The Martin County
Defender
The e-newsletter for aware citizens – No. 148
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
ATTACHED TO THIS ISSUE
The Martin County Follies
Save $$$ on Constitutional Offices
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
ITS wiring West with fiber cable. They may give Comcast a run for its money
PALM CITY & INDIANTOWN PHONE CUSTOMERS NEED TO CONTACT ITS BEFORE FEB. 26 FOR FREE INSTALLATION
ITS Telecom, formerly known as Indiantown Telephone Company, provides thousands of residents in the Palm City / Indiantown area with home phone service. Now it is moving into the digital age with plans to wire its resident base with high speed fiber cable. Such cable allows the transmission of internet and TV programs, which engineers believe will meld together in years to come.
During a technician visit, a battery backup unit will be mounted in your home. Some wiring may possibly need to be updated. This service is free at the present time, but there may be a charge later on if not done now. ITS is notifying customers that they should contact ITS before Feb. 26, 2010 at 597-3423 to set up an installation appointment.
GETTING OUR PRIORITIES STRAIGHT
Children, spending, business stimulation and the Constitutional Office Building
Martin County has such Constitutional Offices as the Supervisor of Elections, the Tax Collector and the Property Appraiser. With the growth of government, these authorities have had to rent offices at dispersed locations in Stuart. So the Commission and staff decided that it would be desirable to construct a building to house them all.
But where? Searching for an answer to the location question has become a self-interest boondoggle.
The City of Stuart says it wants to give the County Sailfish Park to build on [we got that inverted in our last report] because it would help Stuart’s economy. It was claimed to be more convenient for the public, but that is a questionable assumption. They would have to demolish four Sailfish Park baseball fields to do so. Those fields are used by over 500 Little League players, and it is outrageous to disrupt the lives of those children and their families. There are better alternatives that would be less expensive, and preserve the ballfields.
Alternative sites exist on East Ocean and Willoughby Boulevards, among other Stuart locations. There are existing buildings that could be adapted. However, downtown merchants have political influence with Stuart officials. Business stimulation is a good thing, but not when the cost falls heavily on taxpayers. Choosing the most costly alternative at a time when the County is struggling to find $20 million to cut out of the budget is not wise.
City officials have proposed a contract, currently under County consideration, that ties the County’s hands for many years. It would require that future office requirements also be built at the Sailfish Park location. Martin does not need another sweetheart deal.
The good news for the kids is that most commissioners are coming to recognize that if Sailfish Park is to be closed, the entire four-field park facility must be replicated first. The more basic question is whether this government office building should be built at all.
CONSTITUTIONAL “TENANTS” DON’T EVEN WANT IT!
You’d think that the big brains pushing the Constitutional Office Building project would at least have consulted with the Constitutional officers to learn if they want to move to such a building. Apparently this did not occur to project supporters trying to foist the building on the Constitutionals and the County. There are good reasons not to move.
At the Feb. 9 County Commission meeting, cost-conscious Supervisor of Elections Vicki Davis explained the logical operational and financial reasons she did not want to move from her present location!
Furthermore, Tax Collector Ruth Pietruszewski also does not want to move! She sees the problem of her office’s heavy visitor traffic on the present four-lane road being shifted to Sailfish Park ’s two-lane road.
Should government be adding to the glut of office space? It seems better to put this office building project on hold until the priorities and real needs can be worked out. We’ve heard of the “Bridge to Nowhere.” Let’s not have the “Building for No One.”
DCA finds one important Comp Plan amendment not in compliance
DEVELOPMENT AT RURAL INTERESECTIONS REJECTED
When a County Commission wants to amend its Comp Plan, it passes an ordinance that adopts the amendment. The state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) then decides whether or not it is in compliance with applicable legal requirements. DCA does not rule on whether the amendment is good or bad, or whether the residents want it or not.
Martin County sent many Comp Plan ordinances to DCA in December 2009, patched up after initial DCA rejection. DCA has now approved 18 of them, and found one not in compliance. That one (Ordinance No. 845 re Amendment #09-6) is very important because it applies to Chapter 4 of the Comp Plan – the Future Land Use Element. Its protections against irresponsible development are vital in preserving Martin as a most desirable place to live.
Ordinance 845 runs 163 pages. The Comp Plan revisions therein are massive, and include both sensible clarifying modifications, as well as undesirable opportunities to implement the excessive growth favored by developer-related interests.
