Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Florida

Tallahassee | Politics

392 posts in this topic

Tallahassee {sodEmoji.{sodEmoji.|}} Politics

USA - FLORIDA - LEON COUNTY

IMG_7931.jpg

Here is the place where we talk about being partisan. We can talk all the dirty politics here rather than in the threads of our informational construction threads. So lets put on our boxing gloves in here. This thread is not for the weak-at-heart!!

Let loose, have fun, but don't take it too personal, and don't get too personal!

All Smiles! :D

-TJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I'm just curious to know how you guys feel about Proctor's proposal to lower the rural zoning policy in the county from one dwelling/10 acres to one dwelling/3 acres or even one dwelling/1 acre?

Here's a link to an opinion column he has just written about this subject.

CHANGE IN LEON COUNTY RURAL ZONING

While I'm not at all a fan of his style of writing (i.e. from the viewpoint of being oppressed) he may have a good point. This proposal could help w/affordable housing in our county. However it could also create even more sprawl. I believe this change (there's that scary word again) would be hard fought in the outlying areas of District 4 (the NE.) So then should this change be proposed for only District 1 (south) or should it be proposed for all rural zoning areas of the county?

I'm on the fence w/this one and just how to implement it or even if we should, so I'd enjoy hearing your thoughts on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just curious to know how you guys feel about Proctor's proposal to lower the rural zoning policy in the county from one dwelling/10 acres to one dwelling/3 acres or even one dwelling/1 acre?

Here's a link to an opinion column he has just written about this subject.

CHANGE IN LEON COUNTY RURAL ZONING

While I'm not at all a fan of his style of writing (i.e. from the viewpoint of being oppressed) he may have a good point. This proposal could help w/affordable housing in our county. However it could also create even more sprawl. I believe this change (there's that scary word again) would be hard fought in the outlying areas of District 4 (the NE.) So then should this change be proposed for only District 1 (south) or should it be proposed for all rural zoning areas of the county?

I'm on the fence w/this one and just how to implement it or even if we should, so I'd enjoy hearing your thoughts on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TJ, this UGB you are referring to, is that the same as the USA (Urban Services Area?)

While DCA may not approve this, changing to 1 dwelling/3 acres isn't necessarily dense development. Many counties I am familiar w/their rural zoning is much lower than 1 dwelling/10 acres.

Besides w/recent events in Tally such as the new ordinance prohibiting the subdivision of lots in existing neighborhoods to higher density to me sends a message that we don't want dense growth w/in the city and then the recent battle and threatened lawsuits over the "one N" Mariana Oaks development says we don't' want growth outside the limits either. IMHO it's got to be one or the other or some type of combo, but No growth is not the answer which often times I feel is what many folks want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TJ, this UGB you are referring to, is that the same as the USA (Urban Services Area?)

While DCA may not approve this, changing to 1 dwelling/3 acres isn't necessarily dense development. Many counties I am familiar w/their rural zoning is much lower than 1 dwelling/10 acres.

Besides w/recent events in Tally such as the new ordinance prohibiting the subdivision of lots in existing neighborhoods to higher density to me sends a message that we don't want dense growth w/in the city and then the recent battle and threatened lawsuits over the "one N" Mariana Oaks development says we don't' want growth outside the limits either. IMHO it's got to be one or the other or some type of combo, but No growth is not the answer which often times I feel is what many folks want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just curious to know how you guys feel about Proctor's proposal to lower the rural zoning policy in the county from one dwelling/10 acres to one dwelling/3 acres or even one dwelling/1 acre?

Here's a link to an opinion column he has just written about this subject.

CHANGE IN LEON COUNTY RURAL ZONING

While I'm not at all a fan of his style of writing (i.e. from the viewpoint of being oppressed) he may have a good point. This proposal could help w/affordable housing in our county. However it could also create even more sprawl. I believe this change (there's that scary word again) would be hard fought in the outlying areas of District 4 (the NE.) So then should this change be proposed for only District 1 (south) or should it be proposed for all rural zoning areas of the county?

