As usual, we’re starting the nomination process with an appeal to our readers. We’re looking for people who work tirelessly, sometimes anonymously, to make this a better community. Some count their impact by the thousands of lives their work touches, others by their rapid response to an emergency. We’ve celebrated the success of innovative and well-executed ideas, and acknowledged dogged refusals to give up on problems written off as unsolvable.

Among past honorees are well-known names such as Gary Cain, who capped a splendid 28-year run as CEO of the Boys and Girls Club of Central Florida in early 2023. We’ve recognized IDignity founder Michael Dippy, who saw the barriers that kept homeless people from obtaining legal identification needed to get them back their feet; Deirdre Macnab, whose tireless advocacy as president of the League of Women Voters of Florida protected critical rights; and the team that fought, on one terrible night, to save the lives of those shot in the Pulse nightclub massacre.

Please help us find the people who deserve this honor for 2023. You can send nominations via email at insight@orlandosentinel.com; please include CFOTY in the subject line and get your recommendations to us by Nov. 27.

We’ll consider groups of people, and you can also send multiple nominations or self-nominations; for each nominee, please include a description of why you think they should be honored, along with your own contact information for any questions.

That stick-with-what-works mentality definitely includes Orlando, where Mayor Buddy Dyer and incumbent city commissioners Bakari Burns and Patty Sheehan cruised to victory with commanding leads. Granted, turnout was low — but that’s not so surprising, either; voters who are mostly content and only have a few races on their ballots tend to exert less effort.

That won’t make the coming two years of city business any easier. The City Beautiful has some ugly problems. That includes homeless people camped under I-4 overpasses and in city parks; a downtown emptied by the COVID-era shift to remote work during the day and taken over by a rowdy party crowd at night;  several historic neighborhoods where gun violence is on the rise and other big challenges. There are also big unknowns, including the real impact of the Legislature’s multiple attacks on local governments’ ability to carefully manage growth.

Overall, however, Orlando’s City Council seems to be doing a good job of balancing those priorities — while tending to local needs including health care, affordable housing,  resources for substance abuse and mental illness and impressive new entertainment venues. There are legitimate complaints, particularly from residents of neighborhoods who feel they’ve been left behind in the city’s push for progress. But Burns, who represents some of those communities, claimed a commanding 4-to-1 vote margin in his District  6 race. That’s a substantial margin of trust.

It probably didn’t hurt that, even as mail ballots went out, Dyer was working a last-minute miracle to get the Pulse nightclub property into the city’s hands and pave the way for a respectful, collaborative memorial to the victims of the second-worst mass shooting in the nation’s history. Dyer’s long been known for a take-charge style that sometimes steamrolls dissenting voices. In this case, decisive action was needed — and it’s not the first time Dyer’s vision has led to dramatic leaps forward for Orlando. Voters were right to keep him on the job for what he says will be his final term.

Regional challenges

Among the other cities with incumbents on the ballot — including  Oviedo, Lake Mary, Rockledge, Clermont, Tavares, Minneola, Indian Harbor Beach and Melbourne Beach — we can only find one incumbent who lost: James Reitz, the Ward 5 commissioner and current mayor of the north Lake County town of Lady Lake, which has been all but consumed by the sprawling megacommunity known as the Villages.

But there were some portents in Tuesday’s results that should give local leaders more to think about — particularly in Oviedo, where voters slapped down a pair of ballot questions that many expected to cruise to easy victory. One, a $35.5 million bond issue to build a long-awaited police station, could reflect significant voter apathy to anything that might raise their tax burden – especially in combination with Orange County’s thumping rejection of a local infrastructure sales tax in 2022. Seminole County leaders, who have their own sales-tax supplement coming up for renewal in 2024, should pay particular attention. (And we’re pretty sure they are.)

The other Oviedo defeat, a refusal to re-authorize the city’s ability to grant property-tax breaks as incentive for economic development, is more puzzling and will take time to unpack. This might not be a huge issue for Oviedo, who has only granted a few breaks under the economic-development law. But it could be a big deal for other cities facing their own tax-break authorization votes in the near future.

Overall, however, this set of election returns sends a clear message that voters are content with their status quo. Local leaders, particularly in municipalities that weren’t put to the test this year, shouldn’t take it as a license for laziness — but as an inspiration to keep serving their constituents respectfully and responsibly.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com

Instead, the GOP-dominated Legislature is taking swift action …. to act as governmental bootlifts, with no greater purpose than to burnish DeSantis’ swagger. The current slate of bills reflects nothing that would qualify as a legitimate emergency, outside of a servile desire to make the governor look tougher when he walks onstage Wednesday for the third GOP presidential primary debate.

Meanwhile, across Florida, families are facing emergencies that demand swift action, including potential evictions, skyrocketing property insurance bills and sick kids who are about to lose their health insurance. If the Legislature does anything at all to help these families, they will have to wait.

It’s a shameful performance, playing out on a national stage.In fact, we’d love to see some of DeSantis’ GOP rivals challenge him Wednesday on the way he’s twisted the Legislature into his personal band of cheerleaders.

