Guest Author
This is a response to a recent op-ed by North Miami Beach Mayor Michael Joseph.
His piece contained numerous misstatements, which we are addressing here with facts backed by public records. Documentation is available upon request at [email protected].
The 25% surcharge is not used for water infrastructure
Mayor Joseph claims the 25% surcharge on customers outside North Miami Beach helps maintain water infrastructure. However, North Miami Beach’s own 2020 Revenue Bond disclosures say otherwise. According to those legal documents, “outside city surcharge revenue” is excluded from operating revenues and instead “passed through directly to the General Fund.” This means the surcharge is a tax, not a maintenance fee, and it does not fund the water system.
Conflicting claims about revenue loss
NMB officials now say removing the surcharge would cost them $5 million annually. Previously, they said $3 million, then $4 million. Regardless of the amount, the key question remains: Where does this money go? As outlined above, the surcharge revenue is deposited into North Miami Beach’s general fund, not the water utility fund. Therefore, eliminating it wouldn’t affect the operations or maintenance of the water system for any customer, regardless of where they live — Miami Gardens, Sunny Isles Beach, Aventura, Golden Beach or unincorporated Miami-Dade. North Miami Beach’s own bond documents confirm that the system’s rates are sufficient to sustain operations without the surcharge.
‘Neighborly’ intent? History says otherwise
NMB claims it has tried to resolve this issue “neighbor-to-neighbor.” That’s revisionist history. In 2018, NMB privatized its water utility despite being warned that doing so would invalidate the surcharge. They charged it anyway. Miami Gardens sued and won a $9 million settlement. That settlement is now being paid from NMB’s general fund, not the water system, further proving the surcharge wasn’t used for infrastructure.
If the surcharge was illegally applied to Miami Gardens during privatization, what about the other cities? Will NMB refund Aventura, Sunny Isles Beach, Golden Beach, and others for the same overcharge? That would be the truly “neighborly” thing to do.
The ‘options’ offered were not real solutions
NMB says it offered options to resolve the dispute, including transitioning Miami Gardens customers to Miami-Dade Water and Sewer or encouraging Miami Gardens to build its own utility. Neither was legally viable.
Let’s be clear: allowing Miami Gardens customers to switch to the County would breach NMB’s bond covenants. NMB has secured nearly $90 million in loans based on revenue from all water customers. Removing those customers, not the surcharge, would violate those agreements.
The idea of Miami Gardens building its own utility also doesn’t hold water. Florida law prohibits a new utility system in areas already served by an existing municipal utility. NMB knows this.
The latest suggestion — letting Miami Gardens buy its stake in NMB Water — sounds reasonable on paper but wasn’t made in good faith. It was offered at the last minute as state legislation advanced. Even if serious, such a complex transaction requires significant due diligence. More importantly, it has nothing to do with whether the current surcharge is justified.
If NMB truly wants to sell its water utility, it should make a formal offer. Miami Gardens will certainly consider it. But vague, last-minute suggestions aren’t an excuse to continue an unjust practice.
The bigger picture
Some say this issue is too complicated for the public to understand. It isn’t. It’s a simple story — one community taking advantage of another. For years, North Miami Beach has levied an unfair surcharge on residents of Miami Gardens, Aventura, Sunny Isles Beach, Golden Beach and unincorporated Miami-Dade. Miami Gardens simply had the courage and resources to stand up and fight back.
___
Oliver Gilbert is a Miami-Dade County Commissioner.
