Sumter County's Proposed Review of Impact Fees and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments

[Veracity]

Does anyone know about the proposal for the Sumter County Commissioners to spend $46,495 of taxpayer money to hire a consultant to review the county’s impact fee program as well as the non-ad valorem assessment program? This is an agenda item on the Tuesday (5/11) Board of County Commissioners Meeting (public meeting).

It looks like the proposed study will consider fees for parks and recreation; fire rescue; medical first response and transport; law enforcement; correctional facilities; libraries; public buildings; public safety radio systems; and storm water. I hope this doesn’t mean another tax increase is on the horizon. See pages 9 – 12 at the following link for details:
https://www.sumtercountyfl.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/18078?fileID=43089

[Northwoods]

Hopefully someone who is familiar will have a comment.
I would be surprised if the newly-elected commissioners would approve an increase in payment for services. They ran on a “roll back the 25% tax increase.” I can’t believe they would want to try to play a “shell game” with taxpayers.

[Dond1959]

Impact fees are paid by businesses that build. Of course the business customers ultimately pay these fees. It is just another move by these commissioners to increase fees (taxes) on businesses and make the area less business friendly.

[Bill14564]

Hopefully someone who is familiar will have a comment.
I would be surprised if the newly-elected commissioners would approve an increase in payment for services. They ran on a “roll back the 25% tax increase.” I can’t believe they would want to try to play a “shell game” with taxpayers.

I don't know what this is about. However, speculating:

- There is a poster on here who has been calling for a review of the Sumter County impact fees. Perhaps the Commissioners heard him.

- A review of the impact fees might be a first step required under the recently-passed bill to make the increase in road impact fees stick.

- If the study will involve more than just impact fees for roads then perhaps it is a way to recover some of the impact of new construction while staying within the bounds of the recently-passed bill

[Bill14564]

Impact fees are paid by businesses that build. Of course the business customers ultimately pay these fees. It is just another move by these commissioners to increase fees (taxes) on businesses and make the area less business friendly.

That's a rather simplistic answer. Do you really suppose the Commissioners went into office thinking that above all what they needed to do was to make the area less business friendly?

[Mleeja]

That's a rather simplistic answer. Do you really suppose the Commissioners went into office thinking that above all what they needed to do was to make the area less business friendly?

Yes, they went in to “stick it to the developer”.

[Bill14564]

Yes, they went in to “stick it to the developer”.

I understand that is the way some want to see it, including some that support the Commissioners. I don't agree with that interpretation. The topic is more complex than that and quick and easy jabs such as "stick it to the developer" do nothing to help understanding.

[Northwoods]

I understand that is the way some want to see it, including some that support the Commissioners. I don't agree with that interpretation. The topic is more complex than that and quick and easy jabs such as "stick it to the developer" do nothing to help understanding.

I honestly wish that wasn’t true. Because I believe we will have a much better “infrastructure/county” if the commissioners would find a way to work with the developer. But some commissioners have stated that they want The Developer to pick up costs for a number of things. One was square entertainment. A portion of that cost is/was paid for by a hotel tax. One commissioner wanted the developer to pay for square entertainment... until there was such a backlash he changed his tune. But it doesn’t change the fact that his attitude was “have The Developer pay for it.”

[Topspinmo]

Does anyone know about the proposal for the Sumter County Commissioners to spend $46,495 of taxpayer money to hire a consultant to review the county’s impact fee program as well as the non-ad valorem assessment program? This is an agenda item on the Tuesday (5/11) Board of County Commissioners Meeting (public meeting).

It looks like the proposed study will consider fees for parks and recreation; fire rescue; medical first response and transport; law enforcement; correctional facilities; libraries; public buildings; public safety radio systems; and storm water. I hope this doesn’t mean another tax increase is on the horizon. See pages 9 – 12 at the following link for details:
https://www.sumtercountyfl.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/18078?fileID=43089


IMO taxes rarely it ever go down. Studies are done to reinforce budget proposal’s which usually mean “ mo money”

[Dond1959]

That's a rather simplistic answer. Do you really suppose the Commissioners went into office thinking that above all what they needed to do was to make the area less business friendly?

