YES on Amendment 4 (Florida)

The way they word amendments on the voting ballots boggles my mind. Amendment 4 reads:

Provides for assessment based upon use of land used predominantly for commercial fishing purposes; land used for vessel launches into waters that are navigable and accessible to the public; marinas and drystacks that are open to the public; and waterdependent marine manufacturing facilities, commercial fishing facilities, and marine vessel construction and repair facilities and their support activities, subject to conditions, limitations, and reasonable definitions specified by general law.

What that actually means, is that large landowners can get tax breaks if they set aside land for conservation... Provides for assessment? Who the hell is going to know what this amendment is about, unless you do your research? It's a shame, really.

The only people that should be voting NO on this are hard-left environmentalists that see this as a moneyed ploy to temporarily get out of paying taxes while using conservation as the bait. I come pretty close to that. But the possibilities of success are too great, and necessary, to worry about conspiracies. Especially the possibility of lifetime, complete tax exemption if you permanently set your land aside for conservation.

This amendment satisfies the property/money-obsessed "right" and us environmentalists.

Vote YES on Amendment 4!!

Here is a great article from the Miami Herald that explains both sides of the issue:

Environmentalists back state Amendment 4 -- with caveat
There is wide support to provide owners tax relief to help preserve wild Florida, but even supporters caution that the devil is in the details.
BY CURTIS MORGAN

.. --> begin /production/story/credit_line_format.comp --> .. --> end /production/story/credit_line_format.comp -->

This is the first in a series examining the six constitutional amendments on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Environmentalists are backing a big tax break for Florida's largest land owners.

You read that right. In an election year notable for nastiness, two typically partisan factions have reached accord over at least one thing: Amendment Four, a measure that would reduce or eliminate property taxes for owners who protect their land from bulldozers.

Environmental groups embrace the proposal as a promising, painless option for expanding preservation in a state with a dwindling budget to buy prime parcels. The amendment is one of six on the Nov. 4 ballot.

''Given the economy and amount of money available for land acquisition, this provides a way of promoting conservation management without using tax dollars,'' said Janet Bowman, legislative policy director for The Nature Conservancy.

Proponents believe it could prove especially helpful in places like South Miami-Dade, where suburban sprawl drives up land values -- and pressure to subdivide -- on remaining rural lands. The pitch is that owners now spending money to run small farms or nurseries mainly to claim agriculture tax breaks could profit by letting land revert to wetland.

''The value of land in South Dade is very high,'' said Eric Draper, policy director for Audubon of Florida. 'One of the reasons that land is even being farmed right now is to qualify for ..green-belt' exemptions.''

Amendment 4 boasts bipartisan political support and no organized opposition. It is endorsed by virtually every major environmental group in the state and dozens of obscure ones, like the Sebastian Fishin' Chics. The Florida Chamber of Commerce, guardian of business and development interests, backs it. So does the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the nonpartisan watchdog, Florida TaxWatch.

THREE SCARY WORDS

So what could there be to worry about? Three scary words: The Florida Legislature.

''It's a long way between the amendment on the ballot and actually implementing the law, because it's left up to the Legislature to write it,'' said Kurt Wenner, director of tax research for TaxWatch.

The amendment would create two tiers of incentives to take effect in 2010. Setting aside land forever -- a covenant intended to carry over in a sale -- would earn total exemption from property taxes. Setting it aside temporarily would earn a lower tax rate, similar to farm land.

It's that ''temporary'' category that adds an asterisk to TaxWatch's endorsement. Details remain to be filled in by lawmakers, who are known from time to time to cater to powerful development interests.

''We're going to be watching closely,'' said Wenner.

State Rep. Dan Gelber, a Miami Beach Democrat running for a Senate seat, has similar concerns. ....On its face, it's not a bad idea. It's how it's implemented. I just think that second part could potentially leave room for mischief.''

Gelber posted a qualified endorsement on his blog, cautioning that if the Legislature made it too easy to claim conservation status, ....the measure could become a giveaway for mega-developers and have a great fiscal impact that shifts the tax burden to homeowners and active businesses.''

A lenient definition, for instance, could allow developers to tag vacant lots for short periods simply to ride out the cold housing market -- meaning they would pay little or no taxes. There have been past abuses with similar ''green-belt'' tax breaks, most visible in the form of a few ''cash cows'' grazing on cleared suburban tracts.

Supporters share those concerns. They've drawn up proposed standards for the ''temporary'' land-protection classification: a 10-year commitment, a minimum of 40-acre tracts, management plans and back-tax penalties at higher rates if the land is developed.

The amendment was spearheaded by environmental groups. But it was proposed to the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission in April by Brian Yablonski, vice president for public affairs for the St. Joe Co., the state's largest landowner with some 700,000 acres, mostly in the Panhandle.

REASON FOR SUPPORT

Yablonski, who also serves as a state wildlife commissioner, said he supported it to enhance wildlife and habitat protections. When asked if the amendment would profit St. Joe, he answered in a word: ....No.''

''Amendment 4 was an organic idea advanced by respected conservation organizations across the state, and they are enthusiastic about its benefits to the environment,'' he said in a written statement.

Preston Robertson, vice president of the Florida Wildlife Federation, dismissed any St. Joe role as ''a red herring'' and said the amendment could be a critical tool when the current development downturn invariably ends.

RESULTS ELSEWHERE

Florida, with 34 million acres, now has only about 165,000 acres of private land under conservation easements. Similar programs in Georgia and Texas have dramatically expanded conservation set-asides.

Because the amendment was approved by the Taxation Commission, no estimates were required for what the revenue impacts might be or how much land might qualify. With undeveloped land usually taxed at a lower rate, Audubon's Draper doesn't anticipate a big difference in the ad valorem bottom line.

The Association of Counties, whose 67 members would have to tweak millage rates to cover revenue shortfalls, agrees that potential benefits outweigh expected minor costs, said association spokeswoman Cragin Mosteller.

''Being able to conserve land is very important to many of our local governments,'' she said.

Because conservation lands remain private, unlike state-owned land, there is the potential for creating large tracts that would be off-limits to public access. But Draper believes most land would be open to hunting and fishing.

While some developers sitting on suddenly unsellable subdivision blueprints might well take advantage, Robertson argues that smaller land owners are the ones most likely to pursue the option. He intends to seek permanent conservation status for his own small farm in North Florida.

LOVE OF THE LAND

''If we protect 10,000 acres or 100,000 acres in this state, then this is well worth it,'' Robertson said. ....I think there are a number of people in this state who love their lands and they want to leave them to their kids.''