The most pressing topic was the debate over the tentative millage rate for the upcoming fiscal year. The proposed rates ranged from maintaining the previous year’s rate of 2.65 to increasing it to 2.8. Some members argued that the higher rate would allow the village to accommodate certain liabilities and agreements, including a collective bargaining agreement, while ensuring essential services were not compromised. One council member clarified that increasing the rate to 2.8 would necessitate a four-fifths vote for final approval, emphasizing the importance of a collaborative approach. Ultimately, the motion to adopt the 2.8 rate passed with a 3-2 margin.

Following the millage rate decision, the council addressed the adoption of the tentative budget, which included various provisions related to budget management, expenditure controls, and personnel authorizations. The council debated different budget scenarios, with one member moving to adopt scenario 1B, which included the 2.8 millage rate. However, this motion faced opposition and failed. Subsequently, scenario 2B was proposed and ultimately approved with a vote of 4-1.

Another discussion revolved around the proposed Publix development, which many residents were concerned about due to its potential impact on Islamorada. Council members debated whether to address the matter during the budget hearing or wait until the regular meeting on September 10th. Elizabeth Jolin emphasized the importance of public input and the need for the council to communicate their position to the county. The council reached a consensus to prepare a resolution expressing opposition to the project, addressing community impacts such as traffic concerns, and to revisit the topic at the next meeting.

Public comments revealed underlying tensions regarding budgetary practices and operational management. Joe Zimac urged the council to adopt a zero-based budgeting approach and raised concerns about the management and usage of village vehicles. Jill Zaborski highlighted issues related to the Kilgore Wastewater Treatment District, including multiple sewer pipe breaks, and emphasized the need for improved wastewater management. Another speaker criticized the Wastewater Department’s performance and suggested hiring engineering services to address system deficiencies.

The council also engaged in a debate over charitable contributions, questioning the appropriateness of the council deciding which charities to fund. One member argued that the decision should rest with taxpayers, while another emphasized the ethical responsibility to support organizations like the Florida Keys Children’s Shelter. The council ultimately decided to remove the charitable contribution portion from the budget for future consideration, highlighting a divide between supporting essential social services and managing budget constraints.

The budget discussion included the allocation of a $3 million land acquisition fund, which sparked differing opinions among council members. Some argued for a more reasonable starting figure, while others emphasized the long-term benefits of acquiring land to prevent future development pressures.

In addition, the council discussed the financial structure and sustainability of the Wastewater fund. Concerns were raised about the need to pull $2 million from the general fund for Wastewater operations, prompting questions about the fund’s self-sustainability. The council acknowledged the need to revisit the fee structure to ensure the fund becomes self-sustaining and to address ongoing maintenance challenges, including pipeline integrity and infrastructure repairs.

The meeting also touched on the Marina fund’s financial status, with discussions about the necessity of multi-year capital planning to manage enterprise funds effectively. One member suggested that the council collaborate with staff to adjust budgeting strategies to include a longer-term view. The conversation highlighted recent upgrades at the marina and the importance of aligning marina rates with those of similar private facilities.

Lastly, the council discussed staff compensation and cost-of-living adjustments, with recommendations for a 5% increase despite the absence of a merit system. Public comments emphasized the need for careful financial planning, particularly concerning union wage increases and the impact of wastewater rate hikes on residents.