No to Jan. 29 property tax referendum

Miami-Dade Democrats are against the property tax referendum that will be part of the Jan. 29 voting exercise. Explanation will follow, but first:

YES! Do vote on Jan. 29. DO NOT swallow any of the negative commentary trying to make you think that your vote for the presidential nominee will be worthless, just because of the fuss over primary dates.

As Nancy Pelosi and others have said: The person who emerges in the lead after the caucuses and primaries will become the party leader and will surely rule in favor of seating the Florida delegation at the Denver convention. Who would be so insane as to snub Florida at that point? Who would snub 27 electoral votes?

With that out of the way, we have to consider what else will be on the ballot, and the biggest item is the lightly considered proposal to amend the state constitution to change property tax rules. I confess that the full details escape me. Those who’ve looked at the verbiage that emerged from the legislature say it may be page after page on the voting screen. I’ll provide a link below to the full text. Here comes the news:

The December meeting of the Democratic Executive Committee voted to oppose Amendment #1 on “Property tax exemptions; Limitations on property tax assessments.” The DEC vote was largely on grounds that the result would be budgetary hardship for public education, first responders and public officials and services. And that most property tax-payers would save so little money that their financial burden would not be eased.

Chairman Joe Garcia said more thoughtful work needed to be done by the tax and budget reform committee in Tallahassee.

The decision to oppose the measure was made by a voice vote of over 100 people attending the Dec. 10 meeting.

Here, thanks to DEC Secretary Charlotte Klieman, who made the motion, is official information on the referendum proposal:

PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS; LIMITATIONS ON PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENTS

Reference: ARTICLE VII, SECTIONS 3, 4, AND 6; ARTICLE XII, SECTION 27 Summary: Link to full text This revision proposes changes to the State Constitution relating to property taxation. With respect to homestead property, this revision: (1) increases the homestead exemption except for school district taxes and (2) allows homestead property owners to transfer up to $500,000 of their Save-Our-Homes benefits to their next homestead. With respect to nonhomestead property, this revision (3) provides a $25,000 exemption for tangible personal property and (4) limits assessment increases for specified nonhomestead real property except for school district taxes. In more detail, this revision: (1) Increases the homestead exemption by exempting the assessed value between $50,000 and $75,000. This exemption does not apply to school district taxes. (2) Provides for the transfer of accumulated Save-Our-Homes benefits. Homestead property owners will be able to transfer their Save-Our-Homes benefit to a new homestead within 1 year and not more than 2 years after relinquishing their previous homestead; except, if this revision is approved by the electors in January of 2008 and if the new homestead is established on January 1, 2008, the previous homestead must have been relinquished in 2007. If the new homestead has a higher just value than the previous one, the accumulated benefit can be transferred; if the new homestead has a lower just value, the amount of benefit transferred will be reduced. The transferred benefit may not exceed $500,000. This provision applies to all taxes. (3) Authorizes an exemption from property taxes of $25,000 of assessed value of tangible personal property. This provision applies to all taxes. (4) Limits the assessment increases for specified nonhomestead real property to 10 percent each year. Property will be assessed at just value following an improvement, as defined by general law, and may be assessed at just value following a change of ownership or control if provided by general law. This limitation does not apply to school district taxes. This limitation is repealed effective January 1, 2019, unless renewed by a vote of the electors in the general election held in 2018. Further, this revision: a. Repeals obsolete language on the homestead exemption when it was less than $25,000 and did not apply uniformly to property taxes levied by all local governments. b. Provides for homestead exemptions to be repealed if a future constitutional amendment provides for assessment of homesteads "at less than just value" rather than as currently provided "at a specified percentage" of just value. c. Schedules the changes to take effect upon approval by the electors and operate retroactively to January 1, 2008, if approved in a special election held on January 29, 2008, or to take effect January 1, 2009, if approved in the general election held in November of 2008. The limitation on annual assessment increases for specified real property shall first apply to the 2009 tax roll if this revision is approved in a special election held on January 29, 2008, or shall first apply to the 2010 tax roll if this revision is approved in the general election held in November of 2008.

