Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Tequesta budget workshop: council pauses Remembrance Park phase 2, reviews rate increases and capital projects
Loading...
Summary
At a Village of Tequesta budget workshop staff presented a proposed 2025–26 budget with a $4.33 million overall increase; councilors agreed to hold off on construction of Remembrance Park Phase 2 and discussed proposed utility and service rate increases, capital work on Tequesta Drive Bridge, and vehicle-replacement funding.
Village of Tequesta staff presented a draft 2025–26 budget at a council budget workshop, outlining a $4,333,625 increase over the prior year and proposing rate and capital changes. Councilors discussed the use of reserves for park construction, planned water and stormwater projects, refuse assessments, and vehicle and facility replacements, and expressed a majority view to delay Remembrance Park Phase 2 construction and further planning for now.
The budget documents staff reviewed show an overall increase of $4,333,625 driven largely by public safety salaries and personnel costs and higher capital spending for infrastructure. Staff said the general fund increase is roughly $1,000,000 (mainly public safety salaries) plus an additional $400,000 for non-represented CWA personnel costs; transfers are increasing by about $550,000. Staff also reported that the village’s taxable value rose 8.4%, largely from new construction and property sales, and that the village has not proposed a millage increase; the millage was set at 6.4595 at the July 10 council meeting and public hearings were scheduled for Sept. 4 and Sept. 11.
Why it matters: the changes affect residents’ bills, fund balances available for capital projects and emergencies, and timing of infrastructure work. Staff projected that, if the millage remains at 6.4595, the average home in Tequesta (assumed value cited by staff) would see an annual tax increase of about $109 compared with the prior year’s figures presented by staff.
Major budget points discussed
- Fund totals and reserves: Staff displayed summary fund slides showing the proposed budget and fund balances. Even using fund balance for certain items, staff projected an ending general-fund position about $357,000 above a three-month target and estimated an ending unrestricted net position for enterprise funds of about $286,000. The capital improvement fund will lose revenue when a local surtax sunsets in December; staff estimated about $650,000 less annually for capital projects after that expiration.
- Remembrance Park Phase 2 (303 fund): Staff said the construction cost previously identified for Phase 2 was $1,300,000 and that planning/design funding already set aside was about $103,000–$106,000. Multiple council members said they were concerned about using reserves for recurring staffing costs and recommended pausing Phase 2 construction (and in several comments pausing additional planning) until the village can evaluate park usage, maintenance costs, and broader fiscal uncertainty. Staff noted the Phase 2 money would come from reserves (the 303 fund) and clarified it is a one-time expense if approved; councilors discussed phasing the project if they decide to proceed later. The council’s predominant direction at the workshop was to hold off on Phase 2 for now (discussion/direction, not a formal vote).
- Water and sewer (enterprise funds): Staff said enterprise funds plan a 3.5% rate increase (part of a multi-year plan). Staff reviewed water-treatment plant upgrades and energy improvements estimated at $7.3 million, membrane replacement at $1.125 million, and a Phase 2 water-main replacement (Beach Road) estimated at $4.7 million. Staff said portions of those projects are expected to use State Revolving Fund (SRF) funding that the council previously approved in concept.
- Refuse and recycling: Staff recommended a 3.5% annual assessment for refuse/recycling, which staff equated to about $19.56 per year (roughly $1.63 per month) per residential dwelling unit under the noticed scenario. Staff said Waste Management’s contract increase was about 4.88% and that the village’s chosen 3.5% would recoup costs while keeping rates competitive compared with neighboring municipalities.
- Stormwater: Staff proposed a 5% stormwater rate increase; they clarified the earlier misstated figure and confirmed the impact is 57¢ per month (not $57). Staff also proposed transferring half of a utility-tax allocation (about $135,000) to the stormwater fund and listed three stormwater projects proposed for the year.
- Vehicle replacement fund and interlocal payment: Staff explained the vehicle replacement program and noted the village receives roughly $270,000 annually from Palm Beach County (for services to unincorporated areas). The village has been allocating half of that ($135,000) to replace large fire vehicles. The vehicle-replacement program is tiered by fund (utility, building, general) and allocates funds for large and small vehicles separately.
- Capital projects and facilities: Staff described capital projects totaling approximately $37 million across multiple funds over the life of the CIP schedule. Notable near‑term items discussed included Tequesta Drive Bridge work budgeted in the CIP (about $855,000 shown for the bridge), planned sensor/fiber extensions tied to Station 11 and Remembrance Park, a proposed Tequesta Park maintenance facility (staff discussed using a prefabricated metal building option estimated to cost roughly $100,000 to install, though $250,000 remains budgeted for the project), and renovation/remobilization of Station 11 (including beneficial use for code and special law-enforcement functions and fiber connections). Staff noted that mobilizing construction once rather than twice reduces total project costs.
Council direction and next steps
- Remembrance Park Phase 2: Councilors expressed a majority preference to pause Phase 2 construction and to delay additional planning/design work at least until later in the fiscal year so staff can report back on park usage, irrigation and maintenance needs, and reserves. Several councilors suggested phasing any future work to reduce one-time cost spikes.
- Old Dixie Highway improvements: Councilors asked staff to revisit county matching possibilities for Old Dixie improvements given recent county leadership changes; staff noted a phased option and provided a rough phase cost estimate for a connected trail (~$670,000) plus planning costs (~$75,000) as one approach.
- Follow-ups: Staff said they will return with further detail where requested (e.g., refined estimates, phasing options for Remembrance Park and Old Dixie, timing for utility-rate projections once ad valorem collections are clearer in February) and noted the council already set the millage rate and public-hearing dates at a prior meeting. Staff also suggested bringing specific authorizations (for example a small deposit to begin permitting for a maintenance facility) back to the August meeting for council consideration.
Votes or formal actions recorded at the workshop
The workshop was mainly a staff presentation and council discussion; there were no formal council votes on budget adoption or project authorization during the workshop. The only recorded motions at the end of the session were procedural (motion to adjourn, seconded and carried). Councilors identified policy direction (pause Remembrance Park Phase 2 planning/construction) but did not adopt a binding ordinance or budget amendment at that meeting.
Ending
Staff will incorporate council direction into next drafts and bring any required formal actions back to the council (including any requests for deposits or design authorizations) for a future meeting. Public hearings on the tentative millage were scheduled for Sept. 4 and Sept. 11 as part of the budget-adoption timeline.
