Killing Crist's buzz on Amendment 1

[ Gov. Crist campaigns in downtown St. Peterburg this morning. Behind him is his longtime barber Carl Troup. "This guy's been cutting my hair since I was like 10," Crist said. Times photo | Scott Keeler ]

Gov. Charlie Crist showed up at a Starbucks at 4th Street N and 9th Avenue in St. Pete as though he'd already soaked himself in caffeine.

"What a beautiful day for a tax cut!" he said, bounding out of an ethanol fueled Chevy Tahoe and slapping on a "Yes on 1" sticker. But before he could start waving signs, the sunny governor was confronted by someone definitely not voting Yes on 1.

"Excuse me governor, my name's Michelle. I'm against Amendment 1 because I believe it's not going to do anything to help me save my home. $300 is nothing, nothing compared to the property taxes I pay. I believe putting it to a vote, it only makes the responsibility fall on the voters. It leaves you in the clear when you were voted in to cut property taxes for me."

Michelle Butler's hand trembled in Crist's.

"Great to see you this morning, too," he said. "Democracy is a beautiful thing. So vote your conscience .. I'm going to vote yes."

Butler, 33, did not flinch. "I absolutely will. Because one, it's not going to work for homeowners in the state of Florida. ..."

Crist: "Thank you for being here this morning. Tell me your name again."

Butler: "I'm a homeowner, two blocks from here and I'm about to lose my house because property tax is so  high and insurance is out of control."

Crist: "I know. I'm working on it."

Comments

Ms. Butler doesn't get it. Amendment 1 isn't about property tax relief for people like her. It's about Charlie's campaign promise to double the homestead exemption. Essentially, that is.

"What a beautiful day for a tax cut!"

Not a bad day to be in your office doing your job either… Chuck.

Ms. Butler doesn't get it. Amendment 1 isn't about property tax relief for anyone. It's about Chucks campaign promises, his subsequent failure to honor any of them, and a special interests funded attempt to divert voters attention away from that fact.

What did you expect from the over-tanned walking sound bite!

[MY KIDS NEED AN EDUCATION MORE THAN YOU NEED ANOTHER BEAMER.]

Is Michelle a homesteader? Or is she among the multitude of yuppies who invested in property in that area in order to flip them for a big killing?

Just curious.

[Do better next time]

Amendment 1 is a bs. Give us a meaningful tax cut

I can’t wait for my $240. I’m going to use it to jump-start our economy by buying a new home, a new car, new furniture, open my own business, send my kids to college, take a 1-month vacation to Lutz, and buy school books for every student in Florida… and with the money I have left over, I’m going to donate to the Re-Elect “The People’s Mistake” campaign!

Just wait ‘til you see what I’m gonna do with the $300 China… errr… Dubya is gonna give me!

12:40

LOL

Ron Paul may be a nutter, but I have to agree with him on the economic stimulus package.

The American government will borrow money from the Chinese to give to American citizens who will "stimulate" the American economy by buying Chinese products. Makes perfect sense.

Amendment 1 is better than Nothihg. And nothing is exactly what we will get is we vote it down.

Vote Yes! on 1!!

[A Blue Voter]

12:40 I couldn't agree more. Let's kill this turkey on the 29th and then do the same to that even more ridiculous 1.35% sham that will surely follow!

Looks like Chuck grabbed the wrong slacks after his love fest with McCain last night.

For God’s sake, will someone feed this freak a sandwich, or at least buy him some clothes that fit! It’s embarrassing… who’s handling him… on second thought, ewwwwww.

He looks like a “Rejected” commercial from e-harmony’s GLBT division.

[Amendment 1 is nothing]

12:46 - How can you say its better than nothing? I am getting back $20/month. Great. Throw it away, and give me something meaningful

12:46,

“You love me, you really love me!”

“Let me eat cake, let me eat cake”

“Thank you sir, may I have another”

… better than nothing … what a simp.

