I'm Voting Today

Early voting for the Florida Presidential Primary started yesterday. I am going to do what has become my tradition. I am going to vote today, on the second day of early voting. I know my friend Alonewolf would want me to change this tradition and vote by mail, and he is more than probably right. But there is just something for me about going to a polling place to cast my ballot.

And of course, here in Florida there has been all this talk back and forth about whether or not my vote will even count. Well, it counts enough for me to get myself to the Supervisor of Elections office in downtown St. Petersburg to cast my ballot for...

John Edwards, because he speaks directly to me on the kind of things our next President will need to do to take back our country and to begin to repair all the damage that has been done by Bush & Co. I want somebody who is going to fight for me. I want someone who understands that when Republicans talk about compromise and bipartisanship, what they are really talking about is you having to give in to them. These people never compromise their positions. They always expect you to compromise yours. John Edwards understands that. He speaks directly to my values and has earned my vote.

So that's me. What about you? Are you going to let some talking head pundit tell you that your vote doesn't count, so don't bother? Please do not listen to that bull. We are having an election in Florida. The results will be tallied. The winners and losers will be known. And all of this is going to happen one week before Tsunami Tuesday when all those other states vote. The Florida results will undoubtedly have an influence on the outcomes in those states. That's what going early is really all about. It is not about delegates. The candidates did not spend all those millions in New Hampshire to get 9 delegates, the number that both Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama received there. They did it because New Hampshire goes early and its results influence the outcome in all the other states that follow. It will be the same for Florida, only more so.

And what about our independent friends? Florida does have a closed primary system, so they will not be able to vote in our Presidential Preference Primaries. However, we do have a very important state constitutional amendment on the ballot this election on which independents can vote. The so called property tax reform, Amendment 1, is a very weak attempt at reform of our property tax system. In fact, this is not so much reform as it is pandering to homestead property owners.

Homestead property owners have been very well protected by the wildly successful Save Our Homes amendment which caps increases in taxable values of homesteads at 3% per year. This has protected homesteaders from the tax impact of the rampant run up in property values in recent years. Yet almost all of the benefits of this "reform" are directed at them. Small business owners and renters do not have this protection, yet they are getting basically none of the "relief" in this amendment. And this "relief" only amounts to $240 per year for the average Florida homeowner. This amount, while small individually, is large in the aggregate and will have very damaging impacts on the ability of local governments and school boards to deliver to us the services that we want. For these reasons, I am voting No on 1. Sorry, Charlie (Crist, our Republican Governor and a big backer of Amendment 1).

Strangely enough with a property tax cutting amendment on the statewide ballot, we are asking the voters in Pinellas County to keep a tax increase on themselves. Four years ago, voters in my county approved a small increase in their school property taxes. This tax was pledged to go mainly to increased teacher salaries, to keeping arts programs in the schools and to adding technology for our students. The proposal passed overwhelmingly four years ago with well over 60% of the vote. However, our Republican legislature will only allow us to choose to tax ourselves for four years at a time. Thus the measure is back on the ballot for renewal.

This program has been wildly successful. There is an independent citizen oversight committee that ensures that this money is, in fact, going where it is supposed to go. And it is. Our teacher salaries have been able to be increased to the point that we have a regionally competitive advantage in recruiting. We have more arts and music programs than we had four years ago. And we now have computer labs in every high school in the County. I am going to vote to keep this program going. (This is also another measure on the ballot that independents can vote for.)

So, as the Florida Democratic Party has asked, I am going out today to "Make it Count!" I can't wait to put that "I Voted" sticker on. I hope all my fellow Floridians will do the same on or before January 29th. You'll be glad you did.

Local Elected Officials - Please Stand Up

This past week has given us some important pieces of information about the voter mind set in Florida. I hope our local elected officials throughout the state will take a close look at the tea leaves and then do something very important. Stand up!

Municipal elections were held throughout Florida last week. In St. Petersburg, two incumbents were on the ballot. Both were reelected. One of them, Jamie Bennett, through a quirk of fate and St. Pete's wacky election code, was actually running against "New Election ". That's about as straight up a "throw the bum out" choice as you are going to get. Bennett won with 82% of the vote.

In Largo, only one incumbent was on the ballot. Largo is an interesting place because earlier this year, Largo used the super majority authority the legislature granted, and did not roll back its property taxes as much as it was otherwise required to do. The incumbent, Harriet Crozier, won with 72% of the vote.

