How are you going to Vote on Amendment 1?

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."

.

.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.


.

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.

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.

Elimination of SOH is not on the table. I would be very surprised for that to get anywhere. It is just too difficult to trust elected officials to control their access to the public treasury.

Yes it's not on the table for the reasons stated. The Pols are trying to pander to everyone, and fix nothing at the same time. The obvious fix will not be considered, and that is the recognition that SOH has created a complicated, protracted public debate pitting those who needlessly bear the tax burden for others against those who escape that burden. A child could remedy this.

Yes it's not on the table for the reasons stated. The Pols are trying to pander to everyone, and fix nothing at the same time. The obvious fix will not be considered, and that is the recognition that SOH has created a complicated, protracted public debate pitting those who needlessly bear the tax burden for others against those who escape that burden. A child could remedy this.

Look Bob there are a lot of problems in this world that could be easily solved. And yes the removal of SOH would make things equitable and would get people more involved because their taxes would more than likely increase on a regular basis. I am all for each of these.

But it ain't gonna happen. So instead of discussing the solution to high taxes that is not going to even be presented. Why not place our energy toward coming up with something that we may get passed. The amendment does exacerbate the problem by allowing people to keep SOH. The amendment does include a 10% cap on non-homesteaded property. Not perfect, but it is scaring the heck out of local officials who have built communities in Florida on the backs of vacation homeowners. This amendment helps to curtail that and is a step, albeit a minor step, but a step in trying to get this under control.

Right or wrong if it fails, you can look to politicians standing in front of cameras saying that they tried but obviously the people do not want to do anything. And if anything else is tried you will see the unions stepping up and asking when are we going to stop pandering to the 2nd homeowners and get to the business of finding ways to generate more revenue for education, firefighters, and policeman, we tried this once and the public said no so why are we wasting our time? Basically, when this fails, you can pretty much hang up any chance of any tax relief of any sort occurring in this State anytime soon.

I to hope the taxation commission fixes some of the massive loopholes in, if nothing else, the sales tax laws. Having to pay taxes on seats to a ball game while skyboxes are sales tax exempt is just plain stupid, imho.

Speaking of effed up sales tax when I am in Destin and by a newspaper I am charged sales tax. I don't know if it happens all the time I just notice sometimes. Isn't that unconstitutional or something? Interfering with freedom of the press like having a poll tax etc...

Speaking of effed up sales tax when I am in Destin and by a newspaper I am charged sales tax. I don't know if it happens all the time I just notice sometimes. Isn't that unconstitutional or something? Interfering with freedom of the press like having a poll tax etc...

I have noticed that also. Sometimes I have to pay tax, sometimes not. One place only charges me tax if I buy two newspapers at the same time. I thought they were exempt, but that may have been one that was repealed. Now Ostrich feed is exempt. Imagine that.

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.

Charlie can cozy up to 'The Donald' all he wants during his freetime....I couldn't care less. I just find it oddly disturbing as to why our governor has to travel to New York City to drum up support and beg for cash for an amendment that he claims is what the citizens of Florida are begging for.

Even on Charlie's Amendment 1 Roadshow-swing through his state (that's Florida, by the way), he's having to bus in a rent-a-crowd of Realtors. The whole thing just stinks out loud and my BS sign is flashing yellow.

Look Bob there are a lot of problems in this world that could be easily solved. And yes the removal of SOH would make things equitable and would get people more involved because their taxes would more than likely increase on a regular basis. I am all for each of these.

But it ain't gonna happen. So instead of discussing the solution to high taxes that is not going to even be presented. Why not place our energy toward coming up with something that we may get passed. The amendment does exacerbate the problem by allowing people to keep SOH. The amendment does include a 10% cap on non-homesteaded property. Not perfect, but it is scaring the heck out of local officials who have built communities in Florida on the backs of vacation homeowners. This amendment helps to curtail that and is a step, albeit a minor step, but a step in trying to get this under control.

Right or wrong if it fails, you can look to politicians standing in front of cameras saying that they tried but obviously the people do not want to do anything. And if anything else is tried you will see the unions stepping up and asking when are we going to stop pandering to the 2nd homeowners and get to the business of finding ways to generate more revenue for education, firefighters, and policeman, we tried this once and the public said no so why are we wasting our time? Basically, when this fails, you can pretty much hang up any chance of any tax relief of any sort occurring in this State anytime soon.

I to hope the taxation commission fixes some of the massive loopholes in, if nothing else, the sales tax laws. Having to pay taxes on seats to a ball game while skyboxes are sales tax exempt is just plain stupid, imho.

I can't find too many neighbors who are voting in favor of this. It will be interesting to see if it can clear the 60 percent hurdle.

Even on Charlie's Amendment 1 Roadshow-swing through his state (that's Florida, by the way), he's having to bus in a rent-a-crowd of Realtors. The whole thing just stinks out loud and my BS sign is flashing yellow.

Now you disagree with CC giving out of work realtors something to do?

I can't find too many neighbors who are voting in favor of this. It will be interesting to see if it can clear the 60 percent hurdle.

That will be interesting. Didn't the amendment now requiring a 60% hurdle only pass at 52%?

Even on Charlie's Amendment 1 Roadshow-swing through his state (that's Florida, by the way), he's having to bus in a rent-a-crowd of Realtors. The whole thing just stinks out loud and my BS sign is flashing yellow.

Shelly, is there a posted schedule somewhere? Will we be lucky to see it?

Shelly, is there a posted schedule somewhere? Will we be lucky to see it?

Check with the FAR...the $1M they tossed in the hat should cover bus rental and then some.

.

I have no idea why FAR would sponsor such a thing.

I have no idea why FAR would sponsor such a thing.

Here's a news story and a video that should help clear things up: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sfl-107cristtaxes,0,4765496.story


.

Voting Yes on Amendment 1 will also add a $25K exemption to the tangible personal property tax. This is going to assist small business owners from completing burdensome paperwork as well as absentee owners who are renting their secondary homes. Most will no longer have to file paperwork annual and pay another 'nuisance' tax annually.

What affect will a Yes vote have on Walton County Government. All things being equal, zero growth, Walton County will see a 1.5% reduction in the property tax base the first year. At the current millage rate that would be approx 1.3 million dollars in revenue. These numbers come from a report prepared for the Florida Senate during the tax cut debates last year. Keep in mind that the higher these numbers are, the better the tax cut would look. Yet the Florida Association of Counties, the government lobbying agency that uses tax dollars from local government to lobby against tax cuts, says that the cuts would actually result in a 3.5 million dollar cut in Walton County.

If the county budget is $125 million, then would you not think that true leaders could find 1.3 million dollars to offer some relief to the citizens? Remember this is based on zero growth. Any growth erodes that number away.

It is a pretty simple choice for me, because without SOH, I would have to leave Florida. As it is, I can barely afford insurance anymore.
I don't care for the tone of the posts that imply that somehow this is the fault of people not getting involved enough to force some other kind of tax relief at the local level. From my perspective, most people who are working full time are too busy making money to pay the taxes and insurance and everything else that daily living requires to effectively participate in govt. It is in fact the retired and the semi-retired that regularly show up at county meetings, and the less wealthy among these are the very ones that will be packing to move away without SOH.
Should I have anticipated this and made more money in past years? Well, yeah, probably, but life throws us a lot of curves. When you still have strength and health you are better able to roll with the punches, but beyond a certain point it ain't so easy.

It is in fact the retired and the semi-retired that regularly show up at county meetings, and the less wealthy among these are the very ones that will be packing to move away without SOH.

I would like to know where you got this fact. From my observation, that statement is far from the truth.