Orange County shelves stormwater utility fee amid $1B backlog and tax uncertainty

Orange County shelves stormwater utility fee amid $1B backlog and tax uncertaintyDespite identifying over $1 billion in necessary stormwater and water quality projects, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners has unanimously voted to delay a proposed stormwater utility fee until after the November elections.

County staff identified a $1 billion backlog of stormwater projects needed to address aging infrastructure, repetitive flooding, and stricter state NPDES permit requirements.

A community survey of 245 residents revealed that 51% opposed the creation of a stormwater utility, and 54% did not support calculating the fee based on impervious surface area.

Commissioners expressed concern over introducing a new fee ahead of a potential property tax rollback referendum in November.

The board unanimously voted to table the stormwater utility discussion until the second quarter of the 2026-2027 fiscal year.

Orange County, Florida, has paused efforts to implement a dedicated stormwater utility fee, despite facing an estimated $1 billion backlog in drainage and water quality projects. The Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously on June 30 to table the Phase 2 Stormwater Utility Update until January or February of 2027, citing public opposition and an upcoming November property tax referendum. During the meeting, stormwater utility representative Julie Bortles outlined the county's pressing infrastructure challenges. The system is grappling with aging infrastructure, increased rainfall, growing impervious surface areas, and strengthened regulatory mandates. Bortles noted that the state recently notified the county of increased inspection requirements under a draft new stormwater permit through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). To address these issues and reach a target "Level of Service B" over a 25-year implementation period, staff compiled a project list exceeding $1 billion. The proposed works include easement acquisitions, infrastructure retrofits for repetitive flooding, sediment management, and capital water quality projects. The decision to delay the fee followed the presentation of community outreach results. A county-administered survey, which garnered 245 responses, highlighted a divided public. While 61% of respondents expressed concern about flooding and water quality, 51% outright opposed the creation of a stormwater utility fee. Furthermore, 54% did not support calculating the fee based on a property's impervious surface area. Of the 48% who supported paying some level of fee, the majority favored a rate of under $10 per month. Board members expressed apprehension about advancing a new fee in the current political and economic climate. Commissioner Simrad argued that introducing a new charge would not be a "good look" for the county, especially given a looming November referendum on property taxes. Noting that the board had previously delayed studying developer impact fees for similar reasons, Simrad stated, "If we're going to pay that to developers, in my mind, we should be doing that for taxpayers as well." Commissioner Uribe highlighted the limitations of the proposed funding, pointing out that older communities like Rio Pinar, built in the 1950s and 60s without modern regulations, face severe flooding that cannot be easily rectified without costly land acquisitions or eminent domain. The board ultimately backed a motion by Commissioner Scott to table the item until after the November elections. The county administrator confirmed the issue would return for board consideration in the second quarter of the next fiscal year, allowing staff to brief newly elected commissioners and reassess the financial landscape following the results of the state property tax referendum.