The Apopka City Commission on Wednesday failed to set a proposed property tax rate for fiscal year 2026-27 after commissioners split over city staff’s recommended 0.75-mill increase. 

The special meeting had been scheduled for the commission to set a proposed operating millage rate of 5.1876 mills, a 0.75-mill increase over the city’s current rate of 4.4376 mills.  

Finance Director Blanche Sherman said the proposed rate, the rolled-back rate and the date of the city’s first budget hearing must be submitted to the Orange County Property Appraiser under Florida’s Truth in Millage, or TRIM, process. 

The proposed millage rate is intended to support a preliminary $287.3 million budget for fiscal year 2026-27. According to city staff, the preliminary general fund is projected to generate about $104.5 million in revenue while operating and capital needs total $121.1 million, leaving a gap the city proposes to cover through a combination of additional property tax revenue and assigned reserves. 

Commissioner Nadia Anderson said she could not support the proposal because she believes the preliminary budget includes spending that is not essential while uncertainty remains over potential state property tax reforms. 

“I feel that the budget that’s presented is not fiscally sound or responsible in light of what’s going on right now,” Anderson said. She said many local cities are preparing for possible reductions in potential property taxes. 

Sherman told commissioners unanimous agreement was needed to proceed with the proposed rate under consideration that evening. Without unanimous support, commissioners tabled the item. 

Mayor Nick Nesta questioned Anderson about whether she had discussed her concerns with department heads and emphasized that the budget remains a work in progress. 

“This is not final. It never was final,” Nesta said. “This vote tonight does not mean a final budget. It’s simply a proposed operating millage rate.”  

Nesta added that his goal remains reducing the proposed increase to 0.5 mills before the budget is finalized. 

Much of the discussion centered on balancing residents’ concerns about higher taxes with the city’s growing infrastructure and staffing needs. 

Vice Mayor Diane Velazquez said departments had already reduced spending requests but warned that lowering the proposed millage too soon could result in delaying projects once again. 

“If we get to the point where we lower the millage, and now they realize these are some important things that we feel we should have, but we’re not going to have them, it’s like we’re still kicking some of the projects down the road,” she said. 

Nesta echoed those concerns, saying city staff continues searching for efficiencies while attempting to provide services expected by residents. 

“Our departments have not grown the way they should have as our city has grown,” he said. 

Anderson, however, questioned several proposed new administrative positions, including a chief of staff and other proposed administrative positions, arguing that the city should instead prioritize infrastructure improvements such as roads and utilities. 

“We should be trying to figure out how we can not cut positions for our current staff,” she said.  

Sherman reiterated that commissioners could adopt a higher tentative millage rate now and reduce it later as the budget is refined, but they could not later increase the rate once it is set. She also reminded commissioners that growth-related revenues have slowed while operating costs continue to rise. 

Nesta cautioned that reducing the proposed rate too early could leave the city without sufficient revenue to address long-delayed infrastructure needs. 

“We need to be setting high right now and get the services the residents need this year,” he said.