STUART – The City Commission majority here voted on first reading Sept. 9 to set the tentative millage rate a 5.0 mils and approve staff’s proposed $104.9 million 2026/2027 Budget, with Commissioner Sean Read dissenting on both and insisting the city go to the 4.7499 rollback rate instead.
The rollback rate is the millage rate the Commission would need to assess to bring in the same revenue as the current budget due to the subsequent rise in property values.
The amount would not cover the added expenses of nine new employees included in the proposed budget for next year, however. Commissioners have had to hold their budget hearings in the midst of very sudden staff and commissioner changes resulting from the August Primary Election that filled the seat vacated by former Commissioner Christopher Collins last April with former Commissioner Merritt Matheson. That created a more pro-business majority, which immediately fired City Manager Michael Giardino – whom the Board hired to replace Michael Mortell, which the previous majority fired last year – and chose Commissioner Eula Clarke to replace Mayor Sean Reed on Aug. 24. Shortly afterwards, Finance Director Kate Ambrosini resigned – who was hired in April to replace long time Finance Director Louis Boglioli who resigned in early February amidst allegations against the former Board majority. Community Services Director Jim Chrulski is now serving as interim city manager while the new Board majority negotiates to rehire Mortell for his old position. The first and second readings of the 2026/2027 Fiscal Year Budget are being handled by Budget & Procurement Manager Anthony Cooling, who came onboard April 13.
Cooling offered a brief introduction to the proposed millage rate during the latest meeting.
“The tentative millage rate put together for the budget is 5.0 mils,” he said. “The rollback rate was 4.7499. The maximum rate is 5.22. The total levy will be $21 million, but Florida law requires that we budget at 95 percent of the actual millage. That comes down basically to $19.1 million, plus an additional roughly $479,000 for debt millage, which is separate.”
Commissioner Reed was the first to comment afterwards.
“I don’t support increasing the taxes on our constituents,” he said. “We as public officials should at least justify why the tax increase is necessary. Speaking with the prior city manager and potentially even maybe the new city manager, I think some of our departments might be bloated. I can go into details if you’d like, but I don’t see any justification to increase taxes.”
Commissioner Matheson immediately responded.
“I think it’s important to discuss what should be cut,” he said. “The 5.0 millage is the recommendation to move forward with the balanced adopted budget. It’s my understanding that this budget has nine new positions, three fire and six city employees. Is it the recommendation by my fellow commissioners to remove these positions, or what other items should be removed? I’d like to hear that. We have over $1 million of unfunded capital improvement projects. Those in a way are just kicking the can down the road.”
Commissioner Reed, however, did not address the new employees in his response.
“I agree with you on the capital improvement stuff and the unfunded stormwater management projects,” he replied. “I think we need to set the beautification projects aside. If we have a backlog of stormwater management issues, why are we doing complete streetscapes [and] trees? If we have roads that are flooding and sidewalks that are broken, stop with the beautification.”
When Matheson continued to pressure him for more concrete examples, Reed responded with a figure that ultimately represented a factual error on the proposed budget before them that night.
“Do we really need to spend $500,000 for designing and reengineering Confusion Corner?” he asked. “How many times can you go back there and continually waste taxpayer money? I was part of this Board majority when Michael Mortell was removed, and I caused taxpayers $100,000 [Actually $102,200 in severance pay]. This Board majority caused taxpayers probably that as well with hiring him. Maybe we shouldn’t get paid for four years up here. That’ll pay the taxpayers back.”
When Commissioner Matheson agreed with him on Confusion Corner, CRA Executive Director Pinal Gandhi-Savdas chimed in emphasizing that cutting CRA projects wouldn’t necessarily help the budget.
“It’s actually $250,000 for Confusion Corner,” she said. “At the last meeting, I did say we corrected the CIP. The CRA has enough funding to do the capital improvement projects even if you reduce the millage.”
Commissioner Laura Giobbi then agreed she and her colleagues should review some of the capital projects further after reminding them they’d told staff to come back with the 5.0 millage rate.
“If we do adopt this moving forward, perhaps we should take a stronger look as a Commission at the capital improvement projects to try and rank them,” she said. “We sit up here and talk about CRA and budget money. The reality is, this is the taxpayers’ money, and I think sometimes this is a forgotten issue. It is their money.”
For his part, Commissioner Campbell Rich gave his colleagues a hard choice.
“The budget proposed to us is $113 million versus the adopted budget of 2026, which was $103 million,” he said. “That’s just under a 10 percent increase. If we’re accepting those obligations, including that additional staff, then as Commissioner Matheson said, either come up with the cuts or accept the responsibility. We have to balance the budget.”
After Cooling provided further details at the mayor’s request for the city’s increased payroll and insurance costs, the Commission voted 4-1 with Commissioner Reed dissenting to approve the 5.0 millage rate. Commissioners then voted unanimously to approve the Fire Protection Assessment, the capital improvement plan and the general wage increase. Commissioners concluded with the budget, approving it with a 4-1 vote as Reed dissented.
The City Commission is scheduled to hold the second readings on Monday, Sept. 14 beginning at 5:15 p.m.