Yes, I believe from their actions thus far they are less business friendly and would like to slow or stop growth. And there are many residents in the Villages who think the Villages is too big now. So these commissioners are feeding that “make the developer and other businesses pay”. This is just an extension of the road impact fee increase to other impact fees on any business that expands. It is amazing that these alleged Republicans are spending all their time on determining how to increase taxes. And yet they haven’t explained how they plan to “roll back” the 25% increase on property taxes.

[crash]

Impact fees are paid by businesses that build. Of course the business customers ultimately pay these fees. It is just another move by these commissioners to increase fees (taxes) on businesses and make the area less business friendly.

You read too much Daily Sun impact fees are not taxes. It is a 1 time fee to cover the cost of new roads, fire stations and schools. If the new business does not pay it the tax payers will have to, thus the 25% increase in our taxes. The state just passed a law limiting local government from raising impact fees. This bill was started by a representive employed by the developer at $140,000 a year. Doesn’t seem like the way government is supposed to work to me.

[J1ceasar]

If you ever watched the comedy show Yes prime Minister from England you would know that having a study is one way politicians cover their backsides. That being said actually getting a study done means that the politicians in charge are not experts in the taxes being proposed and the way they are raised as well as competition from other counties. I would applaud anyone who admits they aren't the smartest light bulb in the box. This is actually a good thing even though it's a lot of money I would think it's a lot of work getting all the statistics together to compare other counties and how they raise money. Remember these politicians basically said they were going to cut back the property tax rate and raise the infrastructure taxes to where they should be. At the same time it's only fair to figure out whether or not the citizens are getting their just desserts and are paying a fair share of total tax burden. There are many parts of government that have no way to raise revenue, like building departments do, or having the gas tax for the counting to help pay for road maintenance, certainly the hospitals, fire departments, building inspections, have a specific costs and they have to have revenue every year to cover themselves. I remember quite distinctly 10 years ago when we had a recession certain cities like Leesburg cut back their building inspection teams and permit from 50 people to 10 people. Sumter county literally raised 50 million last year in new taxes which I'm sure they figured how to spend right away. Nobody likes to see taxes rise unless it's truly necessary and as certain parties always say it's fair. I'll leave you to the side which party says Fair more often

[RuthA]

That is where you are wrong. The 25% increase in the real estate rate was necessitated by the Developer refusing to pay for the new roads down South of 44 and the then Commissioners voting to raise taxes on all the residents in Sumter County in order to benefit the Developer. The current Commissioners voted to raise the Impact Fees in order to force the Developer to pay for this development and thus be able to roll back this huge increase.

[Bogie Shooter]

That is where you are wrong. The 25% increase in the real estate rate was necessitated by the Developer refusing to pay for the new roads down South of 44 and the then Commissioners voting to raise taxes on all the residents in Sumter County in order to benefit the Developer. The current Commissioners voted to raise the Impact Fees in order to force the Developer to pay for this development and thus be able to roll back this huge increase.

I am waiting for my refund………..

[merrymini]

Very disappointed in these guys. Glad to have removed the puppets but I feel we have replaced them with fools. Looking to the next election.

[heenables]

Very disappointed in these guys. Glad to have removed the puppets but I feel we have replaced them with fools. Looking to the next election.
Don't just look to it. Run for it. I would love to see how everyone here responds after they are in those shoes. Lol!

[airstreamingypsy]

Sumter County is so corrupt, it's like a town in a bad movie. Between commissioners who reside in the developer's pocket, and the leaders in Wildwood who say yes to everything that will line the town coffers, this place is becoming unlivable. When all the new houses, and apartments are finished the roads will be impassable because of the traffic.

[Joe V.]

