By Reggie Connell, Managing Editor
In Summary:
Utility rate hikes set the tone as Nesta attacked 40% increases, Nelson defended the math behind the city’s finances, and Moore pointed to inflation and meter problems affecting communities statewide. A closing round of controversies — a residency lawsuit, an ethics complaint, and Nelson’s prior censure — shifted the focus to trust and credibility rather than policy specifics.
*****
For many Apopka families, the 2026 Apopka Mayoral Election isn’t about politics.
There are issues that directly impact their daily lives, like the water bill, the longer and longer commute to work, and whether the next development, and the next, and the next, will overwhelm the existing infrastructure. Those everyday pressures shaped most of the questions and answers at Tuesday night’s mayoral debate.
Related: Four debates set to shape Apopka’s 2026 election season.
Inside the auditorium at Apopka High School, Apopka Mayor Bryan Nelson sat side-by-side with Apopka City Commissioner Nick Nesta and Orange County Commissioner Christine Moore, each offering a sharply different explanation for why life in Apopka feels more expensive and more crowded, and why they should be trusted to manage what comes next.
By the end of the night, the conversation had moved from monthly bills to infrastructure audits, from annexation to property taxes, and from City Hall management styles to personal credibility.
But was there a winner?
Utility bills set the tone
The debate’s most pointed exchanges came over water and wastewater rates — the issue that has followed residents home each month.
Co-moderators Greg Fox of WESH-2 News and J.C. Derrick, Publisher of The Apopka Chief, noted rates have increased roughly 40% over the last two years, with additional hikes already scheduled.
Nesta made that number the centerpiece of his case.
“The way that we’ve raised our utility rates almost 40% over the last two years is absolutely out of control,” he said. “I had a resident speak and said, ‘We can’t flush our toilets, it’s costing us too much.’”
Apopka City Commissioner Nick Nesta.
He also accused the city of shifting money from utilities to cover general expenses.
“We’re pulling almost $6.8 million out of that fund to help subsidize the general fund,” he said. “That money needs to be put back.”
Nelson pushed back, describing the increases as unavoidable.
“The operating fund has to fund itself,” Nelson said. “To maintain that investment grade, you have to make sure that your operating expenses meet the revenues.”
He said the city has reduced estimated meter readings, added tampering fines, and tightened collections to stabilize the system.
“We should have started earlier,” he acknowledged, “but we made some policy changes.”
Moore framed the problem as both local and statewide.
“It upsets me about these estimated meters,” she said. “Some of you have gotten outrageous bills once that meter was fixed. Just about every utility in Florida has had to raise rates due to inflation. It is just a difficult problem for every local government in Florida.”
Growth and the price of progress
From water bills, the conversation expanded to growth — a blessing and burden the city has wrestled with for years.
Nesta said Apopka has not been strategic enough about matching development with infrastructure.
“We should have been doing that years and years and years ago,” he said. “How we’re using impact fees is almost like a Ponzi scheme.”
His solution: a full audit and long-range plan.
“What we need to do is look at the real facts… see exactly what is deficient, what’s high priority,” he said. “From there, we can build out a proper plan.”
Nelson countered with a list of completed projects.
“We have completed 47 miles of resurfacing, added or replaced a thousand LED streetlights, and constructed over 60 miles of sidewalks and nine miles of multipurpose trails,” he said.
He described Fire Station 6 as a model for cooperation.
“If it wasn’t for the partnership… Fire Station 6 might not have ever been built.”
Orange County Commissioner Christine Moore.
Moore argued that maintenance is the hidden cost many cities underestimate.
“They have to go for that new development. They can’t go for maintenance,” she said. “The maintenance is what is bankrupting many, many cities all across the country.”
She emphasized regional cooperation.
“We cannot fix these roads without partnerships. You’ll get a lot more done with me because I will not let projects languish.”
Housing, affordability, and property taxes
When the topic shifted to housing, all three candidates acknowledged the squeeze many families feel.
Moore said, “We cannot build our way out of the housing shortage with large subdivisions.”
Nesta said, “It’s our teachers, it’s our firefighters, it’s our police officers. We want to make sure that they have safe and affordable housing, but quality as well.”
Apopka Mayor Bryan Nelson.
Nelson pointed to grant-backed programs helping residents stay in their homes.
With the state considering changes to property taxes, candidates were asked how they would handle a potential revenue drop.
Nesta asked, “How are we staying proactive to this and not reactive?”
Nelson said, “Without debt and with $30 million in reserves, we can weather any storm.”
Moore said, “If you want to lower the taxes, then yes, we’ll ask the people what you would like to do without.”
Controversies close out the night
After nearly 90 minutes focused on policy, the final portion of the debate turned personal, with moderators pressing each candidate on three controversies that have lingered over the race — a residency lawsuit, an ethics complaint, and a formal rebuke from the City Council.
First came Mayor Bryan Nelson’s lawsuit challenging whether Christine Moore legally resides within Apopka city limits.
Moore said she followed the rules and moved into a downtown home specifically to serve the city.
“I did everything I needed to do to move,” she said. “I moved right into the CRA because I wanted to be part of the solution.”
She characterized the suit as political.
“I believe it’s just a Hail Mary because he (Nelson) doesn’t think he can win at the ballot box.”
Nelson defended the challenge, arguing the issue is factual, not personal.
“Seventy days she lived at her Orange County home,” he said, adding that residency requirements should be verified.
The exchange was brief but sharp, underscoring the tension between the two longtime public officials.
