Like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders!

Chief Shuqualak,

You're such a tease! Don't keep us in suspense! We know we have one BCC member (Conkey) who's a Watson realtor and 3 running for commissioner who are Watson realtors. Care to enlighten us on which Watson realtor running for a BCC seat that has openly said he wants to do away with impact fees??

I'm one  little chicken that doesn't want a "plucking!"

Chief Shuqualak,

You're such a tease! Don't keep us in suspense! We know we have one BCC member (Conkey) who's a Watson realtor and 3 running for commissioner who are Watson realtors. Care to enlighten us on which Watson realtor running for a BCC seat that has openly said he wants to do away with impact fees??

I'm one  little chicken that doesn't want a "plucking!"

The way I heard it was that one of the candidates at the Republican Forum at the FI Library on Monday night made some statements about how we needed to do away with the impact fees (both school and road) so that the building industry that is so vital to Clay County could get back on its feet.

Now I'm a bit hard of hearing sometimes but I'm pretty sure I heard it the way it was said.

There was also some talk of car and school age children impact fees. I'm not sure just how that would work. He didn't go into details. But everyone knows the cars and the children going to school are really the problem right?

I mean if people moving into Clay County would just leave their cars someplace else or at least not have more than one, and not bring all those children with them we wouldn't have a congestion problem and our schools wouldn't be over crowded.

The builders could keep on building and realtors could keep on selling and everything would be just peachy. Doesn't sound like much of a solution and seems to be a bit self serving but that's just my humble opinion.

Do some checking on the SOE site and it won't take long to figure out who got all their campaign funds from a land developer and a contractor. Now these could be family friends but it does look strange.

Mike Heemer

If there really is such a candidate running in Dist. 3, I may have to move to the district long enough to vote.  I just wish I had more money so I could contribute to their candidacy.

Fuh-get-abou-dit.  It ain't happenin'.  Impact fees are here to stay.  Why stop with a new home tax?  I support further taxation via impact fees on a wide variety of growth related products.  Anyone who dares buy a new home should have to pay impact fees (er . . . taxes) on all the furnishings for the new home.  Things like refrigerators, furniture, home furnishings.  If they've got the nerve to move to our fair county, we should pound them for daring to decorate their new home as well.  Then, when they dare to plant new flowers and shrubs, plants that will require that precious commodity that only existing Clay County residents are allowed - water - we should charge an environmental impact fee on said purchases.  Heck - the County could make a bundle on the plants sold at local nurseries on Fleming Island alone.

Why stop with new homes?  Release the bureaucrats from their shackles and let's milk every possible penny we can from anything "new".  Let's NOT use logic, fair reasoning and common sense and spread the burden fairly amongst all the people who will drive on the new roads built by impact fee money, or amongst all the people who will benefit from a better educated populace in our new schools built with impact fee money.  That would make too much sense.  Something like a fair property tax millage that would let all the people in Clay County pay for these improvements.  No - Butt-Kiss Crist and his lackeys will have none of that.

But since "we" are already here, and "they" aren't - let's stick it to 'em quick before they have a chance to vote.

I hope that some existing blogger who lives in Clay County now, and has the good fortune to opt to buy a new home in Clay County will come on this site and tell how happy they were to pay an additional $16,000 in fees (before carrying charges and 30-yrs. worth of interest).  Now THAT would impress me.

Bold type is not necessary.  Some like to print their entire post in bold type, while others choose to go back and forth.  Either way - it's annoying.

You're welcome.

Bax;

Let’s get a grip on reality. You make it sound like builders are the poor down trodden step children and everyone is out to make them pay for someone else’s mistakes. I’m not sure I understand your problem with impact fees.

Is the builder paying them or is the home buyer paying them? If it is the home buyer what do you care? That is part of the price of buying a new home. It’s just like taxes, CDD fees, O&M fees, HOA fees and any other fee you want to add. Do you pay the ‘destination fee’ when you buy a new car? It’s the same thing. And by the way, everyone that buys a new home is not ‘new’ to Clay County.