Sumter County is so corrupt, it's like a town in a bad movie. Between commissioners who reside in the developer's pocket, and the leaders in Wildwood who say yes to everything that will line the town coffers, this place is becoming unlivable. When all the new houses, and apartments are finished the roads will be impassable because of the traffic.


I love it here and I enjoy everything the developer has made happen. So many move here then complain on how bad things are here. Simple answer, get the air stream on the road and head back north.

[Travelhunter123]

That's a rather simplistic answer. Do you really suppose the Commissioners went into office thinking that above all what they needed to do was to make the area less business friendly?

LOL
Sometimes a simple logic says all
We need some elected officials who are not supported by the developers

[Mleeja]

Very disappointed in these guys. Glad to have removed the puppets but I feel we have replaced them with fools. Looking to the next election.

I agree about looking forward to the next election for the EMS team. They are just puppets for the POA and will do whatever they are told to do.

[Travelhunter123]

You read too much Daily Sun impact fees are not taxes. It is a 1 time fee to cover the cost of new roads, fire stations and schools. If the new business does not pay it the tax payers will have to, thus the 25% increase in our taxes. The state just passed a law limiting local government from raising impact fees. This bill was started by a representive employed by the developer at $140,000 a year. Doesn’t seem like the way government is supposed to work to me.

Thank you for explaining what an “impact fee” is

[Altavia]

[

Thank you for explaining what an “impact fee” is

It's just semantics, at the end of the day, taxpayers pay.

Impact Fees FAQ: What Are They, Who Pays Them and Why | Development and Taxes (https://flaglerlive.com/44763/impact-fees-faq/#:~:text=Impact%20fees%20are%20a%20one-time%20tax%20imposed%20on,fees%20is%20this%3A%20ne w%20construction%20means%20new%20residents).

Impact fees are a one-time tax imposed on all new residential and commercial construction by local governments to defray the cost of growth’s “impact” on vital services such as schools, parks, roads, ambulance and fire service and other infrastructure needs. The rationale behind impact fees is this: new construction means new residents.

[Dilligas]

They already have played a shell game.....Have your property taxes decreased? Have you received any type of rebate? The 3 got into a game they did not know how to play. They ran against an increase (1st in 9 + years) that was minimal if you consider the timeframe involved, and did nothing except pass an impact fee that was overturned by FL legislature.

[stebooo]

Interesting topic. This is the only place we have lived in where the developer doesn't pay for all of the cost of development..I think it's about time to do it right. As far as paying for entertainment, I suggest ad long as the developer is still developing an truly uses that feature, the developer should at minimum contribute if not pay all . When the YV reaches Orlando and stops we can reconsider.

[Billy1]

The newly elected commissioner never intended to repeal or lower the 25% increase, they are big spenders and will pay out to financially support friends and relatives. This is American politics, getting money to friends and relatives while giving you someone to hate. We love to hate at all cost.

[JoMar]

You read too much Daily Sun impact fees are not taxes. It is a 1 time fee to cover the cost of new roads, fire stations and schools. If the new business does not pay it the tax payers will have to, thus the 25% increase in our taxes. The state just passed a law limiting local government from raising impact fees. This bill was started by a representive employed by the developer at $140,000 a year. Doesn’t seem like the way government is supposed to work to me.

The Business coming into the area will consider it a tax. They will build into their business plan, amortize over what ever year plan they use and pass the cost to their customers. Did market development in a past life and the financial guys considered all those "fees" as costs and not only passed on to our customers but also with a margin to maintain bottom line profitability. Anything a business pays to anyone is collected from customers with profit. The one time fee is correct, but they don't handle it that way, they recover it over time and we their customers pay for it. By the way, the original house bill was started in 2019 and the current bill was introduced by 9 House member of which Hage was only one.

[Altavia]

The Business coming into the area will consider it a tax. They will build into their business plan, amortize over what ever year plan they use and pass the cost to their customers. Did market development in a past life and the financial guys considered all those "fees" as costs and not only passed on to our customers but also with a margin to maintain bottom line profitability. Anything a business pays to anyone is collected from customers with profit. The one time fee is correct, but they don't handle it that way, they recover it over time and we their customers pay for it. By the way, the original house bill was started in 2019 and the current bill was introduced by 9 House member of which Hage was only one.

