already set for the year. And because the IRS didn't update those payroll tables until after it passed, you know, employers were still withholding more tax, you know, than necessary from paychecks, which resulted in these bigger refunds. So it's kind of unclear how much this will change going forward because it will depend on, you know, how employers and employees update those rates. Sam Putterman has joined us,

separating political fact from fiction through our partnership with Politifact. Sam, thank you so much for joining us. Of course. Thanks for having you. You are listening to The Florida Roundup from your Florida Public Radio Station. This is the Florida Roundup. I'm Carlton Gillespie. Next week on our program, from gas to groceries, prices are going up in Florida. But so is the state's minimum wage, from $14 to $15 an hour. Florida voters approved a ballot proposal in 2020 to raise the minimum wage a dollar a year until it reached $15.

That final increase happens next week. But some say it still isn't high enough. Every little bit helps. But Florida's housing wage for somebody to pay exactly 30% of their income for their rent for a two-bedroom apartment at the fair market wage is $38 an hour. That's Anne Ray, manager of the Florida Housing Data. a clearinghouse at University of Florida, Schimberg Center for Housing Studies. You'll hear more from her on housing affordability coming up. So, will you soon see a rise in your paycheck?

How will this increase impact your budget? Or maybe you're a business owner now looking to cut costs elsewhere. Let us know what you think of the change. Send us an email, radio at the Florida Roundup.org. That's next week. This week, we're continuing our discussion about the way politics has changed in Florida, namely why statewide officials aren't debating anymore. And to help us with that is Susan McManus, political analyst and distinguished university professor emerita of political

science at the University of South Florida. Susan, welcome to the Roundup. Thanks for having me. Happy Friday. Happy Friday, yeah. So first, let's hear from JP in Sarasota. J.P. wants to talk about why he thinks debates aren't worthwhile. J.P., go ahead. You're on the Florida Roundup. Guys, this doesn't particularly have to do with Donald's or Jolly. But I found that when these candidates have these debates, when they get answered a question, asked a question, they just pivot to a talking point, and you end up hearing basically what amounts to his campaign stump speech. That's it. So not genuine is your take.

Yeah, they're not really answering the question. They're just telling you what the point is they want to get across. And like I said, it's just like listening to a campaign speech. Thanks, J.P. Susan, how common is JP's sentiment there? Extremely so, particularly since we always tout the fact that the greatest thing about debates is that candidates can stand side by side and answer questions and on really big issues and the voters can pick sides or determine whether they're going to vote or not.

The problem with that is this. Rarely do the moderators in these debates ask exactly the same question to each candidate. And that yields exactly what he was talking about because the candidates know that, they can go off on their own way and think that maybe the voters don't notice, but your viewer is obviously a very savvy vote.

Well, okay, let's talk about the timeline of this trend. Just how new is the scarcity of debates? Like, what is the timeline of debates falling out of favor as a tool for these campaigns? It's beginning like the 2016, 18, 20. It's been ongoing. It's just picking up speed everywhere. Some of it has to do with people are just not interested in politics. We have a lowest number of people at the moment that are really following it.

A lot of people just also don't trust the candidates and they don't like their ads. We're at a moment, a really unique moment right now where there's terrific distrust in government, the media, politicians, high-tech, you know, billionaires. It's yielding a lot of questions about what turnout's going to look like. But this sort of pattern of not wanting to debate is not only just because people like here, Listern was saying was related to what they say. A lot of it is they don't have the time. And they certainly don't go to some of the media that's most likely to actually host these kinds of debates. Yeah, I think that's interesting, right?

The time and the availability. I mean, we heard Byron Donald's earlier in this program mentioned the prevalence of social media, where he feels he can just connect with voters right there. This is part of a product, is that politicians are much more accessible, say, on a smartphone than they are in a three-hour televised cable news debate. 100%. And the Pew Research Center and you govern both done some outstanding surveys

of exactly this kind of thing. But we would be remiss if we didn't talk about another huge challenge. And that is there is a massive generational split in terms of where people get their news media and where they go first to find out about things and which ones they trust and particularly where they go to to find out news about politics.

