- December 4, 2025
Dear Editor:
We have a new mayor and city staff has been requested by the commission to clearly with detail inquire of the FAA if Riverbend Golf Course can be reopened in accordance with current FAA guidelines. The most recent FAA guideline addressing golf on airport land (150-5190-4b published Sept. 2022) lists golf as a compatible recreation use if it doesn’t threaten aviation safety.
Riverbend Golf Course has no obstacles to aviation. The only obstacle is complete detailed transparency. The city will receive a clear affirmative answer if they tell the FAA the “ultimate plan” to extend the runway 400 feet eastward to Bear Creek and through the golf course is dead today and forever like they are telling some of us.
If the city asks the FAA the wrong question without all the details, they will get a wrong or equivocal answer. If they still have the Bear Creek extension in waiting after renaming it in 2021 as the phase two ‘ultimate plan”, and don’t tell the FAA it is dead, the FAA will be confused.
If the extension is indeed dead forever, then all systems are go to find a new operator to take over as is or after grant-aided renovation. Then we will have active adult and seniors’ recreation back again.
Riverbend Golf Course needs weed mitigation and re-seeding, which is the cheapest part of golf course design and will not take multi-millions. No one has ever proposed that the city take over the golf course and manage it, before or after they allowed it to deteriorate.
All we ever wanted when the city foreclosed on the operator who was suffering cashflow during Covid, was to immediately try and find another operator to takeover as is.
Don Miller
Ormond Beach
Editor's note: In 2021, there was a citizen push for the city to reopen Riverbend as a municipal course, with a change.org petition obtaining over 1,124 signatures. The city then evaluated the municipal golf courses at New Smyrna Beach and Port Orange, which were found to be operating at a deficit, and decided against moving forward with a municipal golf course.
Dear Editor:
The 2025 Florida Legislative Session has once again highlighted a growing concern regarding the principle of home rule — the understanding that local governments are often best positioned to govern their communities.
It is encouraging to see some legislators starting to acknowledge the limitations of a one-size-fits-all approach. However, despite expressing concerns, many continue to support bills that preempt local government authority, with the hope that solutions will emerge later. Unfortunately, by that time, the impact on local control may already be significant.
Each city has its own distinct needs. Policies effective in urban centers like Miami may not be suitable for smaller cities like Deltona, and zoning solutions appropriate for Orlando could be impractical for historic areas like DeLand.
Two pieces of legislation, Senate Bill 180 and Senate Bill 1730, along with companion House Bill 943, exemplify this trend of undermining local governance. Senate Bill 1730 presents challenges to local land-use planning, potentially limiting municipalities' ability to guide growth in ways that align with their long-term character and infrastructure. House Bill 943 extends preemptions that threaten to override carefully developed local policies aimed at addressing unique community concerns, including environmental protection, traffic management, and economic development.
Recently, these bills were merged under SB 1730 and passed in both legislative chambers.
Of particular concern, these measures, along with the 2023 Live Local Act, may restrict residents from participating in discussions about development projects in their own communities and neighborhoods.
This legislation not only prevents local officials from presenting Live Local projects to city councils but may also prohibit public discussions about such projects, regardless of whether local communities already have sufficient affordable housing options.
This trend continues a pattern where key decisions about local issues are made at the state level, often by individuals who may not fully understand the nuances of those communities. Moreover, the implementation of these projects places a disproportionate financial burden on smaller municipalities, where the cost per household can be significantly higher compared to larger cities that can distribute infrastructure costs over a broader population base.
It is vital to recognize that cities and counties are not merely extensions of the state; they are essential partners in governance.
When the Legislature overrides local decisions from afar, it limits flexibility and responsiveness, ultimately diminishing citizen engagement.
If we genuinely value accountability, transparency, and civic engagement, we must empower local communities to determine what is best for their residents.
A tailored approach to governance is not only practical but necessary. We encourage everyone to reach out to Governor DeSantis to advocate for a veto of SB 180 and SB 1730.
David Sosa
Deltona
