Lake County Fiscal Rangers

Lake Appraiser and Lake County Tax Collector Improve Transparency over Tax Authorities

Tavares, FL - Oct. 2, 2011 -  FiscalRangers has achieved an improvement in transparency over tax authorities listed on property tax notices. 

We recently heard at a meeting of the North Lake County Hospital District that a taxpayer had a terrible time finding out what that Hospital tax on their property was about.   She looked at her Tax Trim notice from the County Appraiser, Ed Havil, and the Tax Notice from County Tax Collector Bob McKee, and the only information for the Hospital District tax was the location and date of the final hearing to approve next year's taxes.  No phone, no email, no address and no website was provided.   Sure, she could call either office and they could provide a phone number, but no info on what the tax was or phone number listed on the notices or on the two agency websites (we thought).

In contrast, if you look at THIS Wisconsin based website, it focuses on improved transparency over taxes there.  And, if you visit THIS website from Milwaukee County, you find they have provided a "Milwaukee County Accountability Portal" which "allows the publci to view detaild data on SPENDING by Milwaukee County Government.

And, look at THIS 2012 notice of "Truth in Taxation" proposed taxes from Hennepin County, MN

And, here is their list of Taxing Authority Websites - notice ALL of them have websites.

So, we here in the Fiscal Rangers batcave sent emails to both McKee and Havill asking what could be done.   Both elected officials, who are up for re-election next year, jumped at the chance to provide more transparency and contact information for each "tax authority" that levies all those lines of taxes you see on your property tax.

It turns out McKee did have an existing page HERE which does list the phone contact number for each authority.   Havill didn't have anything.

However, both have responded.  

Havill has added a similar page HERE with both phone numbers and websites if available (The Hospital District still doesn't have a website, so it is blank). He also added links to the page on three different places, including the top main webpage.  Notice that a large number of the tax authorities, including the MSTU's, don't have any webpage to describe the statute that authorizes, them, the process for setting taxes, and explanation of uses of funds, etc.

McKee's existing website with Tax authority information is HERE.   He now has a HUGE button on the front page leading to a smilar page showing phone numbers for all the tax authorities that he collects money for (on your tax notice), but hasn't added websites yet.

So, at least now, you can find the phone numbers of the tax authorities so you can call and ask questions.  Our idea is you should be able to contact the tax authority website BEFORE taxes are decided for the future year, know what the taxes are for, know what the process is to set next year's tax rates, and get enough information BEFORE the decision meetings to decide if you want to provide an arbument of lowering or raising the tax rates or find how to appeal YOUR tax for that specific line item. 

We will keep pushing for more transparency.  We want both the Tax Collector and Appraiser to use the same acronyms for the tax authorities on their respective notices to taxpayers.  We want their notices to have a clear, big text notice of how to find the above websites (which they are working on).   We want all the tax authorities to have a website, phone and email listed on the Tax Collector and Appraiser's websites which lead to all the information you need to know about that tax. We want them to include Powerpoints they give to local government Boards and groups also, like the presentations by EMS or Fire Depts, or Library staff give to just about everyone. 

We also want the cities and the County to provide centralized tax explanation website pages.

Although not property tax based, the same should be available for sales taxes, fuel taxes, etc that have been voted locally. 

Florida law should require this kind of transparency over all local taxes in ALL counties, and it should be available in ONE place.   And, the local webpages should have a link to a State page describing ALL State Taxes, including sales taxes, fees, etc (which may exist, I just haven't looked yet).

vj

Transparency References:

http://www.opengovernmentmn.com/NAIOP_Transparency_www.pdf 

HERE is a sample "Truth in Taxation" notice from a Minnesota County government - it shows the tax authority contact info right on the notice of proposed taxes for 2012

 

 

UN's Agenda 21 is Taking over Florida Public Lands in Lake County & Other Actions

Updated July 28 to add section at bottom on Agenda 21 foreign aid projects on DEVEX website.

Tavares, FL - July 25, 2011 - The UN has an initiative called Agenda 21 which is really aimed at reducing property rights and increasing socialism around the world.

Agenda 21 has affected Florida as well as Lake County.  Keep on reading...

But first, if you don't know much about Agenda 21, WATCH this 9-minute "Agenda 21 Video for Dummies" explaining it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM&feature=youtu.be

This article link below clearly explains one part, which is the encouragement of "wildlife" corridors which then prohibit access by humans.   The article says now that 28% of Florida land is now taken up by such programs, and all of it funded with taxpayer money because no one challenged the concept.

