| In This Issue: |
February 7, 2003
|
 |
Dr. Hank Fishkind of
Fishkind & Associates, Inc., was hired by the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) to develop and test a fiscal impact analysis
model (FIAM) that local governments could use when
making land use decisions. The project was in
response to a recommendation of the Growth
Management Study Commission to, “[D]evelop a
uniform model for evaluating the true cost of new
development.” The project team, led by Dr.
Fishkind, developed the FIAM using numerous
specialized features, which are explained in
detail in the final report found at
www.fishkind.com/dep/pcommunities.html. The model
was presented to the FIAM Steering Committee and
Working group for review and comment, after which
it was approved by DEP for field-testing. Seven
pilot communities were chosen to test the model
and FIAM project concepts: Orange County, Palm
Beach County, Sarasota County, Sumter County, and
the cities of Orlando, Hollywood, and Panama City
Beach.
On Tuesday, February 4, 2003, Dr.
Hank Fishkind of the economic consulting firm of
Fishkind & Associates, Inc., presented an
overview of the Fiscal Impact Analysis Model to
the Senate Committee on Comprehensive Planning,
Local, and Military Affairs. This was followed by
comments from Richard Unger, a planner with the
City of Orlando and FAPA’s Vice-President for
Professional Development. During the discussion,
it was noted that the FIAM would have limited
usefulness for local planners without accurate
local information being fed into the model. Dr.
Fishkind stated that the results produced by the
FIAM should not be the sole basis for land use
decisions.
Senator Geller, Chair of the
Committee, stated that legislation to implement
the FIAM was not anticipated. The Senator added
that he believed the Committee had the ability to
influence and add input into decisions regarding
what will go into the model and how it will be
used. Senator Geller emphasized that the Governor
wants a full cost accounting procedure to evaluate
development impacts, and that this was not
intended to be a mandate but rather a useful tool
to calculate the cost of development. We will
continue to keep you apprised of activity
associated with this initiative.
|
|
|
|
|
When the Governor released
his proposed budget, it included the elimination
of the State Housing Trust Fund and the Local
Government Housing Trust Fund and reallocated all
funds to General Revenue. While appropriations for
housing programs are proposed from general
revenue, according to the Florida Housing
Coalition, they are $89.9 million less than the
amount that would be available from the dedicated
revenue in the trust funds. Under the proposed
budget, SHIP would lose $58.4 million and the
State programs would lose $25.5 million. This is a
tremendous blow to the accomplishments of the
William E. Sadowski Affordable Housing Act of
1992. According to affordable housing advocates,
if the Governor’s proposal is approved by the
Legislature, there will no longer be a dedicated
revenue source for affordable housing in Florida.
The Florida Housing Coalition developed a
legislative alert, which lists the reasons why it
would be a mistake to lose a dedicated revenue
source for affordable housing. The list includes
the following:
*Without a trust fund that
can rely on a dedicated revenue source, housing
funding will be uncertain, and will remain
stagnant or decrease.
*Over 700,000 of
Florida’s families are in immediate need of
affordable housing (paying over 50% of their total
household income for shelter).
*The trust
funds serve Florida’s first time homebuyers,
working families, the elderly, and the
homeless.
*No state expenditure provides as
much economic stimulus as affordable housing. The
construction industry has a strong multiplier
effect—more than 2-1. Combined with the fact that
Florida’s housing programs leverage private sector
investment (bank loans and equity) and federal
funding at a ration of more than 4-1, each $1
million of state monies spent on housing provides
over $8 million of economic activity and over 160
jobs. Under funding by $83.9 million will result
in the loss of over $335 million of economic
stimulus and thousands of jobs.
*The
dedicated doc stamp revenue source was
deliberately designed to be a growth tax- so that
housing funding could keep pace with housing
costs. Although the economy is not good, land and
housing costs continue to escalate.
To take
action, the Florida Housing Coalition recommends
that the list of Legislators below be contacted
and informed about the adverse impacts of
eliminating the State Housing Trust Fund and the
Local Government Housing Trust
Fund.
