Friday, March 09, 2007

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread by gimleteye


The tax buck never stops except at your door.

You are not alone, trying to make sense of the mess in the housing markets and the vulnerability of the US financial system to wild excesses in debt creation during the latest, greatest housing boom in history.

In Florida, the boom chewed up citizens’ rights, wetlands, quality of life and municipal budgets. It created political machines like the one that propelled eight years of Jeb Bush. It buffed public corporations like WCI Communities—a production home builder led by Bush loyalist and the former finance chair of the Republican National Committee, Al Hoffman. Champion of the housing bubble, WCI is seeking advice from Goldman Sachs on how to survive.

Florida is left with a property tax crisis of immense proportions as the costs of growth sailed far beyond the capacity of the state tax infrastructure to keep pace. Now, what?

Here, home values in some areas of Florida have increased so rapidly that property taxes are forcing out-migration of families and businesses. Today, the Republican-led Florida legislature is proposing to roll back property taxes and shift the burden to the counties to make up the difference.

Hank Fishkind, a leading economist, testified yesterday to the Florida legislature: between 1999 and 2005 Florida’s population increased 17 percent, while county budgets increased 68 percent.

Florida’s 67 counties, of course, are exactly the level of government where the dislocations of growth have been sold as communal assets.

At the bottom of the political food chain—the level of counties and municipalities—the production home builder lobby has been most successful in throttling dissent in order to advance zoning and permitting changes fomenting an incipient rebellion by citizens that the state legislature has spent the past several sessions trying to kill off.

Last year, under the guise of “protecting” the Florida Constitution, home builders supported a change to the constitution that will require future changes by petition referendum to be approved by 60 percent, instead of a simple majority, of voters.

This year, the Legislature is moving forward a new law to restrict where petition gathers can collect signatures. In Florida’s atomized suburban sprawl, the only places where people collect are shopping centers and malls and that is where petition-gatherers go: the Legislature is trying to give property owners the right to “decide” what kinds of petitions are suitable for signature collection.

The rebellion that the Legislature is trying to head off is called Florida Hometown Democracy, led by grass roots supporters, who want to give voters in each of the state’s counties the right to require major land use changes to be submitted to a popular vote BEFORE consideration by local legislatures.

There is a term to describe the Florida legislature trying to pass off the unabsorbed costs of growth to local legislatures while inhibiting citizens from stopping local legislatures from promoting unabsorbable costs of growth: it’s called legal white-collar crime.

In Florida, as in other frenzied markets, much of the growth during the building boom was fueled by speculators.

Speculators in land development, speculators in condo markets and speculators in lending markets. Speculation in property ownership is so rampant that there is no functional middle class in the United States today.

To the extent that there is class division in the United States today, it is defined by leverage. There is one class that has chosen not to borrow. They would be called fools. There is one class that is too poor to borrow. They would be called unfortunate. And there is one class that has greatly distanced itself from the other two by leveraging borowed assets. In rising markets they would be called, rich. In falling markets, they would be called unfortunate fools.

There is inherent instability in these inequities: that is what citizens are rebelling against, but they won’t quite know it until the blood is running thicker in the streets. It is starting.

The front page of the Wall Street Journal today reports that the nation’s second largest lender of subprime mortgages, New Century Financial, has stopped making loans and is on the verge of filing for bankruptcy, the latest casualty in the financial algae bloom choking the $1.36 trillion market.

The speculators of last resort are hedge funds, largely unregulated financial vehicles looking for wide-open spaces to roam free.

In downtown Miami, hedge funds are buying condo buildings nearing completion before developers lurch to bankruptcy.

This week, as one hedge fund operator, Greenlight’s founder David Einhorn withdrew from New Century, while another hedge fund operator, Citadel, bought another createring subprime lender, ResMAE.

But an underlying dispute is arising among hedge funds and their investors: how to price securities and risk.

It is the mirror image of the Florida legislature and local counties flailing at each other, how to price the costs of growth that everyone knows is out of control and no one wants to take responsibility for.