There are hundreds of deletions. There are also a like number of additions such as the following: “PUD zoning agreement to allow flexibility in the land use regulations”; “Creation of zoning districts that encourage expansion and relocation of targeted business”; and “Residential subdivisions … in the Secondary Urban Service District, connection to regional utilities may be permitted.”
The DCA rejection boots the sprawl-inducing change to allow 5-acre commercial development at six select intersections, so-called rural Essential Service Nodes. It turns out that only about half of them are truly rural. DCA rejected this amendment primarily because there is no “demonstrated need” for it. It is a “poorly planned conversion of rural land to other uses.” It’s the camel’s nose under the tent.
Such Browardizing provisions, as was pointed out by environmentalists during the 2009 EAR process, do not bode well for Martin’s future. It is expected that County authorities will try to patch up the ordinance - again - to bring it into compliance. Residents should tell commissioners to let it Rest in Peace.
Quasi-electioneering at Commission meetings
There are lots of rules governing public activity at Commission meetings. Some are foolish – like censoring photos a week earlier that public speakers wish to display (a restriction that, fortunately, is repeatedly not enforced). Or forbidding the audience from spontaneous laughter or applause (aka the Chairman’s Zombie Rule).
Some restrictions are reasonable and conducive to orderly conduct of meetings. One good rule prevents individuals from speaking twice on the same agenda item; once in the public input period, and again when the item is up for discussion. Still another good rule is No Electioneering, which prevents meetings from turning into campaign debates.
At the Feb. 9, 2010 Commission meeting, Commission Candidate Lee Weberman violated both good rules. The topic related to reserve funds. Chairman Doug Smith felt compelled to admonish Weberman that he should not have double-dipped his three minutes of speaking time. The Chair should also have told him to knock off the not-so-subtle electioneering.
In Commission meeting after meeting, Weberman discusses some topic in a way that ends up accusing his election rival, Sarah Heard, of something or another. On Feb. 9, it was about hoarding funds reserved for future projects. Of course, this is standard forward planning – and was practiced by Weberman when he was a commissioner.
What would be the appropriate word to describe someone who criticizes another person for doing the very thing he himself has done?
Pro-developer impact fee law challenged
Local governments filed suit to overturn new state restrictions on local impact fees, saying the Legislature unconstitutionally forced them to prove their fees are accurate, according to Florida Capital News. The Florida League of Cities, Florida School Boards Association and Florida Association of Counties filed the suit. They were joined by Al achua, Collier, Lake, Lee, Levy, Nassau , Pasco , St. Lucie and Sarasota counties. Not only is Martin County absent from this respectable list, but it previously removed some impact fees from developers.
In challenging impact fees on new development, state law long put the burden on developers to show that cities or counties miscalculated costs of new infrastructure or unfairly applied them, the suit said. The new law reversed that, taking away local government's presumption of correctness and requiring them to justify challenged fees. Campaign contributions anyone?
Funds for removal of derelict boats
Acting County Administrator Taryn Kryzda reports good progress in obtaining funds to remove derelict boats that are both an eyesore and a hazard:
“The Growth Management Department has identified more than $58,000 that is needed for the current list of derelict vessels, many of them located in Jensen Beach . When the County increased the vessel registration fee, a portion of those funds were to be used toward derelict vessel removal. After a few years of collection of this additional fee, we now have sufficient funds to move forward and put a good dent in removing the derelict vessels that have been identified.”
Martin’s Engineering Department – the quintessential stubborn bureaucracy
Martin County’s Engineering Department continues to display its resident-be-damned attitude concerning the Green River Parkway wall. The following excerpt from a letter to commissioners by Pinecrest Lakes resident Kathy Perez sums up the current situation:
“At the last commission meeting on February 9th, during public comment portion, a representative of our group submitted the “Letters of Support”, which were signed by all nineteen affected homeowners. We have much more than a majority, we have complete unanimity of agreement among the affected and abutting homeowners. We are now asking the commission to honor your agreement, please direct the Engineering Department to build the wall as shown on the permitted plans
“We are troubled that you are taking the time to allow the Engineering Department to conduct its own survey. To date, and to the best of my knowledge, they have not sent out a single letter polling our residents. Not only have they not sent out a letter, but they are now attempting to meet with all the affected homeowners. They have even presented a third plan, which also deviates from the permitted plans.”
A similar letter from Pinecrest resident Inez Willis states, in part: “We hope the wall will be in place quickly as the construction crew has curiously chosen our homes (that are closest to the Greenriver Parkway with no wall up yet) to park a lot of their construction vehicles, storage, supplies, and personal vehicles.”