If you can’t afford them don’t buy the house. Builders had no problem raising prices once or twice a month when the housing boom was going because the name of the game was ‘whatever the traffic will pay’. Now that the boom has fizzled they are all crying poor mouth and trying to be a nice guy and help out the poor buyer by trying to do away with the ‘unfair and unjust’ impact fees.

Road Apples! What they want is for people to start buying again at the inflated prices of 3-5 years ago. It isn’t going to happen for another 3-5 years. It might be as many as 7.

It’s kind of like the oil companies raising the price of gas three times in a week and they haven’t put one new gallon of gas in their tanks in the ground. Some call that making hay while the sun shines. Others have a different name for it.

The problem is builders got used to raising prices and making a bunch of money. When the business slowed they couldn’t understand why profits came down so far. Way too many people thought it was going to last forever and now they want the tax payer to bail them out.

My guess is that there aren’t a whole lot of ‘new’ roads that have been built with impact fees. From what I can see the total impact fees that have been collected so far probably wouldn’t pay for the ‘improvements’ we just contracted for. And I’d venture at least a little money that the school impact fees aren’t paying the full price of that new school we just broke ground for.

My guess is that most of the ‘new’ roads built in Clay County in the past 10 years have been inside CDDs or DRIs. The county can handle a certain amount of new traffic if it is spread out. The problem I see is that we put a few thousand new houses in one spot and expect the old road to handle a 500% to 1000% increase.

Did some idiot actually think that Branan Field Rd was going to be able to handle the traffic increase from Eagle Landing and the new shops at the intersection of Blanding? How about that intersection at Baxley and 220? Nice job of forward looking decision making there.

Do you think that impact fees have or are going to generate enough money to fix that mess? A toll road called the ‘outer beltway’ isn’t going to fix it either.

As for all the other things you mentioned, we already ‘pay’ for that by paying sales tax. If I remember correctly there is some ‘extra’ in there isn’t there? Actually I think there is a little ‘extra’ in the price of gas too. I think we also pay a utility tax and I pay ‘extra’ for my water because I’m in a CDD. I also pay ‘extra’ for the reclaimed water I use on my lawn.

Too many in the building industry overbuilt trying to beat the bust and missed. Now they don’t know what to do with their inventory. It’s not the impact fees that killed the builders in Clay County. And getting rid of them is not going to do some miraculous CPR and bring it back to life. The new DRIs that are on the drawing board aren’t going to do the trick either.

If a home is priced right it will sell. If a builder wants to try to keep the same profit margin of 3-5 years ago it won’t. And building more of them isn’t going to help either.

Yes there are other ways to generate money for roads and schools. Impact fees are just a part of that mix. And I don’t see any reason to do away with them to benefit one industry.

Building is not a sustaining or sustainable industry. At some point you reach full saturation and they move on to someplace else. Then the only thing you have left is a lot of houses and people that can’t get to where they want to be in a reasonable time.

I’m sorry but the building industry eats itself. It cannot survive as the 600 pound gorilla eating every square foot of land in sight in a slow economy.

What we need is managed growth. We need infrastructure before rooftops and we need real jobs from something other than the service and building sector. If that means some big builders leave then I wish them luck getting out of town. They probably shouldn’t try leaving during rush hours though. Congestion don’t you know?

The problem is we have a lot of land developers around here that have lots of money that they like to spread around in order to get things done their way for their profit. I for one am sick of that show and I think a lot of other people are too.

Mike Heemer

Don't anyone for a moment believe that impact fees are here to stay, the upcoming elections and diligence of the voters will "impact" the future of impact fees.  The notion that the citizens who believe mismanaged growth is a chronic and crippling issue are selfish because "we got ours" is a smoke screen for the growth industry who as a whole operate on that very mindset, "lets get ours and the problems that come on down the line are not our problem" 

If we end up with a BCC full of people who were supported by lobbyists and the big boys of the growth industry then you can kiss those impact fees goodbye and look forward for various creative fees to be shoved down your throat.  The biggest of which will come from the State Goverment if they fix it so the people who will make the most money off this beltway will also be relieved of paying taxes on it. 