Here’s how DeSantis’ hyper-online strategy suddenly went south

No case for urgency

Here’s what you need to to understand about legislative special sessions: They are meant to be reserved for emergency situations. That’s because special sessions wipe out most of the safeguards that ensure time for thorough analysis of a law’s potential impact, ample public input and time for lawmakers to amend and debate. Special-session bills are usually introduced, go through an abbreviated committee process and are then hustled onto the floor within a week’s time.

But DeSantis and his legislative minions have trampled that extraordinary authority into a ramrod, shoving useless, harmful or deeply flawed legislation into law before anyone realizes what’s going on. Nearly everything under consideration for rapid action this week falls into one of those categories; the only real exception being an expansion of relief (in HB 1) for victims of Hurricane Idalia.

Some of the bills are meant to be merely a Greek chorus of the points DeSantis plans to make Wednesday on stage, such as support for the state of Israel and condemnation of Hamas. Yes, such a declaration is timely — but Florida lawmakers are perfectly capable of expressing their own opinions. There are also “sanctions” against Iran that are highly unlikely to have any measurable impact, outside of an opportunity for DeSantis to pretend he’s already president.

Other bills ladle more cash into voucher programs — months after Florida’s school year has started — and dole out money for security measures at Jewish day schools. There’s nothing here that can’t wait for the regular session that starts in January, if it’s necessary at all.

By then, of course, DeSantis’ presidential hopes may be thoroughly extinguished. That’s why these bragging points are being so hastily manufactured.

The real emergencies

Contrast that to the issues being raised by a handful of Democratic lawmakers who are — let’s be realistic — also using the special session to make a point, rather than an actual difference.

But there is a critical distinction here. Their quick-action bills — most filed by Rep. Anna Eskamani, the irrepressible Orlando-based Democrat — address real emergencies that are impacting more Floridians every day.

And those bills were brutally stomped within hours of their filing, with House leadership refusing to even make them available for consideration.

Among those bills were opportunities to:

• Help Florida children being shoved, sometimes unfairly, off Medicaid rolls right now;
• Find ways to assist Florida tenants facing eviction and help workers searching for housing they can afford right now;
• Find relief for Florida property owners who are receiving massive property insurance hikes (or can’t find insurance at all) right now;
• And something that should be an urgent priority for any lawmaker proclaiming themselves to be pro-life — curbing gun violence in a state that has already seen more than 100 deaths from firearms in 2023 alone.

These all sound like things that can’t really wait until the 2024 legislative session convenes in January. Add to that an override of a bizarre DeSantis veto that blocks the state from accepting hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid, and Florida voters have to ask: Why do their lawmakers care so much about the governor’s political fortunes, and so little about the real threats their constituents face?

It’s a deep disappointment to constituents who deserve better, and a cautionary tale to voters in other states who want to know what a DeSantis presidency might look like.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com

It’s a limited-time opportunity. Election Day is Tuesday, Nov. 7. Mail ballots must be received by local elections offices by 7 p.m. that day to be counted. Depending on when you’re reading this and where you live, your opportunity to vote early may have already passed.

But you can still go to the polls Nov. 7. And if you’ll give us a few minutes, we’ll offer some reasons why you should.

Traditionally, all these elections are low-turnout; in some Orlando precincts, fewer than 10 percent of eligible voters cast a ballot in 2021’s municipal elections. That’s a shame — not just because local officials can have such an outsized impact on residents’ quality of life, but because local voters can have such an outsized impact on the decisions their city leaders and legislators make.

In today’s troubled times, it’s a great way to remind yourself that your opinions and priorities count.

It’s also a way to thank those with the courage to step forward and offer their service on city-level councils and commissions. Presidents, governors, even members of Congress live their lives surrounded by layers of staff and earn substantial full-time salaries. But most of the candidates on Tuesday’s ballot are regular folks — juggling their campaigns (and, they hope, their official duties) with day jobs, child care, family duties, retirement activities and other challenges of daily living.

Throughout the 2023 campaign season, the Sentinel has interviewed many of them for our own endorsements. Before we summarize those, we have to say: What we’ve seen is truly impressive.

That’s why we encourage voters to research candidates for themselves — reading news stories, reviewing candidates’ websites and talking to their neighbors about their choices.

Here are our picks:

State House District 35 special election

Republican and Democratic voters will choose their nominees for a January special election to replace former state Rep. Fred Hawkins in a district that includes parts of Orange and Osceola counties.

Endorsement: For House District 35, Democrat Marucci Guzmán by a hair

Democratic primary: Marucci Guzman, a tireless community advocate who is the driving force behind multiple nonprofits and was a finalist for the Sentinel’s 2022 Central Floridian of the Year, is our choice, but only by the narrowest of margins — mostly because of her potential strength against the likely Republican nominee. Any of the three candidates would be a stellar choice.

