Property Tax Relief & Impact Fees

Property Tax Relief, Services, and Impact Fees

Asking for property tax relief does not mean citizens want fewer first responders, unsafe roads, dirty water, or reduced veteran and animal services. I believe citizens can support property tax relief while also supporting strong public safety, clean water, safe roads, veteran services, parks, libraries, and animal services. These things are not mutually exclusive.

Cuts alone are not a plan. A responsible county should be looking at every legal revenue tool available, including impact fees, infrastructure surtaxes, user fees, grants, special assessments where appropriate, and better long-term economic development.

The conversation should not be, “What vital services do you want to lose?”

The responsible conversation should be:

Are we budgeting wisely?

Are we planning for growth?

Are new developments paying their fair share?

Are we using every available grant, fee, and revenue option before placing more burden on local taxpayers?

Let’s talk about impact fees since they’re a hot topic. At least 43 Florida counties have used impact fees in recent years to help pay for infrastructure needed because of new growth. They are a common tool used by many of Florida’s 67 counties. Impact fees are limited, but they are not useless. Florida law requires them to fund infrastructure needs created by new development, not general government operations. Still, depending on the fee study and local ordinance, they can help pay for roads, public safety facilities, parks, and other growth-related infrastructure.

There are roughly 500 new homes built annually in Wakulla in recent years. Those homes sold for more than $250,000 on average. Let’s say the County charged an impact fee of $2,000 per new home, which is not even 1% of the average sale price. For 500 homes, that would generate $1 million in revenue.

That matters. Every dollar impact fees contribute is a dollar the county may not have to pull from general revenue, essentially freeing up funds currently used for growth-related infrastructure to be used in other areas.

Impact fees will not solve the whole budget problem, but refusing to use them leaves money on the table and shifts more of the cost of growth onto existing taxpayers.

I'm interested in hearing your ideas on realistic solutions to offset a potential shortfall.

See less