The voter must be diligent and involved, not only in who is running and who is supporting them but in speaking with people you know, everyday, or those you merely run into. Think about the customer standing in line behind you at the checkout, or the person sitting at the table next to you in the restaurant.  Strike up a conversation in the Drs Office.  There is no one so captive as someone you do business with on a regular basis. I have found that my hair salon is an excellent place to talk to people about what is going on in the County. Since I've been going there for nearly 17yrs I'm like EF Hutton in there.....they listen.  We must all encourage those who are not registered to vote to get registered and get involved. 

One person CAN have an impact, I see it in my own small circle of the world and I am no one special, you can do it too.    

Baxley:

In your blog, you close by saying:

"I hope that some existing blogger who lives in Clay County now, and has the good fortune to opt to buy a new home in Clay County will come on this site and tell how happy they were to pay an additional $16,000 in fees (before carrying charges and 30-yrs. worth of interest).  Now THAT would impress me."

You mean like the property owners in Eagle Harbor, Fleming Island Plantation, Magnolia West, and Oakleaf Plantation who pay much, much higher impact fees than $16K over the same 30-year period?  If property owners in those communities were not happy enough, would they have bought homes and commercial sites in those communities? 

I heard one candidate for county commission say that the sale of homes and commercial sites in those parts of Clay county were not slowed down because of impact fees.  When I drive through those communities, I have to agree with him.

Funny how some home builders and some of their developer friends want to shift the tax burden of increasing infrastructure costs onto the shoulders of existing county residents through their favorite taxes like the utility tax, doc stamp fees, increased sales taxes and whatever else they can get through the county commission.  And they continue to get their candidates for the BCC to use their "talking points" that the impact fee slows down the sales of homes.  As if the overbuilding that occurred along with the faulty mortgage industry and weak dollar had absolutely nothing to do with it.

These excuses used by our developer friends are just that talking points and excuses. I am personally familiar with Central Fl and some of the counties that implimented impacted fees many years ago. When the recent growth happened in that area those people were charged and paid impact fees. It did not stop or slow down any of the mismanaged growth in Central Florida. Any current Commissioner or person who is running for that position should be asked if they support impact fees. If they say no, then they should not be elected or re-elected. We are 10 years at least behind in charging those fees.

Marsha I do the same thing that you do. Talk with the people in the county on a daily basis about things that are going on in our county. I also tell them we do not a have a failure in the government. Instead a failure of the people to get involved, learn about the issues facing the county, and then voting. If we truly want change in the county it will come from the voters.

Marsha

In your blog, you say, "....we do not a have a failure in the government. Instead a failure of the people to get involved, learn about the issues facing the county,..."

I applaud you for your wisdom and insight - you are absolutely right! When one weighs on the one hand how few people get involved in either political party at the local level, and the turn-out for local elections - either mid-term or presidential years - versus how many complaints we have when corruption is revealed, it is truly pathetic.  If people had been involved in grass-roots politics four years ago, they could have heard the district one challenger point out how the district one incumbent had supported utility taxes, voted for the appointment of Arthur Ivey to Public Works Director after voting to waive the educational requirements, and was chauffered to campaign stops by a sheriff's deputy in a county sheriff's auto.  And if enough people had cared to find out about that, they wouldn't have re-elected the incumbent.  but the fact is, county-wide nobody took the trouble to find out by attending candidates' forums.  And the press ignored it because it would have upset their advertisers who were allied with the incumbent's financial backers.  S0 - they didn't care then.

And if they cared enough today, they'd find out which candidate in district one is being backed by the same developers', realtors' and home builder's PACs that backed Mrs. Fitzgerald four years ago in an effort to continue their control over county land use policies and abolish impact fees.  It's all there on the Supervisor of Elections website.

