Item P13
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGRNDA T~RM SlWMARY
1~1eek.ug Date:
Mi'3rc;h ?O. ?OO?
Division: Boec
Bulk Item:
No
x
Department: Djstric;t Five
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of a resolution to oppose the use of Sadowski
Affordable Housing Funds for water reuse facilities.
ITEM BACKGROUND: Monroe County has serious funding issues with affordable
housing and land acquisition and use of the Sadowski funds and Florida
Forever funds are not in our best interest. It is imperative that these
sources of funding not be utilized for Everglades restoration and that a
recurring, dedicated source of funding should be created for Everglades
restoration and water reuse projects.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
TOTAL COST:
BUDGETED: Yes
No
COST TO COUNTY:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
No
AMOUNT PER MONTH
YEAR
APPROVED BY: County Attorney OMB/Purchasing Risk Mgt.
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL :>>tt..-L.-,rt_/'C-CA--?L. "C-/2c.-..t-a-<T'-----
I~
MlJRRAY R NRLSON. Commj ssioner
DOCUMENTATION: Included: X
To Follow:
Not Required:
DISPOSITION:
AGF.NDA T'J'F:M # ~ ?
/
-- -- ..'- ~.. ...... 1111... OJ_ ..., OJ ......~1I..... I........ ....".............
Co",missioner Murray Nelson
RESOLUTION NO.
- 2002
A RESOWTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY. FLORIDA SUPPORTING A DEDICATED, RECURRING FUNDING SOURCE TO
FUND THE COMPREHENSIVE eVERGlADES RESTORATION PLAN. SUPPORTING
BOND AS YOU GO LEGISLATION, SUPPORTING LEGISLATION THAT IS
RECURRING, OPPOSING VTIUZIN6 "HE SADOW~ AFFORDABLE HOUSING
TRUST FUND TO FUND THE COMPREHENsIVE eVERGlADES RESTORA-rION PLAN
AND OPPOSING THe EXPANSION OF THE FLORIDA FOREVER AC1" TO INClUDE
WATER REUSE FACIlITIES
WHEREAS, the Florido Everglades i! (1 vital por't of Florida's heritage and is recognized nationally
and internationally as one of the world's most significant but imperiled <<osystems; and
WHEREAS, local governments, the State of Florida, the South Florida Water Management District,
and the US Congress have undertakUl the Cornprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan to restore the Florida
Everglades; and
WHEREAS, the success of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan dependS on purchasing
sufficient land to support Everglades Restoration cotnponents which improve capacity to store water and
provide for wildlife habitat; and
WHEREAS. according to the South Florida Water Management District, 104,987 acres will be
needed over the next five years ot a cost of $943 rnillion: and
WHEREAS. land n<<essory for Everglades Restoration is becomil'l9 increasingly scarce and expensive
due to development pressures; and
WHEREAS. the Florida Legislature is considering Bond As You Go legislation that will provide up to
$125 million per year for land acquisition from docunu~ntQry stamp tax revenue; and
WHEREAS. the proposed Bond As You Go I~islation will provide a long term recurring funding source
that will not require yearly legislative approval; and
WHEREAS. other funding proposals being considered include utilizing the Sadowski Affordable
Housing Trust Fund. a progrom for low and very low income housing projects, to pay for the ComprehUlsive
Everglades Restoration Plan; and
WHEREAS. amendrnents have been approved that would expand the intent and purpose of Florida
Forevu. a funding source that supports Everglades Restoration. to allow water management districts to
utilize Trust Fund dollars for water reuse facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County hos historically recognized tke
economic and environmental value of Everglades Restoration and supports the Comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Plan; now. therefore
::
BE rr RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY.
FLORIDA:
See1ion 1. The SOCC considers the Everglades to be such 0 si9nifiCC1l'lt resource that a
dedicated, recurring state funding source is needed to fund the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.
Section 2. The BOCC supports Bond As You Go legiskztion that will utilize documentary stamp
taxes to pay for klnd acquisition necessary for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.
Section 3.
The eocc supports funding It.gislation that is recurring.
Section 4. The 80CC opposes utilizing the Sadowski Affordable Housing Trust Fund to fund the
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.
Section 5. The BOCC opposes any amendments that expand the purpose and intent of the Florida
Forever Act to provide for the water management districts to utilize the Florida Forever Trust Fund to pay
for water reuse transmission facilities.