Republican primary: No recommendation. On the other side of the ballot, all three candidates seem to have made the same cynical choice: Focus on national politics, laced with as much Trumptosterone and DeSanctification as possible, while steering clear of inconvenient questions about what they’d accomplish if elected to the state Legislature. That leaves the way clear for a deceptive pivot, post-election, to appeal to Democratic and nonpartisan voters. Republican voters in District 35 deserved better than this pending betrayal. And all voters should remember this shameless pandering in January.

Orlando City Council

Endorsement: Orlando needs Mayor Buddy Dyer’s skillful leadership

Mayor: Buddy Dyer. Over the past 20 years, Dyer has served as Orlando’s mayor with vision, warmth and honor. He’s been the city’s emotional leader in times of heart-rending crisis and often serves as a voice of reason when dissension threatens to derail critical progress. He is sometimes criticized for being too heavy-handed, but his vision has also been the driving force behind projects such as SunRail and the Dr. Phillips Center for the Performing Arts. He’s earned a sixth (and he says, final) term as mayor.

Endorsement: Patty Sheehan has served Orlando City Council’s District 4 well

District 4: Patty Sheehan. Like Dyer, Sheehan has spent two decades serving Orlando voters, and her tireless advocacy for her downtown-anchored district has been a key driver in preserving the city’s focus on historic preservation and retaining a sense of community in the heart of a modern downtown. Voters should keep her on the job.

Endorsement: In Orlando City Council District 6, Bakari Burns merits re-election

District 6: Bakari Burns. District 6, which spans some of Orlando’s most historic yet underprivileged neighborhoods, has made considerable progress during Burns’ first council term. His health-care background gave heft to his demands that District 6 get its fair share of pandemic-fighting resources, and his plans for the future include projects, large and small, that should serve District 6 voters well.

Oviedo

Endorsement: Megan Sladek’s independent thinking a good match for Oviedo’s challenges

Mayor: Megan Sladek. In her first two terms as mayor, Sladek has proven herself to be one of Seminole County’s most innovative thinkers, and someone who isn’t afraid to challenge the status quo. Her vision could be key in attracting more innovative industry and expanding the city’s tax base. She should stay on the job.

Endorsement: Oviedo residents should say ‘yes’ to police funding, economic development

Referendum on city police station: Yes. Oviedo’s police department is clearly bursting at the seams. It’s a shame the city didn’t move ahead with this project when voters first approved it in 2016, but the need hasn’t gone away.

Referendum on economic incentives: Yes. This re-authorizes council members to approve incentive funding, a responsibility they’ve handled well in the past.

Lake Mary

No endorsement: In Lake Mary, voters face a difficult choice between Duryea, Renteria

City Commission District 2: No recommendation. This race pits Lake Mary’s longest-serving commissioner against a repeat challenger who still doesn’t seem to grasp the complexities of city government, which makes us doubt her ability to fulfill her promises of greater transparency. Normally that would tilt our decision in favor of the incumbent, but he barely appears to be campaigning and has offered voters little idea of his plans if elected.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com

Florida lawmakers probably saw the same reality, even though many of them still publicly resist the scientific reality of rising sea levels and remain bound to a dogmatic devotion toward fossil fuels. They also must have looked forward to boasting about their support of programs that would bring hundreds of millions in federal aid to Floridian families with a negligible impact on their own budget machinations.

It was a rare moment of pro-consumer triumph that reached across the aisle — across the nation, including Florida.

Then Gov. Ron DeSantis crashed the party and, for those in this state, brought it crashing down, blocking the ability of families and local governments to tap into federal funding intended for rebates and other incentives.

Floridians stung by DeSantis veto that cost $346M in energy-saving programs

That has left Florida’s congressional delegation grasping for a way to rescue the state’s share of this funding before it flows to less foolhardy entities in other states. U.S. Rep. Darren Soto has taken the lead on that effort, and is working every angle to rescue the rebate programs. It should also inspire the state’s most rational Republicans — including Wilton Simpson, commissioner of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and state Sen. Jason Brodeur, R-Sanford, whom DeSantis double-crossed with one of his most pointless vetoes — to get up on their hind legs and fight for Floridians.

Rebates: What’s at stake

In recent months, the Sentinel’s Skyler Swisher and Jeffrey Schweers have done a great job documenting the cost of DeSantis’ vetoes and other actions. Among the federal programs DeSantis has blocked access to:

• Home electrification and appliance rebates, which could be worth as much as $22,000 to many Florida homeowners. The rebates will be administered through one of two programs. One targets low- to middle-income households with rebates for electric heat pumps, wiring upgrades and more efficient water heaters, dryers and other appliances. A second program rebates consumers who upgrade energy-efficient doors and windows and air conditioners. If Florida doesn’t meet the cutoff date for applying, the $346 million allocated for the state will be split among other applicants. That would be a particularly brutal slap against homeowners who are still rebuilding after three major hurricanes, Soto says.
• Support for local governments and state agencies that include electric vehicles in their fleet, which could save up to $277 million in fuel costs statewide over the coming 15 years. That’s a big enough hunk of money to have a potential impact on individual property tax bills. DeSantis’ veto of SB 284, Brodeur’s unanimously supported bill that encourages buying EVs and other energy saving measures, killed that opportunity for Florida.
• Rebates through the 2022 Solar For All program, which would give low-income Floridians a boost to install the bill-cutting panels on their own roofs. This one is a little more politically fraught, because it crosses Florida’s biggest, most powerful utilities, and relies on Simpson to apply for the funding. But lawmakers should at least open the door to the possibility.

