"Local news worth reading" — The New York Times
SUBSCRIBE
The independent voice for West Orange County news
A longtime advocate for families and children victimized by abuse, Marsha Summersill is seeking the open Orange County District 2 Commission seat in the Aug. 18 election.
This is Summersill’s second run for public office. In 2024, the private practice family law attorney and guardian ad litem ran unsuccessfully against incumbent Republican State Rep. Doug Bankson to represent House District 39, also up for re-election this year. She’s trying to stand out in a five-way race that includes Wes Hodge, chief of staff to Orange County Commissioner Kelly Martinez Semrad; Ocoee City Commissioner George Oliver III; former State Rep. Kamia Brown; and Orange County Sheriff Lt. Mike Crabb. County commissioners serve four-year terms and earn $127,320 annually.
Summersill, 52, has emphasized expanding affordable housing, investing in public transportation, protecting rural boundaries and preserving Wekiwa Springs.
VoxPopuli profiled Summersill in December. Here, she answered questions from VoxPopuli and the News Collaborative of Central Florida. (Responses have been edited for brevity and clarity.)
Housing Affordability and Cost of Living Too many working families can no longer afford to live in the communities they helped build. As someone who spent nearly two decades working with children and families in crisis, I've seen how housing instability affects every part of a family's life. I'll support expanding affordable and workforce housing, encourage responsible development that includes infrastructure, preserve existing affordable housing, and ensure growth benefits the people who already call Orange County home.
Protecting Our Environment and Quality of Life Our clean water, wetlands, parks, and natural spaces are part of what makes Orange County special. I'll support responsible growth that protects our drinking water, conserves environmentally sensitive lands, strengthens stormwater infrastructure, and increases resilience to flooding and severe weather. We don't have to choose between economic growth and environmental stewardship; we can and must do both.
Transportation and Infrastructure Families deserve to spend more time at home and less time sitting in traffic. I'll advocate for smart investments in roads, transit, sidewalks, and intersection improvements while making sure new development pays its fair share through impact fees. Transportation planning must keep pace with growth so we build communities that are connected, safe, and economically competitive.
I've dedicated my career to protecting children and helping families navigate some of the hardest moments of their lives. I served as a child abuse investigator, attorney, and advocate, always putting people before politics. My decision to run is personal. When my brother lost his health insurance after becoming seriously ill, I saw firsthand how systems can fail good people. Losing him strengthened my commitment to public service. I'll bring that same compassion, legal experience, and determination to the Orange County Commission, where every decision should put working families first.
Affordability starts with housing, but it also means addressing transportation costs, utility bills, wages, and access to opportunity. At the county level, I'll work to increase the supply of affordable and workforce housing, require growth to pay for the infrastructure it demands, support small businesses and good-paying jobs, and invest in transportation options that reduce commuting costs. Families shouldn't have to leave Orange County because they can no longer afford to live here.
I support providing meaningful tax relief to homeowners, but I do not support a constitutional amendment that would dramatically reduce the primary source of funding for local governments without a realistic plan to replace it. Property taxes pay for essential services that families rely on every day, including law enforcement, fire rescue, parks, libraries, transportation, and infrastructure. Slashing that revenue would likely mean higher fees, cuts to critical services, or shifting the tax burden elsewhere. Instead of making promises that jeopardize local services, I support targeted tax relief, responsible budgeting, government efficiency, and requiring new growth to pay for the infrastructure it creates through appropriate impact fees, not asking existing residents to make up the difference.
Rising utility bills are putting even more pressure on families who are already struggling with the cost of housing, groceries, and insurance. Utility regulators should ensure those creating the greatest demand pay their fair share of infrastructure costs, while continuing to invest in a more reliable, efficient electric grid. We can support economic growth without shifting higher costs onto working families, and that balance should always be our priority.
One of our greatest challenges is managing rapid growth while protecting our water resources and natural environment. Once wetlands are lost or our aquifer is compromised, those impacts are difficult and expensive to reverse. Orange County must make thoughtful land-use decisions, preserve environmentally sensitive lands, strengthen water conservation efforts, and ensure new development is supported by the infrastructure needed to protect our environment and our quality of life for future generations.