The other interesting news came from a poll commissioned by various Florida media, including the St. Petersburg Times. This poll is not a pretty picture for the Republican run Florida Legislature. Only 53% of respondents said they would vote yes on their proposed property tax constitutional amendment. Typically this is perceived as the kiss of death.
That's because the initial polling for an amendment usually is the high water point for it's poll numbers. And remember, constitutional amendments now require a 60% super majority vote to pass.

But it gets worse for the legislators. 44% of respondents believe Florida is on the wrong track. Only 34% believe we are on the right track. A whopping 77% of respondents rated the legislature's performance on property tax relief as only fair or poor.

But here is the crux of the legislature's real problem. Fully 77% of respondents believe they will see little, if any, property insurance relief as a result of our legislature's reforms of earlier this year. In my opinion, this is something the legislators have known all along. And that is why they have been on this unending campaign to demonize local elected officials as "spending like drunken sailors." They needed to do something to take the heat off them for their failure on property insurance reform.

Now is the time for our local elected officials to stand up. Stand up and tell your constituents to let their legislators know what they really think of their cockamamie property tax reform efforts. The election results tell you that the voters like what you incumbents have been doing. The poll results tell you the legislature's credibility is in the toilet.

Stand up and push back. The voters are on your side.

Down on the Hustings - More Local Politics

I can't believe it has been over a month since my last post on DKos. But what a month it has been in local politics in the City of St. Petersburg. The last post was a rundown on our City Council elections, which will be on November 6th. Follow me below the jump, and I'll bring you up to date on what has been happening in our little corner of the world.

First let me do a little quick recap and a correction. St. Petersburg, Florida's 4th largest city, is a city of about 250,000 folks on the west coast of Florida. It's eastern boundary is Tampa Bay, so that puts us in the Tampa Bay area, the western terminus of Florida's infamous "I-4 Corridor". Our county, Pinellas, (pop approx 1 million) is the westernmost county in the corridor, Florida's swing area of the state. In 2000, Pinellas went for Al Gore by about 10,000 votes. In 2004, it went for George W Bush. So we are the swing county in the swing region in the swing state of the country. Just a bunch of swingers is what we are.

But St. Petersburg, which occupies the southernmost part of our county, is actually a fairly solid blue city. The map of legislative seats in the southern half of Pinellas County is almost solidly blue. The sole exception to this are the state House and Senate seats (1 each) which also include the beach communities on the barrier islands.

In St. Petersburg, we have a strong Mayor and City Council form of government. While the Mayor, Rick Baker, is a conservative Republican, 5 of the 8 seats on the officially nonpartisan city council are now held by Democrats. There is now one Independent, who most often votes with the Dems and but two Republicans remaining on the Council. To get to my count of Dems on the Council in my previous diary, I miscounted the Independent as a Dem.

This party lineup of 5 Dems, One Independent and two Rs is not likely to change after November 6th unless something (else) really strange happens. I say something else really strange because we have had several really strange happenings in this election cycle in St. Petersburg.

The first really strange thing was the sudden resignation and then suicide of the City Council Chairperson. This occurred on the Friday before the September 11th City Council primary elections. John Bryan was accused in family court of having improper physical contact with his his teen aged adopted daughter. He resigned his City Council seat and committed suicide the following day.

The vacancy in the Distrcit 2 Council seat was filled last Thursday when the City Council selected attorney James Kennedy, a Democrat, from among the five applicants for the seat. Again, although officially nonpartisan, the 4 Democrats on the council voted for Kennedy, while the two Republicans and the Independent voted for the lone Republican applicant. Thus, the District 2 seat was flipped to Democratic, as John Bryan had been a Republican (albeit of the moderate, not right wing Christian nut case type). Kennedy will serve out the remaining two years on John Bryan's term. And that's how 4 Dems got to be 5.

The other strange thing happened in the District 5 council race. Incumbent Jamie Bennett won his primary with 67% of the vote and advanced to the general election facing political newcomer Chris Kelly. In St. Petersburg, if more than two candidates file for a seat, a district only primary is held. The top two vote getters then advance to a city wide general election. But here's where things really got weird, as if they weren't weird enough already.