DeSantis’ vetoes aren’t the final word. But deadlines for the state to apply for funding are fast approaching. Soto and the rest of Florida’s Democratic congressional delegation (including Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost, who is demonstrating an appetite similar to Soto’s for working hard and smart on behalf of his constituents) tried one strategy — an amendment to the original legislation that would allow other groups, including local governments, to go after funding in the handful of states that have blocked access. That was blocked, but he’s currently drafting standalone legislation that would accomplish the same thing.

“We’ll take every opportunity,” he told the Sentinel this week. “The clock is ticking.”

Reaction: The good fight

That’s what fighting for Florida consumers looks like — and Florida’s savviest Republicans in Congress should seize on this chance for bipartisan championship. That could include Bill Posey of Melbourne, Mario Diaz-Balart of Miami-Dade and Mike Waltz of Flagler Beach, who is married to Julia Nesheiwat, DeSantis’ first “resilience czar” (appointed back when the governor acknowledged the reality if not the reason for global climate change).

It may still be a heavy lift in Congress; why should members from other states rescue Florida and other holdout states from their own folly? But holding onto Florida’s congressional seats will be critical for GOP lawmakers who are serious about keeping their razor-thin margin of control over the House. If anyone can get it done, it’s Soto.

There is a better, faster solution, and it starts next week: Lawmakers can simply override DeSantis’ vetoes in the special session that starts on Monday.

It would take a lot of courage, but it’s the best path. Many will probably argue that the Legislature could reauthorize access to the federal grants in the regular session that starts in January, but that risks triggering another veto. Without another special session dedicated to an override, Florida will miss all the federal deadlines and its share of funding would flow to other states.

A veto requires a two-thirds majority. But it’s the final say: DeSantis can’t veto an override. This would give Florida’s legislative leadership a prime opportunity to reclaim the power that the state constitution says is theirs by right — and use it to defend the state’s beleaguered, bewildered consumers.

It won’t erase six years of idolatry to DeSantis’ reckless agenda (which is packed with hypocrisy on the subject of federal funding). But it would demonstrate a long-overdue recognition of the fact that Florida lawmakers are entrusted with the responsibility to put their constituents first. That would be worth celebrating.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com

It’s been a year of mixed reviews. Depending on who’s talking,  the new terminal is either a mess, a miracle or a mystery.

We’d vote for a bit of the first and third, but mostly, a magnificent miracle. The massive terminal has seen some mid-flight corrections. Overall, however, it’s lived up to its hype. Airport authorities are making plans to take better advantage of the most technologically advanced airports in the nation — including shifting more domestic flights to C, alleviating crowding at Terminals A and B — and moving to address the most common complaints about the newest addition.

The mess

That starts with, ugh, the interminable  hike from the TSA checkpoint to the farthest gates on C’s east side.

Certainly, a half-mile walk is something that a healthy adult should be able to manage with ease. But not all the people flowing through this facility fit that description. And few people would set out on a walk encumbered with the kinds of burdens many tourists tote —  suitcases, strollers, wheelchairs and wayward children—or sprinting to make a flight  that will close its doors in 10 minutes, with or without them aboard.

Complaints about the distance to Gate C20, one of those slotted for JetBlue departures and arrivals, started piling up almost immediately. To their credit, airport authorities quickly tried to address the problems. A few months after C opened, they mobilized a fleet of zippy little transport vehicles to rescue winded passengers. But it never should have come to this: It’s now clear that the 2017 decision to eliminate a planned-for moving walkway was a mistake (something prescient individuals pointed out at the time, to no avail).

Adding one has become a priority, airport officials told Spectrum News 13 recently. Also in the works: More car-rental facilities in the new terminal, and an elevated bridge that will connect C to the older A and B terminals without forcing passengers to trudge through C’s garage.

These are all great, but in the interim, would it be possible to concentrate popular flights at  the closest gates? As airport officials move forward with plans to shift more domestic flights over to C, it will become increasingly difficult to manage an adequate flow of transports to rescue winded passengers.

The miracles

There’s no denying, however, that the new terminal is packed with the latest in airport technology — the most notable of which travels on rails, not wings. Brightline trains are now running a regular schedule between Orlando and South Florida, and the reviews are enthusiastic. It remains to be seen how the ridership will stack up in the long term — but for now, it’s a thrill just to see the “accelerating serpent mottled in sherbert colors, slithering by jets and terminals, and getting its day finally to derail a decade of doubters, deniers and detractors,” as the Sentinel’s Kevin Spear wrote Sep. 23.

