How are you voting readers? I am a "No" on gambling and property tax reform. "Yes" on the date move. Primary, still up in the air.
10 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I am a no on slots but a yes on tax reform. Tax reform hurts no one and benefits all, if only by a little. If you think a "better deal" is forthcoming you're dilusional. The unions/cities/counties will never let any meaningful reform happen, even though they have been awash in almost a 100% increase in tax revenue in the past few years. The revenue increase far-out paces Miami-Dade's less than 1% increase in population. Unions and governments are notorius whinners, they never have enough. Yes on tax reform and yes on some serious fiscal responsibility.
Yes, but the portability may set us up for a lawsuit to overturn save our homes. Did you read the dueling lawyer opnion in Sunday's herald? Oh, that's right no one reads the Herald here it is:
Headline: New Florida residents target Save Our Homes 'The reason it's ripe right now is because the discrepancy and disparity has increased over the years so that it has created real inequity among the citizens,'' said Doug Lyons, one of several lawyers challenging the lawsuit on behalf of the homeowners.
Another argument: the Save Our Homes annual cap on tax assessments amounts to a ''defacto residency requirement,'' he said.
University of Georgia professor Walter Hellerstein, a tax law expert hired by the Florida Legislature to evaluate the legal consequences of implementing Save Our Homes portability.
In his 93-page analysis, he warned lawmakers that if they didn't find a way to offset the unfairness of the tax burden on first-time homeowners and newcomers to the state, Save Our Homes ''would be subject to substantial constitutional objections'' and possibly struck down.
But Republican legislative leaders and Gov. Charlie Crist, who pushed for the constitutional amendment, disagree.
''They are wrong and we are right,'' Crist said at a recent property tax rally in Miami. ``It's constitutional. I listen to Florida lawyers more than Georgia lawyers."
Crist, who is an attorney, also offered this legal opinion: ``We're changing the constitution. How can it be more constitutional?''
House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber, a former federal prosecutor who voted against putting the amendment on the ballot, said:
Crist is ``flat wrong.
''The challenge isn't a state constitutional challenge; it's a federal constitutional challenge,'' he said. ``The lawyer the state hired to advise them warned us not to do exactly what we're doing.''
Given the difficulty in getting a deal on property tax reform, I can't see legislators coming up with something more substantive. So, while it's woefully inadequate, I think it's the only alternative. As for the primaries, I'm voting for Senator Obama. On casinos, while I hate them, the public sector needs revenue for some critical needs: education, infrastructure,improved transit and affordable housing. My fear is that they will (as has been the case in many other jurisdictions) lower other allocations to these line items by precisely the amount they get from casinos, making it a net wash rather than a gain.
On the property appraiser issue, I voted against turning the property appraiser into an elected position. All that would happen, in Miami Dade county, is that the office would become another rat's nest of political influence peddling. Hire professionals and make sure they are good and competent administrators and leaders.
As someone who is very well versed in the financial implications of the slot vote, let me clear some things up for you.
With only 3 facilities, and a maximum of 1500 slots per facility, the total revenue derived from these facilities will probably be close to $300 million.
The state takes half ($150 million) and devides it up statewide. Not alot when spread that thin.
The County will get 1.5% - 2% ($4.5 - $6 million) and whatever city it's in will get the same amount.
Not exactly the windfall you are hoping for.
All that being said, I voted for it. It's already here and we might as well get some money.
Probably about $400 million will eventually get spent on construction at the 3 facilities, which will create some construction jobs and minimally bump some sales tax revenue, but it's not long term.
I predict a republican will not win the presidency>
that was the democratic primary...in all its glory. The reason the candidates were not here is because Flroida used to havce their primary on Super Tuesday with other 23 states. However, last year, our state house leader Marco "look at me Mommy, look at me" Rubio devised a plan whereby Florida would move up its primary date to become "more relevant". Well, our illustrious democratic leaders in the house rolled over and thus, we became a stand alone primary state. In their infinite wisdom, the Democratic National Committee punished florida for moving this date and the candidates all agreed that they would not campaign in Florida. It remains to be seen if the DNC will count our delegates and sit our people at the convention...The whole thing has been a major fiasco and only the republicans benefit. If i was cynical, i think it was orchestrated, but that would be giving Marco "huckabee for mee" Rubio a bit too much credit..
10 comments:
I am a no on slots but a yes on tax reform. Tax reform hurts no one and benefits all, if only by a little. If you think a "better deal" is forthcoming you're dilusional. The unions/cities/counties will never let any meaningful reform happen, even though they have been awash in almost a 100% increase in tax revenue in the past few years. The revenue increase far-out paces Miami-Dade's less than 1% increase in population. Unions and governments are notorius whinners, they never have enough. Yes on tax reform and yes on some serious fiscal responsibility.
