Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxes Ballot Measures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews proposed sales-surtax, millage renewal resolutions to place on 2026 ballot
Summary
Brevard Public Schools staff presented draft resolutions asking the county commission to place a half-cent sales surtax extension (proposed 10-year term) and a re-formatted Ad Valorem millage renewal on the November 2026 ballot; staff and board members discussed timeline, ballot language and required state review.
Brevard Public Schools staff presented draft resolutions Sept. 9 asking the Brevard County Commission to place a half‑cent capital outlay sales surtax extension and an Ad Valorem millage renewal on the November 2026 ballot. The staff recommended sending the resolutions to the county after the board’s Sept. 23 meeting and noted the sales‑surtax proposal would require a state review and performance audit because it changes program parameters.
The sales‑surtax resolution is proposed to extend the current term from six years to 10 years and to permit proceeds to be used for new construction or replacement of existing facilities in addition to renewal, technology and security improvements. “The sales tax resolution is different in 2 ways. The first way is proposed extending the term from 6 years to 10 years. … And the second aspect … is relating to allowing for the proceeds to be used for either new construction or for replacement of existing facilities,” said Sue Han, the staff lead on the renewal teams.
Board members asked about the wording that will appear on the ballot and whether the board can influence the short title that voters see. Staff replied the full ballot language is included in the resolution and that county officials and the state review body (referred to in the meeting as “Opaga”) may request changes. Staff said the proposed ballot title for the sales surtax would read, in part, “half cent sales surtax extension for critical school facility security and technology.” Several board members requested clearer language on the millage item to state explicitly that the measure is a renewal rather than new tax, and staff said they would revise the draft to make that clearer before it is returned for board action.
Staff also explained one advantage of a 10‑year sales‑surtax term is calendar separation from the millage cycles so the two measures will not align again for several cycles, reducing voter fatigue. Staff noted the county school board statutory maximum for a local capital outlay surtax is a half cent; the county itself may levy larger surtaxes for other authorized purposes, the presentation said. No formal motion was taken; staff said the draft resolutions will come back for board action Sept. 23 and then be forwarded to the county commission and the state review process.
Board members and staff discussed the schedule and required steps, including the county and state review, and the potential for a state-initiated performance audit because the district is proposing changes to the surtax parameters. Staff said they will update the draft language to reflect the board’s feedback and include a clearer statement that the millage request is a renewal.
Outcome/next steps: staff will revise the draft resolutions and present the items for board consideration at the Sept. 23 meeting; if approved by the board they will be forwarded to the county commission and the state review body for the required processes.
Ending: No final action was taken at the Sept. 9 work session; staff and board members set a timeline to return the revised resolutions for formal board action and to begin the county and state steps needed for a 2026 ballot placement.