Chris Kelly dropped out of the race claiming exhaustion. It is tough to campaign in Florida in the summer time, but that was just very strange. What happened next is even stranger. A long forgotten provision of City Code declared that Kelly's name would be replaced on the ballot by the phrase "New Election". That's right, "New Election." Had the third person in the primary received 20% of the vote, her name would have gone on the ballot as a replacement for Kelly. But since she received only 14%, the city code dictated "New Election." What this means is if the voters decide not to retain Council Member Bennett in office, they can vote to hold a brand new election for this seat, starting from scratch with a primary.

The result of this is a pretty much straight up or down "throw the bum out" vote. You don't get to see this very often. We actually have a "retention" vote for judges in Florida, but nobody really knows much about them anyway. This is very unusual and it comes at an interesting time. In the state of Florida right now, we have the Republican dominated legislature busy demonizing local governments as tax and spend scoundrels, just wastefully spending away a bonanza in property taxes that had been provided by rising property values in Florida.

No matter that this very same legislature required local school boards to raise property taxes by $500 million this year. At the same time they required county and municipal governments to roll back their property tax rates and have been trying to get a "tax reform" state constitutional amendment on the January 29th Presidential Primary ballot.

This is our legislature's 3rd shot at property tax "reform" this year. They failed to accomplish it during the regular session in the spring. They thought they had something in a special session earlier this year. However, a state judge ruled that the ballot summary our legislature wrote about their proposed constitutional amendment was unconstitutionally vague and misleading. Now they are back at it again. Lord only knows what they will come up with. But through it all, to cover up their failure to provide meaningful property insurance relief, our Republican dominated state legislature has been painting local elected officials as tax and spend villains.

That brings us back to the city council race of Jamie Bennett vs "New Election". Council Member Bennett has been one of the more vocal critics of the legislators meddling with local governments ability to set their own millage rates to meet their communities needs as they see fit. The vilification of local electeds by our legislators did not seem to have a major impact on his primary. As mentioned above, Council Member Bennett got 67% of the vote in his district primary. Perhaps that kind of popularity is why no organized effort for "New Election" has emerged as of this date. Maybe the local voters like the job their local elected officials are doing. Maybe a big win for Jamie Bennett should be a message to our legislators that they are barking up the wrong tree in their so called "tax reform" efforts.

Now if they could only put this amount of energy into truly reforming property insurance in this state...

Full Disclosure: I am a paid fundraiser for Council Member Bennett's campaign, as well as for two other council candidate's campaigns. Part of the reason I have not been on these pages much lately.

Budget Balancing on the Backs of the Needy

Poor pregnant women; hospitals and poor immigrants; missing children; and law abiding citizens. What do all these groups have in common? They are all about to bear the brunt of the state budget balancing measures. Maybe.

The Miami Herald has a story today about various proposals being floated for balancing the budget when the legislature meets for its special session in September. Cost-cutting recommendations from more than two dozen state agencies are due to Gov. Charlie Crist and legislative leaders today. These measures are needed help close a more than $1 billion budget shortfall, due to a sluggish economy that has sapped tax collections. Legislators will meet to decide what to cut on Sept. 18 when they convene for a three-week special session.

Lets repeat what is causing all this scrooge like activity:

a sluggish economy that has sapped tax collections.

Make that sales tax collections. This tax revenue fluctuates notoriously in line with the Florida economy. With the slowness in the housing market spilling over into other parts of the economy, state services are facing the budget cutting axe. And still we have certain state legislators who think replacing the property tax with a much higher state sales tax is a good idea.

Here's what would be a good idea: Legislators who think this is a good idea should be turned out of office to find another line of work. Another good idea? Get in touch with your state legislators to make sure they know you do not want the most needy in the state to bear the largest burden in this special session of service cutting.

Bill Nelson Pinellas Town Hall

Bill Nelson started off his August Congressional "vacation" by holding a Town Hall meeting in Pinellas County today. Nelson answered questions for one hour from the over 150 in attendance. One remarkable thing about this event? Nobody asked about Iraq.

