The debate is not minor. The refund was a political condition agreed upon when approving the 2025-2026 budget with the same millage rate as the previous year, which in practice means an increase in taxes due to the increase in property values. Less than a month before the municipal elections, the amount of the check has become, on the one hand, a decisive issue for the families’ economy, and on the other, an electoral strategy for those who aspire to a position in the municipal government.
Relief promise
On October 1, the new budget went into effect with no changes to the millage rate. In practice, rising property values put pressure on taxpayers’ bills. To offset that impact, the Council committed to approving a one-time refund for Homestead Exemption accreditors. The first figure that was put on the table was 120 dollars; but the mayor, seeing that the councilors wanted more, returned with a proposal to hand over a check for $200. “He moved internal pieces” to square the new margin. However, some Council members demand that the check reach $250 and — above all — that there be transparency. They wonder where the money that previously seemed impossible came from and what items are involved?
The board is divided into two blocks of three. Councilors Melinda de la Vega and Mónica Pérez are aligned around Tundidor. On the mayor’s side are Juan Junco, Carl Zogby and Luis Rodríguez. The latter is inclined to issue a $120 check “at least,” and Zogby is reluctant to issue $200 “out of fiscal prudence.” With that balance, any change in posture can seal the outcome.
“$200 is responsible; more would put reserves at risk”
The mayor defends a refund of $200. He assures that his team worked until the last minute to bring to the table a “sexy” figure that the councilors wanted, but sustainable, with an estimated cost of more than 6 million dollars to distribute in around 32,000 homes with homestead (the exact number depends on the appraiser’s list, which includes first responders, whose personal information is protected by law).
García-Roves’s central argument is prudence. He maintains that raising the reimbursement above $200 affects reserves and compromises the City’s credit rating, which, remember, requires keeping two months of expenses in reserve. Added to this is a Water Department that operates with a deficit, carries legal contingencies, so it should not use its reserve to finance the relief. “If the check goes up more, we would have to touch the reserve and that would affect us with everything,” warns the mayor who is also risking her position in the next elections.
In a political key, García-Roves attributes the resistance to his proposal to the electoral campaign. According to him, “they don’t want me to achieve anything.” Even so, he promises to insist on each plenary agenda “until some relief is approved” and calls on residents to put pressure, asking his councilors to “leave the little games and do the right thing for Hialeah.”
As background, the interim mayor lists several initiatives promoted by her that, she says, already ease residents’ pockets. Among others, it mentions the elimination of the water franchise, containment of increases in garbage and the increase in the water bill and since November, the option of a second irrigation meter to reduce the payment for consumption of the precious liquid.
“There is room for $250–$300, if we review the vacancies”
Councilor Jesús Tundidor maintains that the single payment should be more robust. I would agree that it was “between 250 and 300 dollars,” because “it only applies to homes with homestead.” He denounces the existence of a “little game” that allows the budget to be inflated with more than 200 vacant jobs and then reschedule those items during the year. If this “gap” is closed, he states, about $7 million would appear, enough to fund larger refund checks “without affecting services.”
Handle several references, send a check for $150, the cost would be around $4.8 million; a $200 check would consist of about 6.5 million; and for 250, the bill to the city would reach seven million or something.” In his opinion, the City can support a single check of 250 dollars if it redirects spending. What Tundidor rejects is a relief of “a few kilos a month” which, in his reading, “would only be a political fact.”
Additionally, Tundidor opens the water front. He proposes negotiating with the County, as a block, along with the 14 wholesale cities, to put a cap on future increases in the price of water, which this year was close to 20%. It also suggests reviewing Hialeah’s fit in the regional system in the medium term. That is, review the usefulness of having a Water Department to alleviate the pressure that today falls on the General Fund.
Tundidor sends a direct message to residents. “This is the year they deserve real relief.” And he invites people to fill the plenary hall on October 14, convinced that public presence can break the existing tie.
“Without complete data I do not vote; $250 is the number”
For her part, Councilor Melinda de la Vega believes that there is a lack of information. Therefore, he asked the administration for more transparency, to be able to decide. You want to know all the existing vacancies in each department, the cost associated with each one and how long these positions have been open. He claims to have heard – “not in writing” – that many places last longer than six months, or even years, which would reinforce the thesis of the existence of fiscal space to send a larger check to residents who deserve true relief.
His position is based on a political fact. If management was able to go from $120 to $200 in one week, without explaining where the money came from, there may be room to issue a $250 check.
However, he recognizes part of the prudential argument of Councilor Zogby who states that the reimbursement does not solve the water deficit or rebuild the reserves, but emphasizes that today the objective is not to pass on the increases to residents.
The fear of Melinda de la Vega, who is campaigning to keep the councilwoman’s position, is a 3-3 tie that will leave the city without the check that she considers important. That is why he demanded that a value be chosen in plenary on October 14. “My sexy number is $250,” he sums up.
Water: the backdrop that conditions everything
The question of water runs through the debate. The mayor emphasizes that the Water Department operates with a deficit, that its reserves must be protected and that a million-dollar litigation with the County restricts the margin. De la Vega provides a political fact stating that Hialeah pays 30% more for water than other cities, something that is not sustainable “for many more years.” Tundidor proposes a regional strategy to curb the County’s increases and redesign the wholesale relationship if necessary.
In summary, water functions as a fiscal anchor to moderate reimbursement from the vision of the mayor’s office and, at the same time, as a negotiation lever to release resources, the vision of several of the councilors.
What can residents expect on October 14?
The October 14 session will be decisive and a close vote is anticipated. With a Council divided into blocks of three, any change in position can tip the balance. What does seem clear is that there will be some type of reimbursement, since everyone agrees on wanting to return money to the residents, although the exact figure remains the crux of disagreement.
If the administration is able to present detailed information on vacant positions and their costs, the $250 proposal could gain traction.
On the other hand, if the logic of taking care of the reserves prevails, the final amount will be closer to the $200 that the mayor defends.
Even so, even if the measure is approved, García-Roves herself admitted that the administrative process, which depends on the exchange of information with the county assessor, will make it difficult for the checks to arrive before Thanksgiving or Christmas as she would have liked.
Meanwhile, a new tie would leave the city without relief, a scenario that would have political consequences in the middle of the electoral campaign.
So, on October 14, not only a figure will be decided; a message will also be sent. Approving a $200 check would reflect fiscal caution and continuity; Going up to 250 would mean an all-out effort to give back as much as possible to residents; and not approving anything would leave the image of a Council paralyzed by the electoral campaign. For homeowners with Homestead, the translation is clear: finally, well-deserved relief… or a prolonged wait.
(email protected)