I'm on the fence w/this one and just how to implement it or even if we should, so I'd enjoy hearing your thoughts on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bill proctor's idea will only increase sprawl!!! at the last monticello local planning agency meeting we discussed how counties/cities should focus on higher density developments to limit the cost of infrastructure, the impact/use of mva's. if bill gets his way you have a whole bunch of low density single family dwellings spread out all over south tallahassee without any amenities close by... not pretty. also, i doubt it would have an impact on affordability as developers would still try to squeeze max $$$ out of each sale...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for the intelligent and interesting responses to this proposal. Also kudos to you TJ for teaching me that USA and UGB are pretty much the same thing. I guess I've been in FL too long to call it anything else but a USA. TJ could you direct me to a link showing a map of our USA? It's obvious where the line is in certain areas of town like in the NE in Bradfordville, but in other areas it's not so obvious at all. I definitely don't see much evidence of a USA line in the Big 4 metros of the state.

Portland, OR has one of the most strict UGB/USA policies in the nation.

So I hear what you guys are saying about the rural density proposal and that we should just build more w/in the current USA, however that is where the problems lies. We as a City/County need to have a plan, policy(yeah I'm sure they are on the books but no one seems to notice that) and take action that we are going to built up w/in the USA. I'm sure I don't have to name projects, but as you know and can see and hear just about every time a subdivision is proposed WITHIN the USA, all sorts of community groups and even our commissioners run out or grandstand at the dais in opposition of these proposals. Sure you can not be pleased w/the specifics of a project and work to get those changes, but most of these examples I can think of are from those against development period w/in the USA. If the USA is going to work properly and to help curb some sprawl we all (local gov.) have to be united in implementing this plan or else it really won't work effectively as it should.

Should be interesting to see how this proposal plays out in April if even at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Many thanks there TJ for the USA map link. It's not that bad of a map to use, but then again, I love all maps. :D

A few things of interest I noticed on this map if I'm looking at it correctly:

Fallschase is completely w/in the USA by several miles since the line is out past I-10 on Mahan.

Welanuee also falls w/in the USA.

The "one N" Mariana Oaks is w/in the USA. I believe it to be at the NE corner of Williams and St. Augustine.

St. Joe's proposed Southside does NOT fall completely w/in the USA and I assume the line will have to be moved for this development to take place?

Interesting that we talk about not expanding the USA or increasing density in rural Leon, but when projects come in and meet all the zoning and land use requirements w/in the USA, we still have many community leaders and groups that adamantly oppose these projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great point there Poonther. And I think the reason is, because they do not know what they are talking about or doing. They need to study the reasons these regulations are in place. Often they don't even know the law that govern many of their activities, and rather than discover why that rule is in place, they try to pass rules to exempt themselves from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Higher Sales Tax to help relieve Property Taxes?

Hey guys, Im sure youve read the articles on the House proposals to raise the sales tax one or two (or maybe more) pennies to help roll back property taxes. What are your opinions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, its just a trial balloon by the republican leadership to see what kind of traction it gets. I do not believe it to be a serious proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Higher Sales Tax to help relieve Property Taxes?

Hey guys, Im sure youve read the articles on the House proposals to raise the sales tax one or two (or maybe more) pennies to help roll back property taxes. What are your opinions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMHO, its just a trial balloon by the republican leadership to see what kind of traction it gets. I do not believe it to be a serious proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I'd personally like to see them relax on this idea. It seems Florida is trying to pass to much of its tax burden on to people who visit the state as tourist, and/or those who don't actually own a piece of it. Younger people will be hurt worst by this proposed change and therefore I'm not in favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd personally like to see them relax on this idea. It seems Florida is trying to pass to much of its tax burden on to people who visit the state as tourist, and/or those who don't actually own a piece of it. Younger people will be hurt worst by this proposed change and therefore I'm not in favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does it not make perfect sense. It follows the same pattern as the rest of our Tax reforms in this state. Take the burden off of Florida homeowners (be it a percentage large or small) and pass that burden on to people who pay Florida sales taxes, namely State Tourist. Of course everyone will pay more across the board, but only homeowners will Save with what is being proposed and this simply is not fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. But I'd hope the government wouldn't make it more difficult for me to save for a home by increasing my tax burdens. I too, support tourist paying more of the tax burden, but this is a poor proposal. It serves the purpose of helping those hardest hit by skyrocketing home values, and insurance costs, but it also hits those who don't own homes very hard. This proposal will cause many Floridians, who rent or do not pay mortages on low and fixed incomes a tremendous amount of hardship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it looks like they are making the proposal w/a 2.5% hike in sales tax correct?