Recently, last year, two environmentalists on the Lake County Board (now no longer on the Board) pushed through modifications to the Lake County "comp plan" which laid out land usage plans, so that property rights were taken aways from owners by tactics such as limiting the size of roads in their area, which then controls traffic, which then reduces the value of land that could have been used for housing.

However, at tomorrow's Lake County Board meeting, on the agenda are a number of reversals of those modifications to the comp plan because new Commissioners are more focused on property rights.

Agenda 21 is a way to reduce human footprints on land and increase government control over public lands.  As government controls more land, humans have fewer property rights and are pushed into central living sections.

Another objective, explained in the video above, is to REDUCE math literacy to reduce education levels because better educated people "consume more" which is not acceptable to Agenda 21 folks.

Read this article to understand it, especially about the government land purchases around the Ocala Forest, and then ask yourself why Lake County spent over $30-million to buy "public lands" but did nothing to make it accessible to the public until new Commissioners on the Lake County board pushed through adding parking spaces and trails in four of them.

http://www.floridapoliticalpress.com/2011/07/25/the-un-wildlands-project%E2%80%A6taking-over-america-starting-with-florida/ 

These type of actions  start in "planning departments" in government agencies and I am told several cities are implementing some Agenda 21 concepts as well.  One of the key tactics is to create regional "planning groups" which then take power away from local officials and push through changes with little public knowledge.   For instance, they regional groups push expensive government operated transit systems which are government subsidized (again, the government is the solution, rather than the free market) like trains, buses, etc. which focus on taking away public freedoms like driving cars where they want.

Do you doubt this?  Search on Google images on "agenda 21 logo" and see all the different logos from different countries.  Basically, the socialist countries that control the UN want to bring the US down to their level of government control over freedom.

Here is another article "The Horrors of Agenda 21 and ICLEI in Florida".  Read about ICLEI ( aka The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives), which has a commitment to “sustainable development” throughout the world which in essence results in a private property land grab veiled in warm and fuzzy terms. ICLEI comes up with regulations and other ideas that restrict property owners from using their land."

http://polymontana.com/2011/03/23/the-horrors-of-agenda-21-and-iclei-in-florida/ 

HERE is the ICLEI website.  Notice they no longer provide a list of member cities and agencies, because activists have been using it to lobby for their local cities to drop out of ICLEI.  BUT, I found the hidden page listing all 1200+ ICLEi members including the United States, which is HERE.  I SCANNED the list and didn't find Lake County, Clermont, Mount Dora (surprise), Tavares, Leesburg or Eustis in the member list.  But, there is Collier County, Tallahassee, South Miami, South Daytona, Seminole County, Palm Beach County, Ormond Beach, North Miami, and a few others.

HERE is another article about ICLEI and what to do about it.

For Lake County, can anyone say Metropolitan Planning Organization, aka MPO??

vj

More:

THIS blog posting explains that Florida's Sarasota and Pinellas County's have canceled their membership in ICLEI due to all the complaints.

 Update July 28 -

After the Agenda 21 presentation at the REC recently, I went to the website of the largest international “foreign aid” forum and “development professionals” organization, called DEVEX.  It is for finding projects in “developing countries” like the anti-corruption work I did in Iraq and Afghanistan (but I got mine through the State Dept or DoD, not Devex).

DEVEX is used by the World Bank, UN, USAID (the US foreign aid office), DFID (UK foreign aid) to find “development” staff for foreign aid projects.

I searched on the “projects” category and keyword of “Agenda 21” (has to be in quotes or you just get any document with “21” in it).

I got 15 hits at this search page (I hope it opens for you, it is also a dues paid group and I have paid dues):

http://www.devex.com/en/projects/search?keywords=%22AGENDA+21%22&reset_base=1 

Notice the first item is “Developing Agenda 21… for Chad” which is funded by the French foreign aid office.

The next two, funded by the World Bank are in Beijing, and if you open the document, you see that the ADDRESS of the funding organization at the bottom of the document is the “Beijing Agenda 21 Office.”

However, at least only 15 hits existed – I was expecting many more.   But, if I searched on “sustainability” or other Agenda 21 buzzwords, I am sure I would find many more, including ones funded by USAID.