Section 6. A certified copy of this resolution shall be sent to the Governor, the President of the
Senate, the Speaker of the Florida House of Repr.."sentotives. the Chair of the Monroe County L.egislative
Delegation. the Choir of the South Floridc Water McIl,09ement District.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Boord of County Commissioners of Monroe County. Florida, at Q
regular meeting of said Board held on the 20th day of March. 2002.
Mayor Charles McCoy
Mayor Pro T em Dixie Spehar
Commissioner Murray Nelson
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Nora Williams
(SEAL)
Attest: DANNY L.KOlHAGE. Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY. FLORIDA
By
By
Deputy Clerk
Mayor/Chairperson
~ dl'aEvel'glad&502
Mar U~ U~ Ul:~~p
Ulstrlct fwo
l~:::J-tJ ~2~-~~'W2
p.:::J
Support Everglades Funding Through Bonding Approach--
Oppose Taking Funding From Sadowski Affordable Housing Funds
II
The cleanup of the Everglades is long overdue. Florida is committed to paying its fair share of
restoration oflhis natural treasun:. SB 684 by the Committt.:e on Natural Resources, SB 930 by
Senat.or King, and H.R & 13 by Representative Dockery and olhers all offer a prudent and
responsible method for funding this dlol1.
All oflhese bills recognize that bonding of the Everglades restoration is the only way to insun:
proper funding-funding that will not be debated over and over again during the next 8 years. The
bills recognize that the proper ~ource for paying debt service on the Everglades bonds is the
unallocated ponion of documentary tax revenues. This ensures that the critical housing and
C1'lvironmental activities that are currently funded from docume::nlary taxes are not raided.
..H;,u;kgro"ud
Over the years, environmental groups and the real estale industry have joined logether to support
incre::ilses in the documentary tax LO fund both housing and environmental prognuns. To enahle
public acquisition ofenvironm~ntally-scnsitive lands, legislation known as Preservation 2000 (or
P-2000) inc.reased the doc stamp by 17 cents beginning in 1990. However, some of'trus revenue
was nOf placed in dedicated trost funds, but instead was part of the unallocarcd doc stamp
revenues that could be lransferred to General Rewnuc. As a result, over the years, revenue
intended for the environment have been siphoned away [0 pay for other activities.
With cooperation between the Florida Home Builders Association (FHBA) and environmental
groups, in 1992 the Legislature passed the Sadowski Affordable Housing Act. This included a J-
cent increase in doc stamps to help defray the environmental funds that had been siphoned away,
and also e5tablished the State Housing Trust fund and Local Goverrunenl Housing Trust Fund,
allocating a IO-cent increase in doc l:tamps to provide affordahle housing. In subsequent years,
however, the Legislature bas continued to siphon funds intended for land acquisirion and
protection for other unrelated uscs.
Governor Bush's Proposal
Unfortunately, Governor Bush now proposes taking dedicated State Housing Trust Fund dollars,
generated by Sadowski Act documentary tax rt.:venucs, to fund Everglades activities This is an ill-
conceived plan that combines both poor economic and bad soci:!l policy. Taking doIJar5 from
afiordable housing production will strongly harm our already weak economy, and prevent
production of much needed shelter for florida's most needy citizens.
Impacts on Arrordahl~ Housing
The State Housing TnJst Fund focuses on the hou!';ing needs of our most needy resident 5- very
low and low incomt.: families, seniors, farmworkcrs, and the homeless. Unlike the local
....",..,.\ i.'.fl'.'.."...,....:..,'..,I;...,.....
-- -- --~""'-f"
&j..... -"....., .........,..... I......-,J
,--..... . ~ ......-..... .....................
government State Housing Initiatives Program (SHIP) funds, which are utili~ed for it mil( of
residents up to moderate income, all of the State Housing monies are utilized for the groups that
can least afford a reduction in housing services- very low and low income homebuyers and
renters. Everglades restoration would be ucomplillbed by taking funds from very low and
low income families.
