Emily Duda Buckley

Age: 34

Where they live: unincorporated Oviedo

Where they work: A. Duda & Sons

Prior work experience: A. Duda & Sons

Prior political experience: None to report.

Platform: “My focus is on addressing the kitchen table issues that have the greatest impact on Floridians. Issues like lowering insurance rates, reducing burdensome taxes, increasing affordable housing options, fixing our deeply flawed child and elder care systems, and making our state more affordable for the families that call Florida home.”

Why they are running: “I’m running for State House to fight for struggling Floridians facing sky-high housing and insurance prices, rising costs of child and elder care, and a government that just keeps taking more from the people they are supposed to serve.”

Most recent campaign finance report: $163,136.72 in contributions

Endorsements:

Candidate website

Fun fact about the candidate: “I enjoy hosting and bringing people together — I believe real change starts with connection.”

---

Candidate Q&A: The questions below are based on voter questions and expressed priorities. Each of the candidates within a race were asked the same questions and given the same amount of time to respond. The candidates’ answers were fact checked, checked for spelling and grammar but otherwise unedited.

If elected, what are the three most pressing problems you want to address, and what do you suggest to solve them? — Top problem and your suggested solution:

1. Affordability and the rising cost of living. Central Florida families are being squeezed by rising property taxes, insurance premiums and housing costs. My solution is direct relief: Property tax relief for homeowners paired with disciplined, live-within-your-means budgeting, and lowering the government-imposed costs — permitting delays, impact fees, and unnecessary regulation — that quietly drive up the price of a home.
2. Housing supply and attainability. Too many young families, teachers, first responders and seniors are getting priced out of the communities they serve. I would build on the Live Local Act by streamlining and digitizing the permitting process with clear deadlines, encouraging targeted zoning reform such as accessory dwelling units where they fit the community, expanding down-payment assistance for first-time buyers, and clearing the way for employer-sponsored workforce housing.
3. A cost of doing business that is choking job creation and pushing good jobs out of reach. My solution is to keep Florida pro-business by cutting red tape, streamlining permitting and licensing, and investing in workforce pathways — from the skilled trades to healthcare — through partnerships with local employers, technical schools, and our state colleges, so parents can find good jobs close to home.

For challengers and open seats: Why do you deserve to be elected in this race?

I’m a lifelong Central Floridian, a mother and an external affairs professional with my family’s longtime Florida company, A. Duda & Sons. I’ve spent my career at the table with state agencies, the Legislature, and regulated industries — including service with the Florida House Appropriations Committee and as Legislative Affairs Director for the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services — and my community service has centered on children and families, including board roles with the Florida Association of Foster and Adoptive Parents, 4Roots Foundation, and Kids House of Seminole. That combination of deep roots here, hands-on policy experience, and a heart for this community is what I bring to this race. Mine is a grassroots, voter-contact-driven campaign, and I’ll be an accessible, principled representative focused on keeping Central Florida affordable.

According to a University of North Florida poll, Floridians say housing affordability is their top issue. What are your solutions for dealing with Florida’s affordability issue?

Affordability comes down to two things: expanding supply and lowering the costs government adds. I support building on the Live Local Act to:

• Streamline and digitize permitting, with clear deadlines and automatic approvals when local governments miss them, so supply catches up with demand;
• Open additional zoning tools, including accessory dwelling units, where they fit the character of a community;
• Expand employer-sponsored workforce housing so families can live near where they work;
• Encourage homeownership through down-payment assistance for first-time buyers;
• Deliver property tax relief and reduce impact fees and regulatory costs that inflate the price of a home.

On insurance, I support building on the recent reforms that reduced fraud and frivolous litigation, encouraging more carriers to compete here, and strengthening mitigation programs like My Safe Florida Home so families can harden their homes and earn lower rates.

Will you vote YES or NO on the constitutional amendment to slash property taxes, and explain your position. How would you replace lost revenue – fees and/or service reductions?

Yes. Rising property taxes are among the top concerns I hear at the door, and government too often treats homeowners as the default funding source for every new line item. I support meaningful, structural property tax relief for Florida homeowners.

I would not replace it by shifting the burden onto renters or commercial property — that just raises the price of everything from groceries to rent — and I don’t support new or increased taxes to backfill it. The right offset is the standard Florida families live by: living within our means. Florida’s economy is growing and local revenue is growing with it; that organic growth, paired with real spending discipline — eliminating waste, ending duplicative programs, and prioritizing core services like public safety — is how we protect essential services without breaking household budgets. Any relief should be phased in responsibly so local governments can adjust.

Utility costs are rising for customers in Florida, and the proliferation of data centers is expected to exacerbate that issue. How should Florida’s utility regulators respond?