The first question Nelson fielded did allude to the Bush administrations trampling of civil rights in the guise of the global war on terror. Nelson professed not to know about a controversial classified Executive Order recently issued by Bush. He did talk about this weekend's FISA vote however. He stressed that what was done was a temporary measure that sunsets in six months. Nelson went on to say that the legislation was meant to protect the warrant requirement for US Persons, but not for foreign sources. Nelson lambasted the "mishandling" of the Terrorist Surveillance Program for the last five years. There was also the chance to bash embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Nelson related that one of the biggest sticking points in the bill was the administrations' insistence that the Attorney General be in charge of certifying compliance for this program. Nelson said this was unacceptable to a bipartisan group of Senators. The solution? Having the Director of National Intelligence share this responsibility.

OK, now we have a man that nobody believes and the man in charge of spying certifying compliance for this spy program. Some compromise. And as the 2008 election will be all that much closer in 6 months, does anybody expect that the Congress will show more backbone then?

The questions next turned to domestic issues. Nelson said that a wholesale reform of health insurance delivery would be coming "down the road". Nelson, a former Florida Insurance Commissioner explained that the principle of insurance - spreading risk over large pools of people - was just not working in health insurance. The reason - health insurance pools are too fragmented. The current system only seems to work, if at all, for very large employers. Nelson did tout the recent passage of the children's health care program (SCHIP). Nelson also said that legislation would be introduced soon to induce health insurers to provide more mental health benefits. In response to a question about support for a breast cancer research program, Nelson related how on his space shuttle flight, his primary experiment was for cancer research. He did this shortly after a very dear friend had died from breast cancer.

Nelson got a couple of questions from local elected officials, who were well represented in the audience. The first came from a Gulfport City Commissioner who asked for help regarding changes in the rules for Community Development Block Grants. Nelson responded that his office would be happy to assist in helping communities obtain the grants, but seemed to miss the impact of the change in rules on these communities. He did take the opportunity to point out how the property tax "reform" in the Florida Legislature has impacted his office. He is now getting deluged with requests for Federal funding from local governments. Seems the local governments are turning to the Federal government for funding projects and programs that were once funded by their own property tax revenues or by the state.

The other question was from St. Petersburg City Council Member Renee Flowers, who also is the President of the Florida League of Cities this year. Flowers asked for Nelson's help in securing adequate funds for affordable housing, including the re-authorization of Hope VI grants. Nelson said that the prospects were grim for passage due to the requirement in the Senate to get 60 votes to move a bill. Nelson said that as long as the administration opposed a funding level, Bush's Republican enablers in the Senate would make sure that the 60 votes would not be forthcoming.

Nelson was asked about the upcoming re authorization of No Child Left Behind. His initial response was that he was in favor of fully funding NCLB, something the Bush Administration has not done. As he continued to talk about NCLB, however, he seemed to be talking himself into some major modifications to the program, if he was to vote for re authorization at all.

When asked about outsourcing of jobs, Nelson responded that there were no simple answers in this complicated, interconnected world. He did say he favored changing the tax code to remove rewards for companies off shoring jobs. He went on to say that in order to remain competitive in a global economy, America's advantage would be its intellectual capital, which all comes back to education.

The final question came from Linda Osmundson, Director of CASA (Community Actions Stops Abuse). She asked for help in increasing the availability of FHA Section 8 vouchers. The availability of these vouchers has all but dried up. CASA has used these vouchers to place battered women in temporary housing as a way stop in helping these dislocated victims find permanent housing. Nelson failed to see the particular significance of this question and referred back to his previous answer about affordable housing funding and the 60 vote roadblock. Seems to me the answer is to elect a bigger Democratic majority and get a Democrat in the White House in 2008.

Nelson closed the meeting by noting that no one had asked him about Iraq. He then proceeded to explain his position on Iraq. Mainly, he supports the Iraq Study Group conclusions that the US should have begun a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq and a change in the mission of the remaining troops. That changed mission would be to provide training for Iraqi forces; to provide border security and force protection and targeted missions against Al Qaeda in Iraq. Nelson also pointed out the ISG's call for increased diplomatic activity to create a regional solution for Iraq. This allowed him to point out his earlier visit to Syria and the criticism he had received. However, he is getting the last laugh as the administration now seems to be talking more to the Syrians, and they are even talking to the Iranian Ambassador in Baghdad.

Overall, this was a good performance for Nelson. He has been doing Town Hall meetings for 35 years and is very comfortable in this format. Despite my nitpicking above, he answered all questions put to him. He talked about what a privilege it was for him to serve. You got the feeling that he meant it. While I do not always agree with Bill Nelsons' votes on specific issues, he is a trustworthy man of his convictions. As Ronald Reagan said, someone who votes with you 80% of the time is your friend, not your enemy.