Save Our Homes IS the problem. If it were not for SOH, there would not be the disparity among homeowners that we see right now. People wanting to move would not be experiencing “sticker shock” at their potential new taxes. Plus I don’t believe tax rates would be as high as they are right now if everyone was paying equally.

That being said, I would like for this to fail – because I believe there is waste that local gov’t and school boards can identify – and not because of the threats of reductions in police, education and other needed services. For example, and I have the data to back this us, the City of Tallahassee INCREASED property tax rates during the housing value boom. The City of Tallahassee recently began a push to INCREASE taxes on businesses. And reported in today’s newspaper, Leon County refused to complete an exercise on identifying potential cuts in anticipation of Amendment 1 passes – one can only guess that they only want to address the issue IF they are required to cut, not because it is the correct thing to do. Additionally, it is truly unfortunate that the major opponents to Amendment 1 would rather use scare tactics than address the simple inequities that the proposal creates and exacerbates.

I understand the need to collect taxes to an extent. However, the legislature or the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission should look for a plan that phases out SOH - holding long-term SOH’ers somewhat harmless because there will not be the support needed if it doesn’t. However, most everyone will eventually need to or want to move and a good plan will have benefits for them, and anyone who doesn’t move would feel any impact in a phased-in approach. Any successful plan would also need to cap what local gov’t can collect and would require a super-majority approval for any tax or fee increase that is greater than the inflation rate. Ultimately, if Amendment 1 passes, any meaningful relief will not occur and what we are experiencing now will be experienced three-fold 10-15 years down the road – sort of a tax crises re-dux on steroids. And talk about further entrenching an entitlement attitude… we would never be able to get 60% approval to change the constitution at that point.

What frustrates me is when those who support this amendment go to a home in Miami and talk about why a person who has enjoyed SOH protection since its inception cannot move because of the “sticker-shock” if they were to move… even if moving to down-size. I researched the tax-payer (got to love the internet and county appraisers putting all the information online), but the proponents of the amendment do not look to the person’s immediate next door neighbor who bought two years ago (similar size house and lot) and who are paying 3 times the taxes of the long-term SOH’er.

Another item that frustrates me is when someone says that those who bought during the housing boom shouldn’t complain because of taxes, when in fact, the real issue is the folks who have had the protection of SOH for more than 5 years and want to take advantage of their property values increasing, but don’t want to pay the taxes associated with the new property. I say to them the same they say to people who bought recently – only buy what you can afford.

The truth is this plan simply does not address the problems that created the situation we are in!

Wonder if anyone has done a statewide analysis of the number of homeowners who have 1, 2, 3…15 years of SOH. I am sure with the housing value boom, the median number is probably a lot lower than it was say 5 years ago. This information would provide interesting insight into what people would be looking for in a constitutional amendment and any “threshold” that would need to be addressed in a better amendment.

I'm going to use my family's extra $20 a month in prop tex cuts to get fake tans like Cristi.

The was about the most stupid comment I have ever heard!! These people who vote against it because it is not enough are voting to keep it exactly the same for at least two more years??! How stupid is that?? Vote no and keep your taxes the same--vote yes and stop the bleeding and let's push for more before the legislators and local officials run for office in the fall. HELLO???

What's going to happen to Crist's most beloved poll numbers when both Amendment 1 and McCain fall on the same day? He'll probably claim he never endorsed either.

Amendment One is proposing to AMEND OUR CONSTITUTION and should not be taken lightly. It will make an unfair tax system even more unfair. It will not impose any restraints on our local governments from raising mill rates and actually increasing your taxes, rather than lowering them, and it does not demand accountability for how they spend our money.

Do you really want a proposal like this to become part of our constitution? Furthermore, there are many new and recent buyers who are shafted by this amendment who will join others in a class-action suit against our State. This will cost our taxpayers money and put a dark cloud over anyone who takes advantage of portability. In addition, it could place SOH in serious jeopardy.

