Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Property Tax Millage topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sunny Isles Beach commission transmits tentative millage at 1.7 mills after debate

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City of Sunny Isles Beach City Commission voted 3-1 to transmit a tentative ad valorem millage rate of 1.7 mills for fiscal year 2025–26 after debate over lower alternatives and absent finance staff; commission can lower the rate at public hearings but not raise it before final adoption.

The City of Sunny Isles Beach City Commission voted 3-1 Tuesday to transmit a tentative ad valorem millage rate of 1.7 mills per $1,000 of taxable assessed value for fiscal year 2025–26, the number the city must send to the property appraiser by the statutory deadline.

The vote follows more than an hour of discussion and several failed motions as commissioners debated rates between 1.6 and 1.8 mills and pressed staff for additional budget detail before final hearings. The commission was required to transmit a tentative rate by the next business day; the rollback rate cited by staff is 1.6741 mills.

City Manager Stan told the commission the purpose of the special meeting was “to set our tentative millage rate,” and warned that “our millage rate may be lowered during our public budget hearing, but not raised” after transmittal. Stan said staff had reworked the budget since the commission’s prior meeting and could recommend reducing the tentative rate to 1.75 mills through cuts that “represent almost a million dollars.”

Commissioner Jerry argued for a lower tentative rate, saying the city’s reserves and projected revenues support returning more to taxpayers: “This is the residents’ money and we’re only the conservators of those funds,” Jerry said, urging a 1.6-mill rate. Other commissioners said they wanted scenario planning showing what programs or positions would be cut at lower rates before committing to a number.

The city attorney explained the deadline and consequences if the commission failed to act: if no tentative rate is chosen the property appraiser will use the rollback rate and, if the commission later seeks to raise the rate, the appraiser must mail registered notices to taxpayers which staff described as costly. “If you don’t decide that number amongst yourself, you’re relegated to the rollback rate from last year,” the city attorney said.

After several failed motions (including a 2-2 tie on a 1.75-mill motion), the commission adopted the tentative rate of 1.7 mills by roll call: Commissioner Stuyvesant voted no; Commissioner Joseph voted yes; Commissioner Viscara voted yes; Vice Mayor Grama voted yes. The city attorney and city manager reiterated that the rate transmitted is tentative and may be reduced at the commission’s public budget hearing in early September but cannot be increased without additional expense and notices to taxpayers.

Finance Director Tiffany was not present; commissioners repeatedly requested detailed reserve and multi-year projection figures that staff agreed to provide before the first public budget hearing so commissioners could consider scenarios for 1.72, 1.75 and 1.7 mills and the budget cuts each would require.

The commission’s action transmits a proposed rate to the county property appraiser; the commission will consider and may lower the rate during public hearings in early September before final adoption later in the budget process.

The commission adjourned after adopting the tentative millage.