Preliminary plan released Yesterday 6/8 on State Tax Cuts

[Diane Melendez]

Looks like Florida legislators have released a preliminary plan about potential tax reductions. According to TU Jacksonville would collect between $38 million to $50 million less the first year and $139 million the next year. First, I want to give a big thumbs up to Mary Kelli Palka for being the first to report on this issue and tell the story more accurately. She pointed out for the first time that I have seen in media, that the potential cost to Jax because of tax reductions would be a maximum of $50 million, not the $75 million the mayor and his administration have been telling the public all along. I have been very vocal about the fact that they were trying to slide $25 million into the tax reduction category in my view to hide the fact that and I quote TU here that, $25 million more is because of increases in personnel and other costs In other words his administrations actions this past year has put us in a "hole" which is being claimed at $25 million (finally being reported as a deficit) which is actually closer to $35 million.

While the mayor continues to claim that the tax reductions will devastate Jacksonville he totally ignores the fact that his leadership has already driven us into deficit amounts larger than those estimated by the state tax reduction. He did not call the deficit's he created devastating...imagine that. They also are not addressing the fact that even with the cutbacks, the rising tax income in Jacksonville will greatly rise this year and next by millions and millions.

Rep Dick Kravitz along with other Jax leaders have said the State plan is being drafted with special attention to Jacksonville's needs. However this turns out, one thing at least is quite clear. The mayor and his administration will not be able to hand our tax dollars out as thank you gifts through incentives, landbuys and whatever else. Time to clean out our financial closets and see how many skeletons we can find.

[Screamin Eagle]

The major problem with Jacksonville's politics is a lack of citizen oversite. For as long as I can recall, anytime a Mayor or City Council wants something, especially pork, they quickly find money for it. Obviously, some of the pork finds its way home to their own larders.

Peyton has had a free hand with civic funds and has serreptisiously lined Gate's pockets with many millions. In doing so, it has cost the citizenry. Extra taxes, loss of projects we should have had, and loss of interest savings we could have had.

We even lost out on Cecil field because the land developers coveted the acres, and Gate Land Development owns a measley twenty thousand acres.

What Jacksonville really needs; is some serious oversite to politician's spending. Perhaps a citizen-committee, independant of the CC, to approve or reject expendatures and explain their reasons.


Lastly, let me illuminate politics. The word is derived from two root words. Poli meaning many and tics meaning blood sucking insects.

[jbm32206]

Lastly, let me illuminate politics. The word is derived from two root words. Poli meaning many and tics meaning blood sucking insects.

Isn't that the truth! I also like the idea of having a citizen watchdog group, but we all know that, even though it may start off with reasonable people, that it would end up with 'hand picked' individuals that would not have the best interst of the people in mind. Not as long as the 'good ole' boy' system remains intact.

[spidey]

When I had my debate with Suzanne Jenkins on auditing the Constitutional Officers (on the previous forum before this one), I learned alot about the Council Auditors office. Ideally, they should be the ones identifying whether or not the monies being expended are being spent in a fiscally sound manner. But City Council is not required to listen to them or do what they recommend. I wonder how many of the Auditor's recommendations have been followed by City Council?

On the citizen's oversight committee, I agree with JBM that they would likely be handpicked friends. Just take a look to see who is on the Planning Commission and the JEDC for starters.

[Screamin Eagle]

When I had my debate with Suzanne Jenkins on auditing the Constitutional Officers (on the previous forum before this one), I learned alot about the Council Auditors office. Ideally, they should be the ones identifying whether or not the monies being expended are being spent in a fiscally sound manner. But City Council is not required to listen to them or do what they recommend. I wonder how many of the Auditor's recommendations have been followed by City Council?

On the citizen's oversight committee, I agree with JBM that they would likely be handpicked friends. Just take a look to see who is on the Planning Commission and the JEDC for starters.



Indeed both JEDC and CPC are full of "Peyton Pals."

[Diane Melendez]

Let me share the following letter written by Marco Rubio, Speaker the Florida House of Representatives (public record)

Marco Rubio....

Dear Property Tax Reform Supporter:

The special session on property taxes has begun.

As expected, those who do not support property tax relief have begun their assault on the proposed agreement between the House and Senate. The special interests in Tallahassee do not have the political courage to reveal their opposition to property tax reductions, so instead they hide behind attacks on the process and on specifics of the plan. Their goal is to keep anything from happening at all because they simply do not trust the people of Florida to make the final decision on how much they want to be taxed on their homes and properties.

I wanted to take a moment to address some of the issues that have been raised.

Issue #1: The Plan Does Not Cut Enough

* I agree with this concern! However, we must get a plan on the table. The good news is that this plan is an almost $32 billion tax cut—the largest in Florida’s history. You may recall that at the end of the regular session, the Senate was proposing as $12 billion tax cut. Now they have agreed to a $32 billion tax cut. It does fall short of the House’s original $44 billion tax reduction plan, but this plan is a significant reduction, and we need to take this first step forward.
* There is some confusion about the statutory rollback. This is not just a rollback to 2006. It is a rollback to 2006 AND an additional cut of between 3% and 9% depending on how the city or county has treated taxes over the last five years. It is also important to remember that this is only the first part of the plan. The second part of the plan provides a super-sized homestead exemption that would help 73% of homeowners reduce their taxes by an average 44%!
* Yesterday and again today, aparade of local elected and appointed officials have appeared before the House Policy and Budget Council to say these tax cutswill be too big. Their opposition to this plan is a clear sign that it is a significant tax reduction.

Issue #2: The Plan Would Eliminate Save Our Homes and it Does Nothing for Small Businesses or Owners of Second Homes

* This is simply wrong. We are not just getting rid of Save Our Homes. We are getting rid of Save Our Homes for homeowners AND we are replacing it with a new cap on taxes for everyone.
* Under this plan, all properties, homestead and non-homestead alike will have the benefit of a tax cap based on the growth of personal income. Now the growth in the tax burden will mirror people’s ability to pay. Over the last five years property taxes have grown by 83% while personal income has grown by only 38%. The new cap will close that gap forever.
* Applying a new cap that applies to everyone provides portability, and it helps business as well. They will no longer face massive year to year increases.

Even as I write this, the opponents of property tax relief are working to keep this from passing. They didn't like our original plan because it provided a revenue source to replace the lost revenue (a sales tax). Now they don't like this plan because it doesn't replace the revenue. They complained that the process was moving too slow. Now they complain that it is moving too fast. They opposed our original plan because it didn't include school taxes, now they complain because it does. In essence, the opponents to our first plan have opposed every other plan that has been offered. To sum up their position, they want to cut property taxes, but they don't want to cut taxes.

This compromise is not what the leadership of the House wanted. This is not the plan we originally introduced and passed. I continue to believe that we should not tax home ownership at all.

I believe that there is more work to do, but at this moment the choice before us is not between this plan and some better plan. The choice is between this plan and the existing system. I can assure you that this plan is much better than the existing system and should be viewed as the first step on the road to reform.

In about 24 hours, your Senator and your Representative will have the opportunity to vote for the largest tax cut in Florida's history. Before that vote, please know that they will get an enormous amount of pressure from the opponents of property tax reform. Many of these opponents are here in Tallahassee, and their expenses are being paid by the very people who they are lobbying against--the taxpayer.

Your legislator also needs to hear from you!

Sincerely,

Marco Rubio

Speaker, Florida House of Representatives
PO Box 311 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 | Phone: 850.222.7920 Fax: 850.681.3768
Paid for and sponsored by the Republican Party of Florida