Nelson continued his vacation with another Town Hall meeting later in the day in Pasco County. Enjoy your "vacation", Senator Nelson.

Local Governments Win BIG?

The St. Petersburg Times is reporting on a letter sent yesterday by Senate President Ken Pruitt and House Speaker Marco Rubio

touting "substantial agreement" in the property tax talks.

One very significant portion of this letter could prove to be a major victory for local governments.

The details of this letter start out by saying

Cities and Counties will be required to cut their property taxes...

A cap on future property taxes will ensure that local governments cannot grow faster than personal income.

Nothing in there looks like a win for local governments. But look at the very next line in the letter

Local governments may override the caps and the cuts by an extraordinary vote

So what is an extraordinary vote, you ask? Here is what the letter goes on to say about that.

allowing local governments by a super majority vote, referendum or other heightened standards to override the mandatory cuts.

This provision appears to give local governments the power to retain control over their budgets. All they have to do now is to have the political courage to do what they think is best for their communities. I am betting that local governments in the Tampa Bay area will still look long and hard about where they might be able to reduce spending without impacting the quality of life in their communities. But they will retain control over how much to cut.

Stay tuned.

Florida Primary: How to Have Our Primary Cake and Eat It Too

The Florida Legislature has thankfully ended their regular session. I say thankfully, because it is harder for them to screw things up when they are not in session. But they are coming back in June for a special session since they could not get their act together on property tax "reform".

That's another whole diary in and of itself. Today, there is good news and bad news and it is the same news. The good news is the Legislature has voted to move Florida's Presidential Preference Primary to January 29th. The bad news is the Legislature has voted to move Florida's Presidential Preference Primary to January 29th.

Follow me to find out why this is both good and bad news and how to have our cake and it eat too.


The Florida Legislature limped to a close of its annual regular session with a whimper Friday afternoon. The list of the dids and did nots will provide fodder for many diaries in the days and weeks to come. Today, though, we are going to take up the topic of the Florida Presidential Preference Primary.

The Republican dominated Florida Legislature passed a wide ranging election reform bill this week. The most publicised news is that Florida is moving to voter verified paper ballots. Congrats to Pam Haengel, President, Voting Integrity Alliance of Tampa Bay (VIA Tampa Bay) and all the other folks who worked so hard to make this happen.

The other big news is that the Legislature also voted to move Florida's Presidential Preference Primary up to January 29th. This is before the primary "window" allowed by both the Republican and Democratic National committees. From the New York Times:

The national parties warned Florida that any state slating its contest earlier than Feb. 5 without express permission will lose half its delegates to the party’s national conventions in the late summer of 2008. In addition, Democratic Party rules stipulate that any candidate who campaigns in a state that has violated Democratic scheduling rules will forfeit delegates the state retains — in effect, shutting out the state altogether.

That sounds pretty draconian, particularly on the part of the Dems. Maybe Karen Thurman should call Howard Dean and remind him that the Florida Legislature is dominated by the other guys. A little help with the 50 state plan might be more in order than threatening us with punishment for the sins of others.

But there is another option that is entirely within the control of the Florida Democratic Party. Also noted in the New York Times:

DNC spokeswoman Stacie Paxton said in a statement that the committee is hoping to work with the state to reach a solution. “This is not the first time that a state legislature has set its primary on a date outside DNC party rules,” Paxton said. “As with similar situations in the past, the DNC is working closely with the state party to look at the alternatives for proceeding in accordance with the rules on or after February 5th.”

Alternatives might include holding a party-run event such as a caucus, making the primary a non-binding event.

This may be the saving grace for for Florida Democrats. The FDP could choose to make the January primary non-binding. They would then need to create a mechanism for the awarding of convention delegates to the candidates. A caucus is one method that the FDP would totally control. The only real problem the FDP is going to have: Figuring out how to make it snow so the caucus goers will have to wade through the obligatory snow to get to the caucus locations.

The Value of Art Education

This may be a particularly apropos time for a diary on this topic. This very week The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation joined forces with The Broad Foundation and announced a $60 million political style campaign for Strong American Schools called Ed in 08.