And the bill impacts just the rate of increase. The county needs to plan accordingly.

Maybe the Developer should be given credit for covering the cost of building and operating one of the best charter school systems in the coimtry

[Pmarlow]

You really need to understand that businesses never pay taxes, they just collect them. These impact fees will be taxes that all users of the business services will pay. So if you expect to by services from local businesses these fees will be included in the cost of the products or services you purchase. Unfortunately though what will also happen is those businesses will not even locate in Sumter county which will mean you won’t be able to get those services or products locally. This is how the real world works. These fees will result in higher cost for all of us and a reduction in the number of providers for us to choose from and is in fact anti business.

You read too much Daily Sun impact fees are not taxes. It is a 1 time fee to cover the cost of new roads, fire stations and schools. If the new business does not pay it the tax payers will have to, thus the 25% increase in our taxes. The state just passed a law limiting local government from raising impact fees. This bill was started by a representive employed by the developer at $140,000 a year. Doesn’t seem like the way government is supposed to work to me.

[Cmacnair@hotmail.com]

Very disappointed in these guys. Glad to have removed the puppets but I feel we have replaced them with fools. Looking to the next election.Where I came from the developer always paid the impact fee.

[dewilson58]

Where I came from the developer always paid the impact fee.

here too

[Bill14564]

You really need to understand that businesses never pay taxes, they just collect them. These impact fees will be taxes that all users of the business services will pay. So if you expect to by services from local businesses these fees will be included in the cost of the products or services you purchase. Unfortunately though what will also happen is those businesses will not even locate in Sumter county which will mean you won’t be able to get those services or products locally. This is how the real world works. These fees will result in higher cost for all of us and a reduction in the number of providers for us to choose from and is in fact anti business.

Oversimplification.

The impact fees are one-time fees. The property taxes levied in lieu of increasing the impact fees are recurring taxes.

A business might pass the impact fees along to its customers as a higher price but if I am not a customer then I don't help pay that fee. If property taxes are increased to keep the impact fees low then they will affect me and everyone else even if I never enter the business.

The impact fees apply to homes as well and will be paid by the purchaser of the home. Property taxes in lieu of impact fees will be paid by everyone EXCEPT the purchaser of the home.

If paying a portion of the impact a business has on the community is anti-business then forcing homeowners to subsidize a business by paying for that impact in the form of property taxes is anti-homeowner.

Businesses will open wherever they feel they can make money. They certainly will come to places with tens of thousands of existing customers and tens of thousands more customers planned for the future. If taxes are increased and home sales slow or homeowners don't have as much discretionary income then businesses will begin to see a decrease in sales. Fewer sales means less profit means fewer businesses.

So which is more anti-business, a one-time, targeted impact fee that will be passed along to customers or a recurring property tax that will take money out of customer's pockets?

[dewilson58]

Oversimplification.
The impact fees apply to homes as well and will be paid by the purchaser of the home. Property taxes in lieu of impact fees will be paid by everyone EXCEPT the purchaser of the home.


Oversimp...............that's me.

Why doesn't the purchaser pay property taxes??????????????????????????????

[Bill14564]

Oversimp...............that's me.

Why doesn't the purchaser pay property taxes??????????????????????????????

--- Sorry about that. I should have used a different word.

Once the purchase is complete he will. Hopefully, the infrastructure will have been built before he moves in and therefore paid for by the existing homeowners. Yes, it could be argued that his property taxes will help pay some of the back bills or will pay for some of the improvements that were not yet completed. Certainly, he will be paying for the next neighborhood that gets built.

[Altavia]

Oversimplification.

The impact fees are one-time fees. The property taxes levied in lieu of increasing the impact fees are recurring taxes.