Moderators then turned to an ethics complaint filed against Nick Nesta, who had voted for a $50,000 Main Street grant while also representing the organization’s director in a real estate transaction.
The Florida Commission on Ethics dismissed the complaint.
“I wasn’t worried about this to begin with,” Nesta said. “There was no legal sufficiency.”
He called the complaint “another distraction” and said he followed legal guidance when recusing himself from portions of the discussion.
Nelson countered that Nesta could have sought clearer direction in advance, suggesting the situation raised unnecessary questions.
The final controversy involved Nelson himself — his 2023 reprimand by the City Council after members said he misled them about when the city attorney left employment.
Nelson dismissed the episode as political infighting.
“It was all about political points and not governance,” he said.
Nesta, who voted for the action, pushed back and corrected Nelson’s wording when the mayor referred to being “censored.”
“Censured — not censored,” Nesta interjected. “I was lied to. I was deceived. There’s a reason that it happened.”
Moore declined to weigh in directly, saying the focus should remain on residents’ day-to-day concerns.
Debate takeaways: Who won?
No candidate delivered a knockout blow Tuesday night, and none committed a fatal mistake. Instead, the debate unfolded as three distinct governing styles competing for three different types of voters.
Each candidate had moments that resonated — and moments that felt less persuasive — and by the end of the night, the contrasts between them were clearer than any single “gotcha” exchange.
Nesta was at his strongest when the conversation centered on utility bills and everyday affordability. He consistently spoke in plain language and leaned on resident anecdotes rather than policy jargon, giving his answers an immediacy that others sometimes lacked. Lines like “We can’t flush our toilets, it’s costing us too much” and “It’s home” were among the most memorable of the night, reinforcing his outsider message and positioning him as the candidate most closely aligned with household frustrations.
Overall, Nesta emerged as the strongest emotional connector in the debate, particularly among residents frustrated by rising costs.
Moore, by contrast, projected the most policy fluency and administrative experience. She was especially effective during discussions of infrastructure, growth management, and intergovernmental partnerships, often speaking with the confidence of someone already navigating those systems. When roads, drainage, or regional coordination came up, Moore sounded less theoretical and more operational, emphasizing process and execution.
Her answers carried a consistent “this is how you actually get it done” tone that may appeal to voters who value competence and delivery over rhetoric. She often framed problems in terms of maintenance costs, long-term planning, and collaboration with county and state agencies — a perspective that underscored her experience in larger government settings.
Moore likely left the impression of being the most prepared and administratively seasoned candidate on the stage.
"I believe a clear choice for Mayor emerged from last night’s debate," she said in a statement to The Apopka Voice. "I’m grateful for the substantial community support at the live debate. I’m grounded through years of public service, ability to articulate a path forward, and proven methods of engaging residents such as surveys, neighborhood civic groups, and newly proposed advisory boards. I stand prepared to lead with integrity, vision, and transformative thinking."
As the incumbent, Nelson leaned heavily into stability and stewardship. His strongest moments came during conversations about the city’s finances, where he repeatedly cited reserves, reduced debt, and completed projects. Statements like “Without debt and with $30 million in reserves, we can weather any storm” were simple, concrete, and likely reassuring to voters concerned about risk and uncertainty.
Nelson consistently positioned himself as the steady hand — someone who has already guided the city through challenges and can continue doing so without disruption. His emphasis on completed sidewalks, resurfaced roads, and new facilities reinforced that message of continuity.
But that same steadiness sometimes came at the expense of energy. His answers often relied on lists of accomplishments and technical explanations, lacking the emotional punch of his challengers. And during the late-debate controversy segment, he found himself on the defensive, which dulled some of the incumbent's advantage.
In the end, Nelson’s performance felt managerial rather than inspirational — a style that may comfort supporters but is less likely to sway undecided voters.
"I’m the only candidate who has executive experience with a proven track record of reducing debt, increasing reserves, and setting the City up for success in the future," Nelson said in a statement to The Apopka Voice.
Taken together, the debate didn’t produce a clear winner so much as it clarified the choice.
Nesta was sharper, more skeptical, and focused on accountability.
Moore projected experience and delivery.
Nelson offered steadiness and a financial footing.
Which approach resonated most likely depends less on debate theatrics and more on what voters believe the city needs right now.
If residents are angry about rising bills, Nesta may have helped himself the most. If they want proven administrative competence, Moore is likely to have impressed. If they prioritize stability and continuity, Nelson made the safest case.
Rather than a single standout, the night sharpened the contrasts. And for many voters, the decision may come down not to who sounded best on stage, but to which style feels most trustworthy when the next real-world problem lands at their door.
The next mayoral debate is on Monday, February 9, when the Apopka Involved Voters organization hosts a mayoral candidate forum at Victory Church, 509 South Park Avenue.
Key Points:
- Water and wastewater increases dominated the early exchanges, with Nesta framing the hikes as unaffordable and Nelson calling them fiscally necessary
- Moore emphasized regional partnerships and maintenance costs as the real drivers of long-term infrastructure challenges
- Candidates split on growth strategy, impact fees, and how quickly the city should expand
- Property tax uncertainty revealed different approaches: structural reform (Nesta), reserves and stability (Nelson), and trade-off realism (Moore)
- The final segment addressed legal and ethics controversies involving all three candidates, underscoring credibility as a central campaign issue
Editor's Note - The date of the next debate is Monday, February 9. A previous edition listed the incorrect day.