In Florida, my home state, the combination of rising property insurance premiums and property tax increases is driving the state legislature towards draconian changes in the tax system. The major target is property taxes which are the only source of revenue for local school funding requirements and the major source of revenue for local governments. The state legislature's well intended efforts to provide much needed relief to property owners are about to have some very severe unintended consequences for the quality of life here in Florida.

Caught squarely in the headlights of those unintended consequences are the arts and art education. The arts are always high on the list of the first place to cut funding in times like these. Follow me below the fold to examine why this is precisely the wrong place to start cutting.


My good friend Alonewolf , has heard more than enough about workforce training. As the CEO of an innovative high tech company, he worries about creating the next generation of leaders and creative thinkers. "Workforce Training" makes him think of the 1984 Apple Super Bowl commercial with the suited automatons marching over the cliff. At a recent "Regional Leadership Breakfast" in St. Petersburg, the topic was "Education in Florida". There were several comments and questions about "workforce training." But at this "leadership" breakfast, no one seemed to much care about leadership training.

New Horizons for Learning provides a terrific resource for the value of arts in education. Their prologue states in part:

Today it is recognized that to be truly well educated one must not only learn to appreciate the arts, but must have rich opportunities to actively participate in creative work. The arts are languages that most people speak, cutting through individual differences in culture, educational background, and ability. They can bring every subject to life and turn abstractions into concrete reality. Learning through the arts often results in greater academic achievement and higher test scores.

In Why are the Arts Important?, Dee Dickinson provides a 15 point checklist. Here are my favorites from that list:

They improve academic achievement -- enhancing test scores, attitudes, social skills, critical and creative thinking.

They exercise and develop higher order thinking skills including analysis, synthesis, evaluation, and "problem-finding."

They provide the means for every student to learn.

To my way of thinking, that should be enough to end this diary right here. But not every decision maker is influenced solely by these factors. So here is something decision makers do understand - $$$$$$.

The Economic Impact of Florida’s Arts and Cultural Industry released by the Florida Cultural Alliance in January 2004 is a study by Dr. William Stronge of Florida Atlantic University. The study is based on fiscal year 2001. Some highlights are:

Florida’s arts and cultural industry is one of the fastest growing in the state. Its annual statewide economic impact has grown from $1.7 billion in 1997 to over $2.9 billion and now supports over 28,000 full-time equivalent jobs. (That is $104 thousand per full time equivalent job!)

Attendees at the programs and events of not-for-profit cultural organizations exceeded 400 million in 2000-01. Audience participation is significant because attendance at these events generates related commerce for local businesses such as hotels, restaurants, and shops.

An estimated 7 million out-of-state tourists visited Florida’s cultural facilities or attended cultural events as a primary activity. These “cultural” tourists spent $4.5 billion, adding $9.3 billion to the state's gross regional product and creating 103,713 full-time equivalent jobs with a payroll of $2.6 billion.

The Florida Department of State has also published a brochure, Return on Investment: Florida's Cultural, Historical and Library Programs which highlights not only the economic impact of the arts but also the impact of our state's historic preservation and libraries.

Any fair reading of these studies leads to but one conclusion. Funding for the arts and art education is the last place that should be cut. Please join with me in letting our legislative and business leaders know that if they want to be leaders in the future and they want Strong American Schools , they need to lead with the arts.

Property Taxes and Quality of Life

There is no question whatsoever that the hottest topic in the state legislature right now is property tax "reform". What I want to know is who up there is taking a serious look at how these so called reforms are going to affect the quality of life here in Florida? What do I mean by this? Come along and we'll take a quick tour of the issues.

Nobody disputes that there are serious inequities in our current property tax system. However, nothing in the House bill actually addresses those inequities, and precious little in the Senate bill. Here are the subgroups of people who have been most seriously disadvantaged by our current property tax system:

1) Rental property owners and by extension renters.
2) Business property owners
3) Non homestead residential property owners
4) Homesteaders trapped in their homes by Save Our Homes

Rental property owners, particularly those who rent affordable units, have been brutally hit by the current property tax system. But the people they have been hit by are the property appraisers. The appraisers see that property as a potential high price condo and tax it accordingly. That's akin to an income tax that taxes you on what you might have earned rather than what you actually earned. What a brilliant idea that is.

Business property owners have the same problem. Their properties are being taxed as if they were in a new multi use property or a new office tower, as opposed to the mom and pop shop they actually run. More taxes on potential.