Commissioners instructed County Engineer Don Donaldson on Jan. 26 to poll residents. If he is so determined to delay and stall, maybe they should employ a County Engineer who is not so stubborn.
+++++
For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com
Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.
Al
Al Forman, Editor 2/16/10
The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2010 by WordsmithAmerica, Box 1828 , Palm City , FL 34991 . Al l rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE: Al l correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.
All previous issues of the Defender are archived at our website:
The Martin County
Defender
The e-newsletter for aware citizens – No. 149
Florida Supreme Court rules anti-Hometown Democracy law is unconstitutional
LIES, UNETHICAL TACTICS AND UNDUE POLITICAL INFLUENCE PUSHED “REVOCATION” LAW. THE SAME PEOPLE ARE NOW OPPOSING PASSAGE OF AMENDMENT 4
In a vain attempt to keep Amendment 4 off the ballot, pro-developer forces influenced legislators hungry for campaign contributions to pass a 2007 law that prevented citizens who were duped into revoking their petition signatures from signing another. Florida Chamber of Commerce also spent about $5 million to confuse voters with a competing petition from Floridians for Smarter Growth. That petition went nowhere.
These same folks, who killed Florida ’s economy with over-development, are now opposing Amendment 4, which gives voters a veto over bad development.
Let not a leader of this sleazy effort of lies and bogus letters go unnamed. He is lobbyist and State Senator John Thrasher, the proposed Chairman of the Florida Republican Party.
What the Court said
The Supreme Court decision runs 66 pages. Here are some direct quotations that offer a sense of what the justices think of efforts to disenfranchise voters with the revocations law.
“Politically charged counter-petition revocation campaigns created by these provisions would essentially eviscerate and render meaningless the citizen-initiative process.”
“The record before us contains evidence that frustrated Florida electors were actually duped and misled by a partisan letter into revoking their signatures only to later discover that they would face potential criminal prosecution if they attempted to re-sign the relevant initiative petition.”
“Simply because the initiative-petition method of amending the Florida Constitution is a state-created constitutional right does not mean that the Legislature possesses unbounded authority to limit the constitutional right. In fact, the Legislature has only limited authority in this area.”
“Given its constitutional underpinnings, the right to petition is inherent and absolute.”
“The Legislature has attempted to substantively alter a constitutional check and balance on its power through a statute and, in such a context, it is not owed judicial deference,”
“Therefore, the statute and its implementing regulations are not well calculated to reduce perceived instances of forgery and fraud. To the contrary, they provide initiative opponents an unchecked, unopposed opportunity to ―persuade Florida electors by any means, including illicit, to revoke their signatures based upon these opponents‘ strident disagreement with the underlying initiative proposals.”
For a complete copy of the Supreme Court decision, go to:
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/08/08-884/Filed_02-18-2010_Opinion.pdf
Our best advice: Don’t trust the words of people who don’t trust the voters. VOTE FOR AMENDMENT 4 TO PROTECT YOUR HOME VALUES.
Feb. 23 Commission meeting to vote on creating another layer of costly government
Agenda Item 6A proposes to shift Commission power, sitting as the Community Development Agency (CRA), to an independent CRA agency with essentially all of the Commission’s authority, except for bond issuance. This added layer of government would consist of seven members appointed by the Commission majority for four years. By appointing their pal$, pro-developer commissioners can avoid decision responsibility.
This Super-CRA agency would be empowered to appropriate funds, control assessments and rezone land. It would definitely cost taxpayers more by hiring its own lawyers, paying operational overhead, etc. There is no need for this additional layer of government that is not answerable to the voters – especially when we need to cut County spending.
Tell commissioners to fugedaboutit!
Outrageous! Engineering Department still stalling on Green River wall
The following slightly edited letter to commissioners from Pinecrest Lakes resident Keith Kopp pretty much sums up the current status of the ongoing saga of the Green River Parkway wall being moved next to resident homes.
“Commissioners: You directed staff to expeditiously poll the affected homeowners to determine whether the majority supported a return to the plans approved by SFWMD and the ACOE with regard to the GRP wall. As you may recall, engineering changed the plans to move the wall within 3 to 4 feet from our property lines for the convenience of the maintenance department and without advising the affected homeowners. Engineering has provided to us the financial benefit to the county of the wall move. The amount potentially saved is $300 per year. The relocated wall is also much less effective as a sound barrier.