In Thursday’s Wall Street Journal, C2, a little sunshine peeks through the bramble: “Investors say that many hedge funds… complain about the difficulty of getting pricing information about complex securities… the problem actually is that hedge funds disagree with the value brokers are placing on their positions and are ‘shopping around’ for more bullish numbers.”

The point, transposed to the pricing of speculative growth in Florida’s communities, goes something like this: if you are selling growth—like the production home building lobby does—all growth is good, there is never a limit to the benefits derived from housing priced to be ‘affordable’.

But if you are a Florida legislator and you have to price the cost of growth that are out of control, you don’t want to raise taxes in Tallahassee (we’re Republican!), you want local legislators to do that work.

Whether you are a state or local legislator, you are still essentially the mechanical arm of private developers who above all, want voters to be uninformed about pricing risk that taxes will not come close to covering the costs of growth.

It should be surprise no one that the mismanagement of local and state budgets in Florida depends on mispricing economic activities. It is also the essential nature of derivative financial instruments: if investors all start asking at once—what are these things really worth? we will find out that they are not indexed to any form of reality, which we suppose is one definition of a financial bubble.

The Wall Street Journal continues, “Many of these complex securities appear to trade easily when the markets are going up. But when markets are in free-fall, they can quickly become much more difficult to trade. That leaves both dealers and their clients potentially assigning vastly different values to similar positions.”

Thanks, for that!

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

you have covered so much. I don't know where to begin in comment. Great - Complex - Post!

Anonymous said...

Since developers/builders seem to pay only a fraction of the true cost of infracture, schools, police, fire, etc. the local governments have to pay the balance. When it was boom, boom, boom no problem, it got buried in the budgets. Now these costs have to be paid with no new plan at this time really solving the problem

Anonymous said...

County budgets increased 68% while they have a few billion of unfunded infrastructure? Why didn't our county fund the infrastructure during the time the money was coming in? I smell another bond issue coming..

Fishkind did not address the most important expenses we have in Miami: Waste and corruption. Maybe the power should shift away from the county. Even with the legislature's treatment of Miami as the mis-behaving step-child, could we do worse?

Anonymous said...

It is my belief that smaller municipal governments like Palmetto Bay, Cutler Bay & Pinecrest are the answer, they have more accountability to the tax payers. Cozy relationships with developers and lobbyists are more visible. For some, like Pinecrest, they publish the check register in the community newspaper. You can vote the mayor and council members out of office if you don’t like what they are doing, try that with a Miami-Dade Commissioner. I know all is not perfect with some of thease small cities but they look a lot better than the Miami-Dade municipal government does.

Anonymous said...

Reacting to angry calls for property tax relief, the Hillsborough County Commission took an unusual step Wednesday: It put a cap on some of its spending.


Read more at http://www.tbo.com/news/nationworld/MGBAZGKQWXE.html

Anonymous said...

One more link. The Fishkind report can be found at; http://www.fl-counties.com/proptax/fiscalstudy.shtml

Miami-Dade was one of the sample counties used for more detailed information.

WOOF said...

Excellent work gimleteye
Thank you

Anonymous said...

I pulled some of the data from Fishkind report for Miami-Dade County into a spread sheet. The data I pulled covers years 2000 to 2006 for such items as County Expenses, number of employees and population. Here is some preliminary information I calculated from the data.

Overall growth in spending from 2000 to 2006 was $1,361,257,000 or 43.81%.
There were two big jumps way above CPI. $405,817,000 or 12% in 2002 to 2003 and $437,311,000 or 11% in 2005 to 2006. Both just shy of about ONE HALF a BILLION DOLLARS. Don’t forget there was another 19% jump in the 2006 to 2007 forecasted budget that I reported on in another entry.

Population growth was 183,660 or 8.15%.

Number of Miami-Dade Employees grew in the same period 2,143 or 7.70%.

The cost per resident grew from $1379 to $1834 a total of $454.64 or 32.97%. That’s not cost per family, a family of four would have a cost of $7,334.81.

Comments?

Anonymous said...

Are you sure about the cost for a family of 4. that means about $600 a month goes to the county?

Anonymous said...

Here is how I got there. All data is from the Fishkind report APPENDIX TABLES last page.

