#13 There
is a need to protect and preserve the separation of the Constitutional functions of
assessing property for ad valorem taxes and collecting and refunding such taxes from the
control of the county taxing authority which sets the tax millage rate. There are numerous
potential statutory conflicts if such Constitutional officers are controlled by a major
taxing authority. I am attaching a position paper on this issue as it relates to the
position of Property Appraiser in Brevard County, prepared for presentation to the local
Charter Study Commission (Exhibit A). Also, an attached petition, involving this issue,
illustrates that 60 of 67 Property Appraisers showed their concern by signing it in 1995.
(Exhibit B, Issue 2)
#14 This
would avoid a proliferation of new county municipal service taxing districts and special
non-ad valorem assessment charges being placed on tax bills for services taxpayers do not
want.
#15 This
would prevent a municipality which owns property in another county from removing such
property from that county's tax rolls, as tax exempt property, when the municipality
provides no direct public services to the residents of the county.
#20
Appeals of property valuations should not be decided by persons who are members of taxing
authorities and utilize such revenues. Rather, a system should be developed, by general
law, which provides for such decisions to be made by independent persons who are licensed
or certified as having an understanding of property valuation. Some taxpayers scoff at
having to appear before persons who levy taxes and spend tax revenues when they are told
who decides their appeals. Also, there are instances of pure politics by these Boards as
is evidenced by decisions in Levy county in 1994 which are the subject of lingering
litigation to this day. (See also Exhibit B, Issue 1)
#21 There
are types of tangible personal property which now must be identified and assessed which
produce little tax revenue compared to the cost of administering and collecting such
taxes. The Legislature should be permitted to identify and exempt such properties by
general law.
#22
A property tax inequity exists between property owned by a city or a special district and
similar property owned by a county. We now have city or special district owned ports or
airports which pay taxes on leased property and county owned ports or airports which do
not, even when the use of the property is clearly for a private, proprietary purpose.
#23
After Constitutional Amendment 10 passed in 1992, the Florida Department of Revenue was
successful in having a rule adopted which requires a re-assessment of the property each
year to recapture taxable value, even when there is no further change in the market value.
This is based on a misreading of the intent of the original amendment which, having to
address only a single subject, could not also have implemented this procedure. Such was
not the intent of the amendment's drafter and would be precluded by this Constitutional
provision.
#24
There are many different federal, state and local government regulations which are adopted
placing extraordinary permitting constraints on various types of private property for
environmental reasons. Once these designations are officially made, there is a chilling
effect on the marketability of these properties as buyers will purchase other properties
not having this stigma. Thus, there is no market for these properties. Consequently,
property appraisers should be permitted to place these properties, or portions thereof, in
a special classification and assess them at a nominal value until their extent of utility
can be determined, after necessary environmental permits are obtained. It is arguable that
current statutory provisions, in this regard, are sufficient to allow proper treatment for
these properties.
A better approach would be to pattern the
treatment of all environmental properties after the way in which the Constitution
currently addresses recharge "blue belt" areas by valuing them based upon their
character and use as vacant, unimproved properties in their natural condition. Currently,
a costly and difficult parcel by parcel evaluation is necessary to determine if the
highest and best use is even attainable and, if so, at what price. Sometimes the cost to
obtain permits can exceed the value of the property. Also, one is never certain as to
whether an environmental permit will be issued or upon what conditions.
This proposal is better suited to the mass
appraisal process of valuing property uniformly for ad valorem tax purposes. The current
situation requires too many individual studies and too many tax dollars spent trying to
value certain properties fairly for all concerned. The current system places the property
appraiser in the middle of conflict between those who regulate to protect the environment
and those who wish to use their property for its highest and best use.