Editorial: Orange, Seminole voters spoke up, loud and clear: Stop the sprawl
Orange and Seminole voters of any partisan background can be proud to say they recognized the cost of irresponsible growth and howled "not in my backyard" to developers who want to turn vast acres of wild and rural lands into sprawling subdivisions and strip malls.
In Orange County, that meant re-electing District 1 Commissioner Nicole Wilson and District 3 Commissioner Mayra Uribe, and welcoming newcomer Kelly Semrad in District 5, creating a formidable front that will guard the county's reputation for more responsible growth policies. Some of those margins were overwhelming, and all of them were convincing — including the District 1 race, which saw Wilson defeating Austin Arthur by nearly 6,000 votes despite his lavish funding advantage of 5-to-1.
Perhaps more important, however, is that it meant supporting amendments to the county charter that will establish a clear rural boundary encompassing 345,000 acres, and hopefully put an end to the practice of developers pushing to be annexed into cities so they can duck the county's stricter environmental and smart-growth protections. A third growth-related charter amendment puts a significant guardrail up that protects against sweetheart deals that would let development creep into land the public has already invested in preserving — and there's even more protection in an amendment that will require a fiscal sustainability analysis for any development that encroaches on the rural boundaries and other open land. Even for voters who have never hugged a tree in their lives, it makes good sense to know how much it will cost existing taxpayers to pay for the roads, schools, utilities, police and fire protection, libraries and other services that must be built when thousands of new residents crowd into areas that were previously inhabited mostly by humans living on farms, ranches and large lots — not to mention the bears, eagles, tortoises, manatees, sandhill cranes and other beloved wildlife that call those open acres home.
These are encouraging signs, but they do not cement the future of good growth management in Orange County. Commissioners can still surrender to developers' pressure by a 5-2 vote (or 6-3 when the commission expands by two seats in 2026). That's why Orange County voters should watch what happens in these rural areas with great care.
But they can also look to adjacent Seminole County to see how voters feel about these anti-sprawl measures after living with them for more than three decades. The answer is clear to see: 84% of Seminole voters approved a measure similar to one passed in Orange County, requiring a supermajority vote before county commissioners traded or sold publicly owned land, and 82% backed a measure that requires at least four members of the five-member County Commission to sign off on attempts to shove intense development past that county's rural boundary, which was first established as a bulwark against sprawl in 1991.
Endorsement: Yes on Seminole land protections, Osceola conservation fund, Oviedo police station
Seminole's prosperity speaks for itself — and against those who argue that these boundaries inevitably hurt a county's bottom line. Over the decades, smart growth has become almost a religion in Seminole, where registered Republicans form the largest single voting bloc. In fact, Commissioner Andria Herr was even more passionate about responsible development than her Democratic opponent on Tuesday's ballot. And it showed. Herr handily won re-election.
Voters in both counties can also be proud that they backed additional sales-tax levies to improve schools and — in Seminole County — continue a long tradition of investing in the parks, roads and other infrastructure that make the county a more attractive place to live, work and do business.
This is foresight in action, propelled by a desire for better, more sustainable communities. It's worth repeating: Voters in both counties should be proud.