Total cost of government was $4,468,774,000 this is sum of County Salaries & Wages, All Other County Fringe Benefits (HealthCare,etc.), County Pensions, County Fire & EMS, Total Sheriff Department Allocation, All Other Constitutional Officer Payments and All Other Expenses Not Already Classified for 2006.

2006 Total population was 2,437,022.

Divide the Total cost of government by Total population, $4,468,774,000 / 2,437,022 = $1,833.70. As a test multiply Total population X Cost per resident, 2,437,022 X $1,833.70 and you get $4,468,774,000. Cost for family of 4 is $1,833.70 X 4 = $7,334.81.

Divide the $7,334.81 by 12 and you do get $611.

Wonder how we compare with other places to live? I will try and do the same for another county or two.

Also remember we all don’t pay the same and the county gets funding from many different fees and taxes, grants and other sources, not just Property taxes. This just shows spending per resident.

Anonymous said...

Can you decode exactly where/which departments the big increases came from? Do the Fishkind numbers also provide increases in assessed valuation for the county, as a comparable measure?

This is a great discussion, but it makes you wonder why the hell this detail isn't being reported in the news... I suppose if the legislature tax cut passes, and they have to cut the county budget, they'll cut the libraries first so that people won't have anywhere to go to get information. Just like Bush did with the EPA libraries.

Anonymous said...

Here is some of the same data from the Fishkind report for Orange County (Orlando Area). As in Miami-Dade County, the data covers years 2000 to 2006 for such items as County Expenses, number of employees and population.

Overall growth in spending from 2000 to 2006 was $465,041,195.00 or 31.91%.
There was one big jump way above CPI. $225,088,895.00 or 14.56% in 2002 to 2003. Just shy of about ONE QUARTER of a BILLION DOLLARS.

Population growth was 183,180 or 20.44%.

Number of Orange County Employees grew in the same period 934 or 10.36%.

The cost per resident grew from $1626 to $1781 a total of $155 or 9.53%. That’s not cost per family, a family of four would have a cost of $7,123.

In summary:

Orange county population grew 20.44% vs Miami-Dade 8.15%

Orange county spending grew 31.91% vs Miami-Dade 43.81%

Orange County Employee count grew 10.36% vs Miami-Dade 7.70%

Orange county cost per resident grew 9.53% vs Miami-Dade 32.97%.

Orange county cost per resident in 2006 was $1781 vs Miami-Dade $1,833.70

I have no idea if Orange County runs a tight ship as far as spending goes. I don’t know if they have had any scandal involving waste but as all large government I bet there is some waste. It’s probably harder to hide with a smaller budget than MDC.

Draw your own conclusions.

Anonymous said...

To Answer:

Can you decode exactly where/which departments the big increases came from? Do the Fishkind numbers also provide increases in assessed valuation for the county, as a comparable measure?

They cover the following:

County Salaries & Wages
All Other County Fringe Benefits (Health Care, etc.)
County Pensions
County Fire & EMS
Total Sheriff Department Allocation
All Other Constitutional Officer Payments
All Other Expenses Not Already Classified

I did not do the breakdown on the above only the total.

From what I have read so far Fishkind only covers expenditures. I jumped right on the data because it had information all the way back to year 2000.

Some of what you are asking is in the three volume almost 1500 page Miami-Dade budget summary report. Notice I said SUMMARY REPORT. The detail is not there. I have no idea how the department budget review is done. Many Miami-Dade department budgets are bigger than most county budgets in the state. As we used to say when I worked for a living “our budget is equal to rounding errors in those guys budgets!”.

See http://www.miamidade.gov/budget/

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know how you measure the financial effectiveness of municipal government? What would the metrics be? Does anyone do such a thing at the various levels of city, county and state government?

Are there common metrics like:
Cost per resident
Employee per resident
Average Employee cost
Cost per square mile
Cost per road mile

Just wondering.

Anonymous said...

rthrc, thanks for bringing some examination and detail to these issues!

Anonymous said...

