Discussion Points for Taxation and Budget Reform Commission (TBRC) Meetings
The following are message themes we recommend using during the public hearings. When the TBRC hears these messages over and over by different county leaders and local supporters at each meeting, your words will resonate and make an impact.
Unfunded mandates
- For years, the state of Florida has passed down responsibilities that were historically funded by the state to local governments. This creates an unfair burden on local governments and begs the question: How are counties supposed to adequately provide programs and services that our citizens want if their costs continue to go up while their revenue is slashed?
- Understand this: local governments support property tax relief and reform for Florida's citizens. However, relief can not rest solely on local governments, especially when the state continues to pass down unfunded mandates.
- Just as our current property tax structure is unfair and broken, unfunded mandates are also unfair as the state passes its responsibilities onto local governments without providing the funding to cover those duties.
- It is our hope that the TBRC will consider in its review process increasing the requirements on the state on passing down unfunded mandates. Existing limitations are minimal and easily overridden, however, many other states - such as New Jersey - have made this a priority, passing legislation that significantly limits the unfair passing down of unfunded mandates.
- In recent years, state and federal leaders have mandated that counties pay for increasing shares of budgets for programs or fund them outright.
- Mandates imposed on counties include voter regulations, labor requirements, and increasing costs from Medicaid, juvenile justice programs, and health care for the uninsured.
- State and federal mandates now add $1 billion to counties' fiscal burdens. Counties must use property taxes to fund these mandates.
Local decision-making
- There is nothing more important than the quality of life that our residents expect and demand.
- The proposed constitutional amendment is a direct attack on the ability of Florida's citizens to make and keep decisions in the hands of their community leaders.
- Local decision-making means having a voice in the decisions that affect you and your neighbors.
- We must keep decision-making where it belongs - closest to home, with you and your local community leaders.
- Residents look to counties to provide services that add to the quality of life in Florida's communities. For example, counties provide residents with public transportation, parks, libraries, community health care, affordable housing, animal services, and economic development.
- The needs for these services are as unique as the 67 counties in Florida. A one-size-fits-all mandate from Tallahassee may work for one community (such as Miami-Dade) while hindering the success of another (such as Okaloosa). Local decision-making is essential to meet the varying needs of diverse counties.
FAC's Unfunded Mandate Initiative Idea:
The goal of the initiative is to promote local control, accountability, and to protect local taxpayer investment with stronger constitutional unfunded mandate protections
Florida's Current Mandate Provision:
Article VII, section 18, Florida Constitution
- It is a procedural voting requirement with little substantive protection.
- There are many subject matter exclusions from the voting requirement, including elections laws, criminal laws, the general appropriations act, and special appropriations acts, among others.
- It specifies many dates that preclude provisions of law from being subject to the 2/3 vote requirement.
- It contains an exclusion for "laws having insignificant fiscal impact;" this exclusion can lead to a "death by a 1,000 paper cuts."
Unfunded Mandate Concept FAC Wants TBRC to Consider
Any rule, law, or provision of either which is an "unfunded mandate," without sufficient resources authorized, other than the property tax, to off-set the additional direct expenditures required by a city or county, is not mandatory in its effect.
Any rule, law, or provision of either that is such an "unfunded mandate" cannot be deemed to establish a standard of care for the purpose of civil liability. (Example: DJJ).
If, in the current year or in the out years, the resources provided are insufficient to fully fund the cost of the mandate, a city or county may opt out of the mandate, without state penalty.
Certain classifications of rules or laws are defined to not be "unfunded mandates," even if no resources are authorized. (Example: provisions of law that require expenditures but require them equally of government and private entities, such as a portable restroom facilities requirement within so many feet or acres of workers without access to permanent facilities).
It also creates an independent body to resolve disputes over unfunded mandates. The independent body is a constitutionally based commission which reports neither to the Legislature nor to the Governor. Cities and counties are given the right to petition to the body, asserting a rule, law, or provision of either to be declared an "unfunded mandate."
After presenting evidence and a hearing being held, the body issues a written opinion, setting forth its ruling on the unfunded mandate. If an unfunded mandate is found, it ceases to be mandatory on the city or county. The procedure for the body's proceedings could be set forth by state statute.
Benefits of Stronger Unfunded Mandate Protection:
Promotes "partnership" between state and locals by rebalancing the bargaining table when setting policy priorities for the entire state
Protects local control of community budget decisions
Protects local taxpayers by beginning to dedicate their property tax investment to local services and facilities
Begins to prevent the local taxpayer investment from being used as a subsidy for statewide programs and services