I've been asked that question, and what's interesting is it depends on who's asking. If it's stakeholders in the tourism industry, who are collecting this money through the required taxes and fees, they tend to be highly concerned and firmly against any changes to the current revenue sources or the laws that restrict how that money is used.
Individuals outside of that industry tend to go back and forth on whether we should look at other opportunities for spending those tax dollars.I would require further research. I'm not someone who's immediately going to believe it's necessary to change an existing statute that was created for a specific purpose. But we also have to address what's happening and what could happen. I think all of us are behaving as though we'll have tax relief related to the homestead exemption, but there's also a possibility that won't pass. So I'm hesitant to commit to changing substantial legal terms within a statute unless I know there's no other option for ensuring we can continue providing the required services for our county and meeting our needs.
I wish I had an itemized list I could refer to, but I'm not 100 percent informed on the percentages, the needs, or whether funding for specific programs is contingency funding or recurring funding. I would need all of that information to make a good assessment of what programs may or may not need increased or decreased funding. But the core functions of county government — public works, public safety, infrastructure, transportation and improving our economic development — are highly critical. We have to ensure we focus on those services because they're essential to developing our county and increasing revenue.
I've attended several meetings, including NOWCAB meetings and TransMAC meetings. I've talked to business owners and residents as well. I believe it's a great opportunity for us to invest in and implement the transportation programs that are currently being explored, particularly bus transit. I also spoke with a union representative who explained that these transportation changes should help alleviate congestion. They talked about how many people they transport, particularly in Northwest Orange County, where we currently have one stop in Apopka. They discussed how adding more stations would allow us to transport more people to work and other destinations on time.
A lot of us who live in Northwest Orange County work in Orlando, and unfortunately a significant number commute to Tampa. Having more transportation options beyond individual vehicles would be beneficial.
I also sat through a meeting about SunRail and Brightline. I was excited about the possibility of expanding rail service because, in my career, I travel throughout Florida. I'm a guardian ad litem, and I often have to travel for cases. Being able to take Brightline to South Florida is incredibly convenient, and the prospect of eventually taking Brightline to Tampa would be fantastic.
Originally, we expected SunRail to extend to Apopka. Right now, many of us drive to Altamonte Springs just to access the system. I'd like to see us achieve what we envisioned when voters first supported SunRail. I know the Orlando International Airport is already working with Brightline, and if I remember correctly from one of the presentations, infrastructure already exists for future SunRail expansion. The thought of taking SunRail from Apopka directly to the airport would be an incredible improvement.
I grew up when this area was much more rural. There were no buses and very few transportation options. I was poor. I drove a car that was running on a wing and a prayer, and I literally had a bungee cord holding the driver's door shut while I drove from Apopka to Disney for work. Having reliable mass transit would make a tremendous difference, especially for people who spend so much money driving everywhere. I absolutely think it's something we need to continue exploring as a county.
A: The hard part is looking to see where we can adjust our current budget and ensuring that we have some boundaries, limits or caps on certain departments where we may be able to carve off expenses that hopefully won't be needed and redirect those funds into areas that will pay off in the long run.
In government, we also have other options to explore, including creating additional revenue. I'm a little hesitant about those because they place the burden on our residents, businesses, commercial properties, rental properties and, ultimately, sales tax impacts everybody.
As a last resort, we may have to explore those options, but I believe that if we're able to properly fund our transportation needs, we'll see a very positive outcome. There will be residual effects that reduce overall expenses for the people who live in this area as well.
The goal is to be judicious with our spending while also viewing spending as an investment. Improving transportation is going to have a huge payoff for us in the long run.
I'm firmly in support of [the rural boundaries]. Individuals who purchased property, maintained it, increased its value and worked hard to preserve the integrity of their neighborhoods did so with the understanding that the city, the county and the voters all agreed to those protections.
Orange County and Seminole County are both dealing with attempts to infiltrate and negatively impact rural boundaries. I'm an attorney and a litigator by trade, and my job is to follow the law. I firmly support our existing ordinances, and I don't agree with what I call "forum shopping" by some developers. They're going to different departments within Orange County trying to get different answers, then using those responses to appeal decisions when they want developments outside the existing zoning rules. I don't care for that technique. That's a nice way of saying I'd shut it down.
Northwest Orange County, particularly Apopka, has grown substantially, and I live there, so I've seen that growth firsthand. In unincorporated Orange County, we're seeing more high-density development in areas that don't have the same zoning restrictions.
