eLauderhill News Recommends Against the Constitutional Amendment

On Jan. 29, voters will decide to amend the Florida Constitution to primarily double the homestead exemption, and to provide portability as to the Save Our Home Amendment. On its face, it sounds like a good idea, and would seems to be a popular idea saving the average residents money. However, beneath the surface, the amendment would do a disservice to Florida, and will have significant repercussions to our community. Therefore, eLauderhill News recommends AGAINST it.

The reasons for consideration of this amendment is to find a way to reduce taxes, and help the homeowner so they are not locked into a house forever, which was caused by the Save Our Home Amendment in the first place. One bad piece of legislation will not be corrected by passing another bad piece of legislation.

Home prices are controlled by supply and demand. The Save Our Home Amendment created an artificial cap on sellers, while buyer demand nationwide increased. Therefore, we were actually in a period of hyper-inflation, as it relates to our home values. Now that the national economy is nearly into a recession, the buyers are few, and we are going to create a whole new group of sellers. Therefore, we will have hyper-deflation on home prices.

I know that these sellers will be seeking new homes to buy, but not as quickly as many believe. Plus, many of them will be downsizing, which will create a larger glut of the more expensive homes in our areas.

The other part of this equation is that local communities, which already have gone through a mandatory cutback of the tax rate, will have to do it again. Many in the community have seen first hand how this limited cutback has significantly effected their services. Additional reductions of taxes will have a much bigger impact. All for a very small tax reduction. Besides, as it was recently pointed out, cities can offset the tax lost by imposing tax rate increases. But all that will do will be to hurt even more the non-homestead property, and the newly purchased homesteaded property. The only ones that will get any advantage by this amendment will be the homestead property owner who has owned their property since before 2003.

Finally, and probably the best reasons not to support this Amendment, is that this Amendment does nothing to fix the broken, inequitable, unfair property tax system in Florida. In fact, it makes it worse. It will pass down to our children a burden that they will not be able to afford. It hasn't helped that because of this tax structure, among other unresolved problems, more and more residents are leaving the state.

Already, with all of the projections of massive increases of population expected, we are seeing the opposite in the near term. More people voting on these issues vote by leaving the state, not staying here. If not for those immigrating to Florida from foreign countries, you would already be seeing a net loss of population statewide, and particularly in South Florida.

Rather than pass a hastily prepared Amendment, would it not be best to give the Florida Taxation and Budget Reform Commission time to do its job. They are presently studying these issues, and are expected to put on the ballot for November proposed Amendments, that hopefully will address these deficiencies in the present laws.

Therefore, it is recommended that you VOTE NO on the Constitutional Amendment.

In furtherance of this position, the City Commission passed the following Resolution also asking you to VOTE NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, URGING FLORIDA CITIZENS TO CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING PROPERTY TAXES THAT WILL APPEAR ON THE JANUARY 29, 2008, BALLOT; OPPOSING SAID PROPOSAL FOR REASONS STATED HEREIN; SUPPORTING A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROHIBITING UNFUNDED STATE MANDATES IN ORDER TO REDUCE PROPERTY TAXES; AND URGING THE FLORIDA TAXATION AND BUDGET REFORM COMMISSION TO DEVELOP MEASURES CONSISTENT WITH THIS RESOLUTION.

WHEREAS, the City of Lauderhill supports property tax reform because the current property tax structure created by the state and imposed on cities is unfair and unsustainable in that certain property tax payers are forced to assume tax burdens that, in fairness, should be borne by the owners of all types of properties, and similarly situated homeowners are treated differently for purposes of ad valorem taxation;

WHEREAS, the City of Lauderhill supports a tax structure that is fair and equitable for all property owners, is competitively neutral and allows cities the flexibility to provide adequate services to their citizens;

WHEREAS, the state continues to force cities to raise property taxes to fund state initiatives at the expense of services to their citizens; that is, the state continues to place “unfunded state mandates” on cities;

WHEREAS, the state continues to shift its constitutional responsibility to adequately fund public education to local school districts by forcing school boards to increase their “required local effort”; that is, the state continues to force school boards to raise property taxes as a condition to the receipt of state revenues;

WHEREAS, the state has proposed an amendment to Florida’s constitution that increases the homestead exemption, permits the portability of Save Our Homes, provides a $25,000 exemption from the tangible personal property tax and places a 10% per year assessment limitation on non-homestead properties;

WHEREAS, said proposal compounds the disparities and inequities imbedded in the current property tax structure and in current appraised values and ignores the dramatic influence “unfunded state mandates” and the state’s shifting of its educational funding responsibility have had on property tax increases; and

WHEREAS, the fiscal impact of the amendment is unknown, and thus the proposal fails to adequately inform citizens of its impact on their essential services, including education and public safety.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF LAUDERHILL, FLORIDA:

Section 1. The City of Lauderhill urges Florida citizens to consider the proposed amendment will compound existing disparities and inequities for Florida’s property tax payers and fails to resolve the disparities and inequities in appraised values.

Section 2. The City of Lauderhill urges Florida citizens to consider the fact the proposed amendment ignores the dramatic influence unfunded state mandates and the state’s shifting of its educational funding responsibility have had on property tax increases.

Section 3. The City of Lauderhill urges Florida citizens to consider the impact of a proposed amendment to the constitution for which the fiscal consequences are unknown.

Section 4. The City of Lauderhill opposes the proposal scheduled to appear on the January 29, 2008 ballot because it fails to resolve the disparities and inequities embedded in the existing property tax structure and in current appraised values and fails to address unfunded state mandates and the state’s practice of requiring local school boards to increase school property taxes.

Section 5. The City of Lauderhill supports an amendment to the state constitutions that prohibits “unfunded state mandates” and required the savings derived therefrom to be used to reduce property taxes.

Section 6. The City of Lauderhill supports a prohibition on the state’s existing practice of requiring local school boards to increase school property taxes to fulfill the state’s constitutional obligation to adequately fund public education.

Section 7. The City of Lauderhill urges the Florida Taxation and Budget Reform Commission to develop meaningful and comprehensive tax reform measures that are consistent with this Resolution.