Forward this to anyone who might be interested about the UN Agenda 21's insiduous backdoor method to reduce property rights, liberty, etc in the US or the World.

vj

Other Agenda 21 references:

DELPHI Meeting Technique - Agenda 21 supporters use community "visioning" meetings to gain "consensus" on a direction such as land use plans or even school policies.  The method they use is the "Delphi" meeting facilitation method developed at the Rand Corp. which is a structured method to get people in public meetings to be led to agree with a pre-decided conclusion.  The original use was a process to get EXPERTS together and evolve consensus, but a watered down version is now used to lead public meetings to pre-decided conclusions.    HERE is a GOOD article describing how the Delphi technique is applied to exclude knowledge experts or mute their testimony.   In 2006, I attended some MPO "visioning" sessions in Lake County, FL used to gain consensus on a comprehensive plan for locating population and other centers.  That is exactly the method they used to gain public "consensus" and claim public support when there WAS NO VOTE, only statements that a "consensus was reached".  Some people call it a brainwashing technique.  It seems to have been taught to professional "planners" in government so they can get the SOME of the public to agree with what THEY believe should be done.

HERE is the official United Nations page on Agenda 21

Radio show on A21:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/usatalkradio/2011/06/15/what-is-agenda-21-very-important-for-all-americans 

 Here is a great overview of Agenda 21 published in the Canada Free Press:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/39875  

Here is a YouTube video explaining the Federal Government's plan to take over farm lands flooded near the Missouri River.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffbTBglMLHo&feature=share 

Another great Agenda 21 warning video - regarding a sustainability plot in the San Francisco area:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kH5KYGV8314  

Here is a webpage from the Spruce Creek Patirots in Volusia County about Agenda 21 and Smart Meters.

http://www.sprucecreekpatriots.com/United_Nations_Agenda_21.html 

    The page includes links to two videos on SmartMeters and their privacy & radiation issues

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8JNFr_j6kdI 

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj0ANyjdBnk    

Channel 9 TV Quotes FiscalRangers in Report on Impact Fee Waivers by Lake County Governments

Tavares, FL - July 20, 2009 -  Sometimes we win, sometimes we lose.

Here is a Channel 9 report by Bernt Petersen on the issue of the value of waiving impact fees by local Lake County Governments.

They got me questioning the value of the waivers, and they have quotes from local officials and staff supporting the waivers.

http://www.wftv.com/news/28601741/detail.html  

What this all comes down to is whether you believe developers of new homes and business buildings should contribute impact fees EARLY towards the roads, schools and other infrastructure growth needs caused by that construction.  Or should there be no impact fees attached to new construction, and ALL existing taxpayers keep getting taxed via sales taxes, property taxes and fuel taxes to pay for additional infrastructure needed by residents of the newly constructed buildings.  Keep in mind that "new Infrastructure" is not the same as maintenance costs on existing roads, etc. which SHOULD be paid by property taxes, fuel taxes and sales taxes.   Developers don't want to pay for any of those upfront costs, they want you to pay for it.

Read it and post a comment.  The video clip would not work on my computer, but the text is there and at the bottom of this document.

Comment

One problem with TV news reports is that they do not have enough time to clarify complex issues, which is the case here.  

They mix up waivers of commercial impact fees, which ARE onerous and excessive , and new home construction impact fees, which are the current method to fund some of the county infrastructure, including roads and schools.    They don't mention that the commercial waivers are highly variable and excessive for some businesses, like banks, and much lower for others.   They don't mention that the former Impact fee committee had recommendations to drastically reduce the number of commercial business waiver categories, AND reduce the excessive category fees to a much more reasonable level, which would eliminate the problem with high impact fees for specific businesses.   They also don't mention that the recommended changes in commercial fees and categories have NOT been brought to the Board by Chair Jennifer Hill or current committee liasion Sean Parks.   So any griping about excessive fees for new business buildings like banks or doctor offices is not valid, since the Commission has not demanded a discussion on those 18 month old recommendations.  If they modified the commercial impact fee rates to the recommended reasonable rates, much of the pressure they cause on businesses would go away.

I would really like to see the evidence of where the claimed "630 jobs" came from.   If you look at the permits filed for Lake County, they are very low.

As for Tavares, their success may be elimination of their own CITY impact fees, including formerly excessive fees for "change of use".  Those types of fees were charged if you changed a commercial building's use from one category like office, to that of a restaurant.   Those waivers, PLUS the aggressive marketing of Tavares by Tavares officials and staff have to be the reason for their improved businesses.

Actually, since some old Tavares buildings ARE falling apart, there SHOULD be a waiver on impact fees.

I didn't see any clear evidence cited that showed a direct correlation between specific fee waivers and "increased valuations".

This is a very complex issue, and the report didn't really talk about how the waived fees would be replaced, so it will be interesting to see when the former impact fee committee (which meets tomorrow in Eustis) will start formulating OTHER and NEW taxes to replace to lost impact fee revenues.   Thus when I say impact fee waivers are "builder welfare", I mean that their selling costs are reduced, but the funding need for infrastructure is still needed, so there is an effort to shift that funding requirement to ALL taxpayers with possible increases in fuel taxes, property taxes, or sales taxes (the School District is looking at that one).

