HB 89 creates a new section of Florida law addressing “food insecure areas,” which the bill defines as areas commonly referred to as food deserts. The Legislature states that limited access to affordable, healthy food—especially fresh fruits and vegetables—poses a threat to public health and welfare, and that local governments should be encouraged to approve development for small-footprint grocery stores in those areas.
The bill authorizes local governments to adopt land development regulations and comprehensive plan provisions that permit land use for small-footprint grocery stores in food insecure areas. It also defines key terms such as “food insecure area,” “nutrient-dense food,” “small-footprint grocery store,” and “supermarket.” In addition, the bill allows local governments to require mandatory reporting of certain information from these stores. The act would take effect July 1, 2025.
HB 89 would add s. 163.31791, F.S., giving local governments express statutory authority to facilitate grocery store development in designated food insecure areas through zoning, land development regulations, and comprehensive planning. It would not mandate local action, but would create a state-level framework that local governments may use to encourage access to healthier food options in underserved communities. The bill could affect land use regulation, comprehensive planning, grocery retailers operating in targeted areas, and any reporting requirements imposed by local governments.
The bill appears to have been framed positively as a public health and community access measure, with the stated goal of improving availability of affordable, nutrient-dense foods in underserved areas. However, there is no committee transcript or recorded vote history provided, and the bill died in the Housing, Agriculture & Tourism Subcommittee, suggesting it did not advance despite its policy rationale. Overall, the available context indicates limited formal opposition or support recorded in the materials, but insufficient committee progress to move the bill forward.
The main policy questions likely involve local land-use authority, the scope of permissible regulations, and whether the bill’s incentives or reporting requirements would meaningfully attract grocery development. Potential points of contention include how “food insecure area” is identified, whether the 30 percent nutrient-dense food sales threshold is workable for retailers, and whether mandatory reporting could impose burdens on small operators. Because no transcripts are available, specific supporters or opponents are not identified, but the bill’s failure in subcommittee suggests unresolved concerns or lack of sufficient backing.