When the local-commuter SunRail spur to the airport is completed   — something that should remain a priority —  that will be one more link to a transportation future that many Orlando residents couldn’t envision just a decade ago.

Meanwhile,  behind-the-scenes improvements are making routine airport tasks like baggage handling more precise and foolproof. Work has already started on eight more “narrow-body” gates that will allow more airlines to use C, currently reserved for JetBlue and international travelers.

And getting through C’s security checkpoints is a breeze, even on busy holiday weekends.

Among Terminal C’s most striking features, however, are the stunning digital-art exhibits throughout the facility. Since the terminal opened, photos of the exhibits have flooded social media. Many passengers clearly find them captivating.

The mysteries

But that leads us to one unanswered question: Airport folks, what is up with those spitting gargoyles?

For most of the digital displays, it’s easy to see the connection to Orlando: Giant manatees floating serenely in blue waters, families screaming with joy on roller coasters.

But one giant installation known as the “Moment Vault,” overlooking the busy food court at the juncture of C’s two concourses, is truly puzzling. Most of the online attention has focused on the panels inside the installation, which track the movement of nearby humans to generate stunning, abstract selfie-ready images. But from the seating area, travelers focus on its  three-part, curving exterior.

At first, screens show a massive, ivy-covered wall. But then the digital vines shrivel back to reveal images of carved-stone animals (which seem to be modeled on Florida wildlife) and Gorgon-like human heads — and that’s when the spitting starts, with narrow streams of actual water projected at adjacent images.

If you think it sounds weird, well, it is. Orlando has certainly never been known as the City with Giant Walls of Spitting Gargoyles.

What’s even stranger is that nobody seems to be commenting on it. The more often we look at it (we found a short video, which we’ll link to online) the more we succumb to its goofy impudence. We’d still love to hear the backstory  — one of our two big questions about C, along with “Did the people who laid out the gates here ever tried to trot half-a-mile dragging a suitcase with one busted wheel while maintaining a firm grip on an overstimulated toddler?”

Overall, it’s clear, however, that Terminal C belongs solidly in the “win” category, and give airport officials full credit for recognizing the tweaks needed to make it even better than it already is.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com

A constitutional right to hunt and fish? Florida voters will decide in 2024

In this case, it’s the right to hunt and fish, something that most Floridians probably never think about. Maybe it’s because state residents already have strong laws protecting their ability to shoot, trap or hook all manner of critters, from 20-foot pythons to tiny, shimmering bait fish.

So voters should ask themselves: Why do lawmakers want to carve a right to hunt and fish into the Florida Constitution, and why do they want to cut so deeply? As leading Florida conservationist Clay Henderson pointed out in a column we printed Sunday, an amendment that will be on 2024 ballots in November would put hunting and fishing on the same level as democracy’s most sacred rights, including free speech and even Floridians’ rights to life and liberty.

Coming from the same set of lawmakers who enthusiastically stomped on voters’ ability to mandate clean air and water — a law that wiped out an Orange County charter provision meant to protect sensitive local water bodies — it’s a highly suspicious move. Even in Florida’s current, falsehood-oriented political environment, gaining the 60% vote needed to write it into the Constitution seems like a long shot.

What’s the real target?

Here’s the reality in Florida: State law is already pretty favorable to hunting and fishing, with most restrictions aimed at balancing the health of key species against sport-fishers’ and hunters’ access to public lands and other opportunities.

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission sets generous hunting and fishing seasons and licensing provisions and makes it easy to buy licenses at affordable prices. And the sportfishing and hunting communities often give back, supporting land-preservation measures and other conservation activities. One notable alliance: The involvement of groups such as Ducks Unlimited in the push to clean up the Indian River Lagoon, one of the most diverse estuaries on the eastern seaboard.

Most Floridians aren’t all that interested in hunting, but they have plenty of opportunities. Sportfishing is more popular (and lucrative) but that’s pretty well-protected too.

Scary implications

None of this supports a case that Florida needs special, expansive protection for one particular set of activities. But that’s what the language proposed by the Legislature would accomplish.

The text, as approved by lawmakers earlier this year, says the “right to fish and hunt” would ‘preserve forever fishing and hunting, including by the use of traditional methods, as a public right and preferred means of responsibly managing and controlling fish and wildlife.” That’s far more expansive than other rights guaranteed in the state constitution, including the right of Florida children to quality public education, small class sizes and universal pre-K. The amendment goes on to say that the FWC will still have the authority to regulate these things, but the first part of the amendment directly contradicts that: Right now, the FWC is the state agency that manages hunting and fishing. There’s no way to create a new “public right” that wouldn’t curb the commission’s ability to manage species against threats like overhunting or efforts to manage disease.

Meanwhile, notably, there’s no wording safeguarding the state’s ability to protect endangered species and fragile ecosystems — including land the state spent millions to preserve — from incursions by motorized vehicles and other accouterments of modern hunting. This amendment could also have a significant impact on the state’s ability to manage public lands against wildfires and flooding.

Some analysts have suggested that this amendment could even trump the rights of private property owners to restrict hunting on their own land.