Vance Jochim

Here is the Channel 9 report text:

http://www.wftv.com/news/28601741/detail.html

Local Governments Suspend Impact Fees

Posted: 6:54 pm EDT July 19, 2011Updated: 7:21 pm EDT July 19, 2011

TAVARES, Fla. -- Local governments are giving up millions of dollars they used to collect from developers and they suspended impact fees to encourage new construction. But WFTV learned on Tuesday why critics call it "builder welfare."John Drury's City Hall office is a room with a view ."I see eight new restaurants,” said Drury.It’s part of the business boom in Tavares. In 2009, there was $11 million worth of new construction."After we passed the impact fee waiver ordinance, that tripled,” said Drury.The impact fees pay for new roads and services required by growth, but cities and counties across Central Florida have stopped collecting the fees. Government watchdog Vance Jochim said he doesn't like it."It was pushed through by the builders. It does benefit them,” said Jochim.Jochim, and other conservatives like him, said they love tax cuts, but he said this is different.

It’s nothing more than builder welfare."How would you respond to that kind of criticism?” asked WFTV reporter Berndt Peterson."It's really up to the consumer,” said Andrew Knutt, Homebuilders Association President.Knutt insists the buyer saves the money, not the builder. He said suspending impact fees has led to more work."And with that work there are jobs,” said Knutt.Six-hundred-thirty new jobs, according to Lake County Commissioner Jimmy Conner, who said impact fees were standing in the way. They can add thousands of dollars to the cost of a new home and tens of thousands to a business."When you charge a doctor $90,000 of transportation impact fees, they don't build the office,” said Conner.Critics said local governments will miss out on millions.

The Lake County School Board is giving up $4 million that was supposed to pay for more classrooms."And so the question is, where are the taxes coming from to pay for what they used to pay for?" asked Jochim.  

For Tavares, it was a loss of $1.8 million, but Drury said they're getting it back."For every buck that we waived in impact fees, we had $17 in new construction,” said Drury. Also, a better view from Drury's City Hall office. Lake County officials said they've seen a $10 million increase in taxable property value, since they suspended the fees. Some local municipalities have waived impact fees through the end of 2012.

 

 

 

108 Miles of Lake County Roads Belong to the Cities - so who pays for Maintenance?

Tavares, FL - June 25, 2011 - Yup - here is another stupid Lake County government Fiscal Fiasco.  If you are a County resident, would you be mad if you found the County was using YOUR tax funds (mostly sales taxes, not property taxes) to repair and maintain ROADS within city limits, and city resident taxes are not being used for the repairs, even though they LIVE or WORK on the street?

Are you in a city, paying city property taxes, and the nearby road and sidewalks are not repaired because the City tells you "that is up to the County".  The CITY should be doing the repairs using your property taxes or sales tax revenues they get (or other sources).

It seems that a number of cities keep growing by annexing neighborhoods and businesses.  That means the CITY gets the property tax at CITY tax rates (usually higher than the County), and the properties go off the tax rolls of the County Government, reducing their revenues.

That is normal.

Note:  I if you know someone who should read this, please forward this to them, and ask them to LIKE our "FiscalRangers" Facebook page.

But, what came out at recent meetings of the Lake County Capital Facilities Advisory Committee (CPAC - formerly the Impact Fee Committee) is that the cities get the benefits of tax revenues from the newly annexed properties and residents, BUT they cleverly did NOT annex the County roads next to or between the properties.  Thus, the County and County taxpyaers have been PAYING for maintenance on about 108 miles of roads that are INSIDE the cities because of this trick.

That means that taxpayers living outside cities are paying taxes to the County and also funding repairs for roads within city annexed areas while the nearby CITY residents are NOT paying for the maintenance costs.   Not all cities are using this trick,

Why Don't the Chambers of Commerce Host Panels of Elected Officials to Answer Questions from the Public?

Here is an idea for an event that each of the local Lake County chambers could hold.  It is an open meeting hosted by the Chambers to have the public ask direct questions of elected officials (as opposed to candidates).   Right now, there is nothing like this in Lake County, but the one below is held by the Chamber of Commerce in Fountain Valley, CA where I used to live.

They do it just for State and Federal officials, but I think the local one should include elected officials from County Government, the School Board and local cities.  So what if it goes 3 hours - I think they would get a big crowd.

