The following is a letter-to-the-editor sent to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, a sister publication of The Palm Beach Post. Letters following the one from Sarasota were sent to The Post.
I have been a winter resident of Sarasota for 15 years and a homeowner for 20 years, but anapproval of Amendment 3 in November would cause me to permanently leave Florida.
I have no problem with paying my fair share of property and sales taxes to support public education and local services.
If Amendment 3 is approved, it will exacerbate a longstanding trend of shifting the tax burden away from permanent year-round residents and onto visitors.
It will effectively turn the word "visitors" into a pejorative.
And even though my tax rate has doubled during my time in Sarasota,
I am not able to vote on this proposed amendment.
That's why I urge those who can vote on Amendment 3 to oppose it.
As a matter of fundamental fairness, it is not in Florida’s best interest.
John Figliozzi, Sarasota
Figliozzi is also a resident of New York state.
City leaders should stop the Amendment 3 whining
Regarding Amendment 3, Boca Raton Mayor Andy Thomson stated at the Tower Club: "We will have to make tough decisions if it passes in order to make sure that we are living within our means." At the same event, Fort Lauderdale Mayor Dean Trantalis stated: "We're going to have to make some tough choices [if this passes]." This is outrageous.
Individual households all have to live within our means. Boca Raton and Fort Lauderdale should be making those tough decisions every day, like we do. I am sick of these governmental bodies increasing their spending as more and more revenue pours in. Vote "Yes," and put more money in your pocket and force the local government agencies to spend your money wisely!
Stephen W. DeFilippis, Hallandale Beach
First responders aren't shielded from Amendment 3
I read State Rep. Gossett-Seidman's Sept. 27 column regarding the legislature’s deliberations on Amendment 3. First, she is incorrect in stating that the legislature took steps to protect taxes that fund law enforcement and public safety. There is no such language in the amendment. The amendment specifies what cities and counties may spend tax revenue on, but does not specify any set level of spending. That’s why the Florida sherriffs, police officers and firefighters have officially opposed it. Second, in this case it’s almost worse that the legislature took a lot of time to deliberate on this, rather than rushing, and still failed to consider the consequences of its disastrous action.
Hal Valeché, Palm Beach Gardens
Sheriff's debacle fuels Amendment 3 support
Thank you, Palm Beach Post. Once again, you've shown the world why the press is so important. You've prodded the County Commission into acknowledging that something has to be done about the Ric Bradshaw PBSO, its lack of transparency in submitting its budget and the poor oversight and, in doing so, have made the public aware of some of the issues. For far too many years, Bradshaw has behaved as though the PBSO were his personal fiefdom. He's considered himself accountable to no one. If not for your articles, we, the taxpayers, whose money pay the bills that come due in the county, would have been ignorant of this charade. It's a shame but Bradshaw's behavior gives the supporters of Amendment 3 a real issue despite all the hoopla about the loss of local services.
Ellie Schweitzer, Palm Beach Gardens
Government spending has a new target
Approaching Election Day, the volume of pro- and anti-Amendment 3 advertising will only increase. The folks who are worried about the reduction in essential services should it pass have a valid concern. But, when one reads about the excess pay and bonuses going to senior and retired employees of the [Palm Beach County] Sheriff’s Office, and their retirement plans that are so much more generous than those of the people they serve (and who pay for it), it’s no wonder that a lot of people are saying “enough is enough.”
Paul Loschiavo, Jupiter
Government spending fuels Amendment 3
Yes. I agree with Bryan Desloge about the consequences of approving Amendment 3. It is sugar for hungry people. In my view however, the problem is that local government has had a huge influx of money, vis-à-vis property value increases, and they have only spent more. There has been no restraint and property owners are upset. If there are millions more because of property value increases, why do taxes keep going up? I am against the amendment, but I understand why it's happening. Our politicians are not doing us any favors.
Christopher Cornelio, Jupiter
Amendment 3 coverage ignores spending
The Palm Beach Post’s article, “Could Property Tax Plan Mean Less Access to Hospital Care for County?” is another example of its consistently skewed coverage of property-tax relief. Every dollar taxpayers might save is portrayed as a government “loss,” while years of uncontrolled growth in government spending are ignored.
The Palm Beach County Sheriff’s budget, for example, has grown from approximately $425 million to $1.2 billion—nearly tripling—while the homestead exemption has not been increased since 2008. Inflation has steadily eroded its value as taxing agencies have reaped windfalls from rising property assessments.
Homeowners receive no cash from higher property values unless they sell. Government, however, taxes that unrealized appreciation annually and spends the proceeds like drunken sailors. Every business and household sometimes must actually spend less—not merely reduce the size of a requested increase. Government should be no different. Any honest reporting on proposed tax relief would disclose how much each affected agency’s spending has increased, express the proposed reduction as a percentage of its current budget, and explain whether it merely returns spending to the level of a year or two ago. Instead, the Post treats endless government growth as an entitlement and taxpayer relief as a crisis. That is advocacy, not objective reporting.
Douglas Sabra, Ocean Ridge
This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: If Amendment 3 passes, I'm leaving Florida. Other letters from readers