So if you host something somewhere, that may draw a certain demographic. If you host it in another venue, it may draw another crowd. It's why some candidates, including David Jolly, have said that sometimes being able to have presentations in 300 town halls reaches more directly people who are interested in voting

than a debate, televised, and a news channel that's really not accessed by very many people. And particularly this year, 37% of Florida's registered voters are the two youngest generations. They don't go to television very much. for their news about politics or much of anything else. So if you want to reach that demographic, which both Democrats and Republicans say they must reach because that's a growing demographic that tends to not really lean heavily into either party

and sometimes registers more as no party affiliation. So Florida is really the epicenter and the beginning point of what we're going to see across the nation in this generational split and how to reach voters. And it's certainly going to impact, like we mentioned, the gubernatorial race, not having debates as of now. Jolly seems pretty final on it. The Senate campaigns, not having a debate and numerous state and House seats. Well, Susan, thank you so much for joining us. Susan McManus is a political analyst and a distinguished university professor emerita of political science at the University of South Florida. Thank you so much for being with us.

Thank you for having me. Now we step away from politics to talk about affordable howluster. Florida is the most rent-cost burden state in the country. Around 60% of this state's 2.9 million renters spend more than 30% of their monthly budget on rent. 30% of those spend more than half their budget on housing. To try and solve that crisis, Florida's Live Local Act was touted as a tool to increase the amount of affordable housing. But it preempted local zoning laws. Essentially, if developers promised they would build a certain number,

of units of affordable units on their projects, they could bypass local zoning regulations that limited density. That law was passed in 2023. So three years on, what's been the real impact on the people who rent? To help us answer that question is Ashon Nesbit, chief operating officer for the Florida Housing Coalition. Ashon, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for having me today. So I want to start. I think we should start by kind of clarifying the definition here. affordable housing sounds like a nebulous term right just anything you can afford but for the purposes specifically of this live local act and for the state it needs something very specific right that's right so the live local act and most people are familiar or know about the land use

mandate which refers to a portable housing as affordable to households that have an income at or below 120 percent of an area median of an areas median income income And that's a pretty key distinction too, right? Because I guess by the virtue of it being 120% of the middle of the median income, by its very definition, it's not affordable for everyone below that. Yeah. So for those that are, you know, targeting, you know, that upper income, yes. So it's not going to be affordable necessarily to someone at 80% of the area median income. But it does allow for folks. to reach those lower incomes with those developments. Right. But there is a range, right? It's like 80 to 120% counts as affordable,

but below 80 is considered workforce. Do I have that right? So it's actually the opposite. So that 80 to 120% is considered, you know, workforce in the lexicon. Okay, right. And below 80% is that traditional affordable housing income ban. Okay.

And it's kind of a, you know, this 120% of median income is it kind of ends up being a pernicious statistic here because generally, the less you make, the lower your percentage of the area median income is, the more rent cost burdens you are. That's right. According to the data and what we're seeing in markets, you know, once you get below 80%, you know, that's where we really start to see the higher cost burden, those that are kind of net. 80 to 120 percent. The majority of those households aren't yet cost burden in most markets. And to me, I get the sense that it affects different career choices, right? Different professions differently, right? I mean, how many teachers are making 120% of the median income versus, you know, finance traders, right? So it seems like there is just kind of, by the way, the definition is set up, it's made it more difficult for certain people who work in certain professions to get access to this kind of housing?

Yeah, so when you look at it, it's based off of household income. Right. So, you know, if you're a teacher and you are a single person, most likely, you know, you are, you know, at 80% or below. If you're a teacher in a two-person household, you know, you may not meet that definition. So if you really want to break it down that way, you know, looking at, you know, household makeup, does, you know, tend to impact whether or not you meet the definition or the household that this is targeting. Okay, so we've talked about the income range a little bit.

Let's talk about the kind of things developers can actually build with this law. Here's Anne Ray again, the manager of the Florida Housing Data Clearing House at the University of Florida Schindberg Center for Housing Studies. So it does, on the one hand, open up things like commercial and industrial sites. And certainly, in some cases, allows a lot more intensity of use. on those sites, than it would if the land was just multifamily to begin with, residential to begin with. It doesn't mean you can build anything you want. So, Ashan, it doesn't let developers build anything they want, but what does it allow developers to do?