According to the Governor's press release. the money taken from the Housing Trust Fund will
total $145.5 million. The State Housing Trust Fund. which receives only 4.8 percent of
documentary tax revenues, would shoulder over J 8 pt:recnt of the cost of Everglades activitie!i
There are not enough housing fund!\ tD meet florida's c;urrent need, de!;pite increases in federal
tax code programs. There is no "surplus"ofhousing fund!'; instead, there is a huge shortfall
compared to existing need. The Governor's Affordable Housing Study Commission detailed this
shortage of funding aI1d unmet need in its 200 I report, wherein it demonstrated that over $62
billion of public outlays are nceded in this decade to meel fo"Iorida's goal of safe, decent. and
affordable housing for all citizens by 2010.
As noted. the Sadowski Affordablt: Housing Act funded both housin~ and environmental
programs through separate documentary tax increases. Republicans in the legislature supported
the Sadowski Act because the industries that would be paying the taxes supported the tax.~s. The
legislature, builders, and reaL estate professionals realized that expanding homeownership
Oppol1unities and building apartments for the working poor was good business for both the
industries and Florida. This proposed raid breaks the good-faith commitments relaled to that tax
increase that have withstood the test of time.
Our Position
We firmly oppose the proposed raid on the State Housing Trust Fund to pay for Everglades
n:storation. IMtead, we support lI!iillg tho>: lItullllocated doc stamp revenu~s for the purpose for
which they were intended-protecting the environment. Theretore, the Ev~rgll\des restoration
should be funded through bonding, with d~bl sClVice paid from unalloc;a.ted documentary tax
revenues intended for environmental protection, and the State Housing Trust Fund should pay tor
affordable housing, as intended.
It<.l' U....J U_ ...,.... -..J....,.~
"-"4 'J"'. ............ I wV
......,.......,) OJL-"",,, _"""'V_
I ~.. I
Comparison of Everglades Funding Proposals
Sen;tle BiJJ 684 by Natural
Resources Committee
Hou,;e Bill RJ3 by Dockery Guvernor's Proposal
2Dd others
Bond as rOIl Go
$75 million plus (retains
$25 million Florida Forever
enrmMk).
Need and opporlLUuty
driven approach to
iim.U1Cing J::vcrglade~
restoratioll.
Uses documentary stamp
tax revenue to pay principle
and interest on bonds.
Rt:quires legislative
approval of initial debt
servicl:.
Bonds $75 million a year
tor eight yeMs or more if
South Florida Water
Management District's plan
required more.
Rl;venuc impact would be
approxinmteJy $6 million
per year for every $75
million in bonds issued.
T mmediate revenu~ impact
would be negligible.
No funds would sit Wlllsed
in reserved accounts.
Biggest risk claimed by
DEP is lhal long-term cO~t5
ofbond~ might impede
future budg~!..~ccisions.
Bond as Ynu Bu,-._ hh
$125 million (reIeasl.:s $25
million Florida Forever
earmark).
Need and opportunity
driven appronch to
financing Everglades
restoration.
Uses docwnentary stamp
tax rl:Venue lu pay principle
and mlcn::st On bonds.
Requires legislative
approval of initial debt
st:rVlce
Bonds $125 million per
year fur eighl years and
fi"ccs current Florida
Forever funds now
dedicated solely to
Everglades ($25
million/yeM).
Revenue impact would be
approximalely $10 million
JX:r year for every $125
nullioD in bonds issued.
1.1ll1llcdinte revenue impact
would be negligible.
No funds would sit unused
in reserved accounts.
Riggesr risk claimed by
DEP is that long-term costs
ofbondsnrightimpede
futur~ budg~l decisions.
Pa 45 You Go
$75 million only (retains
$25 million Plorida Forever
eamlark).
Budget drivcn approach to
fmancing Everglades
restoration.
Eannnrks documentary
stamp taxes from general
revenue and state housing
trust fund.
Requires full legislative
appropriation each ye.lI.
No new proposed bond
authority
Impnct of up to $62.5
million on general revenue
and additional impact on
olher trust funds and
rest=TVt:S.
Immediale revenue impact
up 10 $75 millioo_
Once appropriated, funds sit
witil spent.
Bigg~slr~k:~ecessary
land is lost. te) development
or becomes too e"])eJ1sive.
F.... morc information conlact; t;;ric UNpcr - ^",IIlb.'1f . 224-7H/;. K~lhcrinc Andrews. The NllUrc COn$CIVDnL'Y Z22~I""U or
Knthy I\.~II!-h"'an and :'iccphanlc Culp- 'HilS'! for I'1Iblic l.and 222-7911