A business might pass the impact fees along to its customers as a higher price but if I am not a customer then I don't help pay that fee. If property taxes are increased to keep the impact fees low then they will affect me and everyone else even if I never enter the business.

The impact fees apply to homes as well and will be paid by the purchaser of the home. Property taxes in lieu of impact fees will be paid by everyone EXCEPT the purchaser of the home.

If paying a portion of the impact a business has on the community is anti-business then forcing homeowners to subsidize a business by paying for that impact in the form of property taxes is anti-homeowner.

Businesses will open wherever they feel they can make money. They certainly will come to places with tens of thousands of existing customers and tens of thousands more customers planned for the future. If taxes are increased and home sales slow or homeowners don't have as much discretionary income then businesses will begin to see a decrease in sales. Fewer sales means less profit means fewer businesses.

So which is more anti-business, a one-time, targeted impact fee that will be passed along to customers or a recurring property tax that will take money out of customer's pockets?

Yes but existing homeowners also benefit from increased rate of appreciation in their homes and additional tax base resulting from the development.

[JoMar]

Oversimplification.

The impact fees are one-time fees. The property taxes levied in lieu of increasing the impact fees are recurring taxes.

A business might pass the impact fees along to its customers as a higher price but if I am not a customer then I don't help pay that fee. If property taxes are increased to keep the impact fees low then they will affect me and everyone else even if I never enter the business.

The impact fees apply to homes as well and will be paid by the purchaser of the home. Property taxes in lieu of impact fees will be paid by everyone EXCEPT the purchaser of the home.

If paying a portion of the impact a business has on the community is anti-business then forcing homeowners to subsidize a business by paying for that impact in the form of property taxes is anti-homeowner.

Businesses will open wherever they feel they can make money. They certainly will come to places with tens of thousands of existing customers and tens of thousands more customers planned for the future. If taxes are increased and home sales slow or homeowners don't have as much discretionary income then businesses will begin to see a decrease in sales. Fewer sales means less profit means fewer businesses.

So which is more anti-business, a one-time, targeted impact fee that will be passed along to customers or a recurring property tax that will take money out of customer's pockets?

In this case, business's can get our business and avoid the impact fee by locating in Marion and Lake Counties. The Marion Commissioners were hopeful that the impact tax would occur so they can attract businesses that will pay their lower taxes to their County knowing the Villages will show up if it's the right business. Hopefully the legislature will stop the insanity and pass the bill.

[Pmarlow]

My point is either way you are going to pay and I believe we would be better off if businesses were not taxed for the privilege to provide goods and services to us . As another poster said these businesses will also add a markup to the tax meaning it will ultimately cost us even more than we would have to pay ourselves.

Oversimplification.

The impact fees are one-time fees. The property taxes levied in lieu of increasing the impact fees are recurring taxes.

A business might pass the impact fees along to its customers as a higher price but if I am not a customer then I don't help pay that fee. If property taxes are increased to keep the impact fees low then they will affect me and everyone else even if I never enter the business.

The impact fees apply to homes as well and will be paid by the purchaser of the home. Property taxes in lieu of impact fees will be paid by everyone EXCEPT the purchaser of the home.

If paying a portion of the impact a business has on the community is anti-business then forcing homeowners to subsidize a business by paying for that impact in the form of property taxes is anti-homeowner.

Businesses will open wherever they feel they can make money. They certainly will come to places with tens of thousands of existing customers and tens of thousands more customers planned for the future. If taxes are increased and home sales slow or homeowners don't have as much discretionary income then businesses will begin to see a decrease in sales. Fewer sales means less profit means fewer businesses.

So which is more anti-business, a one-time, targeted impact fee that will be passed along to customers or a recurring property tax that will take money out of customer's pockets?

[Bill14564]

My point is either way you are going to pay and I believe we would be better off if businesses were not taxed for the privilege to provide goods and services to us . As another poster said these businesses will also add a markup to the tax meaning it will ultimately cost us even more than we would have to pay ourselves.

You can keep calling it a tax but it doesn't make it so.