Our government hired an attorney to advise them on the constitutional soundness of amendment of Amendment 1 and was advised it could be overturned by the Federal courts. They decided to go ahead with it anyway after paying him $50,000 for his advise. More wasted money by our government and truly dispicable that they would even propose an unjust, immoral plan such as this.

REMEMBER, WHEN IN DOUBT ABOUT TINKERING WITH THE STATE CONSTITUTION, THE SAFEST POLICY IS TO VOTE NO!

12:25 - no, she DID get it - she called CC out (to his face, great job!) that if A1 fails to pass then CC can blame the voters, but that he can still say that he at least followed thru on his promise, essentially

[A Blue Voter]

1:13 Thank you Mr. Norquist. It's good to know that you don't support that fascist 1.35 percent plan, and are looking after the preservation of our SOH benefits.

1.35% plan does preserve SOH. All it does is cap the millage rate on the "taxable value" of your home. Currently mill rates in Hillsborough County and Pinellas County are around 20. It would actually give restrains on our local government from increasing tax rates.

If you don't know what taxable value is, it is your assessed value (not market value) less your exemptions (i.e. homestead exemptions). The 1.35% plan would LOWER everyone's taxes signiciantly.

It's amazing how many people are clueless out there. It is scary on an issue this important. AMENDING OUR CONSTITUTION! When in doubt -- vote NO.

I'm voting YES!! only a stupid A*s would vote no! Can you imagine the union bosses telling their people to vote no when they receive taxes on every closing that happens? oh I forgot you have to be stupid to be in the union! Self serving SOB's. All they want is the big retirement while we foot the bill on our backs. I hate those jerks!

when in doubt vote YES!! It's your money! keep it in your pocket!

1.35 plan will make it on the ballot in 2010!!! Are you crazy? I want something NOW!

[Buzzard]

Tax cut not needed as much now that home prices have come back down closer to normal...and are still dropping. Still, I'll vote for it and smile all the way to the bank, knowing I've taken at least one small step to limit out of control government spending. A better amendment would have been one that limits all government spending to 2005 levels, adjusted to the annual rate of inflation.

when in doubt vote NO! It's a scam! And it will take more money from your pocket!

Stupid elitists who say $250 a years is nothing. Well, it's something to me and I will be voting yes.

I'm voting yes! I sold my home 6 months ago and have been renting---now I can buy a new home at low prices and take my savings from my old home with me! Horay!!

[afisher]

I am getting concerned over McCain's infatuation with war combined with his headstrong anger. SCARY! I keep hearing him repeat WAR WAR WAR!
To me this is much more serious than his lack of understanding of the economy and not being a fiscal conservative.

Hey! I bought a home 6 months ago! Now I can go back and claim the SOH break I had then!! It will save me $2500!!

THANKS BUY OWNER!!!!

you staffers are starting to lose it.

Hey! I’m voting NO because I’m an actual taxpayer in Florida, not just a paid for staffer, and I recognize that this is a scam designed to divert my attention away from the fact that our Governor and Legislature failed to do a damn thing about the real problem (Insurance).

Only the greedy or the ignorant will vote yes. for those of you voting yes for the proposed $240 savings, it will be stripped away as soon as the local governments increase mill rates. You want to restrain government spending, Amendment One will NOT do that.

If you want real facts and a proposed real solution, please go to the following link.....

www.floridataxwatch.org

I am a taxpayer of Florida I want my money and I am voting yes. There is not one single reason that I have read here to make me want to keep giving money to our tax and spend commissioners. They are against this and I am against them. I don't care what party they are in. If they are not out there saying vote yes on 1 then I am voting NO on them the next time they run. I have a long memory but this won't take much since no one in pinellas is supporting this and only 1 in Tampa.

HEY! I’m voting yes because I can use my $240 to buy this cool looking pink fuzzy pillow for my dorm room bed. Thanks Chuck, you’re so cute!… by the way, what’s a tax?

1:52,

This amendment in no way impacts your commissioners’ ability to raise your taxes.

We don’t need a Constitutional Amendment to lower taxes; we just need to pay attention to who we vote into local office.

