This question was recently posed to the Times-Union editorial e-mail group:
We would like your comments on the constitutional amendment up for a
vote on Jan. 29. If passed, the constitutional amendment on property taxes will double
the personal homestead exemption and save the average homestead property
owner about $225 a year. Supporters say government is fat and needs
to be forced to cut spending. Opponents say this approach for cutting taxes is all wrong and that the
potential damage to local government services isn't worth the annual
savings. What is your view and why? Your comments may be used as letters to the editor in either the main
paper or our community sections. If you don't want to be quoted, please say
so.
The comments that follow are all from Arlington residents who responded. If you have thoughts on this topic, feel free to create a username and post a comment.
For starters, I do not support the amendment which might safe me $225 a year, if local government must make up the loss revenue through increases and new fees for common use services, city regulated service licenses, permits and ticket prices for city sponsored events. The proposed new fees and assessments are already predicted to cost me more than I will likely receive in the proposed property tax system. The concept by the state legislature and Governor Crist is simply wrong. I want "home rule" I wish to allow those that are elected by the Duval citizens to make the decisions of governing us on all matters local. The state electorate should stay out of the local issues other than help with equal statewide funding for local needed projects and state provided services. This attitude by the state politicians smell of "Big Brother" knows best. Just do as we say, not as we do, we will tell you what to think and when to speak. We are a democratic republic to be governed " of the people, for the people and BY THE PEOPLE", not a king!!
Francis Loving
The proposed doubling of the homestead exemption on property taxes has Duval County politicians squirming. They are eager to replace any reduction in revenues with a variety of fees. During the years of rapid growth and massive construction of new homes, increases in home values and the resulting increases in revenues were a windfall to the county. During this time, had they exercised spending restraints, the problems they now face would be minimal.
Not only should the doubling of the homestead exemption take place, but spending reductions should be enforced as well. Seniors/retirees, in most cases, receive annual cost of living increases of 3% or less and our property taxes generally increase 3%. Doesn't it make sense that we should enact spending controls on our local politicians that would force them to expend funds at, or below the rate of inflation, adjusted as necessary, to match increases or decreases in population?
The norm for most politicians is to allocate every dime available to them and when excess funds are available, they tend to squander them on new pork projects. The problem with this mentality is that these projects are rarely one-time expenses. Creating programs and adding funds to departmental budgets is easy. Getting rid of expenses when the purse shrinks is another matter.
We elect these folks and pay them pretty well for what they do. Now, let's see them work to get expenses within the budgeted revenues. It can be done! If the current mayor and council members can't do it, then we should all know what to do on our next visit to the ballot box.
Tommy Farmer
I believe that if the politicians want to cut taxes then they should first cut spending. That way the people can see the true cost to services and education before they vote. They won't do this however because if people realized the price they would pay for cutting taxes they would not vote for the amendment.
Anthony Rigney
When government is unresponsive to the citizens, the citizens initiative
petition is the only way, citizens can correct the injustice. Waste in
government is today a fact of life. Lawmakers have created waste, lawmakers
could end it, but have chosen not to. Citizens are now going to do what the
government has refused to do. Let me give you one instance of government
waste: Lawmakers refuse to complete their duties within the timeframe of the
legislative session. Extended sessions are now the norm. Million of taxpayer
dollars are squandered keeping bickering lawmakers in Tallahassee.
Owen Ganzel
I am in favor of the property tax amendment.
Property taxes and homeowners insurance have continued to spiral upward for
some time now. Many people need help in order to remain in their homes.
As for services being cut due to the loss of tax monies, with the booming
growth which Jacksonville has seen in recent years, there should be a great
increase in tax revenues. Where the problem lies is within the bureaucracy
of government.
Just look around the next time you see JEA workers, road crews, etc.
Usually there will be one worker doing the work and several others standing
around watching.
Another place where money could be cut is in the freebies and perks given to
the "higher ups" such as tickets in premium seats at the Jaguars games as
well for other events.
City Council junkets which are suspect as to their value and cell phones for
personal calls could also be taken away.
I am sure there are many other ways to control spending as well but we all
know that more money just means more unwarranted spending.
