Letter: Ad valorem taxes, transparency, and financial acuity

Letter to the editor

Governor Ron DeSantis stirred up a hurricane when he announced his desire to eliminate homestead property taxes in the state of Florida. 

Anyone who has lived in Florida for any length of time knows that when storms form, the only thing the people want to know from the experts is how big it will be and where the storm is going. 

In response to the governor, the Florida legislature has proposed HB 201 and HB 203, which clarify that the governor intended to say he wants to put the axe to non-school ad valorem property taxes.

County tax bills are pretty straightforward, but they can be quite tricky. Here are two important points that all citizens who receive a tax bill should understand:

State law does not allow the total millage of all ad valorem taxes to exceed 10 mills. However, this limit can be altered; voters may decide to exceed ten mills if they wish.

There is no state-mandated cap on non-ad valorem assessments, meaning county governments have considerable flexibility in how they levy these charges.

Currently, there is no clearly defined center to this tax cut storm, and it needs direction.

Is Transparency Really The Answer? 

Recently, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Blaise Ingoglia presented his models outlining the direction he would like the legislature to take to provide financial relief to Florida citizens in case the governor’s property tax cut idea doesn’t gather enough velocity and fizzles out.

Blaise has made his intentions clear: he wants the legislature to implement laws for local government transparency. He also proposed formally establishing the Florida Agency for Fiscal Oversight (FAFO) in state law. 

Blaise believes that transparency measures from Tallahassee for local governments are the key to controlling spending, which he thinks will ultimately result in lower taxes. I think Blaise has oversimplified the problem, which explains the list of proposals he has put forth.

Reckless spending often occurs in plain sight and is quasi-legal; how will transparency measures passed by the legislature change that?

Blaise doesn’t need to look any further than the consent agendas of the Alachua County Board of County Commissioners’ public meetings to understand why his proposals lack significance.  I admire Blaise’s enthusiasm, but the problem he is trying to solve requires a bottom-up approach rather than a top-down one. Tallahassee will never find a one-size-fits-all solution that works seamlessly for every county.

The CFO needs to consider another approach, one with fewer moving parts, tried and true, and hard to evade.

I would prefer to see legislation that focuses on the type of individuals who are serving on county commission boards across the state.

The County Commission serves as the primary agency in every county, and if you fix them, all county entities will come into their orbit. 

You fix them by requiring a mandatory financial acuity test for individuals seeking to manage public funds. In other words, those individuals should first demonstrate their ability to manage their own personal finances effectively.

The CFO should place at the top of his list of legislative asks that county commissioners must maintain a FICO score of 820 or higher, since this is a crucial position within the state government structure that is most responsible for setting the tone for spending at the local level.

Why Financial Acuity?

When you want to make a purchase on credit, apply for certain jobs, or complete a rental application, it’s common for a credit check to be conducted. This process reveals whether you will behave responsibly or not. Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion are the closest things we have to a crystal ball for determining what goes on in one’s head when faced with a financial decision. 

I believe it is crucial to include FICO scores as part of the election qualifying metrics for county commissioners. Having people with FICO scores around 590 on the board always leads to poor financial decision-making, which in turn results in frivolous spending and higher taxes.

The free state of Florida should be able to boast that all its County Commissioners are required to maintain personal FICO scores that are 820 or greater, and ensure its citizens are in responsible hands at the county level. 

Any sitting commissioner whose FICO score drops below 815 better have an ironclad explanation to FAFO. The oversight board can make exceptions for certain medical charges and fraud issues, but not much else.

I’ve found that individuals with high FICO scores tend to be very pragmatic when managing their finances, as well as others. They know how the positive multiplier effect works. They can detect a con artist from a mile away, and they possess no credulity whatsoever. This pragmatic approach is essential for addressing runaway spending in local government.  

The CFO’s current legislative proposals aim to convert ideological individuals into pragmatic ones. This amounts to trying to fit a square peg into a round hole or get a tiger to change its stripes.

Citizens living in counties with commission boards whose FICO score averages 575 are doomed; it is a given that their rampant frivolous spending and their taxes are through the roof. 

Although this solution may significantly reduce the number of candidates with visions of running for county commissioner, consider it a good thing because it raises the bar for the position.

I say weed out the bad actors up front by means testing them based on their FICO scores before their names ever reach a ballot, and you will see how the problem of runaway county government spending miraculously fixes itself. 

The CFO’s legislative proposal:  

• Codifies the “Florida Agency for Fiscal Oversight” in Florida statute to increase accountability and transparency in local government and make this effort a long-term, permanent initiative.  
• Requires both state and local government employees to complete FAFO training on how to report waste, fraud, and abuse.  
• Requires each local government to submit an annual Financial Efficiency Report.  
• Grants government employees, contractors, subcontractors, and taxpayers whistleblower protection if they contact DFS to report waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars. 
• Allows DFS to pursue financial penalties from local governments if they don’t respond to inquiries promptly, including by withholding any state funds until they do. 
• Obligates local governments to upload all government contracts into the state’s FACTS system or something similar that is searchable and indexed. 
• Codifies the ability of Florida’s CFO to recommend the removal of any elected official who is found to have committed financial abuse, malfeasance, or misfeasance.  
• Requires DFS to audit local governments if they propose to raise taxes via referendum.

Anthony Johnson, District 4 in Alachua County

The opinions expressed by letter or opinion writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of AlachuaChronicle.com. Assertions of facts in letters are similarly the responsibility of the author. Letters may be submitted to info@alachuachronicle.com and are published at the discretion of the editor.