“It appears your directive is not being followed. Engineering was told more than a month ago to get together with the homeowners and find out how they feel.
“They didn't do that. When asked several weeks later what they had done, Project Manager Mr. Bangs said staff was planning meetings with the homeowners and needed a few more weeks to set that up. They didn't do that either. Then, they decided to have a single meeting on January 24 to discuss another alternative plan but not discuss returning to the originally approved plan. Now, according to emails from Feb. 17 circulating within staff, they're thinking they won't do that, they'll just mail out a ‘ballot.’
“But there's no need to do that. When staff failed to move forward promptly, we collected and delivered to you written confirmation from all affected homeowners (and then some) which clearly and unequivocally stated the homeowners' unanimous position that the wall should be built in its originally approved location. Staff and the administration appear to be simply ignoring this.
“It is absurd to go through the time and expense of what staff is proposing, when the homeowners have already been polled and have clearly expressed their wishes.
“It is also not productive to send out a written ‘ballot’ with alternatives prepared by staff without input from the residents and then ask the residents to select one of what may well be totally unacceptable alternatives. What if your choice is none of the above? What if staff has not included alternatives the residents might suggest if the residents were actually engaged in meaningful discussions (such as having homeowners or the homeowner association take care of maintenance issues.)
“In addition to the failure of staff and administration to follow the BOCC directive, it is a waste of time and resources in what appears to be an attempt to avoid keeping a promise to the residents. If Martin County staff worked as hard to keep their commitments to citizens as staff appears to be working to avoid that commitment, perhaps the problem of mistrust of government would not be so prevalent.”
It’s time for the Commission and the Acting County Administrator to stop pussyfooting on this issue, time to stop being deferential to recalcitrant County Engineer Don Donaldson. If he stubbornly refuses to do the right thing as instructed, and in a timely manner, fire him!
Home sales up; foreclosures up, too. What does it all mean?
A total of 2,082 mortgage foreclosure cases were filed in Martin County Circuit Court in 2009, an increase of 19.5% from the record 1,742 filed in 2008, court records show. “There has been absolutely no let-up. The foreclosures continue to be filed at a high value. We do not see any end in sight,” said Clerk of Courts Marsha Ewing. At the same time, County MLS listings showed that sales of homes were up 46% in Jan 2010 over 2009.
In a sense, these counter-directional numbers indicate that the fortunate (those who have jobs and surviving businesses) and the prudent (those who did not over-borrow) are replacing the unfortunate and the imprudent. It’s a jungle out there.
Martin County among the top five healthiest
The U. of Wisconsin and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation have released a report ranking the healthiest counties in which to live. Martin came out 5th in Florida after Collier (1), St. Johns (2), Seminole (3), and Sarasota (4). Neighbor Palm Beach was 12th, and St. Lucie was 30th.
FCAT phase-out legislation gaining
Proposed state legislation to phase out the FCAT test is gaining in Tallahassee , according to the Capitol News Service. The FCAT is catching flack from parents, students and teachers concerned that too much emphasis is being put on passing the test and not on learning. Changes could come as soon as next year. If the legislation passes, next year math would be taken off the FCAT exam, with the other subjects being phased out over the next four years. End of year exams would replace the FCAT.
Commissioner Heard cleared of 2006 election law violation charges
The Florida Elections Commission cleared Commissioner Sarah Heard of election law violations related to her successful 2006 campaign. The charges, widely viewed as insubstantial and politically motivated, had been filed by Kirk Sorenson, a defeated candidate for County Commission .
One of the best patriotic websites
If you have even a little patriotic feeling, you will enjoy the spirit and rousing music at the following website:
The organization was started by TV producer Norman Lear and songwriter Keith Carradine. It is non-political, and entertains and uplifts. The site urges you to: (1) Volunteer in Your Community; (2) Register and Vote; (3) Talk Back to Your Elected Officials.
A MUST-ATTEND MEETING
10th Annual Growth Management Forum
The theme will be: “Growth Management Impacts on Economy and Environment.” Distinguished speakers include Maggy Hurchalla, Richard Grosso, Charles Pattison, Virginia Sherlock and Greg Braun.
DATE: Saturday, March 6, 2010
TIME: 1:00 to 4:00 pm
Location: Morgade Library, SE Community Drive , Stuart
Admission is free and open to the public, but attendees are requested to register in advance by email to elzer@gate.net.
+++++
For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com
Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.
