Milton city leaders on Sept. 11 adopted a 4.118 mill operating property tax rate for fiscal year 2026 and approved the city’s final budget, capital improvements plan and two ordinances including a revised pay table, all by unanimous votes at a special public hearing.

City staff presented a series of slides comparing the proposed city millage and the county municipal services taxing unit (MSTU) scenarios, explaining how the city’s decision to opt out of the county MSTU affects total tax bills for property owners. "This post is 100% accurate for 50% of the story," Mr. Spears, a staff member who led the presentation, told the council as he summarized earlier social-media coverage and the fuller tax picture.

The staff presentation is the practical basis for the council’s votes: the adopted 4.118 mills is the operating millage the resolution sets. The presentation showed that the city millage alone at 4.118 mills will generate about $2.5 million in operating revenue (compared with $1.8 million at 2.99 mills), producing roughly $683,000 in new recurring general fund revenue. Because the city is opting out of the county MSTU, staff said the net combined millage for city property owners would be about 13.4228 mills, a 6.6% decrease from the current total millage, which staff said translates to a savings of about $95.10 for a homeowner with a $100,000 assessed value after exemptions.

Why it matters: the council’s decision sets tax collections that fund public safety and other city priorities. During the presentation Mr. Spears said a scenario that would have retained the county MSTU while adopting a higher city millage would have raised bills substantially: "If we would have gone with the millage rate as you're considering here tonight and left the MSTU in place... that would have been a considerable increase of a $111.90 for that same homeowner of a $100,000 assessed home," he said.

Council review and votes followed staff remarks and brief public comment. A member of the public said the change was an opportunity to explain the savings to residents and to bring residents within the city boundaries onto the city tax rolls, while stressing that those residents would still pay less under the city structure than under the county rate.

The council voted unanimously on the capital improvements plan resolution, the final millage resolution (adopting a 4.118 mills operating rate), the final budget resolution for fiscal year 2026, an ordinance establishing the budget, and an ordinance updating the classified salary pay table with the understanding the pay schedule will be reviewed next year. During the budget discussion council members confirmed the general fund is reduced by 4.23% and the overall budget shows a decrease of about 22.11% compared with the prior year, as staff presented.

Votes at a glance:
- Resolution (Capital Improvements Plan): motion by Councilman McKee, second Councilman Powell; unanimously approved by all 8 members. (Transcript reference: presentation and vote.)
- Resolution (Final millage rate adopting 4.118 mills): motion by Councilman McKee, second Councilman Hawthorne; unanimously approved. Staff cited certified gross taxable value of $643,306,174 and noted the adopted rate exceeds the rolled-back rate (2.7868 mills) by 47.77% as stated in the resolution. (Transcript reference: statutory public-hearing language and vote.)
- Resolution (Final budget for FY2026): motion by Councilman Powell, second Councilman McKee; unanimously approved.
- Ordinance (Establishing the FY2026 budget; "Ordinance 10-25" as read): motion by Councilman Powers, second Councilman Powell; unanimously approved.
- Ordinance (Amending classified salary pay table; "Ordinance 11-25" as read): motion by Councilwoman Farrow, second Councilman Powell; unanimously approved. Councilwoman Farrow asked for and received assurance the schedule will be reviewed prior to next year’s budget meeting.

Discussion versus decision: most substantive discussion was staff presentation of tax scenarios, revenue projections and budget impacts; public comment was brief and supportive of outreach explaining savings to residents. Council discussion before votes was minimal and the council moved through required statutory motions and roll calls for adoption.

What staff said: Mr. Spears walked council members through timeline milestones leading to the hearings, explained the difference between the city millage and county MSTU impacts, and summarized revenue and reserve implications, including that any millage reduction from the proposed rate would require a dollar-for-dollar draw on reserves to rebalance the budget. Laura McDill, a staff member who led the formal resolution presentations, read each resolution and ordinance title for the public record and answered procedural questions.

The public hearing concluded with the council thanking staff for the work on the budget and adjourning the special meeting. The council indicated the city’s fiscal plan balances the budget without drawing on reserves under the adopted rate and prioritizes funding for public safety.