1:52 - they may be limited in their ability to increase valuation of your property, but there ain't nothing in A1 that says the locals cannot raise millage - so guess what, your millage will go up and so will your taxes.

1:59-

You hit the nail on the head. Haven't we had enough embarrassments in our state constitution (pregnant pigs, levitating trains) to realize that some things should be done at the LEGISLATIVE level and not the constitutional level? Your city/county may very well deserve lower property taxes - if so, elect local leaders that will lower mil rates and cut services accordingly. This can be done much more intelligently at the local level than it can be done with a cumbersome, inequitable, state-wide program that is now fixed in the constitution for all time.

Michelle Butler got in a few nice sound bites with Crist - but if she wants meaningful change, she needs to be knocking on the door of city hall, not shaking the governor's hand.

[TJ]

It's a start. More tax cuts to hopefully come. As another person put it, voting it down means we get NOTHING. I'm voting Yes to double my homestead exemption. It will force the government to cut out the over spending that is going on in this state. And since it goes with you, maybe I will finally sell my house.

Michelle Butler got in a few nice sound bites with Crist - but if she wants meaningful change, she needs to be knocking on the door of city hall, not shaking the governor's hand.

Posted by: | January 28, 2008 at 02:17 PM

That's exactly what I'll be doing tonight at the Town Hall meeting in Date City at the courthouse. 6 pm

Talk about greedy and ignorant! You want me to keep my taxes high so you can retire with a big income??

I am voting YES and you should too! We all agree it is not enough, but I'll say YES to a start!

2:25,

To which comment are you replying?

VOTE NO ON 1. LETS GET THESE LEGISLATORS TO WORK ON SOME REAL LEGISLATION. THIS IS IT? SORRY CHARLIE. WE NEED BETTER. VOTE NO

Here's what tell the local officials they cannot raise my taxes========MY VOTE! They raise my taxes on the millage that is maxed out anyway and they are out! Stop the scare tactics firefighter! The postcards of burned homes! What a bunch of low lifes you have become. Not the firefighters I knew in my day. Greedy buch of low lifes

Talk about dumb and ignorant! You want me to increase my taxes so you can buy products from China???

I am voting NO and you should too! We all agree it is not enough, but I'll say NO to an backdoor increase!

2:28, make sure you tell that to the next firefighter who comes to your house and risks his life to save your ignorant a*s!

[calfloridia]

Let me see - let the legislators work on it, give me a break. What planet do you live on. Vote Yes on Amendment One then vote everyone out of office that does not support additional tax reform!

[david w.]

homestead exemption is an antiquated gimmick from decades ago that was designed to encourage out of staters to buy homes in florida when it was bug-infested, malarial and pre- air conditioning. the homestead exemption handout should not be increased... the entire anachronistic concept of homestead exemption should be eliminated. homes should be taxed on their market value... period... no discounts. There is no homestead discount on the cost of the public services and infrastructure people want so why should there be a discount on how revenue is generated to pay for those services/infrastructure? if you can't afford to move because the taxes are too high, i.e. you want to live where there are good schools, libraries, fire and police protection then re-arrange your own personal finances until you can afford it. otherwise, there are many cheaper states in which to live. buh-bye

2:17 knocking on the door of city hall will accomplish nothing. The mayor can't change assessments based on highest and best use, can't stop the state from shifting half a billion dollars to local property taxpayers as they did this year for schools (Charlie plans to shift more to local property tax payers to offset Amendment 1), and he sure can't fix the insurance problem that Governor Crist and the Legislature have failed to resolve, or even make a dent in.

So sit back, do nothing and vote for an unjust, immoral and unethical amendment that will have severe consequences for the state of florida, and will most likely be deemed unconstitutional by a federal court.

You are all being bought for the price of an IPOD and are too ignorant to realize that local governments will raise mill rates to make up for it.

You should vote NO because this proposal adds to the unfairness in an already unfair tax system, and it will make true reform more difficult to achieve.