Yeah, so it does give developers the opportunity to build residential and commercial and industrial zones. In some cases, they might not have been allowed to do that under the traditional zone. zoning district. So it doesn't allow for that use. It does allow for a higher level of density. And basically all of this is to really open up more development sites for housing that's affordable to the workforce and those that are in that lower income ban. So, but yes, there are still some limitations as to what can actually be built there. There's some, there's some flexibilities, but definitely some limitations as well. So what kind of limitations are there? So we say there's, you know, you can build in these spaces that weren't meant to be, you know,

you know, by county or city zoning meant to have something like a four or five, six story apartment building with affordable units or even taller. What are the limitations there for developers? Yeah. So there are some outright limitations, you know, based upon the location near airports and things like that. Also, you know, there's some. some limitations in terms of height. Now there are some greater flexibilities, you know, but also, you know, some limitations in terms of, you know, going a certain number of stories high. You know, there's still kind of all the other things that they have to meet.

So everything that's within a local government's zoning regulations with some additional flexibilities, but in terms of setbacks, in terms of, you know, landscaping, you know, all of those types of things, they still have to meet those things with. which I think is very important because it definitely encapsulates the values, you know, for that particular community, things that they want to see. But, you know, those limitations still exist. I think what gives us the flexibility in terms of the use where they didn't, you know, have that use before. I'm Carlton Gillespie.

You're listening to the Florida Roundup from your Florida Public Radio Station. Ashon, I want to make sure that, you know, we clarify this here. you know, we're talking about housing units and these live local developments are often targeted at renters, right? Like, these are units that are affecting the rent cost burden that we talked about earlier. That's right. So this law primarily focuses on increasing the number of rental units that are available in a particular community. And what can you tell us about? I don't know if you have numbers, you know, statewide or in specific areas about how much affordable, housing has actually been built through live local? Yeah, so we've been tracking and, again, our tracking is not perfect, but we've been tracking

about 70,000 proposed units, you know, of those about 10,000 are under construction. And I have to say, you know, this law has definitely benefited both bringing new developers to the table as well as, you know, our traditional affordable housing developers that now have more sites to choose from. So some of the first units that are coming out of the ground are actually those traditional affordable units, you know, for tax credit developers that are really targeting those at a below 80%. And so what's been the impact? I mean, has this really helped? I mean, you talk 10,000 units or under construction, but we're talking about 870,000 renters in the state are paying more than 50% of their income for rent.

I mean, how much impact is this really making? Yeah, I would say, you know, the first impact is that the production has definitely increased overall in terms of rental housing production. I think we are yet to see, you know, what the long-term impacts will be in terms of how this is impacted, you know, overall rates, you know, in a particular community going down just because there's more supply. So, you know, I think we're. we've yet to see that. But I will say kind of these initial impacts is that, you know,

there are just more sites that are available, more units that are starting to come out of the ground. And of course, development takes time and when the need is right now. But I think that we can't overlook that there's been more, more production in that I think we will start to see some impacts on overall markets in terms of rental rates. I think that is a very poignant thought there at the end, right? Development takes time, but people are feeling they pay rent every month, right? But developments can sometimes take a year or two. I think it's also interesting you mentioned that there is benefit for developers who wouldn't normally go into affordable housing to do this. But I wonder if the effects haven't been felt, you know, entirely across the

state, are there any policy changes or changes to live local or I know we're in election season, but maybe looking forward to the legislative session in Tallahassee? Is there anything coming through that could further alleviate some of these affordable housing concerns? Yeah, I think what is often overlooked is that, you know, the Live Local Act did create, you know, some new funding streams, you know, that we hope will come back. A big part of it was the innovative sale, which, you know, provided some additional funding to create more of those 80% and below units. And, you know, that was super important. And we saw some, some developments are benefiting from that. And, you know, we hope that that's something that comes back with this legislative session.

And so, you know, those are the types of things. I think, you know, we should look forward to, you know, as we go into the 2027 session. Ashon Nesbit is the CEO of the Florida Housing Coalition. Ashon, thank you so much for joining the Florida Roundup. Thank you very much. You're listening to the Florida Roundup for. from your Florida Public Radio Station. Do you have thoughts about the program? Radio at the Florida Roundup.org. This is the Florida Roundup. I'm Carlton Gillespie.