It could certainly tie the hands of future lawmakers to respond to currently unforeseen environmental consequences of hunting, such as Florida’s ban on gill-net fishing or its most recent laws against the gruesome “Internet hunt” sites that allow online users to fire real guns, loaded with real ammunition, at Florida wildlife using remote control and webcams— a practice so dangerous and wasteful that it’s banned in 42 states.

One possible reason

That’s why this amendment seems so scary. Nobody can say exactly what it could do, or how much harm it could cause. Meanwhile, the only arguments in its favor seem to rest on the fallacy that hunting and fishing in Florida are under attack.

So what’s the point of putting it on the ballot? The best argument we can see for this stinker is that it’s bait — intended to draw out low-information, far-right voters who can be easily swindled into believing that their rights are somehow under attack and who will, presumably, be voting conservative across the rest of the ballot. And Florida’s deep-red Legislature doesn’t care about anything else, if it means winning a few more voters for their candidates.

That wouldn’t explain, however, why this amendment was written to be so expansive. That story might not be fully told until voters see which deep-pockets donors come out to support it — or what Florida’s far-right courts make of it.

So far, however, we see no reason to change the state Constitution, wreck environmental laws and insult Florida Republicans who care as much about this state’s future as anyone else. In the runup to the session that starts in January, lawmakers should hear from their constituents who are suspicious of this amendment, and other reckless efforts to hoodwink voters, with one clear message: This dog don’t hunt.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com

These are two areas voters should always approach with skepticism. In Oviedo’s case, however, leaders have shown themselves in the past to be both cautious and frugal with city resources. This commission has proven itself worthy of residents’ trust. As for future commissions? Well, that’s up to voters as well.

Voting “yes” on both questions will give the city commission and administration the flexibility they need to ensure public safety and attract future economic growth.

Yes on police station bond

The big difference between this year’s police-station referendum and the 2016 approach is the dollar figures involved. Voters authorized up to $11.4 million seven years ago, and it’s important for them to understand that the $35.5 million ask on this year’s ballot will be in addition to that — which would give the commission a total of nearly $47 million.

The backstory on that is a bit complicated. As the Sentinel’s Martin Comas reported, after the 2016 vote, the commission asked for a study of the planned 20,000-square-foot police HQ. The conclusion: That proposed facility would fall short of meeting the police department’s projected needs. It recommended at least 42,000 square feet, which would allow for training, community programs and other activities under the same roof.

It’s a shame the commission didn’t ask for that study prior to the initial vote — and even more regrettable that city leaders didn’t move quickly after hitting pause on the 20,000-square-foot facility. As Mayor Megan Sladek and other commission members have noted, building costs have skyrocketed since then, more than tripling the price tag. But they can’t rewrite history, and current police facilities are clearly overloaded. At the rate the population is going, Oviedo will need at least 20 new officers, and at least as many support staff, within the next 15 years — and the current building is already bursting at the seams.

Authorizing the bonds won’t bind the city to all-new construction, though that’s the direction the current commissioners seem inclined to follow. One proposal, to redevelop property at the Oviedo Mall, might still be possible, and there could be other locations that make sense for police headquarters or substations. If city leaders can construct facilities that realistically meet the needs of a fast-growing Oviedo for less money, they still have that option. This referendum, however, will ensure that the city can borrow a sum that they know will meet the city’s needs, and move forward before costs increase even more.

Yes on corporate tax incentives

Love them or hate them, economic incentive packages have become part of the playbook in Florida when it comes to attracting and expanding employers to a particular area. And though it’s right next to one of the nation’s largest research universities, and about an hour from Florida’s fabled Space Coast, Oviedo hasn’t attracted as much in the way of high-tech industry as it might have. In fact, as Sladek noted during an interview with the Orlando Sentinel’s editorial board, the city is in danger of becoming one of Seminole County’s biggest bedroom communities, dooming it to an inadequate tax base.

Voters are being asked to re-authorize property-tax breaks (the most common form of economic incentive) for employers that plan to offer relatively high-paying jobs in targeted industries. Such tax incentives should be handed out sparingly, subject to tightly worded contracts that spell out a company’s responsibilities. The city has been tight-fisted with these investments in the past; so far, the only project to get tax incentives is the Oviedo Medical Center​, built in 2017, which included a badly needed 67-bed hospital and emergency department. The city’s authority to grant incentives has since expired; under the Florida Constitution, voters must re-authorize it before the city can offer tax breaks to anyone else.

Once again, it boils down to trust: Can voters trust their city officials to keep a tight rein on these breaks, and can they trust themselves to elect equally responsible leaders in the future? Answering that question should lead them to an easy “yes” on the ballot initiative.

This week, we wrap  up our endorsements for the Nov. 7 primary. However, we urge voters to not rely solely on our opinions in deciding how to cast a vote. Voters should check the city’s informational websites on both ballot issues and look at the Sentinel’s coverage; in addition, they can ask friends and neighbors what they think. Google the issues and go to the city’s website  to see who’s giving money to their campaigns. In addition, we’ve recorded our interviews and posted them in full at OrlandoSentinel.com/opinion.

