Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Moratorium Repeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Edgewater council declines to repeal flood moratorium after heated public hearing
Summary
After hours of public comment urging protection from development, the Edgewater City Council voted 3–2 against repealing its temporary moratorium tied to flood and land-use protections; council did, however, agree to pursue coalition litigation and legislative amendments and voted to designate an administrative authority for plats.
Edgewater — After an extended public hearing in which residents and local advocates pressed the City Council to keep rules limiting new development in flood-prone areas, the council voted on Aug. 18 on whether to repeal its temporary moratorium. The motion to repeal Ordinance No. 2025-008 failed on a 3–2 roll-call vote (Mayor DePew — No; Councilwoman Gillis — No; Councilwoman Thomas — Yes; Councilwoman Dolbo — Yes; Councilman Rainbird — No).
Residents urged the council to retain the moratorium as protection against overdevelopment and repeat flooding. "This moratorium is a good thing," said Mike Panaytowski, who said his family home flooded twice since Hurricane Ian. "You did the brave thing, so you need to stay the course," he told the council. Linda Mosier of Majestic Oaks HOA told the council the entrance canopy and neighborhood features required protections that the moratorium helped preserve.
Why it matters: the moratorium was enacted to give the city time to update its comprehensive plan and land-development codes to better address stormwater and flood risk. City attorneys and staff told the council that Senate Bill 180, now state law, bars local governments from adopting or enforcing more restrictive land-use rules and enables private parties to sue for enforcement; plaintiffs who prevail in such suits may recover attorneys' fees. The city attorney warned that continuing to enforce the moratorium could expose Edgewater to substantial litigation costs.
During the hearing dozens of residents and regional advocates — including Brian White of Thousand Friends of Florida and Jeff Brower, who identified himself as a Volusia County chair — urged the council not to "fold" under pressure from the Legislature and to instead join a coalition of municipalities challenging SB 180 or pursue an amendment strategy. "We need this moratorium in place for all the reasons that you just heard," Brower said, urging both litigation and legislative amendment efforts.
Council response and next steps: Council members expressed a mix of legal caution and political resolve. The mayor and several council members said they want to continue pursuing the moratorium’s goals administratively — including finishing a stormwater master plan and updating the comp plan — even if the ordinance cannot be enforced under the new state law. The council gave unanimous consensus for the city manager and city attorney to coordinate with Volusia County on the amendment process and asked staff to prepare a resolution to join the coalition litigation; that resolution will be posted for a formal vote at the council’s Sept. 8 meeting.
Formal action: The motion to repeal Ordinance No. 2025-008 (request to repeal the citywide moratorium and the Florida Shores Building Permit Moratorium in response to SB 180) was moved, seconded and called for a roll-call vote. Recorded votes were: Mayor DePew — No; Councilwoman Gillis — No; Councilwoman Thomas — Yes; Councilwoman Dolbo — Yes; Councilman Rainbird — No. The motion did not carry. The council directed staff to continue pursuing the moratorium’s goals administratively and to post a notice of intent and prepare any required resolution should a safe-harbor notice be received.
Ending note: The council’s final public action was to ask staff and the city attorney to prepare a coalition-resolution for formal consideration on Sept. 8; the city also reiterated work on its comp plan and stormwater objectives.