Some years ago it was suggested to these smaller and wealthier incorporated areas that they should "donate" some funds to help subsidize the poorer areas of the county. Well none of that ever happened from all these good progressive Democratic mayors in these smaller cities, i.e. Pinecrest and Coral Gables for example. Let not talk about smaller well run homogeneous cities lets talk about heterogeneous success stories, and for that I am afraid we will have to look far outside of SoFL. If we were to examine the "reform" candidate - City of Miami Commissioner Mark Sarnoff's attitudes towards the poor, atrocious really. In his view Umoja village is just a drug den. Well even if that is true, what are we going to do about hopeless people on drugs? This is why the underclass continues to be a problem they are under-employed and unemployable in the City as a Growth Machine paradigm (Harvey Molotch) Genius you are right to try to sort this all out if only those posting by your readers were broader minded.

Anonymous said...

Thanks gimleteye,

Last Anonymous:

I hope you are aware of the “mitigation” that the cities of Miami Lakes (1.7 Million), Palmetto Bay (1.6 Million) and Doral ($8.1 Million) pay the county for 06-07 budget. That’s 11.5 MILLION to the county! What does Miami-Dade County do with that money?

For Doral Its 40% of their budget to the county in mitigation. Since incorporating in June 2003, Doral has made payments to the county of $1.9 million, $7.36 million and $7.88 million.

Other recently established cities including Key Biscayne, Aventura, Pinecrest, Miami Gardens, Cutler Bay and Sunny Isles Beach do not pay mitigation. No older cities, such as Miami, Homestead, Coral Gables or Bal Harbor, pay mitigation either.

Also note it’s not only the rich areas that want out from under the misuse of Miami-Dade municipal taxes and the misspending of the funds. In 2003 Miami Gardens was formed. With a population of 105,457, it is the third largest city in Miami-Dade County, that’s over 100,000 less people to be served by Miami-Dade municipal services. Also note that County municipal spending went up even though over 100K people and about 20 square miles of infrastructure left the unincorporated side of county government. What happened to the money the county saved by not having to provide services to this area?

Also, just what is a smaller and wealthier incorporated area and how should "donate some funds to help subsidize the poorer areas of the county” be facilitated? Just who and where are the poorer areas of the county? Do you trust that Miami-Dade would provide the “right” oversight to do this? Force the areas that are managed well to provide money to the group that cannot manage money, Miami-Dade County! The county has used this subterfuge to make people think that incorporations “hurt” the poor.

Anonymous said...

Possible Miami-Dade County Hiring Freeze?

Miami-Dade Budget and Finance Committee Agenda
OFFICIAL Version
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
2:00:00 PM
COMMISSION CHAMBERS

BY Commissioners Carlos A. Gimenez and Rebeca Sosa File Number: 070685

TITLE
RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE COUNTY MANAGER TO INSTITUTE A HIRING FREEZE EFFECTIVE _________ AND AUTHORIZING A PROCEDURE FOR EXCEPTIONS TO ENSURE THE CONTINUING EFFECTIVE PROVISION OF COUNTY SERVICES


BODY
WHEREAS, the State Legislature is currently considering substantial revisions to the State’s tax structure, including replacing the State real estate tax with a sales tax; and

WHEREAS, the revisions under consideration could have a substantial impact on the County’s revenue and its ability to provide services to its residents and visitors; and

WHEREAS, the County must act prudently in anticipation of such a substantial loss in revenue; and

WHEREAS, the majority of the costs associated with the provision of County services come from the payment of wages and salaries to County employees; and

WHEREAS, the County wishes to avoid, or at least minimize, the need to layoff County employees in the event of a substantial loss in State tax revenues,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:

Section 1. The Board directs the County Manager to institute a hiring freeze effective _______________. The County shall hire no new employees from that date forward, provided that the County may in its discretion make exceptions to the freeze to ensure the public’s safety and the continuing provision of important County services
.
Section 2. The Manager shall appoint a committee composed of appropriate County administrators to enforce the hiring freeze and to recommend exceptions to the freeze for his consideration and approval. Before filling any position recommended for exception from the hiring freeze, the Manager shall first obtain budgetary approval from the County Commission. Nothing in this resolution shall be construed to interfere with the Mayor’s authority to make appointments of department directors and other personnel in accordance with the Miami-Dade County Charter.