State and local officials are working to stop the spread of Dengay, as locally acquired cases continue to rise. Three counties have issued local states of emergency this week, Pascoe, Hillsborough, and Pinellas. The declarations allow county officials to bypass some administrative rules and procedures to speed up response. It also provides a path for federal reimbursement of certain expenses. Last week, the Florida Department of Health confirmed the state's first dengue-related death in nearly a century.

Hillsborough County remains the epicenter of the outbreak with 170 locally acquired cases reported since July. That's nearly 90% of the 190 cases statewide. Florida is on pace to surpass the highest number of cases in modern history, which was 199 in 2023. In other health news, a look at how growing vaccine skepticism is impacting health care providers in Florida. For decades, pediatricians have been practicing under the assumption that parents presume

vaccines to be safe and effective. Now, with more and more misinformation about vaccines on social media and confusing rhetoric from politicians, physicians who treat kids have to change the way they practice. That's because before vaccines, pediatrics was an area of medicine. focused on fighting infectious diseases. After vaccines, the modern-day practice has centered on prevention. And that's how most pediatricians have been trained in the last few decades. For our partner station WLRN in Miami, family medicine doctor Rocheon Nebrajani Branson

spoke with several pediatricians about how they're keeping up with the changes and how they're really doing. Miami pediatrician Leah Utset decided to become a doctor while spending summers with her grandmother in Chattanooga, Tennessee. My grandmother was a pediatrician and I just, I loved what she did. I loved that she worked with the entire family, that she was a part of kids' lives from day one. And over the past six years practicing, Dr. Utset's grown to love it too. I love walking families through hard moments and trying to figure out solutions over time.

And there's so much I love about medicine. But it's a really, it's a hard time to be a pediatrician right now. Last year, Florida Surgeon General called to end all vaccine mandates, and though policy has yet to change, the attempts to end mandates continue. For Dr. Utsat, that's worrisome. Her grandmother treated children in her clinic long before most vaccines we use routinely today were even developed. So she went to medical school in like the 40s, and that was before most of these vaccines existed. And she watched the process of the vaccines come into play, and she watched the process of lives being saved.

She practiced until she was 89 years old, and she saw this evolution of vaccines saving hundreds of lives of kids that she was working with and the small community she worked in. So, yeah, it's hard for all pediatricians. It's just I think I carry some extra baggage with it because of that. After two years of working as a general pediatrician at a busy practice in Miami, Dr. Utset decided she needed to shift gears. She's left daily clinical care.

She'd miss doing research, and so now she'll be working in a more research-heavy role. The big thing that really was draining on me more and more over the past two years was the climate around vaccines and children's health and all of the kind of painful misinformation around that. Dr. David Higgins is a vaccine policy expert and assistant professor, of pediatrics and public health at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. While we see parents who are hesitant to vaccinate, the better story that the data is actually showing us is just how resilient confidence in vaccines is, despite all of the

misinformation and misleading claims that are out there. Based on the most current data that that we have, only around 1% of kids have never had a vaccine by the time they reach two years old. Now, it can be time and resource intensive to have these conversations over and over again with parents. It really can lead to fatigue in those conversations. Pediatrics is already a field prone to burnout. With lower reimbursement rates than other specialties, PAC schedules of routinely seeing anywhere from 20 to 30 patients a day, and the emotional toll of working with sick children. Dr. Gabriela Garotti is a pediatrician at Gables' pediatrics.

I would say that this intense mistrust, not just pediatricians, but in the medical field in general, is emotionally tolling. The best analogy that I heard about this problem is that what's happening now is kind of like being a pilot and every passenger on the plane wants to know what every button on the console does. And I mean at the end, certainly if that's what's going to make passengers feel comfortable about flying, then we got to do it, right? But there are going to be delays, right? There should be increased weight, increased frustration among patients, waiting with small kids in the office. Oftentimes we're working through lunch to try to catch up. This isn't just myself, but my staff.

It's actually been pretty difficult to keep a consistent staff because the work is hard and they're long hours. And at the end of the day, we're going home later. We have less time to spend with our own children, with our own families. And so all of that, of course, contributes to the burnout that we're all feeling. In addition to the longer hours, the complexity of each visit increases. That's because the differential diagnosis or that decision tree of what could be causing an illness is much broader. A fever is more serious when you have the possibility of measles or pneumococcal. Diseases that in a vaccinated population aren't really on the radar, for example.

