Last week’s South Florida Water Management District Governing Board meeting featured a discussion about the upcoming budget that suggested the district is being stretched thin — and that could have ramifications for Everglades restoration.

The district, which serves some 9 million residents across 16 Florida counties from Orlando to the Keys, has proposed a $1.1 billion budget for 2026-27. The district has built significant new infrastructure in recent years, and made significant progress on ecosystem restoration, flood control and water supply. But the district, created in 1949, faces a massive and growing maintenance backlog. Upgrading and retrofitting existing infrastructure will cost at least $3 billion, Executive Director Drew Bartlett told the board. 

Meanwhile, new critical water infrastructure has increased 58% since 2009-2010. And new infrastructure means new costs; fuel and electric costs alone are up 79% since 2009-2010.

So hard choices are looming; and that’s BEFORE the potential impact of the proposed property tax cut on the ballot this fall.

Following the presentation, several governing board members noted pointedly that the district was founded for one reason: Flood control. And the insinuation seemed to be that if the budget’s tight enough, ecosystem restoration will come second.

Said Governing Board member Tom Hurley: “Obviously Everglades restoration is what gets the headlines, but it only matters when it matters when it comes to flood control. I just hope we continue to reemphasize the importance of maintaining that.”

Obviously flood control is critical; but we would suggest it’s not an either/or choice — Everglades restoration IS flood control. New reservoirs capture more rainfall; decompartmentalizing the system allows for expanded flows south.

Indeed, Rescuing the River of Grass — see first item in this newsletter — would further aid flood control efforts.

“We’re probably not going to cut our way out of” the budget situation, noted board chair Chauncey Goss, “but we can certainly shift our way out of this.” It remains to be seen what gets shifted where; but bottom line, leaner times may be on the way — and if we treat restoration as something nice to have but not crucial, it too could be cut — to the detriment of the entire system.