Apopka City Commissioner's residency challenged in lawsuit filed by resident

Apopka City Commissioner Nadia Anderson.

A lawsuit filed in Orange County Circuit Court questions whether Apopka City Commissioner Nadia Anderson was legally qualified to run for office in last year’s municipal election.

The complaint, filed by Apopka resident William J. McLeod, asks the court for a declaratory judgment on whether Anderson met the City of Apopka’s residency requirements when she qualified to run for the March 19th, 2024, election. McLeod’s filing alleges that Anderson was not a lawful resident of the city for the one-year period required before the election date and has not consistently resided within the city since taking office.

Related: City commission candidate clarifies her residency.

According to the Apopka City Charter, candidates for mayor and city commission must reside within the city limits for at least one year prior to the election and must remain residents during their term. The City’s code of ordinances further requires that elected officials maintain residency within the municipal boundaries while in office.

McLeod’s lawsuit says that Anderson failed to meet both requirements. He cites multiple legal filings in other court cases where Anderson identified her residence as an address on Falconhill Drive, which is located in unincorporated Orange County, outside Apopka’s municipal limits.

The complaint highlights a series of sworn documents in which Anderson listed Falconhill Drive as her address:

• In May 2023, Anderson filed a petition for an injunction, swearing under oath that she lived at Falconhill Drive.

• In the same case, a court order referenced Falconhill Drive as her residence and granted her temporary exclusive use of the property.

• Later, in June 2024, Anderson filed a petition for dissolution of marriage, again affirming Falconhill Drive as her residence since 2014.

McLeod’s complaint also points to Orange County Property Appraiser records, which show a homestead exemption filed at the Falconhill Drive property in 2025, and to state licensing records listing Falconhill Drive as Anderson’s primary address for her real estate business.

By contrast, when Anderson filed her paperwork to run for office in September 2023, she submitted a residential lease agreement for a property on Valmont Lane, which is inside Apopka’s city limits. That lease, according to the complaint, was dated from February 2023 to April 2024. McLeod alleges the lease was presented to satisfy the one-year residency requirement, but argues that Anderson continued to live outside the city.

Despite these discrepancies, Anderson successfully qualified, ran for office, and was elected on March 19, 2024. She was sworn in approximately a month later and continues to serve on the Apopka City Council.

The complaint also notes that the City of Apopka has not independently investigated Anderson’s residency status. According to McLeod’s filing, the city has a policy of not vetting candidate qualifications beyond the paperwork filed with the City Clerk’s office.

That leaves the matter to the courts, McLeod argues, as he seeks a judicial declaration affirming that residency requirements are binding and enforceable. The lawsuit does not seek monetary damages but instead asks for a declaratory judgment that Anderson was ineligible to serve as a commissioner. 

Raymond McLeod, an attorney in Apopka for 43 years, is representing his brother William McLeod in this lawsuit. And although Anderson has been in office for over a year, there is never a wrong time to make a correction.

"As long as Ms. Anderson is serving as a member of Apopka’s City Commission, there is no time limit to bring a lawsuit for the issues raised in the complaint," he said."

He points to Anderson's homestead exemption as proof of her residence.

"Both Florida Statutes and the Florida Constitution establish a 'homestead' in the State of Florida, which is where person(s) reside," he said. "A person can only have one homestead/legal residence for protection from creditors, and to claim a homestead exemption for ad valorem real estate taxes. When Ms. Anderson filed pleadings under oath with the Orange County Courts to obtain an Injunction for Protection and a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage, she clearly provided an address for her residence, and when the Courts entered Order(s) awarding exclusive occupancy of that residence to Ms. Anderson, how can she now claim an alternate residence?"

He also believes Apopka City Clerk Susan Bone should have done more research to determine if Anderson resided at the address she used to run for office.

"Notwithstanding a recent policy adoption – I believe the City Clerk should take affirmative action(s) and exercise 'due diligence' to determine and confirm if a candidate is a city resident as required by the Ordinances of the City of Apopka, which govern who can be mayor or member of the city commission.

However, in a 2024 interview with The Apopka Voice, Apopka City Attorney Cliff Shepard defined a city clerk's role in conducting due diligence on a candidate's application.

“A City Clerk fills a ministerial role when qualifying candidates for election to council," Shepard said. "The clerk accepts the information provided by the candidate and determines whether it is facially sufficient to qualify. Conducting an investigation into a candidate’s background is neither expected nor permitted.”

According to Anderson, this is a settled matter.

"This lawsuit is nothing more than a recycled complaint that was already addressed during my campaign last year and found to have no merit," she said. "I lived within the city limits for one year before running for office and continue to reside here—period. These claims are baseless, meritless, and clearly politically motivated. I remain confident in our judicial system and steadfast in my commitment to serve with integrity, knowing the truth will ultimately prevail."