When everyone is at a different level of risk, it makes your job more challenging. Dr. Garoti went into the field because of her passion for prevention, and she sees vaccines as her strongest tool for that. My most important role is to make sure that kids get vaccinated so that we can prevent vaccine-preventable. illness. Her office recommends all patients receive vaccines according to the schedule published by the American Academy of Pediatrics and mandates all school-required vaccines. We have made commitments to our patients that they won't be exposed to unvaccinated patients in our waiting rooms. Our newborn patients that come in aren't unvaccinated and they're high

risk. We have patients who are immune compromised, who have autoimmune diseases and who have cancer, that may not be able to receive their vaccines according to their routine schedule. Some parents asked to create their own schedules or space out vaccines and pick and choose which vaccines to give. President Trump's recent executive order called for splitting up the MMR into its component parts, measles, mumps, and rebella, which as of now is actually not available as individual doses in the United States. Certain vaccines were really designed and the data was actually clear that if they were given together, it actually improves the immune response. Not only is it safe, not only is it nicer to only get one shot versus three,

but you actually get a more robust immune response. The second reason I don't think that spreading out vaccines is a good idea, is because how do you choose which one's more important to give today versus next week versus the week after? The third is it reduces medical error. So if every single patient is on a different schedule, the likelihood that we're going to get a miscount or there's going to be an error in that administration is higher. Most recently, the Florida Department of Health moved forward in the process to remove the four vaccines that are regulated at the level of the DOH for public school attendance.

Those are hepatitis B, varicella for chickenpox, hemophilus influenza type B, and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines. The other three vaccines, D-TAP, MMR, and polio, which protect children against seven, vaccine preventable illnesses are regulated by the Florida statutes and would have a lengthier repeal process because they need to go through the House and the Senate. Even though the job may be getting harder, Dr. Garotti says she has no plans to leave the field. If I can prevent any one of those amazing kids from getting sick and hospitalized or, God forbid, dying from a preventable disease, then it's all worth it. While Florida is leading the charge at ending vaccine mandates, Dr. Garote is committed to staying and practicing right here. There's a lot more work that we

have to do, but it's also why I think it's so important to stay, right? This is the place that I was born. It's the place I was raised, and it's where my community and my family is. I am definitely going to stick around to take care of my community and family here. I'm Roshan Everjani-Brandston, in Miami. I'm Carlton Gillespie, and you're listening to the Florida Roundup from your Florida Public Radio Station. Finally, this week on the Florida Roundup, let's stare for a moment into the cosmic void. Is anyone looking back?

For centuries, humans have looked to the stars and asked, are we alone in the universe? When it comes to answering that existential question, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. So what happens when we find life beyond our planet? That question is explored in a new limited podcast series from our partner station, Central Florida, public media. People have been thinking about this since humanity began writing down their thoughts.

And when it comes to answering that question, it's not a matter of if. It's a matter of when. It's hard for me to think of a more important scientific question to be answering, honestly. It could change what it means to be human, because we will stand in relation to something. We've never understood ourselves to stand in relation to before. With that day on the horizon, are we as human? ready for what insight that might bring. We're not ready for this encounter.

When we find them is a new limited podcast series from Central Florida Public Media that looks at our search for life in the universe and the not-so-finished plan to tell the world what we find. Is there enough being done to prepare for that? My guess is that the answer is no. We'll look at our current efforts to search for life, the protocols in place to confirm such an extraordinary finding,

and look at how we, as humans, may react when our entire worldview changes. That was Central Florida Public Media's assistant news director, Brendan Byrne, host of the weekly radio show and podcast, Are We There Yet? And the new limited podcast series, when we find them. New episodes will be released every week through October 28th. You can find the first one now at cfpublic.org. And that's our program for today.

The Florida Roundup is produced by WLRN Public Media in Miami with assistance from WUSN. in Tampa. The show is produced by Bridget O'Brien. Denise Royal is WLRN's senior producer of content streaming and news products. WLRN's director of live original programming is Katie Munoz, and the vice president of radio is Peter Mares. The program's technical director is M.J. Smith, engineering help from Doug Peterson, Harvey Brassard, and Ernesto J. Our theme music is provided by Miami jazz guitarist Aaron Leibos at Aaron Leibos.com. If you missed any of today's show, You can download it and pass programs on the NPR app.

Thanks for calling in and listening.