Al
Al Forman, Editor 2/22/10
The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2010 by WordsmithAmerica, Box 1828 , Palm City , FL 34991 . Al l rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE: Al l correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.
All previous issues of the Defender are archived at our website:
The Martin County
Defender
The e-newsletter for aware citizens – No. 150
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
ATTACHED TO THIS ISSUE
The Martin County Follies
Skewed Priorities
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
DESTROYING BASEBALL PARKS FOR A COSTLY BUILDING THAT CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS DO NOT WANT
Have elected officials lost their minds???
As reported in DEFENDER No. 148, City of Stuart officials are casting a line to hook a 35,000 sq. ft. government office building. The bait is the city’s 7.3 acre Sailfish Park . On Feb. 23, the County Commission cautiously took the hook in its mouth by accepting the city’s contract to build on that site. It has until April 30, and perhaps beyond, to spit out the hook.
We want to salute the two commissioners who had the awareness and good sense to vote against the contract: Ed Ciampi and Sarah Heard. A raspberry to the two commissioners who knee-jerk “yes” to any development: Doug Smith and Patrick Hayes. And a maybe-salute to Susan Valliere, who voted in favor of the contract half-heartedly just to retain options.
What’s wrong with the deal
If you’re a downtown Stuart merchant, it’s a great deal. You might get a little more business out of it, eventually. But for others ….
DO WE EVEN NEED THE BUILDING? The answer is not perfectly clear, but the most reasonable guess is NOT NOW. The two Constitutional Offices that would be the primary “tenants” – the Tax Collector and Supervisor of Elections, have said they do not want to move into that location. [Personal Note: Ski and Vicki – stick to your guns, and don’t let them twist your arm.] There are other options in Stuart if we need more space to accommodate more government. That includes updating existing buildings.
HOW WILL IT AFFECT KIDS WHO PLAY IN THE PARK? It will shaft the kids and their families. Oh there will be plenty of vague official promises, but the alternate suggested park is not suited for four ballfields. Scattering new fields around the County would be a real burden on parents driving their children. And if the deal is set, it’s the kids who will suffer from new construction delays. Consider: County voters imposed an added sales tax on themselves just to add parks and conservation land. Here these development promoters are planning to destroy a great park. Bad planning at its worst.
HOW WILL IT AFFECT TAXPAYERS? It will also shaft taxpayers. Building at this location is one of the most expensive alternatives. The Commission is struggling with how to cut $20 million from the budget. Would you rather have this office building at this one location as the price of a closed fire station or library? This project will add to the tax burden on residents without jobs. It’s damn nervy for a top Stuart official to say that he would not accept cost considerations as a reason to reject the Sailfish Park site. Start considering!
It’s time to get our priorities into perspective.
Pickard to run for District 4 Commission seat
HOW GOOD A COMMISSIONER WOULD HE BE?
Don Pickard, president of the Martin County Taxpayers Association, has become a candidate for the District 4 Commission seat held by Sarah Heard. In our view, he is a quality guy. While serving as a commentator and watchdog on County spending, his anti-waste positions have closely paralleled those of Commissioner Heard.
Unfortunately, Pickard’s views on accommodating developers is closer to those expressed by his other election opponent, Lee Weberman. For example, when Pickard was involved in reviewing the elimination of various Impact Fees for developers, he supported Weberman’s position, giving a gift to developers. This move meant that taxpayers would have to pick up the slack for various infrastructure costs. Al so, he claims that he can work better with the majority on the Commission, but that little group is primarily oriented toward approving developer requests to change the rules in their favor.
Even more troubling is Pickard’s statement that Heard “has been passed over for the Chairperson position several times, reportedly due to the lack of a working relationship and the trust of other Commissioners.“ Whoa Nellie! That’s blaming the victim. It has been outrageous that the pro-developer majority has changed the precedent of rotating the chairmanship, thereby skipping Heard. They bypassed her because she has consistently spoken truth to power – that the majority’s easing the way for over-development would be harmful. AND IT HAS BEEN!
Pickard may be better served by sticking to his good guy image.
Limiting another layer of CRA government
Supporters of the proposal to establish a County Community Redevelopment Agency pooh-poohed the view that it would transfer too much power from the elected Commission (which for years has sat as the County CRA ) to an appointed board. At the Feb. 23 Commission meeting, it was widely agreed that this was true, and that the ordinance should be recast to limit the new “independent” agency’s powers. It’s a good thing that opponents spoke up.