Since Welton Cadwell hardly ever lets the public provide public input at County Commissioner meetings, maybe this type of meeting may provide an alternate version of transparency.

How about it, Chambers?    OR, what about the TEA Party or the local Republican Executive Committee (they are planning several for current candidates, but not incumbents who are not up for re-election)    

vj

In the Local section of the OC Register, in the “Our Towns – Central” column, you find the following announcement.  This is a fun annual event.  In recent years those in attendance have engaged our state and federal electeds in a serious discussion on our crumbling state and how to stem the tide.

 

 

From an email newsletter from a County "Supervisor" (like a Commissioner) in Orange County, CA:

FOUNTAIN VALLEY, California

Do you have a question you'd like answered by a legislator?

Residents can submit questions to the Fountain Valley Chamber of Commerce, which is hosting the 29th annual Legislative Reception at 6:30 p.m. March 26 at the Senior and Community Center at Founders Village, 17967 Bushard St.

The chamber has invited: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, Sen. Tom Harman, Assemblyman Van Tran, Orange County Supervisor John Moorlach and the Fountain Valley City Council.

Submit questions to the Fountain Valley Chamber of Commerce, 8840 Warner Ave., Ste. 207, Fountain Valley, 92708 or e-mail bwhite@fvchamber.com

Contact the writer: 714-796-7956 or epak@ocregister.com

 

 

Election for Florida State Agriculture Commissioner Heats Up Right in Lake County

The Orlando Sentinel blogger, Lauren Ritchie, posted a blog describing how one candidate for FL State Ag Commissioner, Congressman Adam Putnam, made a speech at a local Republican Women's Federation lunch (I was there), and also announced endorsements from three GOP groups.  The article basically said the meeting and announcement was a slam to his opponent, local Lake County resident Carey Baker, who is currently a State Senator.

READ her blog here (also added at the bottom of this posting).  Also read the comments, which contained some more issues related to Baker.

I wrote this response to Ritchie's column on her blog, but the Orlando Sentinel gave the following message, and would not accept my response:

So, here is my response - I decided to stop waffling and come out against Baker - he doesn't do anything that supports local taxpayers...unless they are gun owners or have "Bull's Balls" hanging from their trailer hitch. 

Baker has also angered the volunteers who were trying to get more oversight and voter approval for the North Lake County Hospital tax district that costs local property owners 1-mill in taxes without ANY specific conditions on how the funds are to be spent by the two hospitals receiving them, AND no requirements for an audit trail to trace where the funds are spent.

Last year, as Chair of the Lake County legislation delegation, when supporters of improving the Hospital Tax district legislation talked, he cut their discussion short and moved their public input to the end of the meeting when everyone, including reporters had left.  Then he put off any legislation delegation decision for a YEAR to the next meeting of the delegation (documented on www.FiscalRangers.com ), when he again failed to make a decision, saying he had to research the Constitutionality of the existing law.  It was another excuse to put off a decision or stand on the issue.  Recent calls to his office indicate he still has not researched the "constitutionallity" of the issue, which is not acceptable.  ( I also sent an email request last week which was not answered).  Thus taxpayers have no protection for how the $11-million in Hospital tax district funds are spent from the Hospital tax.

Additionally, about 1-2 years ago, Baker was asked as the head of the State Transportation Committee to get more active in speeding up highway construction on 441.  He would not agree to do anything at a meeting where the FL State Transportation Dept and the highway contractor were speaking.  

Thus, I can't see Baker ever making a specific decision that is important to local taxpayers other than gun issues or kids wearing their pants too low. 
Vance Jochim
www.FiscalRangers.com

====================================

And here is Ritchie's blog entry - but go to the site and read the comments...

State senator slapped in his own backyard?

posted by Lauren Ritchie on Oct 20, 2009 8:56:53 AM

The Republican Party of Florida issued a press release Monday announcing that three Republican groups endorsed Congressman Adam Putnam for agriculture secretary in the 2010 election.

    Officials chose the Golden Triangle Republican Women's Club luncheon in Mount Dora to make the announcement.

    Ouch. That sure looks like a slap at State Sen. Carey Baker, R-Eustis, who is running against Putnam for the cabinet-level position in a fierce race.

    Nothing like learning that the Florida Federation of Republican Women, the Florida Federation of Young Republicans and the Florida Federation of Teen Age Republicans is supporting someone else -- and announcing it in your backyard. The press release said the three groups join a "growing list of endorsements," including 16 Farm Bureaus, the Florida Nursery Growers and Landscape Association and Florida Citrus Mutal, among others.