We do need additional workforce housing. That's already happened in Apopka, and I know one workforce housing development has already leased all of its units and has a waiting list, even though it was just completed. The demand is clearly there.
Within the existing statutes, ordinances and the proper parameters of the Live Local Act, I think we should continue expanding higher-density housing in targeted areas rather than spreading density everywhere. That's consistent with Orange County's Vision 2050 plan, and I think it's a smart approach.
The development I'm seeing is along Ponkan Road, Rock Springs Road, State Road 429, the areas bordering Lake County and Seminole County, Tangerine, Zellwood, Lockhart, Clarcona and Ocoee. Those are the areas experiencing significant growth. We need partnerships between neighboring jurisdictions and appropriate joint planning agreements to make sure that growth is sustainable, services are available and development is coordinated.
I like the idea of having advanced city engineers who have a vision of neighborhoods where residents have their immediate needs nearby. One of our offices is in the Waterford Lakes area, where the owner of the firm lives. She can walk to Publix, restaurants and nearby schools. That's the type of planning I'd like to see continue—similar to what's being built around Mount Dora and parts of Apopka. The commercial uses are adjacent to residential neighborhoods, so people don't have to drive for every basic need.
I'd also like more input from engineers, planners and development experts who are thinking about reducing carbon emissions, creating more green space and designing communities for the future. Those ideas need to be incorporated into our planning.
The areas I mentioned are already under development, although the size of some of those projects is still changing. Typically, when major highways are built, commercial development follows, then high-density residential, followed by single-family homes, and finally rural development farther out. That's a pattern I've noticed.
I don't know if that pattern is ideal. I'd like to see us plan in ways that improve our future, reduce the amount of travel people have to do and reduce reliance on vehicles just to pick up everyday necessities like a gallon of milk.
At the same time, private property owners often purchased land years ago with the expectation that they would eventually develop it for the highest possible return. We can control some of that through zoning laws and county ordinances, but private owners are naturally going to seek the highest profit. Balancing those competing interests is going to be one of the responsibilities of this position.
There is a protected area around Wekiva. There are requirements on building and requirements for protecting the environment. I literally live with my neighborhood backing up to Wekiva National Forest, so I'm a massive advocate. What's interesting is that Wekiva is under the state and Rock Springs is under the county, but they're the same river basin. It's something that's very critical to the functioning of our environment and ensuring our ecosystem functions well.
I would actually implement more restrictive measures to protect Wekiva and Rock Springs and anything that's going anywhere near them. A lot of those springs connect to our aquifer, which is our water supply, so we're dealing with serious ramifications if we're not very strict and very consistent about having proper rules and ordinances in place to prevent contamination, prevent destruction and prevent any negative impact on those areas. That's an absolutely required element for us to be able to live safely in this area.
Well, the housing plan that was put in place, Housing for All, has shown some pretty decent positive outcomes. We've had two projects, I believe, within the city of Apopka — I think one of them is in the county — where we have built multi-family units or more high-density units, like apartments and townhomes, that are catered toward our workforce housing. Again, we have more of a need, so our supply is not quite there. We need to continue that program to ensure that we're providing the supply needed for the affordable housing market.
I have a different view than most. I'm actually working with an individual who initially came here on Temporary Protected Status (TPS), and she is amazing. I have the highest respect for her. She was a lawyer in Ukraine. Her husband was a civil engineer. Of course, you know what happened. TPS was revoked, and now they've jumped through massive hoops. This is what I'm learning from direct experience with what's going on with USCIS, and that's what we're not talking about here.
I get that we have issues with ICE. I think ICE's discretion is too wide, and they're overstepping their bounds when it comes to decisions regarding individuals, especially those who have been in the process with USCIS. This person worked hard, saved money and paid for an immigration lawyer. There's not one immigration lawyer that takes less than a $16,000 to $25,000 retainer upfront.
This is what immigrants are dealing with right now. People want to jump on political spectrums, but the issue is much more complicated than someone saying, "You're bad for doing this" or "We better do this." The bickering has caused massive negative impacts on immigrants who've been busting their butts trying to get this done.
I've called USCIS — no response. I've reached out to elected officials that everyone told me to call. I've personally filled out the forms. I've personally called these individuals. Nobody has called me back — not one — and we've been dealing with this for three years.