Non homestead residential property owners, or second home owners if you will are also getting hammered by the run up in real estate values. But legislators, here's a clue. These people are either not citizens of Florida, or they are fortunate enough to own a second home in this state. The first group are not voters here. The second group, to the extent they can afford to have a second home in this state also ought to be able to afford the taxes on it.

Finally we have the homesteaders who are trapped in their current homes by the Save Our Homes amendment and its unintended consequences. The Save Our Homes amendment is working exactly as it was meant to. People are not being taxed out of their homesteads in Florida. But they are being held hostage in their current homes due to the tax consequences of moving into a new home.

So what do the House and Senate "reform" plans do for these classes of tax payers? The house bill does virtually nothing for anyone except homestead property owners, the exact class that needs tax relief the least. I was fortunate enough to buy a property in downtown St. Petersburg 10 years ago. Thanks to Save Our Homes and Homestead Exemption, the taxable value of my home is still below my 10 year old purchase price. Meanwhile the actual market value of my home has quadrupled. Do I need tax relief? Actually my city taxes in St. Petersburg declined slightly last year. The only tax reform I need is Save Our Homes portability.

The Senate bill attempts a form of temporary portability. Their excuse is that there are constitutional issues (US Constitution) against just making Save Our Homes fully portable. The issue is that making Save Our Homes portable would unconstitutionally create different classes of taxpayers in Florida. This argument is spurious at best. We have had Homestead Exemption for as long as I can remember. We have additional homestead exemptions available for the elderly, disabled veterans, widows and probably some other groups. None of these has ever been successfully challenged on constitutional grounds. There is no real reason to suspect that Save Our Homes portability would not pass the same test.

How about rental property owners and the renters themselves? Well, if your rental property is qualified as "affordable" and you agree to maintain that use of the property for 20 years, you can get your appraised value figured on actual cash flow on the property. There is no reason that actual cash flow could not be used as a valuation method on all rental properties.

The same thing applies to other business property owners. They need to get off "highest and best use" appraisals and get onto some variation of current use valuation. Nothing substantial is being proposed for these property owners.

Now, what has all this to do with quality of life. The reforms that I am in favor of above are already going to cost local governments tax revenue. The bigger gun to the head of local governments is actually the various proposals to "roll back" local governments property tax revenue to some prior year. That is what is going to hit us all squarely in our quality of life.

My own local governments, St. Petersburg and Pinellas County have not been profligate squanderers of tax money, but they are being dumped into the same boat with other local governments that might have been. Both governments have been looking at the likely consequences of the property tax proposals in Tallahassee. Both local governments have insisted that the police and sheriff's departments would not have services curtailed due to property tax revenue reductions. So where does that leave them?

St. Petersburg has mentioned that some fire stations might be closed. That can not have a good effect on overall fire department response times.

St. Petersburg and Pinellas County are faced with a homelessness crisis, as evidenced by the tent cities that have sprung up in St. Petersburg. Residents and business owners want government to step in and fix the problem. The temporary solution is more emergency shelter beds. The longer term solution is affordable housing. Both of these "solutions" cost money. However these are precisely the spending areas that are likely to fare poorly when the budget axe falls. We will then have to deal with the current homeless situation without major relief for some time to come.

Pinellas County is starting to have second thoughts about the feasibility of Tax Increment Financing (TIF). This is the program that allows all property tax revenues from a specific area (city and county) to be reinvested in those specific areas. TIF has had spectacular results in downtown St. petersburg and in Ybor City. If county governments decide they can no longer afford TIFs, the economic effects in construction spending slowdowns will be felt for years to come.

St. Petersburg has already prepared a letter to all social service agencies and charities that have received financial support from the City. These folks have been told to plan their budgets on the basis that they would receive no funds from the City of St. Petersburg this year. These items include support for alcohol treatment centers and an inebriate receiving center.

Other quality of life areas sure to receive budget hits are the Pier Aquarium, the Florida Orchestra, the MLK Festival Band Event and various other City Co-sponsored events. Some of us are surely going to miss these things when they are gone.

There are other areas that are sure to take some hits as well. Library branches might close, or have their hours of operation sharply reduced. Parks will not have their grass cut or their other maintenance needs tended to as we would like to see them.

If our legislators rush into this so called "property tax reform" without careful consideration, we are going to be feeling the unintended consequences in our quality of life for years to come.

