Orange County plans to keep operating under its current comprehensive plan, taking, evaluating and handling development applications following pre-existing rules, even though a new state law nullified Vision 2050.
The county announced its decision Monday, providing public clarity to how it is handling the uncertainty surrounding implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 180, a state law limiting local land-use regulations and comprehensive plans. Last month, Orange County announced it is one of 25 plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the legality of SB 180 in the Second Judicial Circuit Court in Leon County.
The county said the public statement was necessary to clarify how it is managing future growth.
“[Our] PEDS [Planning, Environmental and Development Services] division simply wanted to provide an update about where we are with Vision 2050, so residents and stakeholders are informed,” Amanda Dukes, senior public information office for Orange County government, said in an email to The Apopka Chief.
Dukes declined to comment on if Orange County filed on behalf of unincorporated areas or if it also includes municipalities, even if they don’t sue. The town of Windermere is the only Orange County municipality named as a plaintiff on the complaint.
Orange County’s legislative affairs team will collaborate with state lawmakers to change the law during next year’s legislative session, according to the county news release.
Created at first to help Floridians rebuild after hurricanes, SB 180 was adopted during the 2025 legislative session with a last-minute amendment widening the bill’s scope, nullifying land-use regulations and comprehensive plans that were approved from Aug. 1, 2024, to Oct. 1, 2027.
Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the legislation into law in June. The law has sparked much controversy because opponents say it restricts local home rule authority over land use and planning.
“With Orange County’s population projected to exceed 2 million residents by the year 2050, it is imperative for the County to implement smarter growth management policies that protect natural habitats, foster small business growth, promote walkability, and expand access to affordable housing,” the release said. “SB 180 has effectively invalidated Vision 2050 in its entirety, undermining years of collaborative community planning, hours of public input, and actions of the Board of County Commissioners.”
SB 180 also nullified the city of Apopka’s revised comprehensive plan, prompting the city to consider joining the coalition lawsuit. The city has not, but Mayor Bryan Nelson traveled to Tallahassee to meet with lawmakers about the bill.
At least two more plaintiffs have joined the lawsuit since it was initially announced last month, so the complaint will be amended to reflect this, Jamie Cole, the attorney representing the plaintiffs, said in a Tuesday interview with The Apopka Chief.
“The fact that there are cities from throughout Florida, from the southern, most southeastern tip all the way to the northwestern part of the state, certainly shows that there’s support for this lawsuit throughout the entire state,” Cole said.
The next step is to file a motion for a preliminary injunction to halt SB 180 while the lawsuit is pending, Cole said.
Broward County attorney Richard Grosso filed a separate lawsuit on Oct. 7 challenging the law’s constitutionality on behalf of the statewide nonprofit 1000 Friends of Florida and east Orange County resident Rachel Hildebrand.
For further details about Vision 2050, visit the Vision 2050 – Orange County’s Comprehensive Plan website.