I really think we have to stop the bickering and create a process that isn't so horribly ridiculous. If people want legal status so they can go back to their own countries or eventually become permanent residents or citizens, we should have a functioning process for that while also screening out individuals who mean us harm. That's a no-brainer in my opinion. People come here on work visas, tourist visas and student visas, and then they try to change their status. Many end up labeled as illegal because they can't get a phone call, a response, an administrative hearing or anything from USCIS. Dealing with USCIS is, in my experience, an absolute farce, and it's incredibly frustrating.
I started researching possible solutions. I noticed we can pursue individualized agreements with USCIS. We can complain all we want, but that's not going to accomplish anything. We need methodical approaches to address this and create realistic and timely processes for immigrants who are helping improve our economy and our community.
I also think we should explore changes to Orange County's Basic Operating Agreement. If we're going to enter into those agreements, I'd want provisions stating that ICE cannot ignore someone's pending administrative immigration status simply because a form hasn't been updated yet.
We recently had a Ukrainian individual detained over what they said was an unpaid speeding ticket ... He ended up paying thousands of dollars just to be released on bond while wearing an ankle monitor. If we'd had better protections in place, that situation might have been avoided.
I also think that when corporations bring workers here under visa programs, we should have agreements in place to help those workers if they decide to pursue a different immigration status during their employment. The people working at USCIS want to help, but they're overwhelmed. They don't have enough judges, magistrates or attorneys. That's where we need solutions.
The bottom line is that I have ideas for solutions. I'd like to negotiate better processes with USCIS and put reasonable limits on ICE's discretion because I don't believe that level of discretion is necessary for them to do their job. I want to create avenues that allow people to achieve legal status—whether temporary, permanent or eventually citizenship. I think people have ignored this problem for too long, and it's time we move forward with practical solutions.\
I'm not sure what the purpose is. My concern is that the purpose of that is more posturing, and it's basically a show of force. These local agencies are responsible for enforcing the local laws that impact us as citizens here. If an Orange County deputy gets called to assist ICE while someone else is the victim of a crime, my expectation is that they're going to respond to the victim first. I'm not really sure what the goal is because ICE already has a sufficient number of agents.
I think this is done intentionally to cause a rift and create another political talking point instead of focusing on the real issue, which is fixing the immigration process. We need solutions. We should be looking at ways to help trafficking victims, children without guardians, and immigrants who are trying to navigate the legal system by working with USCIS and creating better agreements that streamline those processes. Nobody wants to do solutions—they want to point fingers and call people names. I want us to focus on practical solutions instead of creating distractions from the fact that no one is addressing the problems within USCIS.
A: We have the Sunshine Law in Florida, so government business is required to be conducted in a manner where the public has access and knowledge of what's happening. One hundred percent, I support that. I've worked in government before entering private practice, so everything I did fell under the Sunshine Law, and much of the court system also falls under public records requirements. I think we have appropriate exemptions in place for certain employees whose information needs to remain protected, but overall I support transparency at both the state and local level. But I support the public having full access to everything at the local level and the state level.This is the public's tax money, their services, their public works and public safety. It's imperative that efforts are made so that the public has access to how money is spent, contracts, communications and government decisions.
Serving on the Orange County Commission may require standing up to Tallahassee, even if it means risking removal from office. If forced to choose between doing what you believe is right for Orange County voters and keeping your position, how would you respond?
You're in that position because of Orange County voters. If there's something the voters approved—for example, the rural boundaries—and Tallahassee passes legislation that attacks those protections, I'm going to support what the citizens voted for. Government is a function of the people. That's why these positions are elected. In any other career, two or three people decide whether you're qualified for a job. In government, the voters decide.
So my responsibility is 100 percent to support the voters and the direction they want to go. Serving on the commission would be a privilege, and I believe I could make a big difference. But my financial stability comes from my law practice. If someone were to threaten me and say, "Marsha, if you don't agree to this, we're going to remove you," and the voters expected me to defend what they elected me to do, then go ahead and remove me. My responsibility in this position is to support the voters.
Has never been elected to public office.
Attorney
Florida A&M University, College of Law, J.D., 2011
Rollins College, B.A., Psychology, 1998