Kathryn Eisele
If the Constitutional Amendment on property taxes passes, looks like I will have to go with the section that allows me to keep my taxes the way they are. (Under the Amendment 10 limits which, many years ago, placed restrictions on increases in assesed value.) Bottom line: This old retiree gets no change in the taxes on his home, but gets to pay new City fees.
Dean Bird
There is way too much trash on the streets. And what's the point of
having closed libraries? If we want services, we should be willing to pay
for them. We are getting what we are paying for in the schools.
The 3% cap on property tax increases for homesteads, that sounds like
such a good idea, is having a lot of unintended negative consequences. We
can keep a Homestead Exemption, but perhaps it's time to just let all
properties, including churches, pay their own share of property tax. The
the costs of running government should should be shared by all of us and
not dumped on those who have moved in the last 5 years.
I oppose doubling the Homestead Exemption. I think I oppose the 3% cap on
property tax increases for homesteads.
Davron King Cardenas
I'll vote for anything that cuts my taxes and against anything that raises
them.
Randy Hopf
Making a constitutional amendment to cut taxes lowers our flexibility to
raise taxes in a crisis. As a homeowner I can sympathize with those who
would like to avoid supporting welfare mothers, but the economy is about to
end up in trouble. A crisis is in the offing.
Tim Temple
I plan to vote no on the amendment to increase the homestead exemption.
This savings for the homeowner is an insignificant sum; yet the result would
be devastating for local governments, Duval County in particular. We cannot
afford to have this pass. We need to fight to defeat it! Jacksonville
needs to sue the State of Florida to put an end to this foolishness!
ROBERT F. EVANS
I will be voting "NO" on the amendment. Cut and spend does not work,
look at the economy of the US that's in a recession due to these same
practices on the national scale. As a result of the tax cut zealots
actions in Tallahassee, FL comes in near the bottom on standardized
tests for our students. We are also very high when it comes to the
number of uninsured children, plus our violent crime is increasing.
Cutting state revenue limits the options to address these issues and
will push state funding even lower as critical services get cut. Just
because So. FL. didn't spend their money wisely, why should all FL pay
by losing money that could be used for education, community police, and
children's health? Charlie Crist is showing his true colors, helping
the rich and businesses and giving the shaft to the rest. $225. a year
isn't worth it, and I'm a homeowner.
Sandra Clark
First let me say that government should learn to cut fat and live within a
reasonable budget. Having said that, I will not be supporting the amendment
because it will not actually reduce the taxes I pay. It will reduce my
property taxes but as we are seeing here in Jacksonville now what I may save
in property taxes will simply be made up by the City of Jacksonville in
other forms of taxes and fees. Right now I know, within reason, my tax
burden based upon property value and assessments. What I don't know and do
not wish to discover is how much more I may have to pay in the additional
fees and taxes, will they exceed what I would have paid in property taxes?
I don't know and I don't want to trust our elected officials here not to do
so. Gov Crist makes it sound so great, increase the homestead exemption and that
will lower your property taxes! But alas, our local political official will
not live with a reasonable budget and reduce unnecessary spending, they will
simply cry and moan about all the services that will be lost if they don't
find new revenue.
Walter A. Kennedy
I say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". I agree that government spending
at all levels is generally out of control but I think the best way to fix it
is to "freeze" taxes and , as inflation puts the squeeze on government, they
then pare back gradually to stay within existing revenues. That will not be
a shock to anyone's system...taxpayer or government...and the problem will
gradually fix itself. If property values have increased, particularly in
South Florida, that's tough. The market will slowly drive prices back down
and Property Assessors can reduce assessed values, upon which real estate
taxes are based, commensurately. Of course this requires government discipline over time which, I suppose,
is naive to expect.
Greg Streeter
I will support any amendment to cut property taxes or increase homestead exemption.
I believe the city, state and federal government waste a lot of money unnecessarily. Such is the case of the JEA giving their employees several million dollars because they reached their annual goals. They are well paid for their job and they should take pride in what they do.
Yes, I believe in incentives, but to give away millions of tax payers money for reasons as they did is absurd. And then the JEA has the audacity to raise electric rates. No one seems to take pride in their job anymore and want to make all they can while doing as little as possible.
There are other examples of wasteful spending such as city contracts given out without proper approval and someone profits from the, OVERSIGHT. I think that's what they called it.
Don Marx