Vote on Jan. 29 -- the mailers start

I've been reading these emails on the Florida Netroots group complaining about lack of guidance on how to vote on Jan. 29, the primary and all. I've got to agree. Of course we can each decide on the right person to be the presidential nominee, but then there are the property tax measure and -- for us in Miami-Dade County -- a referendum on gambling. Maybe people in other counties have local measures, too. What are we supposed to say?

Clang -- the day that mails started up after Thanksgiving, advice poured into my mailbox, thanks to an outfit called "Vote Yes! For A Greater Miami-Dade."

Vote Yes for Job Creation.

Vote Yes for more School Funding.

So it trumpeted. Of course, the Yes is actually for "limited slot machines at our existing horse track, dog track and jai alai fronton in Miami=Dade County."

The double-sized mailer also has two mail-in forms to request absentee ballots for me and ... my neighbor, I guess.

And there's a website http://www.agreatermiamidade.com/ with nothing there as of Nov. 26. How am I supposed to weigh this advice?

There is a tremendous stack of campaign mailers on my dining table from the Nov. 6 municipal election and Nov. 20 runoff -- probably 80 pieces of mail for Miami Beach mayor and three commission seats. Just think how much mail there would be if our presidential contenders were campaigning in Florida. But wait -- they have sent a lot of mail, too. Guess I chucked it all.

This is one of the odd things about voting. Mind made up early and firmly on the presidential choice. It took longer on the local races where I actually saw the candidates and asked questions.

Property tax referendum may get new life, say the misleaders

The Republicans may not have given up on misleading. Their leader in the state Senate, Ken Pruitt, wants to appeal Monday's ruling that declared their writing to be opaque and incomprehensible, thus striking out the Jan. 29 referendum on property taxes. Here's the Miami Herald's story on this Tuesday development.

The Herald also had a nifty column by Fred Grimm laying out the grief heaped upon Weston Mayor Eric Hersh, a Democrat, who filed the lawsuit leading to the judge's ruling. It seems a PAC funded attack ads on cable TV, rang many phones complaining about the mayor, sent out similar junk mail, etc.

Welcome to dirty politics, with plenty of money behind it.

Judge to Republicans: Stop misleading Florida

There's a refreshing ruling.

A judge in Leon County tossed out the ballot referendum on property tax reform. It was to have been on the Jan. 29 ballot when the presidential primary vote is held. Said the judge, "The summary is just not correct. In fact, it is misleading."

House Speaker Marco Rubio ramped up on CBS4 and declared of the Democrats: "It's the biggest tax cut in Florida's history, and that's why they're against it."

Marco, didn't you hear the judge: Stop misleading Florida.

Here's the PDF file of the judge's ruling, from Miami Herald's Naked Politics blog. Scroll down to p. 6 to see the truly opaque language that gave the judge a migraine.

Please vote on Jan. 29

It seems this will be officially announced later today: the Florida Democratic Party has decided to stick with the Jan. 29 primary date. It may cost the state its delegates at the presidential nominating convention next summer, but the chances are that the nominating process will get strong input from Florida's voters, and the delegates will be seated -- at one stage of the convention or another.

Here's a link to the AP story on the issue, and it's also here in the Miami Herald.

I'd be happier if the Florida Democratic Party made it clear that the more important issue on Jan. 29 is the constitutional amendment on property taxes, and that people should vote no.

Along those lines, wise words came from State Rep. Luis Garcia, who was quoted in the Herald as saying, "We are not going to disenfranchise our people and take away take away their incentive to go to the polls."

Property tax debate

Here’s one of our favorite county commissioners, Katy Sorenson, expounding the local view of the property tax conundrum. If her math is right, killing the property tax will benefit the wealthy more. What else do we expect from a Republican-dominated state legislature?

She’s also pointing out that the state can’t really kill the property tax. About half of it is imposed by local bodies like the school district and bond-debt service.

Sorenson column in Monday’s Herald.

And talk about enjoying a tax cut -- I just cashed my $300 refund from being a Miami Beach homesteader. Makes me feel like a pioneer.