Taxpayers association represents all taxpayers

John R , many of the the folks in the "silly movement" are your part time neighbors and have been paying your way for years now. Is that the kind of neighbor you want to be?

i don't think anyone would be so presumptuous to say that anyone has paid YOUR way. merely that they have paid THEIR way and deserve the same rights as you and the same say in decisions about their tax dollars....

John R, What I mean by that statement is the growing amount of costs shifting to the folks out of state taxewise. Heck, that part-time neighbor of yours may be from Lake City or Pensacola. They are your neighbors not standing on the beach everyday in SoWal, making it feel more like PC. They are the folks who are in many cases paying over 1k or more a year in school related taxes, yet their kids aren't here to overcrowd the classroom. Without SOH, your taxes would be 25-200% higher or more depending on when you settled. ...

we just have provide a vehicle and welcome that input. a method for inviting that input and feedback has not yet been provided by the county.

No.

For anyone wanting representation, you do have a voice, and it is your right to be able to talk to the County Commissioner in your district regarding your issues. They do represent you whether or not you are able to vote for or against them.

[/b]

I agree one vote for National Elections.
Secondly, why should I be denied a vote and forced to give a resident my proxy? :idontno: Please explain your rationale.

I do not expect BP to allow me to cast a vote because I have an interest in oil, BUT if I choose to buy BP, I now have a right to vote.

If I owned 2 homes in Maryland, I would expect to be able to vote in both municipalities in the local elections.

I have SJ with no success, and not even a response either verbally or through electronic communications.

Going back to that which Chrisv pointed out, one man, one vote. Are you guys who are for multiple voting, saying that you should be allowed to vote for the governor's race and presidential race in every state where you own property? What about if you jointly own property with another person, or group of people? Does that count for only one vote per property owned? If I own 15 parcels of land, do I get 15 votes? I think the problem with your suggestion of voting is more of a Constitutional question rather than one of local gov't.

I almost forgot, what about people who do not own property? Do they not have a voice? If you do allow them a voice, what about people who vacation here for five months out of the year, choosing to rent? Should they have more of a right to vote than the person living in another state who owns property here, but has never stepped into the state of FL?

i don't think anyone would be so presumptuous to say that anyone has paid YOUR way. merely that they have paid THEIR way and deserve the same rights as you and the same say in decisions about their tax dollars.

many people would like to live here full time, but for some reason the economic development here has not met the same level as the cost of living. many of the successful people who have bought second homes here may have something to offer in terms of providing vision for the future and addressing issues they have already confronted in their hometowns.

i am certainly not so proud as to suggest we don't have anything to learn from our neighbors. and it never occurred to me my neighbors felt differently. and i would not suggest that a second homeowner's contribution tax-wise is "less than" simply because they don't live here. perhaps the fact they don't live here will help bring some outside perspective.

please see: since when is a strip mall a town hall? thread

now...speaking of taxes....i've absolutely done everything i can today to procrastinate and avoid doing my accouting. :roll: hehehe! so i must stop pontificating and get back to work finally! ;-)

I don't have kids, yet I pay school taxes, so that argument doesn't go too far in my book. Also, my guess is that the majority of full time residents in this area, may not be have kids in school.

Regarding the taxes being higher without the SOH, you may be right. However, if non-residents didn't own property here, the assessed value wouldn't come close to being as high, nor would the strain on infrastructure, so it would probably balance out.

Sj, you could lose it and not be a bachelor, but a dad rather quickly, or you could adopt. All those empty houses along 30A have long distance owners with zero chance of kids in school. Plus you have fewer people on the road, fewer people on the beach ,or at home flushing toilets[terrible thought], and the bean counters have come up with 350 billion as the number for sheltered aggregate appraised value in Fl. Living in a resort area actually has a few advantages. All property owners should have a say, unless someone can give me a compelling reason for the second-class citizen treatment.

my other questions still go unanswered. Where are the lines drawn? (pun intended) Should only property owners have a voice in gov't, and how many voices in gov't should people have? Does multiple voting stop at local gov't? Again,my 7th Grade Civics class may be a little shakey, but I think these are all Constitutional issues, not local.

[/B]

I agree one vote for National Elections.
Secondly, why should I be denied a vote and forced to give a resident my proxy? :idontno: Please explain your rationale.

I do not expect BP to allow me to cast a vote because I have an interest in oil, BUT if I choose to buy BP, I now have a right to vote.

If I owned 2 homes in Maryland, I would expect to be able to vote in both municipalities in the local elections.

my other questions still go unanswered. Where are the lines drawn? (pun intended) Should only property owners have a voice in gov't, and how many voices in gov't should people have? Does multiple voting stop at local gov't? Again,my 7th Grade Civics class may be a little shakey, but I think these are all Constitutional issues, not local.

Those paying the freight should have a say with all residents. Then you don't end up with us versus them policies. I believe if you own in multiple states, you should have one vote in each venue. I don't think this was so great an issue years ago before interstates and plentiful second homes, but why not be more democratic in decision making?

We could then revert back to the days of yore and apply the "Golden Rule"....



"HE WHO HAS THE GOLD, MAKES THE RULES."

But I imagine if the one-person, one-vote rule does change Floriduh will make an interesting test case:

Fractional share condo owned by 15 doctors from Atlanta: 15 votes
Double-wide Trailer owned by elderly couple from Idaho: 2 votes
Single-wide Trailer owned by Florida school teacher: 1 vote
Investulator who owns a postage-stamp-sized lot off Hwy 98: 1 vote
Family of 5 from Texas who stayed in Freeport Holiday Inn Express: 5 votes.

aren't you glad Shelly, we have the current unconstitutional situation of non-equal protection before the law. Ummm, feels so good screwing over your fellow citizen.