Florida’s utility regulators should put ratepayers first. Large industrial users like data centers place enormous new demand on the grid, and residential customers should not be forced to subsidize the cost of the generation, transmission, and water capacity those facilities require. I would expect the Public Service Commission to ensure large users pay the full, fair cost of the infrastructure they drive, to demand real transparency and scrutiny in rate cases rather than rubber-stamping increases, and to prioritize reliable, diverse, and affordable generation. Utilities should be held accountable for keeping rates as low as possible while keeping the lights on.

What do you think is the biggest environmental issue the government should address in Florida?

Protecting Florida’s water comes first for me. Our wetlands, watersheds, springs, and the aquifer are the resources our children and grandchildren will depend on. I support continued investment in water quality and wastewater infrastructure that keeps pace with our growth, and I support restoring Florida’s authority over Section 404 permitting — no one has a greater stake in safeguarding our waters than the state itself, and state administration brings efficiency and predictability while upholding strong protections. Safeguarding our water is ultimately about protecting the families who will call Florida home for generations.

Do you agree with the current federal and state governments’ approaches to immigration enforcement? Why or why not?

I support enforcing our immigration laws, securing the border, and the cooperation between state and federal authorities that keeps our communities safe — public safety and the rule of law have to come first. At the same time, coming from an agricultural family, I know Florida’s farms, small businesses, and hospitality employers depend on a reliable, legal workforce. Enforcement works best when it is paired with a workable legal system — including improvements to guest-worker and visa programs — so we are not undermining the very industries that feed our state and drive our economy. The goal should be a system that is both lawful and functional.

Do you believe abortion restrictions in Florida should be more strict, less strict or stay the same?

I support Florida’s current law and believe it should stay the same. It limits abortion based on the detection of fetal cardiac activity while providing exceptions in cases of rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother. I believe that is a reasonable balance that protects life while accounting for the difficult circumstances some families face.

Readers shared concerns about overdevelopment in the Greater Oviedo and Winter Springs community. We know that local municipalities must allow for density based on state population projections. What can be done at the state level to balance property owners’ rights and the desires of your constituents?

The frustration over overdevelopment is real, and it usually comes down to growth outpacing the roads, schools, and water and sewer capacity that are supposed to come with it. At the state level, I would focus on making sure growth pays for itself and that infrastructure is planned in step with development, not years behind it — so density doesn’t simply mean more gridlock and strained services. I would also work to give local communities more flexibility to reflect their own character while respecting the property rights of landowners. Balancing those interests means honest planning, adequate infrastructure funding and treating both longtime residents and property owners fairly rather than pitting them against each other.

Readers complained about roadway traffic in the community. What steps would you take to address this issue from the office that you’re seeking?

Roads and bridges are my top infrastructure priority for a fast-growing region — parents should spend less time stuck in traffic and more time at home with their families. I would push to keep transportation capacity ahead of growth through targeted road and interchange improvements, smarter signal timing, and ensuring new development funds its share of the traffic it creates. Congestion doesn’t stop at a city or county line, so I would work with the Central Florida delegation and Seminole, Orange, Osceola and Lake counties on coordinated regional solutions, including the connecting transit networks and the Sunshine Corridor, which I support.

Do you support AI data centers being built in the community? Why or why not? What would you do to curtail or incentivize their development?

I’m cautious. Data centers can bring investment, but only if they pay their own way and don’t degrade the quality of life for the families who already live here. I would not support subsidizing them with taxpayer dollars or letting their enormous power and water demands be passed on to residential ratepayers. My conditions would be straightforward: They should cover the full cost of the electricity and water they consume, they should not compromise grid reliability or our water supply and siting decisions should include real input from the surrounding community. Where those guardrails are met, responsible development can be considered; where they aren’t, I would push back.

How do you balance the idea of home rule when state lawmakers preempt decisions from local governments?

My default is respect for local control — many decisions are best made closest to the people they affect, by the officials voters can hold most directly accountable. But that principle isn’t absolute. The state has a legitimate role when local action tramples constitutional or property rights, undermines housing affordability, or conflicts with a clear statewide interest. When preemption is warranted, it should be targeted and used sparingly, as a scalpel rather than a sledgehammer, not as a routine substitute for letting communities govern themselves.

Do you support the rural boundary in Seminole County? How do you balance that with private landowners’ rights to build?

Seminole County voters spoke clearly in support of protecting the rural boundary, and I respect that decision — preserving our rural character and the water resources tied to that area matters to this community. Balancing that with property rights means treating landowners fairly: giving them due process, using tools like conservation easements and transfer-of-development-rights programs that fairly compensate owners rather than simply restricting the use of their land, and avoiding uncompensated takings. The goal is to honor the will of the voters while making sure individual families who own that land are dealt with honestly and fairly.