IN YOUR CORNER

In the past few years, both Martin County and the School District have come a long way toward presenting an understandable budget, which allows reasonable year-to-year comparisons. Additionally, due to significant increases in the taxable value of county property, both organizations have proposed a lowering of the tax rate (millage), this year. If the proposed rate reductions are finalized, many taxpayers with homestead property may actually see a reduction in the school and county taxes they pay. These revenues will be offset by increases in the

taxes paid by new construction, commercial, industrial and other non-homestead properties.

The Martin County proposed budget can be found on the internet at http://www.martin.fl.us/GOVT/budget05/. Some interesting tidbits are as follows:

• Taxable values are estimated to have increased over 12% to approximately 14.81 billion dollars.
• The total budget decreased from last year’s by 9.85% to approximately $353 million, mainly due to the 40% decreases in capital spending as projects have been completed and fund balances have declined.
• Fund balances are monies which are allocated and carried forward for multiyear capital projects. This year’s is $90 million, 20% less than last year’s $113 million, but is still over 25% of county revenues shown.
• The property taxes collected will increase 10.69% to approximately $118 million. These revenues make up approximately one third of the monies budgeted.

Other listed sources of income are; $48,100,000 from Charges for Services (permit fees, garbage, sewer, water, etc.), $37,500,000 from Miscellaneous (interest, rents, sales, etc.), $20,300,000 from State shared revenue (licenses, state revenue sharing, etc.), $18,100,000 from Impact fees, $10,800,000 from Intergovernmental and $8,800,000 from Local sales and use taxes.

So, where does all this money go? Of the $352,900,000 total budget, 28% or $97 million goes to day-to-day operating expenses, not including the cost of personnel, which is an additional $61 million dollars, totaling approximately $158,000,000 or 45% of expenses for county operations. Capital expenses account for 22% of our funds. The county’s constitutional officers, which include the Sheriff, Tax Collector, Property Appraiser, Supervisor of Elections and Clerk of the Court require $50,500,000 or 14%. The majority of the Constitutional expenses come from law enforcement. Public safety expenses including Sheriff, Fire, and Ambulance Service cost $77,000,000 and account for 54% of the 1,596 county workers. The county is holding almost $50 million in reserve for unexpected occurrences, such as natural disasters.

The ten largest taxpayers in the county are FPL, Indiantown Cogeneration, Treasure Coast JCP Associates, Bellsouth, Knickerbocker Properties, Medalist Golf, Columbia Properties, Sandhill Cove, Running W Citrus and Lowe’s Home Centers. Pdf. files of the Martin County proposed budget can be found on the internet at http://www.martin.fl.us/GOVT/budget05/.

****

To a large extent, the Martin County School District millage is set by the State of Florida. The only part of the school budget generally controlled by the District is capital spending. In the past we have expressed concern that every project is costing far more than budgeted and often are costlier than we can justify. The Hobe Sound Elementary replacement is another budget buster. The original budget was $12,000,000 but the project may cost almost $14,000,000.

We can not find fault with the bid process, it seems to have been well executed. We made a few suggestions, which may save some in the future. However, it seems once again the School Board finds itself under the gun to sign an over-budget contract. Rising property values will provide the funds to cover the difference, but increased values won't always save the day.

****

In our last column we expressed considerable outrage at the sudden crisis in the City of Stuart’s finances and questioned whether voters should trust the City to manage a bond issue for a new public safety facility. We want to make it clear that the Taxpayer Association does not oppose the bond issue to fund this outdated facility; we have and continue to support the timely construction of needed capital facilities. However, we expect our funds to be managed efficiently and our political leaders to plan and make choices which will protect our future.