What exactly is the proposed amount to lower property taxes?

And finally do projections show that this "swap" would make more or less money for the state?

Also help me out here guys. I know the following items have taxes on them, but do they have SALES taxes on them?

Automobiles (is it for the full amount of the car or is it capped at a certain amount?)

Gas

Utilities (gas, water, electricity)

Houses (if sales tax here is there also a cap on the amount taxed here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well it looks like they are making the proposal w/a 2.5% hike in sales tax correct?

What exactly is the proposed amount to lower property taxes?

And finally do projections show that this "swap" would make more or less money for the state?

Also help me out here guys. I know the following items have taxes on them, but do they have SALES taxes on them?

Automobiles (is it for the full amount of the car or is it capped at a certain amount?)

Gas

Utilities (gas, water, electricity)

Houses (if sales tax here is there also a cap on the amount taxed here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info GG and I look forward to more info from you on this deal. Until I know the details of the proposal, I can't be for or against it. You know what they say "the devil is the in the details."

I don't think utility bills have a sales tax included b/c it's a service, but I could be wrong and would love for someone to verify this for me.

One more question since you answered the one automobile purchases: As a FL resident, if I purchase a car in Thomasville, GA, do I pay FL sales tax on the car or GA sales tax on the car?

On a side note: The proposal that is a no brainer for me is the one where telephone companies want to also provide cable TV services in FL. The advantage they say would be lower cable prices which of course I'm for. The only negative I've read is that the proposal could make customer service worse.......to that I say...."Could Comcast customer service get any worse?" Bring on the competition. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well it looks like they are making the proposal w/a 2.5% hike in sales tax correct?

What exactly is the proposed amount to lower property taxes?

And finally do projections show that this "swap" would make more or less money for the state?

Also help me out here guys. I know the following items have taxes on them, but do they have SALES taxes on them?

Automobiles (is it for the full amount of the car or is it capped at a certain amount?)

Gas

Utilities (gas, water, electricity)

Houses (if sales tax here is there also a cap on the amount taxed here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Poonther, Im not sure what the proposed amount to lower property taxes is. I will try and get that for you today. The legislators are being fairly quiet about this because the logistics arent worked out yet. As for your questions:

Automobiles are taxed at their full selling price. However, if you trade a vehicle in, you are only taxed on the difference (i.e. A $40,000 car with a $20,000 trade in, you are taxed on the $20,000 difference...I know you knew that Poonther, but for our younger crowd :) )

Gas is an EXCISE, not a s SALES tax...although they are similar.

As for Utilities and Home purchases, Im not sure....

One provision that concerns me in the bill, and that we will fight, is that it still allows for local governments to raise millage rates if need be...then you may end up getting screwed twice...so I will find these things out.

TJ

It wont make saving for a house any more difficult. If youre taking 10-15% of your pre-tax income and putting it into savings, you never miss it because its like not ever having it. What I've been telling people is, "Cut 2 trips to McDonalds a month, and you'll be fine."

I know this will sound insensitive, but those who do not pay property taxes or insurance have not been hit by the rocketing rates. Its something they havent had to deal with. So, if this bill does help property owners (and Im not convinced yet it will, long term anyway), they are overdue for it, and it needs to be done. I know Ive opened myself up to attacks for the hardships they do face, but I dont think that the "rich people" should still be unfairly taxed either.

The money saved on property taxes will (most likely) become disposal income, and when spent on most goods, will be taxed at the new sales tax rate. This is the cycle they are hoping to create.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.