Election endorsements are the opinion of the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board, which consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Insight Editor Jay Reddick and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson. Sentinel Columnist Scott Maxwell participates in interviews and deliberations. Send emails to insight@orlandosentinel.com.

This purchase, brokered by Mayor Buddy Dyer and carrying the endorsement of many of those who have been most deeply involved in this discussion, makes sense in so many ways.
Certainly, council members will hear from people with arguments — some of them anguished, others calculated — against this purchase. They should listen respectfully, and keep these objections in mind as they move forward.

But then they should say yes.

Because there is no other road. Getting this land into the hands of the city is an essential step toward creating a memorial to the lives lost and shattered in the terrible pre-dawn hours of June 12, 2016. It is the surest way to break the logjam that has kept the memorial’s status in limbo. That delay has magnified resentment and prolonged the anguish of survivors and families of those who perished. It has deepened rifts and alienated some of the financial and emotional support needed to bring the memorial to reality. The vote is unlikely to put an immediate end to the dissent that has festered for far too long, but it could illuminate the path toward healing.

Commission members can’t let regret cloud their minds. They should say yes.

Editorial: Do what it takes to get progress on Pulse memorial

Loudest among those voices will be those who condemn the deal as unjustly enriching the owners of the nightclub. At one point, many expected that the property owners would donate it. The onePulse Foundation, which led negotiations to purchase the site, backed away from those talks after learning that the property owners had already received an insurance settlement. Earlier this year, anger stirred again after Orlando residents learned of federal COVID funds meant to repay employees of the foundation — which, at the time, included one of the nightclub’s owners — for pay cuts during the COVID era. Orlando leaders must also settle the relationship between the city and onePulse. But those discussions can wait.

In 10, 15 or 20 years, nobody who visits this memorial will be wondering who was paid, or how much. Commissioners should not fear that criticism, especially since the $2 million price is close to the appraised value and less than the city originally planned to pay for the property. They should say yes.

Commissioners may also hear from those who believe local taxpayers should not carry the financial burden of the memorial. The best response would be a plan to ask other local entities for help. Allocating a share of Orange County’s l hospitality-tax funding to reimburse the city’s costs would be by far the most equitable solution, given that Orlando’s booming tourism economy has kept those coffers brimming, with a $300 million surplus.

Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings, who expressed his wholehearted support this week for Orlando’s bid to buy the nightclub, could speed that process along by showing up to Monday’s hearing and pledging his personal support for including more funding for the Pulse memorial in future tourist-tax allocations. That would alleviate any argument that Orlando’s other priorities — including caring for the city’s homeless population and protecting its residents against crime and violence — could suffer because of this purchase.

Even if that doesn’t happen immediately, commissioners should trust their ability to balance competing priorities and recruit partners in designing and building the memorial. They should say yes.

Commissioners should also support Dyer’s pledge to move with deliberation and openness, making decisions with plenty of public input and chances for survivors and family to participate in the discussion. The goal should be to create a memorial that solemnly acknowledges the terror and suffering of the people trapped inside Pulse with a homicidal madman — but also inspires visitors to seek ways to counteract violence and hatred with love and acceptance. In Central Florida, that inspiration has already flowered in many ways; most recently, U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost filed legislation to establish a national Office on Gun Violence Prevention.

Q&A: As Pulse memorial falters, Las Vegas leader shares lessons in commemorating tragedy

The hope, the eventual goal, is that visitors to this memorial will be transformed in ways both great and small — just as the aftermath of the massacre transformed Orlando, inscribing a message of love and acceptance into its DNA.

City leaders say they are proud of that transformation, which will be in full flower this weekend at the Come Out With Pride parade that will take over downtown. They can manifest that pride by doing what they can do to get the memorial past this bottleneck that has delayed action for so long.

Monday’s vote can mark a turning point, one that rises above past division and distrust. That acknowledges the promise of the future but isn’t paralyzed by fear of the decisions that lie ahead.

There is one and only one decision before the council tomorrow. And there is an easy answer.

Yes.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com

Every election cycle brings a few surprises. This year, it was our quest to pry out enough information to make an informed endorsement in Lake Mary’s District 2 City Commission race.

We’ll cut to the chase: We failed.

Not for lack of trying. We spent weeks digging through city records (when we could find them). We contacted multiple leaders inside and outside city government. We interviewed challenger Kristina Renteria, who is making her third run at a commission seat. We tried to interview Commissioner George Duryea, who is seeking to extend his astounding 35 years of service on the commission for another term. Though he initially responded, he didn’t follow through.

Along the way, we learned a lot about Lake Mary. Much of it was good: This tidy island of affluence embraces a generous portion of the corporate-HQ intensive community of Heathrow, and endless gated neighborhoods full of gracious homes on coiling streets. As of 2021, Lake Mary boasts a median household income level more than 70% higher than Seminole County’s overall rate, and fewer than 3% of the city’s residents live below the poverty line.