Businesses coming into an area have to pay for the pipes that carry their water, the wires that carry their electricity, the asphalt that covers their parking lots, and the shingles on their roof. All of these are costs for adding a building and a business in that location. Which of these should also be considered a "tax" and funded by the homeowners?

The markup would be paid by those who use the business; the property tax increase is paid by all even if they never go into the business. Why is it better for the Govt to take the money out of your pocket rather than the business taking the money? And that only applies to businesses - why should the Govt to take money out of *your* pocket to pay for the impact of the new neighborhood rather than taking it from the purchasers?

There is a balance to be had with these fees. There is an amount that new development (business and homes) should be charged but there is also a discount to be given to encourage the new development. The entire cost should not be put on the shoulders of the existing homeowners but perhaps the entire cost should not be put on the new development either.

Currently, the developers are paying only 40% of the cost and the existing homeowners are paying 60% of the cost. Is that a fair number to charge homeowners in order to be competitive and attract new business? Is a 30% discount more appropriate? I don't know the answer, that's why I/we hire/elect Commissioners to look into the situation and determine where the balance point is. The first step in that is reviewing impact fees and making recommendations.

[Bill14564]

Here is an article from the Leesburg Daily Commercial (https://www.dailycommercial.com/story/news/state/2021/05/08/florida-bill-limits-impact-fees-comes-as-need-for-more-roads-grows/7327571002/) about the impact fee bill. Unfortunately, I believe you need to be a subscriber to read it.

The article seems to give arguments from both sides with some numbers from both sides to back up their positions. One thing I found interesting was there was no mention of Sumter County or The Villages. We may see the impact fee issue and this bill as a local concern but several other counties are unhappy about it as well.

[Goldwingnut]

Currently, the developers are paying only 40% of the cost and the existing homeowners are paying 60% of the cost. Is that a fair number to charge homeowners in order to be competitive and attract new business? Is a 30% discount more appropriate? I don't know the answer, that's why I/we hire/elect Commissioners to look into the situation and determine where the balance point is. The first step in that is reviewing impact fees and making recommendations.

Bill, there's a problem with the numbers you're giving that changes the picture a bit. One must go back to the impact fee study that was done to flesh out additional information.

First off, the 100% number is not the cost, it is the "maximum defensible" value that was determined by calculations in the impact fee study, it is not the actual costs incurred by the county, that number is substantially less and varies year to year and is running between 75% and 85% of the "maximum defensible" amount. The study takes this into account when it recommended a 43% value for impact fee.

Second, there are "credits" that are taken into account for the impact fee assessment. These credits come from fuel taxes levied by the state and county for impact assessment, right not in Sumter County that amounts to about $0.19/gallon of fuel and totals between 30% and 40% of the impact fees. About 80% of these fees are collected at the I75 exists in Sumter County and the Oakahumpka service plaza from people passing through Sumter County and having almost no impact on our roads, and we thank them for their contributions to our community.

There are a few other calculations, assumptions, and adjustments to the total impact fee picture, but in the end the study came up with 43% of the "maximum defensible" remaining that needed to be paid for by ALL the developers in Sumter County. The County Commissioners decided on 40% across the board for all property types (not just The Villages). The other 3% comes from the general tax rolls and could be considered an investment in the county. That investment pays huge dividends in additional property and sales taxes that are raised by the new developments.

One last thing to consider, Florida law requires that with no other changes, if the impact fee collected from one source is increased then relief in kind must be given to the other sources. So, if the impact fee charged to builders is raised then the fees collected (credits) must be reduced, we would be giving up the gas taxes collected locally, and in essence paying people to pass through Sumter County.

Continuing to portray the 40% number as a "sweetheart deal" that somehow only The Villages developer is getting is both dishonest and neglects the rest of the facts of the situation.