    Baker wasn't around Tuesday morning to talk about the announcement. We'll update when we can reach him.

==========================

Note:  Below are some of the comments posted on Ritchie's site - they seem to delete some articles after only 1-2 months, and these comments are relevant to an election cycle that won't end until next year:

My guess is that Baker is too middle of the road and the party wanted someone who will toe the line on the issues. Doesn't matter to them if Baker would do a better job, or if Putnam would know a backhoe from a cultivator, just whether or not they will be true believers in the party.

Posted by: Jim A | 10/20/2009 at 12:41 PM

They ought to slap Baker the hell out of town. He's as dumb as my dore nobe.

Posted by: DougRobinson | 10/20/2009 at 11:10 PM

Doug is correct about Baker being slapped out of town. His attendance in Tallahassee hasn't brought out the best in him.
Putnam is the better candidate.

Posted by: wrench's wench | 10/21/2009 at 12:05 AM

I only remember the good senator for his bill on outlawing bull balls on truck trailer hitches and his support for JD Alexanders bill stripping me of protesting Niagara and all other water grabs. and lastly for never once ever answering my e mails or making a call on the issues of school fire safety not being enforced, Lake O levee not being brought up to code and the bill that made it possible for Progress Energy to tax my power bill to pay for a Nuclear reactor and Local Taxes added onro it for a AR100 westinghouse reactor that has never been approved by NRC to build. The good Senator has for me a Republican been a poor excuse for local representation and uninformed on the issues of Lake Co like WATER and Good JOBS and a expanded revenue base and state schools that meet state fire codes and file timely and posted state reports. Yes the Senators record is a great endorsement for term limits .

Posted by: lwheeler45@aol.com | 10/21/2009 at 04:06 AM

Unfortunately I have to agree with lwheeler45 on these Lake County issues. The "unread" amendments to his bill which disallowed localities any say in their water management was the big "speed bump" for me.
I DO agree with Rep. Baker's stand on legal hand gun ownership for licensed/trained owners. But then he owns the gun shop so it would probably be hard to sneak an amendment related to anti gun into any of his proposed bills.....It is a shame neither he nor his staff read what he votes on before he votes on it either.....

Posted by: Patrinka of the Lakes | 10/21/2009 at 09:14 AM

Never, ever, ever answers emails, letters, phone calls, etc. His office will even hang up on you. This is not representation.....

Posted by: Slow Turtle | 10/21/2009 at 10:33 AM

Senetor Baker brought this on himself when he signed Bills that he "Didn't know what was in there" meaning giving Niagra the right to pull our precious water and then sell it back to us. That wasn't the only thing he signed without reading first. At this point I'd rather have an 8th grader in there.

Posted by: Bob Harrison | 10/21/2009 at 11:07 AM

Volusia County Taxpayers Start Local Government Tax Cap Reform Movement

For your info - regarding Volusia County citizens Tax Reform movement.   After sitting in the recent Lake County Hospital District meeting where the Board refused to consider tax transparency advocate requests, I can see why this movement might come to Lake County.   I was amazed at the smirks, and head shaking by the Board members and supporting consultants when asked to initiate an effort to allow flexible tax rates for the District, and they refused to consider a website or other means to provide full transparency on the spending.  In my two years of attending Lake County School District Meetings, the Board there was very sensitive to voter comments, and spent time to educate them.  But it was clear the Hospital District Board wasn't open to public concerns about excess taxes, and it will be interesting how the Board and the Hospitals react next.
vj

Comments about Florida Homeowner's Insurance

State Representative Alan Hays just sent out a newsletter to Lake County constituents, and on the front page focused two articles on two information websites related to Homeowner's insurance.

Below is the letter I wrote to him. The legislature are scoundrels, along with Charlie Crist, for approving house insurance rates that increase fees to inland homeowners to subsidize the rates paid by coastal homeowners who have the highest risk of storm damage.

======================================
To Alan Hays at alan.hayes@myfloridahouse.gov

The front page of your newsletter that was just sent out has two sections on “Ways You can save now on Homeowner’s Insurance premiums” but they both discriminate against owner’s of manufactured or mobile homes when there are some 1.4 million such homes in Florida.

Why doesn’t the My Safe Florida Home inspection program cover manufactured homes, AND WHY DON’T THEY DISCLOSE THAT ON THEIR WEBSITE’S TOP PAGE?

Why does the ShopandCompareRates.com website (that lists insurance companies ) only give examples for a block home and not manufactured homes. As an experienced corporate auditor, I think this website is a joke, and you should not portray it as being that useful, since it doesn’t cover other types of homes, and doesn’t include whether the insurance firm is writing insurance in specific counties.

