​Commissioner Hal Valeche

This November 6, like all election years is an important time for us to consider the candidates running for office and vote our consciences for those we think can best represent the interests of the public.  In addition, this year's ballot includes 13 rather complex Florida Constitutional Amendment questions.  I encourage you to educate yourself on these ballot questions so that you are fully prepared, because some of them bundle multiple issues into one amendment.

According to The James Madison Institute think tank, which has prepared its own 2018 Florida Amendment Guide at https://www.jamesmadison.org/2018-florida-constitutional-amendment-guide-2/, the last time Florida convened the Constitution Revision Commission (CRC), the state had about 15.5 million residents.  Since that time, they note, Florida has become the third most populous state with more than 20 million residents.

Amendments to our state constitution should not be undertaken lightly, and each of the 13 proposed amendments requires 60 percent of the vote for passage.  The Florida Legislature placed amendments 1, 2 and 5 on the ballot; amendments 3 and 4 made it to the ballot by citizen initiative petition; and, amendments 6 through 13 were proposed by the CRC.

Of all of this year's ballot questions, Amendment 1 is of most concern to me.  It proposes to exempt homesteaded properties whose assessed value is between $100,000 and $125,000, an additional $25,000.  What's wrong with a tax break?  Principally, nothing; however, this additional exemption would only benefit a narrow segment of homeowners, so it ends up being not so much a tax cut, as it is a shift. 

For Palm Beach County, according to the Property Appraiser's Office, this measure, if passed, would result in a $27 million hit to tax revenue.  That revenue, as you know, is what pays for all of our essential services.  This number includes revenue losses projected in our municipalities.  For example, in Palm Beach Gardens, the exemption would apply to 14,403 parcels, resulting in a loss of $1.9 million in revenue.  In Jupiter, 14,612 parcels would receive the exemption, resulting in a revenue loss of $942,000.

The tax shift I am referring to is the reality that unless the public is okay with cutting services, money to provide them has to be found elsewhere.  So all of the other taxpayers not receiving the benefit have to help make up the difference, and that means higher taxes.

What sounds great to legislators in Tallahassee, does not necessarily equate to sound fiscal policy on the local level.  They don't provide services directly to the public like local governments do, and I think that sometimes, they lose sight of that.  The Florida Association of Counties, which advocates for all 67 counties in the state, has taken a strong position in opposition to Amendment 1.  The organization seeks to protect home rule, emphasizing that changing local property taxes is a measure that should be determined locally, not through a statewide constitutional amendment.  They also think the amendment could shift a greater tax burden onto small business owners, manufacturers, and working families.

As your county commissioner, I want to keep taxes as low as possible while at the same time preserve the services that make our quality of life exceptional.  I hope you will carefully consider the constitutional amendments as you exercise your right to vote.

As always, please contact me if I can be of assistance to you at (561) 355-2201, or by email at hvaleche@pbcgov.org.