Taxpayers association represents all taxpayers

[Mango]

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 couldn't have said it better myself. :clap_1:

 

[Bob]

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.

 

[Smiling JOe]

oops.

 

[Smiling JOe]

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.

 

[Mango]

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.

I do not think non-residents expect to be able to have multiple votes depending on how much property they own and taxes they pay. Just looking for a voice to be heard in a local municipal election. If you pay the taxes, you should have a voice, period IMO.

The local politicians who are opposing the bill in MD are saying let's not upset our "sense of community" to just mask what they really mean.....let's not upset the "good ole boys network."

 

[John R]

[/B]

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

my contention is still 'one votes where one lives'. i don't want to force you to have a proxy, it seems that is what the taxpayers association is leaning towards, having a lobbyist firm/person. what i don't want forced on me is the dilution of the vote.

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.

obviously, the comparison with stocks is a weak one for me to argue against. shareholder/investor differs from property owner.

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

i still don't see how this can be justified.

please, i need to reiterate, i love the diversity here, and welcome anyone who comes here to live or to play.(as long as they drive the speed limit on 30a;-) ) i just feel that if you want to vote here you should live here.

 

[Bob]

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?

 

[SHELLY]

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.

 

[Bob]

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.

 

[SHELLY]

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.

There's another option for non-residents....they can pass the hat and buy off the Florida politicians, just like the developers have to do now.


.