Requests:

1) Please modify the My Save Florida Home inspection program to also include manufactured and mobile homes. Why? Because standards for attaching them to the ground have changed three times in the last 20 years (according to a Builder magazine article) and if they upgraded old homes to the latest standards, they could stand up to Hurricanes more easily.
2) Get the ShopandCompareRates.com website to include updated info on which firms are writing insurance in each county. Also, disclose whether coverage is only available for site built, or also for manufactured homes.
3) Revise approved insurance rates to make the coastal areas pay their full insurance risk costs, and not make central Florida homeowners subsidize the coastal areas. (Crist and the legislators should all be thrown out of office for allowing such a subsidy scheme.)

vj

Florida Property Tax Cut Proposal to be on November Ballot

Amazingly, another tax cut proposal will be on the November ballot that could reduce property taxes up to 25% but increase sales taxes to offset the cuts.

Local government agencies better start tightening their belts now!
vj

========================================
from the Ft. Meyer News-Press at:
http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080317/NEWS0120/80317038/1075

March 17, 2008

Property tax cut proposal to be in voters’ hands

By Jim Ash
news-press.com Tallahassee bureau

TALLAHASSEE — Voters will decide in November whether they want to cut their property taxes by an average of 25 percent, and make up for the nearly $8 billion in lost government revenue with a penny sales tax increase and a combination of budget cuts and other state savings.

The powerful Taxation and Budget Reform Commission voted 21-4 this afternoon to approve the measure by former Senate President John McKay over the objections of critics ranging from retailers to the Florida Catholic Conference, speaking on behalf of the poor.

The vote was a personal victory for McKay, who was first rebuffed in the Legislature in 2003 and who has been pursuing it ever since.

"The only opponents of this proposal are the special interests," McKay said. "The voters of Florida are going to make this decision. It's imperative that we give them the opportunity."

A House committee room crowded with anti-tax activists and lobbyists erupted in cheers immediately after the vote.

McKay was successful by a comfortable margin. He needed 17 votes to pass.

The fate of the measure looked doubtful as late as a month ago, but McKay was able to work with a powerful critic and fellow commissioner, former Jeb Bush aide Pat Levesque.

Commission critics also seemed to be swayed by two forceful presentations by House Speaker Marco Rubio. The West Miami Republican is not a member of the commission, but he addressed the panel members twice before the vote.

Rubio took a backhanded slap at Gov. Charlie Crist, who successfully pushed a legislative compromise plan that voters approved in January, but one that didn't go nearly far enough, Rubio said.

He said the latest dire economic forecasts required bolder action that would put more money back in the pockets of property owners.

"There are direct consequences to what we do or fail to do," Rubio told commissioners. "Let me tell you, you're our last hope."

Lauren Ritchie on the upcoming Jan. 29 Property Tax Vote

Below is Orlando Sentinel columnist Lauren Ritchie's take on the upcoming Jan. 29 vote on Florida Amendment 1 on property tax changes which has four sections that confuse everyone. Recently, I attended a meeting of the League of Women Voter's in Lake County, which had a panel of elected officials and a lobbyist. Everyone agrees the ballot issue is confusing and fragmented, and then they separate into two camps:

1) Don't pass it because it will "cost" the local governments funds, and they will get the money through another alternative. (Have you seen the video on Channel 22 from the League of Cities - the guy says "government will always get there money" so the only result would be a tax shift.). Notice no press or official ever says "the taxpayer will save..." - instead they always say a vote will "cost" some agency.

2) If you are a residential owner, you will save a few hundred dollars, but there is a risk that a Federal lawsuit could be filed about increased differences between local home owners, and those from another state - which is a equal rights Federal issue.

The best, fiery speaker was Ed Havill, who basically countered most of the other officials and their claims.

Additionally, the Lake County Conservative Founder's Club (I am Treasurer) had the Mayor of Tavares, Nancy Clutts, and activist Marilyn Bainter talk about the issue a few days earlier. Clutts took the City line that they would be harmed if the bill passes, and Bainter basically said that any savings to the taxpayer was good.

So, if you are a homeowner or other resident who will gain from one or more of the four sections of the Amendment, research whether to vote for it. An emotional vote "against government" would vote for it, a logical, analytical vote would be no.

And, if you are a government official, keep making speeches about how much passage will "cost" your agency.

