Talk of The Villages Florida - Rentals, Entertainment & More
Talk of The Villages Florida - Rentals, Entertainment & More
#16
|
||
|
||
Quote:
Rider (legislation - Wikipedia)
__________________
"No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth." Plato “To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” Thomas Paine |
|
#17
|
||
|
||
Quote:
"In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act." And.... "We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it." |
#18
|
||
|
||
Quote:
__________________
It is better to laugh than to cry. |
#19
|
||
|
||
As the original poster for this topic, I appreciate the comments.
|
#20
|
||
|
||
My summary of what I have read from posts is that amendment 1 incrementally increases the homestead exemption up to $75,000 from $50,000. The increase starts at a home valued at $100,000 and stops at $125,000.
Amendment 2 affects non homestead properties only. Currently, they are protected from annual increases exceeding 10% . A yes vote would keep protection at 10% while a no vote eliminates protection. So assuming that our local government expenses are necessary, the additional exemption on homestead properties will reduce needed revenue at current tax millage rates and will require tax increases on some properties. Amendment 2 clears the path to unlimited tax increases on non homestead properties. (isn't the 10% limit bad enough). Another way to get the added revenues to increase the millage rate on homestead eligible properties. That would cause taxes to increase on all homes assessed at less than $100,000. I am a conservative but it seems to me that would be wrong to increase the tax on those least able to afford it so I can get a decrease. This is caused by the stepping stone practice on the Homestead exemptions. Why wasn't the new exemption initiated at a lower evaluation? ie $75,000 to $100,000. I understand that would be even more revenue lost but it illustrates the possible lack of equity on this amendment. Easy to say yes for a benefit that favors me. Easy to say yes to pass the higher taxes to someone else. Just another perspective. |
#21
|
||
|
||
That was exactly my thought.
|
#22
|
||
|
||
I am going with straight "NO" votes. There is too much hanky panky mumbo jumbo special interest smoke and mirror giberishness involved.
__________________
Black Sabbath Matters |
#23
|
||
|
||
Quote:
__________________
A people free to choose will always choose peace. Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about! Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak |
#24
|
||
|
||
[QUOTE=mtdjed;1593052]My summary of what I have read from posts is that amendment 1 incrementally increases the homestead exemption up to $75,000 from $50,000. The increase starts at a home valued at $100,000 and stops at $125,000.
I think the way this works is a resident will get the full $25000 exemption for all houses over $125000. The $100K to $125K range is how it phases in. Example if your house is assessed at $112500 (halfway in the range) the exemption would be half of the $25000 or $12500. Not meant to be only houses within the range. |
#25
|
||
|
||
You are making a good point. This is the state constitution. Why are there so many items that are essentially laws or regulations. One of the items on the ballot is to eliminate dog racing. Is there an amendment in the constitution now that allows dog racing ? If it is in the constitution I have to ask myself why ? Why is is so important as to be in the constitution Vs being a state law? FYI I believe the Florida constitution already has 129 amendments. For reference the US constitution has 27 amendments.
|
#26
|
||
|
||
Ok...I am convinced that amendment 1 in good for most of Florida's people BUT have you ready Amendment 4.......giving Felonds their right to vote back??
|
Closed Thread |
|
|