Miami District 2 Commissioner Damian Pardo talks about his budget priorities ahead of the City Commission’s final budget hearing on Thursday September 26.
It’s budget season at City Hall, and last call for residents to speak up about Miami’s proposed $3.5 billion budget for the fiscal year that begins October 1. The City Commission held its first budget hearing on September 7. The meeting was sparsely attended – only about two dozen people spoke. A final budget hearing is scheduled for Thursday September 26 at 5:05 p.m. Miami District 2 Commissioner Damian Pardo sat down with the Spotlight last week to discuss the proposed budget and his funding priorities for the year. The interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.
Spotlight: In his budget statement this year, Mayor Francis Suarez said “property taxes are the lowest they have been in 59 years,” but that’s not true, is it? The city’s proposed tax rate is lower than last year, but property values are rising so many property owners will pay more in taxes. If the budget is adopted as proposed, the city will collect an extra $59.6 million in property taxes this year, an 11 percent increase. Should the City Commission lower the proposed tax rate to give property owners some relief?
Pardo: No. I think it would be irresponsible, because people, I know they are thinking these are my taxes, these are my household issues, but they also have other issues that create quality of life and that’s traffic, that’s flooding, issues that we are not able to deal with, with our current budget. So, if we lower it (the tax rate) to give them a break at the household level, we stand less better positioned to deal with those day-to-day issues that our residents are talking to us about, every single day.
I know that politically, it is really popular to say let’s lower taxes. Everyone is on board with no new taxes, but to lower them means we have to take that money from where, from which project that our residents are also telling us they want and need.
Another point I want to make about taxes: if residents feel strongly that they want those taxes lower, then they all need to come out and make the case for why the commission should do that versus funding some of the other things that people really need.
Spotlight: And you didn’t hear that on September 7.
Pardo: (Not) at all. We did hear no new taxes and I think that had a lot to do with Solid Waste, but Solid Waste is more complicated because (the city) hasn’t been able to determine what to do with the programs. There’s a recycling program that has gone back and forth, like – should we scrap it, do we alter it? There’s the bulky trash pickup that neighborhoods like the Grove rely on, on a weekly basis. The biggest problem with Solid Waste is we have lowest fee by far of any municipality and we provide the greatest service.
(Editor’s note: In June, the commission had given itself permission to raise the annual solid waste fee from $380 to $440, to address a $20 million shortfall in the city’s Solid Waste budget. Earlier this month, the commission voted to keep the fee at $380.)
Spotlight: So, how do you make up that $20 million shortfall?
Pardo: We pay for it from the general fund. I think the biggest issue is that, specifically, that fee is regressive. It doesn’t matter what you make, you’re going to pay the same amount. I think that’s where the philosophy came from, of you know what, there are so many people in (economic) pain, let’s just keep this, bite the bullet again.
Spotlight: At the first budget hearing, you suggested the city should borrow more money to address unmet infrastructure needs. Do you have a specific plan and, if the city does borrow more money, what would be your top priorities for how that money is spent?
Pardo: It’s not up to me. The administration really needs to come up with the calculations, but I’ve had conversations with the CFO (chief financial officer) and he has led me to believe that there is capacity (to borrow more money).
If we can take care of some of these major infrastructure projects, and also address in an even bigger way affordable housing, how do we look at these top priorities for the city and address funding them?
Costs are only going up, so if we are not dealing with these issues now, the numbers are just going to get bigger, in the future.
Spotlight – You’ve talked previously about climate resilience and affordable housing – would those be your priorities?
Pardo: Absolutely. With the Omni CRA we are dealing with a lot of the affordable housing. And specifically in areas like Overtown that have sadly been neglected.
Again, if we have the ability to organize our finances in such a way where we can do a better job of raising capital to address the needs now, because they are only going to get worse, it would be irresponsible not to try to do that.”
Spotlight: Are there Coconut Grove projects that would be among your top priorities?
Pardo: Sure. For example, we are fully funding Armbrister Park this year. We are also dealing with the Coconut Grove Playhouse parking, because that’s the part (of the project) that belongs to the city. So, the MPA (Miami Parking Authority) has finished their designs on the parking garage (and) we have been pushing with the county to approve the MOU (memorandum of understanding). Once that MOU is approved, we can start building – and we will start building the parking garage regardless of what happens (to the playhouse).
Spotlight: At the first budget hearing, a number of people asked the commission to increase marine patrols on the Miami River and Biscayne Bay, to crack down on the boaters who blast music at full volume. Do you think the city should increase marine patrols, and what would be your recommendation?
Pardo: We are fighting to hard to have a unit of police officers to form a marine patrol. That’s a big issue for us. The boat has been paid for – it’s in the budget – the marine patrol boat, but there is no unit. So, that’s a big thing for us with the administration.
Spotlight: A number of speakers also ask the commission to restore the Civilian Investigative Panel (CIP), which investigates civilian complaints against Miami Police. The city intends to eliminate the office to comply with a new state law. People who support the panel say the city should test the law. What is your view?
Pardo: I believe it’s incredibly important for us to have that function of a Civilian Investigative Panel. I don’t know the form because the information we received, the budget is about $1.5 million. They listen to about 300 cases (a year) but of the 300 cases, about three are actionable. So, when you are looking at the cost effectiveness of that budget, we’re like (sighs).
Spotlight: The city’s position is, they are eliminating the office and folding it into the police chief’s advisory board.
Pardo: I think that might do it, but it might not. It’s a concern because, number one, people fought very hard to get this (the CIP). The voters voted, and it’s in the charter.
I also understand the argument (that) times have changed. The police department has done a lot better. The CIP has had a big influence on that. But then, it’s kind of like, at what point does your success eliminate your need. I think that’s the debate.
Spotlight: What will you be focused on between now and the second budget hearing?
Pardo: Bonding capacity. I would like to know what that looks like. If there is a way to lower taxes, I wouldn’t be opposed to that, if it made sense with some of these huge priorities that I know residents want us to address… I would say the top priority is affordable housing and infrastructure, and the bonding capacity is part of that solution – how can we get some of these big projects started.