No one has made clear why the separate agency is needed. The lamest alibi for doing so was made by Commissioner Doug Smith, who said that the Commission “does not spend enough time on the CRA.” Well, duh. That’s enough of a reason to establish a new layer of government that will cost more money and not be subject to the voters?
CRAs are good for the County – despite the foolish bluster of one blowhard – because they do upgrade neighborhoods in need. But we must keep a sharp eye on how Tax Increment Funding (TIF money) is spent. TIF tax is raised in each of the CRAs with the intent of plowing it back into that area. So the proposal to co-mingle all the TIF funds from seven CRAs opens up new problems. The original proposal was that the mingled funds would not have to be paid back to the individual CRAs. Thanks to objections by Commissioner Heard, it will be paid back.
Mingled funds may mean playing political favorites as to whether spending should be in one area or another. It could breed conflict. It could put too much power in the hands of the new CRA and its director, Kevin Freeman. We hope that the Commission will not allow mingled TIF funds, but if they do, at least limit such co-mingling to affordable housing only – which is basically a county-wide need.
Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) amendment to State Constitution filed in Florida Senate
A joint resolution proposing an amendment to Section 1 and the creation of a new section in Article VII of the Florida Constitution to limit state and local government revenues and require voter approval of new taxes and fees (SJR 2420) has been filed by Senator Mike Haridopolos.
If this bill becomes law it will radically shift taxation control into the hands of voters. Here are its key provisions, quoted verbatim from the bill:
PROPERTY TAX REVENUE LIMIT. The annual percentage change in each local government’s property tax revenue may not exceed property tax revenue in the prior calendar year plus annual local growth, adjusted for property tax revenue changes approved by vote of the electors of the respective local governments.
REVENUE RELATING TO BONDS. Fiscal year revenue of the state or a local government does not include the proceeds from the issuance of bonds. However, the debt service on bonds shall decrease the revenue limit by the amount of the annual debt service.
VOTER APPROVAL TO EXCEED REVENUE LIMITS. State and local governments may not impose taxes, fees, licenses, fines, or charges for services expected to exceed the revenue limit, as projected by the state and local governments at the adoption of their respective budgets for the fiscal year. Revenue collected in excess of the revenue limit may not be spent without approval of the majority of electors residing within the boundaries of the applicable government.
The amendment permits voters to authorize the collection of revenues in excess of a revenue limit. The amendment also permits the Legislature and the governing body of a local government to approve taxes by a supermajority vote for certain emergencies.
Lastly, this amendment prohibits the state or a local government from the following without first obtaining approval by a supermajority vote of the electors: Imposing new taxes, fees, assessments, or charges for services; or (2) Incurring multi-year debts or financial obligations
289 without adequate cash reserves.
Read the entire 10-page bill at:
The Financial Killer: Unfunded liabilites for public employee benefit plans
Two recent reports have found that the unfunded liabilities for state and local public employee benefit plans are an impending disaster of monumental proportions across the nation. Professors Barry Paulson and Arthur Hall in one report, and the Pew Center in another, found that non-federal government entities were short by $1 trillion. Pension plans, a substantial part of the shortfall, are fully funded in only four states, one of which is Florida . The National Conference of State Legislatures says it does not expect finances to improve for at least two years.
Separately, federal funding for mandatory programs and entitlements, plus interest on a growing debt, will gobble up 80% of all federal revenues by 2020. So states can not expect Washington to bail them out the way it did the auto companies.
A parable on excessive government debt
“The American people were, on the issue of spending, the frog in the pot of water: The rising heat lulled him, and when the water came full boil, he wouldn't be able to jump out. But that is the great achievement, if you will, of the past few years. The frog is coming awake at just the last moment. He is jumping out of the water.
“People are freshly aware and concerned about the real-world implications of a $1.6 trillion dollar deficit, of a $14 trillion debt. It will rob America of its economic power, and eventually even of its ability to defend itself.” - Writer Peggy Noonan
+++++
For a free subscription to The Martin County Defender, send request with “Subscribe” in the subject line to: mcdefender@gmail.com
Comments and requests to unsubscribe may be sent to this same address.
Al
Al Forman, Editor 3/1/10
The Martin County Defender is published and Copyright 2010 by WordsmithAmerica, Box 1828 , Palm City , FL 34991 . Al l rights reserved. No part of this issue may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording for public or private use, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. NOTICE: Al l correspondence not bearing legal copyright notice which is sent to the Defender or its editor is subject to being edited and published.