IN YOUR CORNER

A Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary of 1949 defines a tax in several ways, including the words "burden" or "demand". It's no secret that most taxpayers owning vacant land in Martin County have seen their investments depreciate or erode in the past ten years. This has little to do with the economy, or supply and demand, but results from a combination of burdens imposed by county government. The cost of paying for this growing bureaucracy affects every taxpayer as well as precipitating increasing litigation expenses. Last year alone the county spent in excess of $280,000.00 on litigating land use issues and this was prior to the final enactment of many new regulations.

Today, a taxpayer wishing to develop even a modest site plan must hire an attorney who "knows his way around" the Martin County labyrinth. With no assurances of success, he must plod through a review process no one seems to understand which consumes a year or more of time, with each proposal revealing new or altered requirements which send him staggering back to the drawing board

It appears that new burdens are being devised at an even faster pace. Recent new wetland ordinances and interpretations greatly reduce usable property, stopping even seawall and pool construction in long-established communities. These new restrictions often create ugly, illogical, and indefensible exceptions. We want to protect the environment, but it seems to us that some of the new legislation adds a fiscal and financial burden without a commensurate environmental benefit.

New fees of questionable legality affect the economic feasibility of business expansion. Additional requirements for detailed topographical maps of your land and surrounding area, notification and other rules will add substantially to the cost of county economic progress.

As these tentacles continue to strangle many property owners' rights, two new ones have appeared in the form of proposed zoning revisions and storm water regulation. If these are adopted, additional costs and studies for all applicable developments and single family lots will be required, and will impose retrolegislation on existing subdivisions and individual properties. New burdens are being imposed on taxpayers at an

alarming rate.

We can only hope that concerned citizens will attend commission meetings and make themselves heard.

***

Last August, the County Commissioners voted to move $182,000, an amount we think is only one of a number of installments, from reserves to cover the cost of current and pending litigation, such as Pioneer Tile, APS, Tilton, MC Chamber, Edelman, Kanter Seabreeze, Section 28, Wentworth, Annexation and others. The board asked that this

sum not be a part of the County Attorney's budget, but be moved to a separate account.

We have already commented on the wasting of taxpayer money in pointless litigation, so we will not do so again. We do object to the fact that the legal cost of new regulations is not considered before enactment and to having this additional expenditure show outside the budget for the County Attorney . In the last budget, the expenditure for new fire stations was not shown in the budget for Emergency Services. In our opinion this did nothing but hide the true cost to taxpayers of this department. Having litigation cost appear outside the proper department does the same thing. The county budget is inherently inaccurate because of its format; deliberately making it less accurate serves no worthwhile purpose and we would like to see this action reversed.

***

We have devoted a substantial amount of space to discussions of school impact fees because they have a major effect on local taxpayers. The amount of property tax devoted to capital projects within the school system, such as new schools, is a large component of school taxes. Properly designed impact fees will shift a proper amount of this financial burden to new residents whose presence requires the new schools.

Last year, the state legislature passed a law that froze school impact fees until July 1, 2000, at the rates then in effect and formed a commission to study this contentious issue. This committee's report was due by Feb. 1,2000, and should be published any day. We will be sure to follow up. According to our estimate, it could be costing property-owning taxpayers about $300,000 per month, based on the 1999 school capital spending plan and building permits issued. However, this plan may not be accurate, so this amount may be high or low.

Given the inconsistencies of various impact fee plans, the freeze may be a good idea if the study enables a standardize impact fee. Meanwhile, the school board should go ahead with their study of future capital expenditures. The study will be necessary whichever way these expenditures are to be funded. There seems to be a large disagreement over how much school construction will be needed, and this matter must be settled first. For the benefit of current property taxpayers, if the school district cannot demonstrate a need for the money currently raised by the property tax, this tax should be reduced immediately.

***

Reservations for the 50-Year Jubilee, a celebration of fifty years of "watchdog" services in Martin County, are reaching the maximum. If you have not sent in your reservations, and plan to attend, please call the MCTA office to ensure availability. The event will be held, Thursday, March 16, 2000 at the Hobe Sound Golf Club.

The MCTA is also planning our second annual Public Forum on Friday, April 7, 2000 at the Blake Library. This informational forum will begin at 8:30 with coffee and donuts and will end around 1:30 after a light luncheon. Reservations are required at a charge of $5 per person to offset expenses. Topics such as charter government, incorporation, and annexation will be discussed. More information will be available as plans are finalized. SAVE THE DATE!