The Citizens for Conservation and Parks made a well organized presentation concerning the pending half-cent sales tax referendum to the Taxpayer’s Association Board of Directors at our September14th board meeting. This Committee is a grass roots organization formed to support the proposed referendum. Their goal is to acquire conservation lands and implement the Parks Master Plan. The referendum in question asks Martin County voters to support a half-cent sales tax increase for five years beginning January 1, 2007. The proposed increase is estimated to raise $60,000,000 or about $12,000,000 per year. The Committee claims that the money raised can, and will, be used to match grants and other sources of money so as to leverage the money collected from Martin County citizens and tourists as previous sales tax initiatives have done.

Two citizen boards, the Land Acquisition Selection Committee and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, would allocate the money. The Board of County Commissioners would appoint both of these committees. The money would be split three ways: to purchase conservation land, create and improve parks, and for park infrastructure improvements. The split is basically 50% conservation and 50% recreation. Included in the recreation funding is a proposed $12 million dollar aquatics center to be built on the YMCA property owned by Martin County on Monterey Road.

The Committee took our questions and comments. Some of these included the concern that this tax would free up property tax dollars for spending elsewhere. Others included thoughts that the conservation lands should be purchased inside the Urban Service District to provide for more open space and restrict development. Concern was expressed that existing spending policies of the County needed change and that there was very little public access afforded to lands already owned by the County. We were also concerned about the cost of staffing and maintaining new parks, especially the proposed aquatics center.

Our Board was divided as to whether or not to actively support the amendment, which will be included on the November ballot. We liked the uses projected for the funds it will raise, and prefer sales taxes over property taxes to support programs of this type as some of the revenue collected would be generated by non-residents who use many of the facilities, but would not otherwise contribute to their funding. However, we remain very unhappy with the Commission’s regular budget and believe there is much belt tightening needed there. Had the Commission adopted an Ad Valorem rate that included even a relatively small break for our residents, we would probably be enthusiastic supporters.

Our decision was to let our residents, who are already burdened with other tax, insurance and energy cost increases decide whether their households can afford the additional $54 per year this tax will cost them. No matter your decision PLEASE VOTE. And, however it goes, we applaud and encourage the Citizens Committee and wish that more residents would become as involved as these.

We understand that specific proposals to buy specific properties can result in higher prices being paid for those identified lands but we would like to know what we are buying. Public land should have public access unless there is inherent danger to the public users. We also believe that any proposal to increase taxation on the public should be honestly explained to the public and we don’t like surprises or hidden costs. Maybe the County should ask for expert help in all land acquisitions from the local Realtors Board or local Bar Association.

If the referendum is approved we expect accountability for every dollar. Tell us the truth and we can make up our own minds. We want to hear the whole story over the next month in order to cast our votes correctly. What is proposed? How much will it cost? How much are we committing to in long range staffing and maintenance?