Planning Commission chair William Gusler resigned Tuesday night, effective immediately, saying critics unfairly blamed the volunteer advisory board for the city’s rapid growth and infrastructure challenges even though the board has no authority to approve development projects. 

Gusler, who has served on the board for eight years, announced the decision after criticizing what he described as “social media foolishness and newspaper stuff” surrounding recent debate over the Planning Commission. 

“This will be my last meeting,” he said. “I officially resign, effective immediately. I will not be put in that position, and I don’t think any of our Planning Commission members should be.” 

Gusler’s resignation followed weeks of public discourse after the May 6 City Commission meeting, where Commissioner Sam Ruth questioned whether the Planning Commission was adequately evaluating the long-term impacts of growth on infrastructure, transportation, utilities and city services. 

The City Commission later held a May 20 workshop to discuss the Planning Commission’s role and the city’s development-review process. Included in the workshop agenda packet was a memorandum from Assistant City Attorney Holli New outlining state protections for planning board members  under Section 112.501 of the Florida Statutes.  

City officials later said they did not intend the workshop as an attack on current Planning Commission members. Still, Gusler said Tuesday he remained troubled by the public discussion surrounding the board. He said public statements and later headlines wrongly cast the volunteer advisory board as responsible for the city’s rapid growth and infrastructure challenges.  

“The net result is it looks like it’s being deflected, and the Planning Commission is responsible for the city of Apopka’s rapid growth, and the infrastructure, and the traffic, and all that, and I, quite frankly, take offense at it,” Gusler said. 

Gusler stressed that the Planning Commission serves only in an advisory capacity. 

“We don’t have the authority to deny or approve anything. We’re a recommendation board. We recommend to the City Council,” he said. “The City Council has approved every single development that’s happened in the past.” 

He also noted that the City Commission, not the Planning Commission, ultimately controls infrastructure spending and growth management policies. 

Fellow commissioners expressed support for Gusler and urged him to reconsider his resignation. 

Commissioner Malika Harrison thanked Gusler for addressing the issue publicly. 

“That point of clarity, that point of credibility is extremely important for us who are volunteering to serve in these roles,” Harrison said. 

Commissioner Mary Norwood said some criticism may have come from misunderstandings about the board’s responsibilities. 

“I’ve always felt that our position is just recommendation,” Norwood said. “We’re an advisor to City Council.” 

Norwood asked Gusler to reconsider stepping down, but he declined. 

“I don’t necessarily believe that the mayor and the City Council don’t understand where the end responsibility lies, but I think it was cast upon us for whatever reason,” Gusler said. “I’m getting old. I ain’t gonna put up with it. I don’t need it.”  

In a Wednesday statement to The Apopka Chief, Ruth said he respected Gusler’s service on the Planning Commission and said his earlier comments were intended to examine whether the city’s development-review process was functioning as effectively as possible, not to assign blame to volunteer board members. 

Ruth, Mayor Nick Nesta and Vice Mayor Diane Velazquez were present at the Planning Commission meeting.  

Ruth stood by his concerns about the city’s development-review process. He said Planning Commission leadership helps shape growth-related recommendations that ultimately reach the City Commission. 

“The city’s current infrastructure challenges did not occur overnight; they are the result of decades of decisions that allowed development to outpace the infrastructure needed to support it,” Ruth wrote. 

While acknowledging that “no single individual is solely responsible,” Ruth said board leadership “plays an important role in evaluating growth, concurrency, transportation impacts, utility capacity, stormwater management, and long-term service obligations.” 

Ruth also said Planning Commission members should weigh the long-term effects of development proposals, including infrastructure needs, public safety, utility capacity and transportation impacts.  

“The most important qualification should be a commitment to protecting the long-term interests of Apopka and ensuring that infrastructure, public safety, utilities, transportation, and quality of life keep pace with future growth,” he wrote.