
DeSantis plans to sign ‘watered down’ data center bill
News ClipOrlando Sentinel·FL·4/23/2026
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis plans to sign a data center bill (SB 484) that imposes restrictions on construction and aims to prevent increased power costs for consumers. The bill, though "watered down," is seen as a crucial first step in regulating the burgeoning AI-driven data center industry in the state. It also mandates a study on the economic impact and resource use of data centers.
governmentzoningelectricitywaterenvironmental
Gov: Florida State Government, Florida Legislature, Florida Public Service Commission, Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced his intention to sign Senate Bill 484, a measure designed to impose restrictions on the construction of large data centers across the state. Appearing in Jacksonville, DeSantis acknowledged the bill had been "watered down" from his original hopes but deemed it a "pretty strong first step," primarily because it prevents any increase in power costs from being passed on to Florida consumers.
The governor emphasized the immense scale of modern data centers, referencing a Meta project in Louisiana as an example, and questioned the desirability of such extensive land use in Florida. He reiterated that his administration would not allow these facilities to impose additional costs on Floridians.
Key provisions of SB 484 require the Florida Public Service Commission to establish specific tariffs and service requirements. These are intended to ensure that large load customers, such as data centers, bear the full cost of their service, preventing cost shifting to general ratepayers. The bill also allows local governments to keep initial tech company plans confidential for up to 12 months.
Furthermore, the legislation mandates the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability to conduct an independent study. This study will assess the economic impact of data centers, specifically examining land, water, and energy usage and costs, alongside potential impacts on public health and safety. During committee discussions, business lobbying groups had voiced concerns about potential overregulation and additional permitting requirements, arguing these could negate economic benefits.