Yes, but the portability may set us up for a lawsuit to overturn save our homes. Did you read the dueling lawyer opnion in Sunday's herald? Oh, that's right no one reads the Herald here it is:
Headline: New Florida residents target Save Our Homes
'The reason it's ripe right now is because the discrepancy and disparity has increased over the years so that it has created real inequity among the citizens,'' said Doug Lyons, one of several lawyers challenging the lawsuit on behalf of the homeowners.
Another argument: the Save Our Homes annual cap on tax assessments amounts to a ''defacto residency requirement,'' he said.
University of Georgia professor Walter Hellerstein, a tax law expert hired by the Florida Legislature to evaluate the legal consequences of implementing Save Our Homes portability.
In his 93-page analysis, he warned lawmakers that if they didn't find a way to offset the unfairness of the tax burden on first-time homeowners and newcomers to the state, Save Our Homes ''would be subject to substantial constitutional objections'' and possibly struck down.
But Republican legislative leaders and Gov. Charlie Crist, who pushed for the constitutional amendment, disagree.
''They are wrong and we are right,'' Crist said at a recent property tax rally in Miami. ``It's constitutional. I listen to Florida lawyers more than Georgia lawyers."
Crist, who is an attorney, also offered this legal opinion: ``We're changing the constitution. How can it be more constitutional?''
House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber, a former federal prosecutor who voted against putting the amendment on the ballot, said:
Crist is ``flat wrong.
''The challenge isn't a state constitutional challenge; it's a federal constitutional challenge,'' he said. ``The lawyer the state hired to advise them warned us not to do exactly what we're doing.''
sorry bits and pieces -- hope it makes sense.
The proper vote is no on the property tax amendment and YES on the slots, who can only help us and not in any way hurt us.
Given the difficulty in getting a deal on property tax reform, I can't see legislators coming up with something more substantive. So, while it's woefully inadequate, I think it's the only alternative. As for the primaries, I'm voting for Senator Obama. On casinos, while I hate them, the public sector needs revenue for some critical needs: education, infrastructure,improved transit and affordable housing. My fear is that they will (as has been the case in many other jurisdictions) lower other allocations to these line items by precisely the amount they get from casinos, making it a net wash rather than a gain.
On the property appraiser issue, I voted against turning the property appraiser into an elected position. All that would happen, in Miami Dade county, is that the office would become another rat's nest of political influence peddling. Hire professionals and make sure they are good and competent administrators and leaders.
As someone who is very well versed in the financial implications of the slot vote, let me clear some things up for you.
With only 3 facilities, and a maximum of 1500 slots per facility, the total revenue derived from these facilities will probably be close to $300 million.
The state takes half ($150 million) and devides it up statewide. Not alot when spread that thin.
The County will get 1.5% - 2% ($4.5 - $6 million) and whatever city it's in will get the same amount.
Not exactly the windfall you are hoping for.
All that being said, I voted for it. It's already here and we might as well get some money.
Probably about $400 million will eventually get spent on construction at the 3 facilities, which will create some construction jobs and minimally bump some sales tax revenue, but it's not long term.
I predict a republican will not win the presidency>
It will be McCain.
I'm fine with that.
Ack. I have lost the election.
I should not voted the way I did.
No wonder I have never won the lotto.
G O D you were wrong on both your votes. This worries me as I feel you are in the brighter bracket.
can anybody explain why there were no democratic candidates campaigning in florida?
unfortunately i'm not 100% familiar with the US election system (i'm german).
as far as i know, this was the "republican primary." will there also be a "democratic primary" or how does it work?
if not, isn't it wrong that people in florida get to hear the voice of the republican party, but not the voice of the democratic party.
thanks in advance!
Stefan..
that was the democratic primary...in all its glory.
The reason the candidates were not here is because Flroida used to havce their primary on Super Tuesday with other 23 states. However, last year, our state house leader Marco "look at me Mommy, look at me" Rubio devised a plan whereby Florida would move up its primary date to become "more relevant". Well, our illustrious democratic leaders in the house rolled over and thus, we became a stand alone primary state.
In their infinite wisdom, the Democratic National Committee punished florida for moving this date and the candidates all agreed that they would not campaign in Florida.
It remains to be seen if the DNC will count our delegates and sit our people at the convention...The whole thing has been a major fiasco and only the republicans benefit.
If i was cynical, i think it was orchestrated, but that would be giving Marco "huckabee for mee" Rubio a bit too much credit..
Post a Comment