Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Tax Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Town manager warns proposed property-tax amendment could force deep cuts and planning changes

Financial Advisory Board · June 9, 2026
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

At a Financial Advisory Board meeting, the town manager and finance staff outlined scenarios showing a proposed constitutional amendment on property taxes could reduce town revenue by hundreds of thousands to millions over several years, prompting discussion of cuts, fee options, and capital deferrals.

Town manager Marshall Labye and finance staff outlined to the Financial Advisory Board the potential fiscal effects of a proposed constitutional amendment on property-tax assessments that will appear on the November ballot.

"It's going to be austerity, draconian cuts matched with tax increases," Marshall Labye said, framing the scenario in stark terms and urging early planning. Staff walked the advisory board through the town's five-year forecasts and explained that while the town can absorb several years under current assumptions, the 2028–2029 window could see material pressure: staff discussed revenue decreases in scenarios ranging from roughly $900,000 in the near term to $1.6–$2.0 million in later years depending on growth assumptions.

Finance staff said the town 's current reliance on property taxes (about 73% of operating revenue) makes it sensitive to changes in assessed-value growth and homestead exemptions. The board was told Highland Beach has a comparatively high share of high-value homesteads that currently support the tax base; staff reported roughly 42% of town properties are homesteaded and generate about 38% of town revenue under current assessment patterns.

Members and staff discussed options to mitigate a shortfall, including modest millage increases, targeted fees (for example, a dedicated fire service fee), use of reserve balances, delaying or scaling back capital projects, and pursuing state appropriations for specific infrastructure. Staff emphasized the trade-offs and timing challenges: "you can't cut your way out of this," one participant said, noting that cuts beyond roughly 10% of operations start to affect personnel and core services.

The advisory board asked staff to continue refining scenarios and to present more detailed trade-offs (for example, the cost implications of a fire-fee option and the operational break-even for the town's fire department) so the commission and public can evaluate choices ahead of the budget adoption schedule.