Gardens $3M, 6.5% Tax Increase – is it Justified?

At the last Council meeting on the budget, with the big jump in property valuations providing a windfall in city taxes, several members of the public suggested that some of it should be returned to the taxpayer in the form of a millage reduction. On the Council, only Mayor Premuroso acknowledged that the outlook is favorable, and the city can afford to do so, proposing that $500K be taken from the “budget stabilization fund”.

Is this appropriate?

Several on the council objected on the basis of the city’s “5 Year Plan”, which calls for the millage to remain at 5.74 for the next 5 years. The Plan is really about revenue and expenditures though, not millage.

Three years ago, in the 2012 budget, the “5 Year Plan” forecast ad-valorem tax revenue in 2015 to be $45.6M. Today’s budget, is in fact $49M, up $3.4M or 7% above the “5 Year Plan”. When including revenue from all sources, it is up $8M or 12.5% above the “5 Year Plan”.

More to the point, in 2012 the “5-Year Plan” projected the 2015 undesignated fund balances (ie. reserves) would be 22% of expenditures – instead we are at 32% – relatively flush with cash.

So it seems that the Mayor is correct – the city certainly has the ability to reduce the millage by some amount.

If you believe that growth in the size of government should be only undertaken with careful consideration, then any increase in spending above what is dictated by population growth and inflation (currently about 1% and 2% respectively) requires an explanation. Holding to that measure would suggest that half of the windfall should be claimed by the city, the other half returned, resulting in a millage of about 5.56.

Any increase above that level should be justified on the basis of specific needs that are immediate and cannot be deferred until future years.

Council Election Results

Congratulations to David Levy for winning another 3 years on the City Council. Congratulations also to James D’Loughy for running a good campaign and making the race unusually competitive. The voters have spoken (although only 11% of them did so), and it was good that they had a choice in this race.

From the graph below, you will see that David Levy maintains a strong base of support in Ballen Isles and PGA National, while Mr. D’Loughy picked up support in Frenchman’s Reserve and Creek, coming within 6 votes there.

Click on the map segment for detailed results for that precinct or refer to the table below.


Precinct Registered Cast Levy D’Loughy % Turnout
1186 1459 153 67 86 10
1188 787 47 17 30 6
1190 2358 215 81 134 9
1192 1438 97 56 41 7
1194 1875 482 244 238 26
1238 1541 222 131 91 14
1240 2484 236 154 82 10
1242 2491 322 204 118 13
1244 1502 183 122 61 12
1246 2140 133 59 74 6
1248 1491 210 106 104 14
1250 70 13 9 4 19
1252 2272 726 573 153 32
1254 442 59 46 13 13
1260 1298 126 49 77 10
1264 7 0 0 0 0
1266 563 11 6 5 2
1268 302 8 6 2 3
1270 12 0 0 0 0
1272 1898 183 75 108 10
1274 1602 163 63 100 10
1280 436 30 13 17 7
1284 2268 119 101 17 5
1288 38 7 6 1 18
1290 2143 151 84 67 7
1292 61 9 3 6 15
1296 727 17 10 7 2
1306 8 0 0 0 0
1310 4 0 0 0 0
1324 1304 40 22 18 3
1326 588 52 25 27 9
1340 14 0 0 0 0
1352 2067 125 69 56 6
1360 932 72 19 53 8
1372 149 6 3 3 4
TOTALS 149 4217 2423 1793 10.9

« Previous Page