Apopka workshop reviews large proposed increases to police, fire and parks impact fees; council to consider "extraordinary" implementation

Apopka City Commission staff and consultant Sean Ocasio presented results of a municipal impact fee study at an extraordinary workshop on Nov. 5 that showed calculated increases for police, fire and parks fees large enough to exceed statutory phased limits.

Sean Ocasio, of Raftalis Financial Consultants, told the commission the study used current local budget documents, asset records and service‑level standards to translate planned capital investment into a cost‑per‑unit fee for new development. "These fees are are being paid by the developers when a new construction occurs or, significant redevelopment," Ocasio said, explaining that fees are collected at building permit and intended to have growth pay for growth‑related capital.

The study finds Apopka’s calculated combined fee for a single‑family dwelling would reach about $3,578, driven largely by planned police and fire investments. Ocasio said the police multiyear capital plan included roughly $86.1 million in projects — including a $54 million share for a proposed public safety complex and a $25 million training facility — and the fire capital plan totaled about $50.6 million, with roughly $32.3 million allocated to the public safety complex and $6 million for a new Station 7 (plus about $1.5 million for supporting vehicles). Parks projects included roughly $26 million of growth‑related capital (including about $20 million for land acquisition and field courts).

Under current Florida law cited by the consultant, fee increases up to 25% must be phased in evenly over two years; increases greater than 25% up to 50% must be phased in over four years; and calculated increases above 50% are effectively capped at a 50% implementation under the standard approach. Ocasio explained the statute also requires two publicly noticed workshops and that the governing body bear the burden of proof in any legal challenge. He noted changes tied to SB 1080 that take effect Jan. 1, 2026, including an increase in the legislative vote threshold to a unanimous vote to implement through the extraordinary pathway in the new version of the law.

Because many of the calculated fee levels exceed the 50% cap, staff presented two implementation choices: adopt the phased, statutory approach that limits near‑term increases, or adopt findings of "extraordinary circumstances" to implement larger increases more quickly. Ocasio said the city’s historical and near‑term growth supported the extraordinary‑circumstance argument: Apopka added about 22,000 residents since 2010 (an average of about 2.8% per year compared with a roughly 1.5% historic state average), and the consultant pointed to steep increases in capital costs — for example, marked rises in police vehicle costs and a construction materials index up more than 40% since 2019 — that raise the cost of planned projects.

Ocasio estimated that phasing the increases to the statutory caps would reduce growth‑funded capital revenue by roughly $224,000 for police, $300,000 for fire and $178,000 for parks based on residential growth alone (about $700,000 total); he said including nonresidential growth could raise the near‑term revenue shortfall by approximately $1 million or more.

Public commenters raised concerns about timing and local impacts. Albert, a resident who gave his address as 3603 Golden Gem Road, said, "impact fees cannot be used for deficiencies" and warned that raising fees now could hamstring an incoming administration. A local business owner said the proposed nonresidential increases (which in the consultant’s chart included examples that would add about $3,600 per 1,000 square feet in some retail scenarios) were "a massive increase" that would hurt small businesses and noted builders pass the cost through to buyers and tenants. Rod Olsen criticized the city for not reviewing fees more regularly and said deferred reviews had contributed to sudden large increases.

Blanche, a city staff member who opened the workshop, said the final study report had been delivered and would be emailed to commissioners; she confirmed a follow‑up workshop Nov. 19 and that the ordinance’s first reading is scheduled at the Nov. 19 meeting with second reading and possible adoption Dec. 3. Ocasio reminded the commission that, under existing case law, there are refund obligations if fee proceeds are not spent on the projects described within a statutory timeframe (consultant referenced a seven‑year guideline and deferred to legal staff for precise rules).

No council vote was taken at the Nov. 5 workshop. The commission directed staff to circulate the final study and to return on Nov. 19 for further discussion and the ordinance first reading. If the council pursues an extraordinary‑circumstance adoption, state rules require public workshops and a supermajority (or, under changes taking effect Jan. 1, 2026, a unanimous vote) to implement beyond statutory phasing limits.

The workshop record shows the city is weighing whether to have growth bear a larger share of planned public‑safety and park capital now or to phase increases and cover more near‑term costs from existing revenue sources; staff will return to the council with the ordinance on Nov. 19.