Tamarac adopts $293.98 million fiscal 2026 budget after heated public hearing over last-minute additions

The Tamarac City Commission adopted the fiscal year 2026 operating and capital budget on Wednesday, approving a tentative $293,982,462 total budget (including a $114,195,279 general fund) after a contested vote that split the commission 3-2.

The final vote followed a contentious public hearing and internal debate over several line items the city manager added late in the process — approximately $175,000 in new allocations for items including expanded travel for the commission, a public-relations consultant, a business expo, sister-city seed funding and a $25,000 grant for a Black/African American chamber. Commissioner Bolton moved to include the manager’s additions; that motion passed 3-2 (Bolton — yes; Wright — no; Patterson — yes; Vice Mayor Daniel — yes; Mayor Gomez — no).

What staff presented: Budget Manager Jeff Streeter and Finance staff said the tentative FY2026 operating and capital budget totals $293,982,462, an increase of $53,646,238 (about 23.8%) from the amended FY2025 budget of $240,336,224. The tentative general fund budget is $114,195,279, an increase of $12,050,722 from FY2025. Streeter and Christine Cajust, director of financial services, outlined adjustments made between the city manager’s proposed budget and the tentative budget, including removing a proposed public-services director position, restoring an assistant city manager position, and cutting approximately $1,704,000 from the general fund to reach the tentative level.

Public comment and points of contention: More than a half-dozen residents urged the commission to reduce spending and to be more transparent about last-minute changes. Resident Kate Johnson questioned travel and public-information increases and described the budget as “bloated.” Resident Sandy Hill and others warned the budget could deplete reserves and leave the city vulnerable to emergencies. Mark Gorgon and Stuart Webster also criticized the timing and substance of added items such as a $60,000 public-relations consultant and funding for a chamber group.

Staff responses and clarifications: Finance staff said the added $175,000 was presented in the name of transparency although the items were made available to commissioners shortly before the hearing. The specific late additions listed on the slide shown at the meeting were: $30,000 — additional commission travel; $25,000 — sister cities seed funding; $20,000 — increased printing/binding for PIO; $5,000 — commission office supplies; $10,000 — economic-development business expo; $60,000 — additional public-relations support for outreach and business marketing; $25,000 — appropriation for a Black/African American Chamber of Commerce activity.

Budget mechanics and reserves: Staff reported the city’s unrestricted fund balance is about $57 million and that, after the FY2026 appropriations and planned use of fund balance, the city would have roughly $11 million of unrestricted reserves remaining if revenues and expenditures track the budget. Staff said the city’s reserve policy calls for two months of operating expenses (16.667% of general fund expenditures). Finance staff also warned that adopting a rollback rate instead of the adopted 7.0 mill would require roughly $2.7 million in cuts to balance the budget.

Votes and procedure: The commission first took a motion to adopt the budget as presented without the manager’s late additions (motion by Commissioner Wright; second by Vice Mayor Daniel). That motion failed on a 4-1 roll call (only Commissioner Patterson voted yes). Commissioner Bolton then moved to adopt the budget including the manager’s $175,000 additions; that motion passed 3-2. The manager said some of the added items fall within the manager’s procurement/administrative authority but confirmed on the record that several of the items (sister cities seed funding, the chamber contribution, the business expo and related economic-development items) would return to the commission for formal approvals.

What’s next: With the millage and budget adopted, the city moves into implementation and the commission asked staff to return with follow-up information on several late additions, historical comparative budget data and the specific mechanics of any proposed grants or contracts linked to the new appropriations.

Speakers quoted in this article spoke during the temporary ordinance 2600 public hearing and subsequent budget motion debates.