Winter Springs adopts 2.62 millage rate and $79.6M budget after heated debate over capital items

The City of Winter Springs adopted a final operating millage rate of 2.62000 mills and approved a $79,623,211 final budget for fiscal year 2025–26, but not before an extended and at times contentious commission debate about specific line items.

Miss Holly Queen (finance) presented Resolution 2025‑9 to establish the final millage of 2.62000 mills and clarified that, while the rate matched the tentative rate, it was 5.94% higher than the city’s computed rollback rate. Deputy Mayor Kade Resnik moved to adopt the millage resolution; Commissioner Sarah Baker seconded. Commissioners recorded votes on the motion in the public hearing and the resolution passed with Commissioner Paul Diaz recorded as No.

On the final budget (Resolution 2025‑20), finance staff reported total citywide expenditures of $79,623,211. Deputy Mayor Resnik again moved to adopt the budget and Commissioner Baker seconded. Commissioner Victoria Bruce objected and requested that the commission revisit or remove several capital and equipment items she described as unnecessary at this time. She read a list of items she wanted reviewed, including building services items (counter remodel $125,000; lobby kiosk $200,000), parks requests (Trotwood lacrosse wall $100,000), and multiple vehicle and equipment replacements (two zero‑turn mowers $28,000; F‑250 pickup $70,000; other fleet replacements).

Bruce said she believed the list represented a "wish list" and argued that the commission should not add new amenities while struggling to maintain existing infrastructure. “We need to cut back on some of the things that are not needed,” she said. She asked whether directors had been consulted; when staff replied that some line items were carryovers or tied to specific funding sources, she argued for more time to review.

City staff and the city manager pushed back on the characterization that the budget items were discretionary. The manager and department directors said several items were either funded from restricted sources or were part of the city’s five‑year capital and vehicle replacement plans. Finance staff and Brian Dunigan (director of administrative services and operations) explained that some funds (for example, the building services projects) had been carried forward from prior years when work was not completed and that the arbor fund (line 545270) included a $250,000 FY26 allocation for phase one of a two‑year Tuscilla Crossings tree replanting (total estimated $500,000 split across FY26 and FY27). Dunigan said the urban maintenance group had mowers beyond recommended useful life and recommended replacement.

Commissioners debated procedure and timing; the city attorney and manager confirmed the commission could adopt the budget tonight (it is legally required to adopt a budget before leaving the meeting) and still return later with individual budget amendment motions to remove or revise specific items. Deputy Mayor Resnik proposed a compromise to include a placeholder or set‑aside amount and then identify rescission items in the next two meetings; other commissioners discussed finding savings across the budget to offset new projects.

A roll call vote to adopt the final budget showed recorded No votes from Commissioners Paul Diaz and Victoria Bruce and Yes votes from Deputy Mayor Kade Resnik, Commissioner Mark Caruso and Commissioner Sarah Baker; the motion passed by majority vote.

What the vote means: The commission approved the tax and spending package required to operate the city in FY2026. Commissioners retain the ability to propose budget amendments in future meetings to remove or reallocate individual items, provided those changes conform to fund restrictions and state law.

Next steps: Staff said they would work with commissioners on any requested follow‑ups and that individual items can be returned to future agendas for amendment or rescission.