Basically, my view is that it should be voted in because the government agencies don't publish enough information for a voter to determine if the expenditures are efficient, effective and economical (unlike corporations, which actually track those types of performance benchmarks daily, weekly or monthly). Until I see publicly posted details of performance benchmarks by work unit, I don't believe in giving more taxes to local governments.
vj

==========================================
from OrlandoSentinel.com

Money-hungry governments force tax vote

Lauren Ritchie | COMMENTARY
January 20, 2008

The confusing amendment about taxes on the ballot for the Jan. 29 election (and for early-bird voters now) is truly dreadful.

It is a simplistic "solution" that plunges Florida -- and Lake County -- further into the abyss of inequity. It punishes small businesses, newcomers and those who chose not to own property at the expense of longtime homeowners.

But I'm going to hold my nose and vote for it.

The reason is simple: getting even a portion of what taxpayers are entitled to is better than nothing.

After all that blather from legislators this fall about a thoughtful, intelligent reform of the tax system, voters now are stuck with something that could have been dreamed up by trained chimps using calculators from the Dollar General.

Make no mistake: this is not a reform; this is not a solution; it's not even a middling good idea.

This is only a tax cut, and not a big one, either.

The fact that it's even being offered to voters is a measure of two important things -- the inability of the state Legislature to create a fair tax structure and, most importantly, the inability of elected officials to control themselves with a credit card.

This amendment wouldn't be on the ballot if local officials who levy property taxes had been even remotely reasonable during the last four years. Instead, they were greedy, even here in traditionally conservative Lake County, which is ruled by alleged "Republicans." All the taxing authorities in Lake County combined are collecting 90 percent more property tax this year than they did in 2003, and they think they need more, more, more.

There is no excuse. Their "needs," their "demands" and their population did not increase by 90 percent in three years, when the amount of taxes collected rose from $198 million to $377 million.

Instead of leaders asking themselves what really was needed, they blissfully voted for budgets set before them by empire-building staffers. The fault does not lie with the staff. It falls squarely on the shoulders of local officials -- county commissioners, city council members, hospital district board members and water authorities.

They should have said no. Just because my 15-year-old wants a BMW for her birthday and makes an articulate case for its safety and features does not mean that she must have one.

A perfect example of the result of excessive taxation is coming up on Tuesday at the Lake County Commission meeting. Tucked back in what's called the "consent" agenda, where items are voted on as a group, is a recommendation from staffers to award $30,000 in bids to buy "promotional items." You know what those are? Trinkets. Pens, pencils, water bottles, coffee cups -- little nothings with Lake County rah-rah slogans printed on them.

Junk that ends up in the trash. Thirty thousand dollars for knickknacks.

It is obscene. Lake County shouldn't have enough money to even consider spending it on something like that. It makes one wonder what else lurks in the budget.

This is an attitude problem, not a tax problem. It invites trouble to try to fix the attitude by changing the tax structure, which is precisely what this amendment would do. Because voters clip the way that elected officials can take their money means only that the officials will find increasingly creative ways to get the cash.

Too late now.

The question at hand is whether to approve the amendment.

Here's the short explanation of the amendment and what it would do if passed:

Your homestead exemption likely would get bigger than the current $25,000. If your house is on the tax rolls for $80,000 or more, your exemption would be $50,000. (The second $25,000 wouldn't apply to school taxes, however, which make up roughly 40 percent of property taxes.)

Save Our Homes would stay, which means that after your first year on the tax roll, the assessed value of your house can't rise by more than 3 percent. That is why some neighbors in the exact same houses now can be paying dramatically different amounts of property taxes -- one has simply lived there longer.

Homeowners who move to a more valuable house in Florida can take Save Our Homes benefits with them, up to $500,000. Taxes still will rise, but not by as much as they would if they moved to a more valuable home now.

Assessments for businesses and second homes would be capped at 10 percent, and businesses would get a $25,000 exemption for equipment.

If the amendment passes, the tax burden unfairly will shift to newcomers, businesses and renters.

People who have -- appropriately -- paid a fortune in impact fees to move here will keep paying while longtime homeowners get a break. As a 28-year resident, I say that's wrong. Newcomers, once they have paid the admission fee, are part of the community like anyone else. Taxes should reflect that.

Second, small businesses in particular -- and Lake is filled with them -- will get maimed in this proposal. How can these supposedly pro-business "Republicans" justify that?

Third, non-homestead properties, such as rental apartments, are a target of this tax shift. Why should renters be hit for more taxes than homeowners? Do they use more services or cost the government more money than homeowners? Of course not.

So there you have it. It's bad, but leaving things the way they are is probably worse.

Happy voting.

Lauren Ritchie can be reached at lritchie@orlandosentinel.com or 352-742-5918.