How are you going to Vote on Amendment 1?

[SHELLY]

Average savings. I doubt homes in Watercolor are average priced. It certainly is not an average neighborhood.

All things being equal, if it only exempts the first $50,000 that means the savings for the Watercolor owner living in a $7.5M home will be the same as the owner living in a $175K townhouse...no?


.

 

[SHELLY]

What is a solution then? Government is against cutting taxes so they will have more to spend. Citizens are against it because it does not meet some definition of real reform. So if we do nothing, then the spending continues.

This 'tax reform' is a half-arsed attempt by Charlie to tick off a box on his election "promises,"....considering what a cock-up he made of his promise to fix the insurance problems, his desperation to do something....anything... is palpable.

This state's leadership has swung and missed on the insurance issue (by giving million$ in taxpayer-funded reinsurance to companies who fattened their profits rather than passing the savings back to Florida's citizens) and pizzed away billions of our taxes by investing in toxic subprime mortgages...given this state's track record--I don't think a $240 "annual return" is worth the risks for the state and counties down the line.

Like you, Walt, I am a long-time homesteader and will realize some benefit if this amendment passes. But the contents of this 11th-hour-slip-shod amendment (with NYC Trump Tower $1,000 a plate fundraisers ) just doesn't pass my sniff test.

Our "no" votes in this homestead will give Charlie the opportunity of a "do-over."

.

.

 

[wrobert]

All things being equal, if it only exempts the first $50,000 that means the savings for the Watercolor owner living in a $7.5M home will be the same as the owner living in a $175K townhouse...no?

I guess you are right on that one. Do not know what I was thinking. The savings would actually not kick in unless the owner had built up a large SOH cushion and was buying another home.

 

[wrobert]

Like you, Walt, I am a long-time homesteader and will realize some benefit if this amendment passes. But the contents of this 11th-hour-slip-shod amendment (with NYC Trump Tower $1,000 a plate fundraisers ) just doesn't pass my sniff test.

Our "no" votes in this homestead will give Charlie the opportunity of a "do-over."

You seem to have more of a problem with how the money was raised by Crist to try to pass the amendment than anything else. I do not see how that matters. It is not like the amendment will only benefit Trump. And they are friends so not sure why the big deal.

Personally, if this fails, I do not see anything else getting a try for a long time. Another predicted 2 billion dollar shortfall is going to scare the legislature off.

http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2008/01/the-bleakest-of.html

The main problem is the spending at the local levels. But I also understand the commissioners frustration with the State telling them they have to cut back while Tallahassee continues to spend. Commissioners feel that they are doing what they should do because they are getting reelected. But under the current system, the majority of voters are pretty much protected from higher taxes while the second homeowners and newcomers fund the largesse. You here these groups complain once a year at budget time and then they are not heard from until the next year. Then the newcomers start seeing some benefit and I am sure out of frustration give up so the rebellion quiets down and the spending continues. All that was done the last year was putting off some capital projects and equipment purchases to get the budget down to State guidelines. If the amount of money is not further reduced or restricted you are never going to see any real change in budget policy that results in a leaner government.

 

[Bob]

Not one of you supports the elimination of SOH. It's bad law, because it benefits an entitled class. All of this back and forth on voting no or yes is window dressing hiding your own greed.

 

[TooFarTampa]

Not one of you supports the elimination of SOH. It's bad law, because it benefits an entitled class. All of this back and forth on voting no or yes is window dressing hiding your own greed.

Although I believe it is bad law because of the vast inequities, not so much because it creates an "entitled" class. Landlords, small businesses, snowbirds and second homeowners and especially first time buyers get screwed.

My neighbor across the street, who has lived in his home for 16 years and is the director of pediatrics for a major hospital ($$$) pays a fraction of what we pay in property taxes on our house, which is slightly larger, on the same sized lot and purchased five years ago. Right now they are gutting the entire house and adding on some square footage -- we're talking a complete gut job; the only things left are the structural components and the exterior siding. They didn't move because they are "trapped" (read: spoiled) :roll: by SOH. They didn't tear down because of SOH. They will have a totally new house and their tax base will remain the same except for the added value from the square footage. It just does not make any sense at all.

The cap, obviously, is not saving their home. It is just saving them a heckuva lot of money. They are nice people and I am not being critical. They have wisely waited years to update their home. But the system is allowing them to work it to their advantage.

Portability is NOT going to make things better. It will make them worse.

I do believe seniors (and you can exclude the highest earners if need be) are worthy of some sort of cap. Beyond that, the only "cap" in place should be an overall spending yearly increase of 3 percent. Distribute that fairly among the masses and you will have a much better system.

 

[Busta Hustle]

good post 1 and all...Is there any property tax reform plan out there in our legislature or elsewhere that is fair and equal? The "redo" that is definitely needed has a solution and I bet it is relatively simple.

 

[Joe Complete]

Personally, if this fails, I do not see anything else getting a try for a long time.

I am holding out for the Florida Taxation and Budget Reform Commission.
http://www.floridatbrc.org/

Of all the possible proceedures for getting constitutional amendments on the November ballot, they have the easiest route. Since the legislature can't agree on anything meaningful I feel they are our last hope.

You can view the proposals on their web site. By May they will determine which ones will be on the November ballot.

 

[SHELLY]

Not one of you supports the elimination of SOH. It's bad law, because it benefits an entitled class. All of this back and forth on voting no or yes is window dressing hiding your own greed.

The SOH protected a whole lot of long-time residents of this state--who by the way, for years paid for the infrastructure & schools of this state before the johnny-come-lately investulators drove up the price of housing to statisfy their heretofore misplaced mentioned "greed."

The SOH was on the books for YEARS and was never a problem until the wheels fell off of the real estate money-grab frenzy.


.

 

[JustaLocal]

The SOH protected a whole lot of long-time residents of this state--who by the way, for years paid for the infrastructure & schools of this state before the johnny-come-lately investulators drove up the price of housing to statisfy their heretofore misplaced mentioned "greed."

The SOH was on the books for YEARS and was never a problem until the wheels fell off of the real estate money-grab frenzy..

I agree with you.

I find it best to vote against amendments unless there is a reason to vote for them.