Cocoa Beach reviews $5‑year CIP; $53 million muck‑capping project drives FY26 spike and leaves $12 million local exposure

Cocoa Beach city staff briefed the City Commission on the proposed fiscal year 2026 five‑year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) at a June budget workshop, saying the draft shows a large, grant‑backed muck‑capping project that drives a spike in FY26 spending and could leave the city on the hook for roughly $12 million if additional grant funding does not materialize.

Finance Director Hannah Huy Han told the commission that the CIP “is not finalized. The intent is to brief the commission on those department requests and facilitate discussion on the items that have been requested.” She said the FY26 CIP total includes $53 million tied to the muck‑capping project and that $41 million of that amount has been awarded in grants: “There was $12,000,000 awarded by the DEP and $29,000,000 awarded from Savor Indian River Lagoon,” she said, adding that the remainder would be the city’s responsibility unless more grants are secured.

Why it matters: the workshop presented a preliminary spending plan that staff said is intended to be pared and prioritized before adoption. Commissioners pressed staff on refinancing options for existing debt, the timing and irrevocability of large out‑year commitments (notably for a planned fire apparatus build slot), and the risk that stopping or scaling the muck‑capping work midstream would be costly.

Key facts and figures - CIP drafting status: staff called the plan preliminary and said TRIM revenue estimates will arrive in July; the commission will consider more detailed operating budget information in a second workshop. - Muck capping: $53,000,000 total shown in FY26 spending; $41,000,000 in grants already reflected in staff materials; staff identified a potential $12,000,000 city liability if additional grants are not obtained. - City debt snapshot presented by staff: total outstanding city debt about $33,300,000 with FY26 annual debt service slightly over $4,000,000. Major remaining balances cited included approximately $7.7 million for the police station loan and $2.3 million remaining on a fire station loan (figures presented as fiscal year‑end projections). - Spoil/dredge site: staff said the city’s spoil site holds about 68,760 cubic yards (transcript figure: “68,760 cubic cubes of fill”) and that spoil removal for future dredging will require barging and off‑island disposal unless contractors or nearby federal projects can accept it.

Discussion highlights Commissioners asked staff to prioritize “needle‑mover” projects and to look for economies of scale, especially on street repaving. Staff said the FY27 and later years contain a number of large line items that can be shifted depending on commission direction and grant outcomes.

Multiple commissioners asked for clearer labeling of grant‑eligible items and for notes in the CIP showing which items are already grant funded versus those that would rely on city funds. Finance staff said governmental accounting practice requires showing both the expense and the grant reimbursement on the books, which is why the full project costs appear in the CIP even where reimbursements are expected.

Commissioners also pressed on projects that staff described as effectively “locked in” because of multiyear supplier build slots, most notably the planned engine/ladder truck that staff said requires entering an agreement early to secure a future build slot and price; staff warned that once the city commits to a build slot the funding for that future purchase is less flexible.

Other notable program and project items discussed - Street resurfacing: staff said a 2023 pavement condition assessment estimated a citywide need near $15 million; commissioners debated whether to pursue economy‑of‑scale repaving versus piecemeal repairs and asked staff to refine the placeholder numbers into a more detailed plan tied to specific streets and timing. - Spoil removal and dredging: staff described constraints at the city’s spoil island and outlined options to barge material to mainland disposal sites or identify contractors or federal partners who could take material as fill; staff said spoil was “dried out” and potentially usable as fill if appropriate infrastructure is available for barging and loading. - Recreation and facilities: staff flagged several large recreation projects and carryovers, including ballfield repairs and stadium lighting (staff cited a recent vendor estimate near $741,000 for a full rebuild, while noting lower‑cost retrofit options could keep costs near earlier estimates), tennis court renovation proposals tied to outside partners and grant opportunities, skate park coping replacement and ongoing maintenance, and a proposed golf simulator for a restaurant that commissioners asked Leisure Services to present separately before committing funds. - Utilities and SRF loans: staff summarized several State Revolving Fund (SRF) loans used for water and treatment plant projects and said refinancing or refunding opportunities depend on future interest rates and legal eligibility (SRF loans apply to water infrastructure through DEP).

Quotes from the meeting “The CIP being presented is not finalized … the intent is to brief the commission on those department requests and facilitate discussion on the items that have been requested,” Finance Director Hannah Huy Han said.

“So I was never a big fan of the capping project … now it’s gonna cost city $12,000,000 to do something that future generations are gonna have to deal with,” a commissioner said during discussion of project scope and lifecycle costs.

“It’s 68,760 cubic cubes of fill,” Public Works staff member Scott said when asked for the spoil site volume; staff later agreed to share detailed survey numbers by email.

What remained unresolved Staff and commissioners did not adopt a final CIP at the workshop. Commissioners requested (1) clearer labeling of which projects are fully grant‑funded and which create city exposure, (2) refined cost estimates on several large line items (softball field lights, parking garage conduit replacement, parking garage repairs, and street-by‑street paving lists), and (3) follow up on potential external partners and contractors who could accept spoil material to reduce trucking and barging costs.

Next steps Staff said the TRIM schedule will provide updated revenue information in July and planned a second workshop that will present operating budgets, millage scenarios and personnel schedules. Staff further committed to producing refined cost estimates, a clearer grant‑eligibility footnote for CIP items and to follow up with commissioners on specific trade‑offs and possible refinancing options.

Ending The City Commission did not take formal votes at the workshop; the meeting served to surface priorities, identify high‑risk items and give staff direction on which projects to refine before formal budget hearings and adoption later in the summer.