As far as the road costs that were a part of the 2019 25% tax increase, the majority of that was for resurfacing of Morse and Buena Vista Blvds and the result of poor planning by the county, a failure to put money away for repair costs they knew were coming. They were too busy touting "no tax increase for 14 years" to take care of business. The real question one has to ask but nobody is (except me) is what happened the next year. The road resurfacing was a one-time cost and represented about 50% of the tax increase, we should have seen a 10-12% decrease in 2020 but didn't. Why you may ask. Because for 2020 every department in the county fattened up their budgets with 10 to 20% increases. Of course, you can't see these increase in the 2020 budgets because they only forward when they present the budgets, they don't show how much it increased from the previous year. To see this, you have to pull the 2019 budget proposals and painstakingly compare it line item by line item to the 2020 budget, only then does the truth of the mismanagement of the county come to light.

[Bill14564]

I will read the study more closely to find and understand the credits and additional calculations. My impression from the study was that the 40% number was determined by dividing the existing fees by the "maximum defensible" fee: essentially, what number was necessary to keep the fees the same.

I'll also need to look at what "maximum defensible" means. I'm surprised that 110% to 130% of actual cost was considered to be defensible. But again, I need to look at the study more closely.

[Goldwingnut]

I will read the study more closely to find and understand the credits and additional calculations. My impression from the study was that the 40% number was determined by dividing the existing fees by the "maximum defensible" fee: essentially, what number was necessary to keep the fees the same.

I'll also need to look at what "maximum defensible" means. I'm surprised that 110% to 130% of actual cost was considered to be defensible. But again, I need to look at the study more closely.

Be sure to have a fresh pot of coffee available, it's a challenging read.

[Altavia]

...

Continuing to portray the 40% number as a "sweetheart deal" that somehow only The Villages developer is getting is both dishonest and neglects the rest of the facts of the situation.

...



Thanks for the continued education Don, very much appreciated.

[Advogado]

Anyone interested in understanding how the Developer is milking us via his sweetheart impact fee and our massive property-tax hike should read this article:

FL legislators bigfoot local government to benefit big-money developers | Florida Phoenix (https://www.floridaphoenix.com/2021/03/25/fl-legislators-bigfoot-local-government-to-benefit-big-money-developers/)

[Joe V.]

Anyone interested in understanding how the Developer is milking us via his sweetheart impact fee and our massive property-tax hike should read this article:

FL legislators bigfoot local government to benefit big-money developers | Florida Phoenix (https://www.floridaphoenix.com/2021/03/25/fl-legislators-bigfoot-local-government-to-benefit-big-money-developers/)


Your source is a joke!

influence watch .org

"Florida Phoenix was established in 2018 as a left-leaning news and opinion outlet focused on government and political news coverage within the state of Florida. [1] It is part of the left-of-center media organization States Newsroom (formerly the Newsroom Network), [2] which was until 2019 a project of the Hopewell Fund, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit managed by the for-profit consulting firm Arabella Advisors. [3]

Florida Phoenix is also supported by the Washington DC-based New Venture Fund, another grant making and project sponsorship nonprofit managed by Arabella Advisors. New Venture Fund is underwritten by organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. [4]

New Venture Fund, Hopewell Fund, and Arabella Advisors have faced criticism for creating a “dark money” network of left-of-center advocacy organizations. [5]"

[Advogado]

Your source is a joke!

influence watch .org

"Florida Phoenix was established in 2018 as a left-leaning news and opinion outlet focused on government and political news coverage within the state of Florida. [1] It is part of the left-of-center media organization States Newsroom (formerly the Newsroom Network), [2] which was until 2019 a project of the Hopewell Fund, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit managed by the for-profit consulting firm Arabella Advisors. [3]

Florida Phoenix is also supported by the Washington DC-based New Venture Fund, another grant making and project sponsorship nonprofit managed by Arabella Advisors. New Venture Fund is underwritten by organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. [4]

New Venture Fund, Hopewell Fund, and Arabella Advisors have faced criticism for creating a “dark money” network of left-of-center advocacy organizations. [5]"
So, please point out the errors in the article.

[Joe V.]

So, please point out the errors in the article.

