The property tax ruling: Who wins, who loses?
House Speaker Marco Rubio: On one hand, a second stab at tax changes could allow the Miami Republican to push for some of his more ambitious goals (though swapping property taxes for higher sales tax seems to lack momentum, for now). On the other, a highly publicized setback could tarnish the most visible lawmaker on property taxes.
Gov. Charlie Crist: He campaigned on promises to allay growing tension over taxes. Then, late in the session, he laid out his own proposal only to let the Legislature take over. Still Crist has cemented his image to the Jan. 29 proposal. Crist may have to play a more assertive role this time.
Senate President Ken Pruitt. He was not shy about touting tax relief, but the Port St. Lucie Republican mostly allowed Sens. Mike Haridopolos and Daniel Webster to work out a deal, with input from Senate Democrats. Is Pruitt immune or does he have to ensure smooth sailing in the upcoming special session?


Isn't that Rubio? The Guy who constantly bashes Crist?
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:00 PM
The people lose. Poor ruling and the judge should be called on it...
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:12 PM
Let's never pose like this again guys. Thanks.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:37 PM
Oh, come on. It's election time, that's why they stalled last time.
Screw the constitutional amendment, the court ruled the state can dictate the property tax rates, read the last few pages of the ruling. Roll them back to 2001 levels, cap them at 3% or 5%, and make the local governments get voter approval to break the cap.
There is no way these guys were smart enough to plan this, but the judge just handed them a potentially enormous victory.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:39 PM
The ruling was fair. The Senate should not have let the House have their way on this legislation. I believe the initial Senate bill could have worked. However, it was so long ago, and there has been so much written about how we were going to be helped, I really can't say for sure. I do know that the proposed plan was very unclear regarding caps, etc.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:41 PM
Pruitt is termed out. He doesn't care.
Crist is made of teflon and what he really wants is a spot on somebody's Presidential ticket.
Rubio - maybe he can pull it together once again. And maybe this time the other two stooges will support him.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:43 PM
Forget the amendment and just roll back to an earlier date and make the counties work for their money.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:43 PM
And make the existing homestead portable.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:44 PM
And roll back the Republican's $500 million education property tax increase.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 09:50 PM
Good Lord, that has to be the ga*est picture i've ever seen. Please stop the butter.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Speaker
Marco Rubio
&
Speaker-designate Ray Sansom
Cordially Invites you to a
Fundraising reception honoring
Chairman David Rivera
&
CHAIRMAN
Carlos Lopez-Cantera
Governors Club, BC Room
Thursday, September 27th
5:30pm – 6:30pm
Suggested Contribution: $500
Please RSVP to Bridget Nocco at
954.600.7879 or email bridgetgregory@hotmail.com
make checks payable to:
David Rivera Campaign
carlos Lopez-cantera campaign
Political advertisement paid for and approved by David Rivera, Republican for State Representative District 112, Carlos Lopez-Cantera, Republican for State Representative District 113. The purchase of a ticket for, or a contribution to, the campaign fundraiser is a contribution to the campaign of David Rivera and/or Carlos Lopez-Canera. Contributions are not tax deductible.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 10:11 PM
I'm rubber, you're glue...
Everything bounces off me and sticks to you!
-- Charlie
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Today is Vertical Day! To learn more, go to:
http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=VerticalDay.Home&l=0A8242CD3D2CBFD6D6C0957CD339A949
Posted by: Peter | September 24, 2007 at 10:21 PM
Hard to tell who is Dumb, who is Dumber, and who is Dumbest from that photo.
Posted by: Mary | September 24, 2007 at 10:24 PM
Let's give thanks to the judiciary once again for preventing one of the worse ideas in state history.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 10:28 PM
10:28
Nicely said.
Whoever thought term limits were a good idea is an idiot.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 10:31 PM
Let's raise taxes to cut them!
marco
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 10:41 PM
Brett Doster is hot !
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 10:50 PM
10:50
Doster...seriously man, get off the blogs.
Posted by: | September 24, 2007 at 11:10 PM
What's up Peter and Mary? We should get together sometime.
