[FloridaBoy]

Even though what you are saying about waste is true, almost every county north of Orange and west of Leon (except for maybe St Johns and Duval) hasn't seen the dramatic increase in their budgets as the southern counties. I recently read that Miami-Dade pays more for the 130 staff attorneys than the entire budget of Holmes County. In some counties, the vast majority of homes are assessed for less than $200K. To increase the exemption amount (from $25K to 75% up to $200K) in those counties would realistically cause essential services to be cut. If a $3 million home is built in Bradford County, the locals come from miles and miles around to gawk; if that same home is built in Palm Beach County, I bet no one even notices. And speaking of $100K admin. aides, there's not an elected official in most northern counties that makes that much.

But, I also think it's unfair for the media to use the plight of the northern counties as a scare tactic in the sounthern part of the state. If it will have a devastating effect on the budget of a northern county, that county commission can vote to exempt the county from the "super homestead" and do their best to explain their case to the local citizenry.

[macguy]

Originally Posted by FloridaBoy

Even though what you are saying about waste is true, almost every county north of Orange and west of Leon (except for maybe St Johns and Duval) hasn't seen the dramatic increase in their budgets as the southern counties. I recently read that Miami-Dade pays more for the 130 staff attorneys than the entire budget of Holmes County. In some counties, the vast majority of homes are assessed for less than $200K. To increase the exemption amount (from $25K to 75% up to $200K) in those counties would realistically cause essential services to be cut. If a $3 million home is built in Bradford County, the locals come from miles and miles around to gawk; if that same home is built in Palm Beach County, I bet no one even notices. And speaking of $100K admin. aides, there's not an elected official in most northern counties that makes that much.

But, I also think it's unfair for the media to use the plight of the northern counties as a scare tactic in the sounthern part of the state. If it will have a devastating effect on the budget of a northern county, that county commission can vote to exempt the county from the "super homestead" and do their best to explain their case to the local citizenry.

Not to pick on Holmes county but they only have a population of 19,000 in the whole county. Everybody in the place would only fill a corner of the Orange Bowl. Of that only about 5000 live in the cities the rest live in the county. They don't have city water, sewers, garbage pick up, maybe a volunteer fire department and so on. They don't provide any services to speak of now.

Around 50% of the homes in the county are not homesteaded so they won't be effected anyway add to that commercial properties. These arguments are red herrings. If you crunch the numbers they will be fine but may have to do some belt tightening as well. Believe me, even those small places waste their money like everybody else, they will find plenty to cut if need be.

I am for not giving these Ba$%erds a penny more then I have to. Make them for a change have to function efficiently and economically like every other business. Cities, counties, states and even the country are nothing more then businesses. If in the future they need to make some tax increases, fine but not without accountability, and definitely not the same BS business as usual we have now.

This could be one of the most important things to happen to this state in a long time. I am very much hoping for it, we need change and nothing they say could be worse then it is now. This state is like a money pit for tax payers the way our money is treated.

[kort677]

my question, which I haven't seen answer to is: if you take the new exemption and give up SOH do your increases remain capped to 3%?

[firemed]

Originally Posted by kort677

my question, which I haven't seen answer to is: if you take the new exemption and give up SOH do your increases remain capped to 3%?

Thats a good question

[Mike Peterson]

Originally Posted by kort677

my question, which I haven't seen answer to is: if you take the new exemption and give up SOH do your increases remain capped to 3%?

No, there is no cap but the "upper $500,000 threshold is indexed to grow with changes in Florida personal income, which generally increases 4% per year and the "Property tax revenue growth will only be allowed to increase in proportion to population growth (i.e., new construction) and growth of Florida personal income (which averages 4% annually)".

[pianogal]

Originally Posted by Mike Peterson

No, there is no cap but the "upper $500,000 threshold is indexed to grow with changes in Florida personal income, which generally increases 4% per year and the "Property tax revenue growth will only be allowed to increase in proportion to population growth (i.e., new construction) and growth of Florida personal income (which averages 4% annually)".

So we should expect to see 4% annual increases but there is no guarantee it will not be greater that that? Am I understanding this correctly? Thanks!

[Mike Peterson]

Originally Posted by pianogal

So we should expect to see 4% annual increases but there is no guarantee it will not be greater that that? Am I understanding this correctly? Thanks!

It seems it will grow along with the average annual income and population growth but the $500,000 cap will grow also.
It could go up more than 4% but if income growth and population growth is stagnant it could also be less.

[tallrick]

Unfortunately real estate inflation seems to outpace personal income growth nowadays.

[kort677]

Originally Posted by tallrick

Unfortunately real estate inflation seems to outpace personal income growth nowadays.

and despite your accurate insight you refuse to buy a house because you are certain a crash is coming

[pianogal]

Originally Posted by Mike Peterson

It seems it will grow along with the average annual income and population growth but the $500,000 cap will grow also.
It could go up more than 4% but if income growth and population growth is stagnant it could also be less.

So the increase is NOT tied to the fluctuation of real estate value as our current method is - instead is tied to income and population growth? I understand income growth, but why population growth?

Thanks for the help in understanding this.