Senator Jim King, President,
Jacksonville, district includes parts of Duval,
Flagler, Nassau, St. Johns, and Volusia counties,
king.james.s08@flsenate.gov , 904.727.3600
(district), 850.487.5030
(Tallahassee)
Senator Ken Pruitt,
Appropriation Committee Chair, Port St. Lucie,
district includes Martin county and parts of
Indian River, Okeechobee, Palm Beach and St. Lucie
counties, pruitt.ken.s28@flsenate.gov ,
772.335.8000 (district), 850.487.5088
(Tallahassee)
Senator Tom Lee, next
President, Brandon, district includes parts of
Hillsborough, Polk and Pasco counties,
lee.tom.s10@flsenate.gov , 813.744.8683
(district), 850.487.5072
(Tallahassee)
Senator Dan Webster,
Appropriation Subcommittee Chair, Orlando,
district includes parts of Orange, Osceola, and
Seminole counties, webster.daniel.s09@flsenate.com
, 407.297.2064 (district), 850.487.5047
(Tallahassee)
Rep. Johnnie Byrd, Speaker,
Plant City, speakerbyrd@myfloridahouse.com
850.488.0807 (Tallahassee), 813.752.5863
(district)
Rep. Randy Johnson, Speaker's
Liaison, Orlando 850.488.0256 (Tallahassee),
407.877.0122 (district),
johnson.randy@leg.state.fl.us
Rep. Alan
Bense, likely next Speaker, Panama City,
850.488.9696 (Tallahassee) 850.914.6300
(district), bense.allan@myfloridahouse.com
Rep. Bruce Kyle, Appropriation Committee
Chair, Ft. Myers, 850.488.1541 (Tallahassee)
941.335.2411, (district),
kyle.bruce@leg.state.fl.us
Rep. Ken
Sorensen, Local Government Committee Chair, Key
West, 850.488.9965 (Tallahassee), 305.853.1947
(district), sorensen.ken@leg.state.fl.us
Rep. Marco Rubio, Majority Leader, Miami,
850.488.4092 (Tallahassee), 305.442.6939
(District), rubio.marco@leg.state.fl.us
Rep. Leslie Waters, Appropriation
Subcommittee Chair, St. Petersburg, 850.488.6197
(Tallahassee), 727.545.6421 (district)
waters.leslie@leg.state.fl.us
|
|
|
|
|
ANNEXATION
The 2002
Legislature enacted CS/SB 1906, which included the
creation of s. 163.3177(6)(h)9, F.S. This
particular paragraph included a requirement that
the representatives of municipalities, counties,
and special districts provide recommended
statutory changes for annexation, including
service delivery, to the Legislature by February
1, 2003.
In its 2003 Legislative Action
Agenda, the Florida League of Cities states that
it wants to strengthen the ability of
municipalities to eliminate all enclaves
regardless of size or use, and provide reasonable
procedures to expeditiously annex areas that are
contiguous to their boundaries. The Florida
Association of Counties’ 2003 Legislative Program
includes a policy statement that it will support
reform of municipal annexation that prevents the
creation of new enclaves; offers more mechanisms
for eliminating existing enclaves; requires
annexing municipalities to analyze and report on
the fiscal effects of annexation in a timely
manner; sets up a process for reimbursing counties
for the adverse fiscal impacts associated with
annexation; provides for a longer transition
period for newly annexed property to switch from
county to municipal growth management and
regulatory control; and energizes local
governments to locally solve inter-jurisdictional
service delivery disputes.
On February 5,
2003, the Florida League of Cities, Florida
Association of Counties, and Florida City County
Management Association made presentations to the
House Subcommittee on Local Affairs, further
clarifying their positions regarding annexation
reform. The parties acknowledged the missed
deadline, but stated that they were nearing a
compromise, which could include some of the
recommendations found in the Florida City County
Management Association’s Policy Statement on
Annexation, prepared by Dr. Lance deHaven-Smith
(Florida State University). We will continue to
keep you informed of the progress made in this
area.
INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING
The
Senate Committee on Comprehensive Planning, Local,
and Military Affairs released another interim
project entitled, “Review to Determine the
Adequacy of Current Funding and Implementation
Mechanisms for Growth Management Infrastructure.”
According to the report, “the amount of money
needed for future investment in Florida’s
infrastructure is a matter of some debate, and
various estimates have been developed. However,
adequate, functioning infrastructure is essential
for both growth and debt servicing capacity.” The
report examines various local options for funding
infrastructure as researched and reported in June
2002, by the Legislative Committee on
Intergovernmental Relations.
The goal of
the interim project was to provide committee
members with options to address local government
infrastructure needs, which could be legislatively
implemented. Five categories were identified for
addressing local infrastructure needs: non-revenue
policy options; local revenue policy options;
state revenue sources; state water revenue
sources; and state transportation revenue sources.
The options discussed under each category may be
read in detail at
www.flsenate.gov/Welcome/index.cfm. To date, a
bill has not been filed.
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |