Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.
The City Commission held a work session on July 23, 2026, at 3:30 PM to discuss two major topics: incentives for the West Fairbanks corridor (CRA III) and an update on the electric cost of service study along with net energy metering (NEM) policy options. The meeting included presentations from staff and consultants, deliberation by commissioners, and public input from a resident.
Assistant Division Director of Economic Development/CRA Kyle Dudgeon proposed two incentive programs for the CRA III area: a Septic-to-Sewer upgrade program for commercial properties and a Catalyst Development Program that waives permit and transportation impact fees under the Brownfield/Greenfield Economic Enhancement District statute. The current program cap is $500,000 per application with a $1 million annual maximum. Staff noted that land prices in West Fairbanks range from $2–$3 million per acre, and a workforce housing developer indicated that land costs in Winter Park account for about 30% of total project costs, compared to a typical 5% elsewhere.
Four financial scenarios were presented: 1) 10,000 sq ft office; 2) 5,000 sq ft restaurant; 3) 30,000 sq ft commercial multi-tenant; 4) large mixed-use with residential, structured parking, retail, and office. Scenarios 1–3 did not show a 10-year payback on waived fees, while Scenario 4 reached breakeven in about 7 years. Projections used Winter Park's millage rate of 4.0923 with 5% annual escalation (Amendment 3 cap).
The competitive landscape with Orlando was discussed. The Joint Planning Agreement (JPA) between Orlando and Orange County was suspended after the Orange County vote; discussions continue. A key risk is that if Orlando controls the JPA, dense unplanned development could occur at the Winter Park gateway while still using the 32789 zip code and Winter Park branding. Winter Park has matched Orlando's density allowances (up to 8 stories) but still requires developer contributions for streetscapes, sewer, and public amenities, which Orlando does not. Mayor DeCiccio highlighted that $31 million in infrastructure is already in place, increasing land values.
Only two meaningful land assemblages exist: 6 acres in the triangle area and 4.5 acres south near Minnesota. No developer has submitted a viable plan when transportation impact fees are factored in. CRA tools beyond fee waivers include streetscape improvements, sewer connection contributions, and per-unit workforce housing payments.
Commissioners expressed support for Scenario 4 as the target outcome. They agreed to allow fee waivers to scale with project acreage beyond the current $500K cap, evaluate incentives per project with full commission discretion, and maintain an exclusion list (adult businesses, automotive, firearm sales, standalone massage parlors) rather than an inclusion list. Storage units were also added to the exclusion list. Staff will provide a map with street names overlaid on the CRA III boundary, bring the revised incentive program to a future meeting, and collaborate with city attorneys to draft a formal contractual framework with a per-acre fee waiver structure.
Electric Utility Director Jamie England introduced consultant Craig Shepherd from Leidos to provide an educational session on the electric cost of service study and net energy metering (NEM) policy review. The total fiscal year 2026 revenue requirement is $56.8 million, with approximately 72% classified as fixed costs. Residential customers contribute approximately $83 per month in fixed charges regardless of energy consumption. The current NEM policy, implemented in 2014, serves approximately 263 solar customers out of about 16,000 total accounts, providing credits at full retail rate, resulting in an estimated fixed-cost shortfall of approximately $150,000 annually. Power supply agreements expire in 2028, with a provisional model anticipating a 40% increase in capacity costs.
Four policy options were presented: 1) Maintain full retail credit; 2) Credit at wholesale avoided cost; 3) Implement a minimum bill of approximately $83/month; 4) Establish a voluntary green energy fund. Commissioners expressed preference for Option 1 to sustain solar incentives. Commissioner Lindsey proposed collecting public feedback through outreach and surveys.
Todd Weaver, a member of the Utilities Advisory Board (UAB), expressed concerns about the presented figures and opposed reducing net metering. He pointed out that 31.5 MWh was returned to Duke over 3.5 years with little payback, advocated for solar to meet the city's 2050 net-zero goal, and noted that an annual shortfall of $150,000 is an acceptable cost to sustain incentives.
Planned next steps: Craig Shepherd of Leidos will finalize service cost figures based on the FY27 budget and analyze net metering options. Staff and the UAB will organize a public outreach presentation and stakeholder survey on net metering, refining initial slides before public release. After review by the UAB and Keep Winter Park Beautiful & Sustainable (KWPBS), staff will present the updated program and net metering options at a future Commission meeting.
Thank you. Welcome to the City of Wuna Park work session, July 23rd, 2026. And I guess we will just let Peter take it over or Alison for a few minutes. We'll make something up while we're at it. So we've got one in front of you, Craig. I bet he's printing the takeaway sheets. Alright. Yeah, probably. Oh, okay. We've made edits to it if that was easier. No, no, no, you're fine. We're good. Okay. All right. I see Kyle. Oh, there he is. Excellent. Hey, I paused long enough. I can be wherever you need me to be. Forgive me, we ran out of 11 by 17 in printer. And I'm sure that Peter pontificated and uh put together enough background for us to pick up where we left off yesterday, which is really lovely. So we really appreciate that. And thank you so much, Commission members city staff for the opportunity to speak with you again today. Again, what we want to do is pick up where we left off in terms of our process, not only in being able to extrapolate on the additional details that we've been talking about over the past couple of years in West Fairbanks, but also giving us tools to be able to do that. So this slide really kind of showcases where we've been to date, and now we're sort of at that evaluation stage. So the arena in which we're playing with is uh our CRA3 that's highlighted in blue, um, and that's really kind of the uh piece that we want to make sure that as we move forward, um, you know, under your other hats as CRA agency members, you know. We were uh talking about manifest destiny moving west. We want to make sure that uh uh we're we're coupling whatever it is that we're talking about and making sure all these pieces move together connectively. Um that is the arena and the boundaries in which we're working. Um, so any time we're working with incentives, you know, there's a couple of things that I always want to make sure that I speak out loud. There's there's different ways to think about incentives, there's different ways to say, hey, they're good, they're bad, they're indifferent. Um, but you know, for us and and for what's meaningful in terms of moving the needle, which I think is is very important, uh, it's a means of attraction, not only from you are articulating what it is that you want to see, you're identifying that as part of a brand. And you know, for us, we are, and I use the word signaling, we're saying these are the types of pieces that we're willing to invest in with a particular private interest. And I think that becomes really important. Uh, you know, we have a lot of different vehicles here in the city to make sure that we're doing things the way that we're supposed to. Um, and you know, we may have less vehicles to say this is what we want to see. And when we have those vehicles, they become very, very important. Um so one of the other things that I really also like to communicate is, you know, sort of a core principle in terms of an incentive is that it's not going to make a bad deal good, it's going to make a good deal great. So, you know, incentives amplify strong projects and not rescue weak ones. So if there is a weak project, that that's not something that I think really we want to uh we want to see if there's there's value in that appropriately. Uh but ultimately, if we're looking at the broader, grander scheme of things, we want to make sure we're adjusting for that accordingly.