I would not read any of the blather from your clearly unbalanced source. And stop blowing smoke up clear thinking Americans's arses.

[Advogado]

I would not read any of the blather from your clearly unbalanced source. And stop blowing smoke up clear thinking Americans's arses.

I am always glad to be educated, but I didn't see any misstatements of fact in the article. I would suggest you read it before attacking it. By the way, true conservatives should be in favor of local self-rule and against crony capitalism.

[Dond1959]

I am always glad to be educated, but I didn't see any misstatements of fact in the article. I would suggest you read it before attacking it. By the way, true conservatives should be in favor of local self-rule and against crony capitalism.

Your article obviously has its own slant and doesn’t discuss the cons of impact fees. I prefer a more balanced academic approach to the subject. There are some disadvantages to impact fees. The complexity of implementation of impact fees and the impact on low to moderate housing are two of the most prominent. He is an academic paper that gives a more balanced view.

http://impactfees.com/publications%20pdf/dif.pdf

[eyc234]

That is where you are wrong. The 25% increase in the real estate rate was necessitated by the Developer refusing to pay for the new roads down South of 44 and the then Commissioners voting to raise taxes on all the residents in Sumter County in order to benefit the Developer. The current Commissioners voted to raise the Impact Fees in order to force the Developer to pay for this development and thus be able to roll back this huge increase.

:blahblahblah:So where is the roll back??

[Two Bills]

The Taxman taketh, and thou seeist no more!

[Advogado]

I am waiting for my refund………..

Thanks to the Developer's employee-legislator Brett Hage's co-sponsored legislation restricting impact-fee increases, you can, at least for now, forget about a tax rollback. In a nutshell: The Developer's sweetheart impact fee continues, as does our huge property-tax hike.

Big-money wins; the rest of us lose.

[Advogado]

Oversimp...............that's me.

Why doesn't the purchaser pay property taxes??????????????????????????????

Of course he does, but the current residents are paying for the county infrastructure that the new purchaser necessitates. In other words, we are subsidizing the Developer's expansion of The Villages.

[Advogado]

:blahblahblah:So where is the roll back??

Thanks to the Developer's employee-legislator Brett Hage's co-sponsored legislation restricting impact-fee increases, you can, at least for now, forget about a tax rollback. In a nutshell: The Developer's sweetheart impact fee continues, as does our huge property-tax hike.

[Bogie Shooter]

Excuses, excuses….we don’t need no d#&% excuses.

[Dond1959]

Thanks to the Developer's employee-legislator Brett Hage's co-sponsored legislation restricting impact-fee increases, you can, at least for now, forget about a tax rollback. In a nutshell: The Developer's sweetheart impact fee continues, as does our huge property-tax hike.

Why are new fees or taxes needed for a roll back? How about looking at cutting expenditures first and see how far that will get?

[dewilson58]

Of course he does, but the current residents are paying for the county infrastructure that the new purchaser necessitates. In other words, we are subsidizing the Developer's expansion of The Villages.

Unrelated to the post/topic, enjoy hearing yourself.

[Advogado]

Why are new fees or taxes needed for a roll back? How about looking at cutting expenditures first and see how far that will get?

Current spending programs were enacted while the Developer's Commissioners were in control of the County Commission. In fairness to those Commissioners, I am not aware of their being guilty of wasteful spending. Which County services do you want to cut back?

I think that you will find that the problem is not wasteful spending by the County government. We do, in fact, do need a lot of new County infrastructure because of the massive expansion of The Villages. That costs money.

The inequity here is the fact that we current residents are paying, through the massive property-tax hike, for county infrastructure that should be paid for by the Developer through reasonable impact fees. Estep, Miller, and Search were overwhelmingly elected to the County Commission to rectify that unfairness. However, it looks like the Developer has been successful in thwarting the will of the voters.

[Advogado]

Unrelated to the post/topic, enjoy hearing yourself.

My post is completely related to the post/topic, but feel free to ignore it or refute it.