What was hidden

But for decades, Lake Mary has harbored a toxic secret — one that seeped into neighboring communities in the form of 1,4-dioxane, a so-called “forever chemical” believed to be a potentially carcinogenic threat to the city’s water supply. Other potent contaminants were detected near a public-supply water well as early as 2001. The likely source — a manufacturing plant on Rinehart Road that was eventually closed down by Siemens, its last owner — was known to some city leaders as a source of pollution even before it closed down. Two years ago, Lake Mary opened a highly advanced water-treatment plant, funded by a $40 million court settlement with Siemens.

Read Orlando Sentinel’s ‘Toxic Secret’ water contamination series for free here

Yet residents were never adequately informed of the threat until this summer, when the Sentinel launched a series of reports describing the decades-long cone of silence that kept water utility customers in Lake Mary, Sanford and parts of unincorporated Seminole County from knowing about the suspected carcinogen. Even some elected officials said they’d been kept in the dark.

We don’t know how much Commissioner Duryea knew about the Siemens plant or the decades-long saga that led to this summer’s revelations. Mayor David Mealor, whose own service on the commission goes back almost as far as Duryea’s, told us that most of the treatment-plant issues were handled by staff. It’s hard to imagine, however, that something this big would have escaped the notice of someone who is as astute as Duryea’s colleagues on the commission say he is.

Lack of information

Beyond the city’s failure to adequately inform its citizens (and adjacent governments) of potential contamination, however, we also found an overall, distressing lack of transparency at City Hall that makes it extremely difficult for residents to follow what their elected officials are up to. Links to agendas don’t include the backup information that is often essential to understand the decisions the commission makes. Minutes are brief, and the archive of  meeting notices and minutes only reaches back to March 2019. There are no audio or video links for residents to listen to meetings remotely, either live or archived. There is a one-way contact form for the commission, but no individual phone numbers or email addresses for commissioners. And the city’s site posts only bare-bones information about city elections.

Almost every other Seminole County city offers these basic amenities. Many of the cities are using the same website vendor that Lake Mary chose. Responsibility for the overall lack of communication is shared among the members of the commission, including Duryea. Whoever wins this race, Lake Mary residents deserve more.

We’ll give Renteria points, then, when she cites transparency as her No. 1 priority. We like her idea of printing updates on the safety of the city’s water supply on utility bills.

But she hasn’t done what she needs to do to be a viable candidate in this race, though she has the enthusiastic support of Seminole County’s outnumbered but active Democratic organization. In two prior election attempts the Sentinel pointed out her lack of preparation for the office she sought. In our video interview (available online) she answered several key questions — about the city’s budget, its city manager and the pending renewal of Seminole County’s 1-cent sales tax — by saying she didn’t know enough about the issue to comment. As a CPA  who previously sought election as clerk of courts and is now on her third attempt at a commission seat since 2019, we’d have expected her to have more ideas about what she’d do if elected and a deeper understanding of city government.

She certainly falls far short of making the case that voters should replace Duryea on the commission.

No real campaign

So why aren’t we endorsing Duryea? The answer is simple: He’s not giving voters enough information to know where he stands on the issues that are most important to them. He doesn’t seem to have a campaign website. His Facebook page is devoid of any city issues.

We did find out a fair amount on our own. Both Mealor and Commissioner Justin York give him high marks for his fiscal leadership, saying it’s been critical in keeping city tax rates low.

Reading through our own stories and the limited archive of information on past city commission races sheds  a little more light. Throughout his tenure, Duryea has never been afraid of being on the losing end of 4-1 votes — and often, he objected on grounds we find admirable, including his sharp questioning of economic assertions made by city staff and vendors and the need to hold developers’ projects to strict standards. He was on the commission when Lake Mary was chosen to anchor the innovative — and at the time, controversial — development of Heathrow, and saw the potential there, along with the need to occasionally say “no” to some of the developers’ requests.

It took us dozens of hours of research, however, to find out that much. Most voters don’t have that kind of time. Duryea may well assume that — after 35 years of service — voters know him well enough to make up their mind. But many residents don’t even think about city government until election time — or at a point when they need help. Some haven’t been in Lake Mary long enough to make that decision.

We regret that all we can do in this race is share what we’ve found out, and urge voters to look for the candidate who best fits their own values.

The Orlando Sentinel is not endorsing in the Lake Mary City Commission Seat 2 race.

This week, we wrap  up our endorsements for the Nov. 7 primary. However, we urge voters to not rely solely on our opinions in deciding how to cast a vote. Voters should check the candidates’ campaign websites and social media accounts (if they don’t have either, that should be a red flag). Ask friends and neighbors what they think. Google the candidates and go to the city’s website  to see who’s giving money to their campaigns. In addition, we’ve recorded our interviews and posted them in full at OrlandoSentinel.com/opinion.

Election endorsements are the opinion of the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board, which consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Insight Editor Jay Reddick and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson. Sentinel Columnist Scott Maxwell participates in interviews and deliberations. Send emails to insight@orlandosentinel.com.