File photo
Key Points
- The Apopka City Commission voted 4-1 to table changes to Resolution No. 2025-34 after debate over Commissioner Nadia Anderson’s facility use request.
- Resolution No. 2025-34 allows two free city facility uses annually per commissioner but lacks cost limits or event restrictions.
- Mayor Nick Nesta sought guidance due to a $13,000 event request that could require city funds and recommended tighter policy controls.
The Apopka City Commission tabled a review of its discretionary-funds policy Wednesday after a discussion about Commissioner Nadia Anderson’s request to use a city facility erupted into accusations that she was being targeted and threats of ethics complaints and lawsuits.
Commissioners voted 4-1 to table possible changes to Resolution No. 2025-34, with Anderson opposed. The commission did not change the policy or publicly decide how the city would handle Anderson’s pending request.
The resolution allows the mayor and each commissioner two free uses of city rental facilities annually, including city staffing costs. However, the policy does not specify which facilities qualify, limit the city’s costs or require events to be free, open to the public or led by an elected official.
Mayor Nick Nesta said staff sought clarification after receiving a request involving what he described as a privately organized, separately ticketed event that could cost the city about $13,000.
“I can’t make that decision to spend that money, and I need the commissioners to tell me: Are we OK to spend that money as a commission on any events that we want or that we feel are worth it?” Nesta said.
Nesta said the provision originally was meant to allow commissioners to conduct town halls and similar public-engagement events without personally paying the city’s facility and staffing costs. He recommended establishing a maximum expense, requiring an elected official to organize the event and prohibiting separately ticketed events.
Anderson said the review was placed on the agenda only after she sought to use the policy. She accused officials of repeatedly attempting to undermine her initiatives and warned that changes affecting her existing request could result in ethics complaints and lawsuits.
“Anything moving forward, the request has already been made,” Anderson said. “So any change in this policy will not affect requests already made.”
Anderson said no one had asked about her role in the event or obtained complete information before making assumptions about it. She called the policy review discriminatory and part of what she described as a continuing pattern of attacks against her.
Nesta rejected Anderson’s characterization, saying staff needed guidance because the resolution’s broad wording could require the city to absorb substantial expenses.
Vice Mayor Diane Velazquez questioned what “city staffing costs” could include, noting that expenses might involve public services, police, fire and insurance.
“When you say city staff, what does that include, and what’s the limit?” Velazquez asked.
Commissioner Sam Ruth supported placing stronger restrictions on the policy, emphasizing that discretionary funds are public money. Ruth and Commissioner Yesenia Baron said they had not known about the specific event request before Wednesday’s discussion.
Baron recommended tabling the review because commissioners lacked enough information to decide how the policy should be rewritten.
Resolution No. 2025-34 was adopted unanimously Sept. 3, 2025. Its stated purpose is to promote fiscal responsibility and ensure that discretionary spending substantially benefits the community.