Who will the legislators blame then?

The Property Tax Puzzle

Property tax reform is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, issue facing the state legislature this year. There has been much hand wringing all around. Many hare brained schemes have been floated. Civic Concern has just published a thoughtful, reasoned history of the property tax problems in Florida and proposed some solutions.

Some commenters on the St. Peterburg Times Buzz Blog piece on this report claim that

The people want major reduction in property taxes

Others argue

I don't think "the people" want a bunch of half-cocked, sound bite ideas. ... Recent polls show they're pretty skeptical of all the various proposals.

Most of "the people", i.e. the voters in this state are already benefiting from the "Save Our Homes" tax cap. Homesteaders in the City of St. Petersburg saw their City taxes stay essentially flat this year in dollar terms. These are not "the people" clamoring the most for property tax reductions. The "Save Our Homes" amendment has worked exactly as it was intended. Homesteaders are not being forced out of their homes by rising property taxes. There have been some unintended consequences, some foreseen, others unforeseen.

The foreseen consequences are that other property tax payers would pay a larger share of the tax burden if homestead property taxes were "capped". That is certainly happening. Business property owners, and by extension, renters have been seeing their uncapped property valuations and their taxes going through the roof with the recent boom in real estate prices. Chief among the unforeseen consequences are homesteaders being "trapped" in their current homes because they couldn't afford the taxes on a new property if they moved and had to step up to current market valuations.

One of the most curious scenes in this whole property tax situation is how local governments are made out as the whipping boys in this "debate". I say curious because just last fall Leadership Florida did a comprehensive survey of Florida residents. Among the key findings in this survey was the relative approval ratings of the various levels of government. Fully 61% of the respondents see the state government as doing only a fair or poor job. County governments were rated fair or poor by 55% of respondents. Only 38% of city dwellers rated their city governments as fair or poor. The state government, which people like the least, is pointing the tax reform gun right at the heads of local governments, which people like the most. I'm not sure how well that is going to work out for them.

Besides, the increasing revenue requirements of local governments are not entirely of their own making. One of the biggest drivers of increasing expenditures by local governments is growth. And that is not just on a linear basis, because growth does not pay for itself. The new taxes generated are not sufficient to pay for the increased capital needs (roads, schools, sewer) or service needs (police, fire, garbage collection) caused by the growth. Neither have we collected sufficient impact fees to pay for this growth. This, in effect, has shifted the tax burden for growth onto existing tax payers and not the new ones.That is the major reason I am not at all bothered by the apparent inequities in taxes paid for newly built homes relative to existing homes covered by the "Save our Homes" amendment. To the extent that local governments could have ameliorated this situation by charging higher impact fees, it is their fault. To the extent that the state did not do a better job of regulating growth and anticipating the increased costs, it is their fault.


But the question really is not about the blame game. The question is what to do to solve the very real property tax problems that do exist. First, here is what not to do. Arbitrary roll backs of local government revenues are not the answer. Most local elected officials are much more careful with their taxpayers dollars than the folks in Tallahassee ever were. Do you really want them deciding how much your local government can spend on your police and fire departments?


We can do something to stop the bleeding for non homestead property owners. We can change the way properties are valued. Currently, non homestead properties are valued on the basis of their "highest and best use". That is to say that the corner ice cream shop will be taxed as if it were a luxury condo building site if that is what the appraisers deem the "highest and best use" for the property. Changing the valuation method to one based on the value of the current use of a developed property would keep businesses and renters from being pilloried by higher taxes due to speculation in the real estate market.

We can fix one of the unintended consequences of the "Save Our Homes" amendment. We can make the tax benefit accrued by a homestead property owner portable. If the difference between the market value and the capped value of a property is X, we could let that homestead property owner take that X amount of benefit to a new homestead with them. Some say that this might not withstand constitutional scrutiny. I believe that problem could be overcome by carefully crafting the law and developing an appropriate legislative history. All citizens would in fact be treated the same for tax purposes because they could all accrue tax benefits on an equal basis.

These two measures would solve the most egregious issues involving property taxes that we currently face. Turning back the clock and pretending that local governments could maintain the same level of services with less money is nonsensical. Having Tallahassee decide what those levels ought to be really makes no sense. Providing solutions that will work into the future is what we should be striving for.