Posted by: Paul | September 24, 2007 at 11:15 PM
Peter, Paul and Mary...funny! Comic relief if always welcome.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 12:00 AM
Yes - Make the existing homestead exemption portable! My daughter is off to college and I'm not earning enough as a teacher to keep my three bedroom home - but downsizing doesn't make sense unless the existing homestead is made portable! Make it portable! Keep your promises Charlie! If its portable I can afford to get a smaller house and I can afford to keep teaching in Pinellas. If not, its off to Georgia!!!!!
Posted by: UJCH | September 25, 2007 at 12:25 AM
The Lion, The Tin Man and The Scarecrow
Posted by: sweetypie | September 25, 2007 at 12:54 AM
What a joke this is. My tax relief came in the form of an increase of $2700. People aren't going to buy houses and move if the exemption isn't portable. I moved my homestead from orange to volusia and got screwed big time. Local government is trying to inflate values as much as they can to pad the budgets for next year. My taxes doubled in Orange and assessment went up $91,000 in Volusia... even with the homestead exemption. I couldn't sell either house no matter what I priced it. The market sucks, insurance rates suck, interest rates suck, and taxes suck. Thanks for the "relief"
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 01:10 AM
I think we are going about this relief all wrong. I think we ought to vote to force the local government to reduce the millage rate by 75% not the taxable value by same. Without controlling the millage rate, the taxable value is meaningless anyway. For an example, in Pinellas the millage rate is $21. Reducing the rate by 75% the new rate would be $5.25. We all understand that right? East to say. Easy to understand. By doing this, we would not be concerned with portability because our taxes would immediately drop by 75%.
Posted by: Tom | September 25, 2007 at 04:03 AM
What's the millage rate?
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 07:10 AM
The Legislature does not need a constitutional amendment if it genuinely wants to offer tax relief. The Legislatue could leave folks' local, elected governments alone and reduce the sales tax. Of course that would help all people, especially the lower income who cannot afford to homes, and worse yet would cut into the money the Legislature has to spend instead of somebody else's revenue.
A Pragmatic Post
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 07:38 AM
They look like the freaking Three Stooges… and the joke’s on us.
... and chalk up another photo op for Chuck! At least he's good at that.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 08:40 AM
I bet I can guess which one's MO!
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 08:43 AM
that is quite possibly the oddest picture i have ever seen. get a room fellas.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 09:01 AM
Notice Marco “The Rube” Rubio’s thumb capping the ménage… that’s a public bathroom sign for… well, you know.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 09:04 AM
Lets all remember that this amendemnet going by-by is going to stop these guys from creating another $1billion hole in state revenues. Projections already indicate revenues could be down $2 billion next year. If these guys can't figure out how to agree to cut 1 billion this year, how on earth do you think they could handle a 3 billion hole? Im all for tax cuts, but I have little faith that these guys can make sensible budget cuts that wouldn't harm the people more than high taxes are currently hurting them.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 09:32 AM
9:04 - know about that kinda stuff, do ya?
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 09:53 AM
my rent just went up 12.5% - when the hell are they going to realize that people are now moving out of the state faster than they are moving in and school enrollment is down across the state - if they keep allowing property taxes to inflate the cost of living, then good bye to FL.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 09:55 AM
9:53 - don't you... butt pirate?
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 10:43 AM
Judge ruled the statutory part is legal.
Either go with Rubio's plan to eliminate property taxes for 2.5% mor in sales tax
or
just roll back taxes to 2001 & add back in growth & inflation. This can be done statutorily & immediately and would stop the local government's drunken spending spree.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Sweetypie,
Didn't you mean The Liar, The B**ch and The Closet instead of The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe?
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 12:29 PM
10:43 - no i don't - meat flutist
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 03:10 PM
3:10 - took you long enough... having an extra meat-whistle steak for lunch were you?
You can go home to your trophy wife now... I'm done with her.
Posted by: | September 25, 2007 at 04:37 PM
Vote NO on the amendment and save Save Our Homes.
Posted by: | September 29, 2007 at 07:40 PM