Sanford hears fire-assessment study: consultant outlines $2.38M capital option, roughly $95 a year for a typical home

At a Sanford City Commission work session on May 12, 2025, consultant Michael Burton presented a follow-up study on a proposed citywide fire-assessment fee, outlining funding options, sample parcel-level charges and a timetable for adoption if commissioners elect to proceed.

Burton said the 5‑year average capital need used in the presentation was $2,380,000. Under the study’s methodology, the assessment components included a per‑parcel “response readiness” charge of $37.66 and a structure-loss-protection charge equal to $1.52 per $5,000 of structure value. Using an average single‑family structure value of $190,000, Burton presented a calculated annual assessment of about $95.42 for a typical single‑family home (an equivalent monthly amount of roughly $7.95). He also showed a higher-revenue example: a $5,000,000 revenue target would raise the single-family annual charge to about $198.51 (approximately $16.54 per month).

Burton compared Sanford’s proposed numbers to other nearby jurisdictions that have adopted fire assessments and said Sanford’s proposed capital-only approach would not be out of line with regional practice. He noted his survey was based on publicly available information and an internet search; he additionally said he had used an automated tool to locate examples and that he could perform a more extensive survey if requested.

Commissioners and staff pressed for details about implementation and communications. The consultant said tax-exempt properties can be excluded by ordinance but that excluding them would shift their share of costs back to the general fund. Burton described several implementation choices discussed in other cities: pairing an assessment with a millage (property‑tax) adjustment, phasing in the assessment over multiple years (e.g., 50% first year, 75% second, 100% third), indexing annual increases to inflation, or adopting an annual rate-setting process that would not require a full mailed notice if rates do not change.

The timeline Burton presented and staff discussed would require several steps to meet the property-appraiser and tax-roll deadlines for inclusion on the FY26 tax bill. Key dates and steps discussed by staff and the consultant included:

- Finalize the study with the latest property data in early June; present final rates and recommendations at the commission meeting (staff mentioned June 9 as the next meeting). - Late June/early July: introduce an initial resolution and ordinance that set the proposed and maximum rates for the next five years (the ordinance sets maximums so smaller annual changes can be made without a full mailing). - Mid-July: first-class mail notices to property owners (minimum 20 days prior to the final hearing). - Late August/early September: final hearing and adoption; the adopted assessment roll must be transmitted to the property appraiser and tax collector by September 21 (staff said the property-appraiser certified roll process has a Sept. 21 date; the consultant referenced the state statute Sept. 30 deadline).

Commissioners discussed the public-relations difficulty other jurisdictions faced when proposing assessments. Burton said Cape Coral used a fire assessment to offset a prior general-fund deficit and paired it with a millage adjustment; in another example, Winter Springs faced neighborhood backlash and reverted to county fire protection after political opposition. Commissioners said they wanted stronger public communications and suggested staging public information meetings prior to formal adoption steps.

On the procedural question, commissioners did not adopt an ordinance at the work session. Multiple commissioners expressed support for finalizing the study using the average capital-only figure and returning to the commission in early June with parcel-level results and a recommended rate (a ‘‘go/no‑go’’ in early June). Staff emphasized that the commission must give final direction promptly if it wants the assessment to appear on FY26 tax bills because the timeline for notices and the certified roll has fixed statutory windows.

No formal vote to adopt an assessment occurred at the May 12 work session; commissioners provided direction to staff to finalize the study using the capital-only assumption and prepare the materials for formal consideration.