The question is: who cares enough to find out?  I admit I'm too busy to attend all of them, but I try to go when I can, and I have friends who inform me when I can't go.

If you're saying we get the government we deserve, you're absolutely right!

Angela:  The plucking of the taxpayers' feathers reminds me of the famous quotation of Jean Baptist Colbert, the finance minister of King Louis XIV, when he said:

"The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest amount of feathers with the least amount of hissing."

I don't think those candidates bankrolled by the PACs, home builders and land developers can hear the goose hissing, do you?  And I'm not sure if King Louis XIV was the French king who was beheaded or not, but there must be an analogy here, too, don't you think?

I have heard you state on more than one occasion, trying to parry the thrust that you are a member of a significant special interest, that “everyone is a special interest”.  I suppose one could have an intellectual discussion about that statement, but the fact remains, and most of Clay County’s residents understand, that some special interests are significantly more dangerous and fiscally damaging to the lives of the average citizen than others.  The developer, realtor, builder industry(s) is one such special interest group.

If the industry is as tight for money as you imply, than why would they shell out all dollars possible to support certain candidates running for those elected positions most capable of going to bat for their cause?  The answer is obvious to the most casual observer; they expect something in return.  If you want to respond that they don’t expect special consideration in exchange for their money, you are apparently able to say anything and still look yourself in the mirror every morning.

I once stated at the end of a presentation to the BCC that unless or until being a lobbyist is classified as a felony, big money will always influence (control?) elections and I stand by that statement.  It behooves every citizen of Clay County to follow the money and make the appropriate choice in November.  Don’t let the few negatively impact the many.  The representation on the ballot by people associated with Watson Realty is not a coincidence.

P.S. - I’m sorry you are so annoyed by people trying to organize their thoughts while presenting them to their perspective readers.  I guess e.e. cummings is not one of your favorite authors.

I certainly am not supporting the fact that Watson agents seem to be running in several areas, but think about the District 3 primary.  Now that Mike Mann has withdrawn (btw the SOE page has you in active status, Mike), the only Republicans running in the primary are 1) Travis Cummings, backed by developers, contractors, (Stellar Group, Thrashers, Carmada Real Estate, etc.) to the tune of $48,930.  (Bax, the boldface is for you) and 2) Deborah Terry who has raised a whopping $1,170 and that appears to be from the candidate, her friends and family.  Although I cannot vote in District 3 primary, but hope the voters support the candidate who doesn't have the special interest backing in the primary and for the candidate who would best serve ALL of the people in the General Election November 4th. I will cast my vote in District #1 for the candidate without special interest backing and who I feel would best represent me and the other citizens in my district.

Baxley, imho, you are way off base while Mr. Machala hit a home run with his comment.

Check out the SOE website - active candidates and their financial supporters.

Thanks,
Judy B

Good Evening Robert,

Intellectual conversations are always best - I'll try.

I will simply state my opinion re lobbyists and special interests as a starting point.  I suppose it is only natural that our fundamental differences of opinon regarding a wide variety of political and government issues is annoying to each other.  I think it is safe to say we will never change each others mind, and this exercise is close to banging our heads against a brick wall, albeit not quite as painful.

I think the term "special interest" is used by people when they have no other real argument against an issue.  In the eyes of many, if something is supported by "special interests", it must be inherently evil and wrong.  I resent the implication.  I like to try and turn the special interest weapon back on the user to neutralize the argument and move to a more substantial reason for being opposed to something.  Businesses have a right to defend themselves against an over-reaching government.  What constitutes over-reaching and equitable-reaching will always be debated - it depends on which side of the fence you're on.

I feel like much of what passes as concern-for-the-people opposition to virtually anything businesses try to do is actually rooted in some sort of success envy.  Because a large, successfully run, profitable business supports further expansion of its operation, somehow, certain groups see a conspiracy to commit fraud and destruction on a hapless citizenry.  Often, it seems that the opposition is very personal and vindictive.  Referring to lobbyists as felons is the type of hyperbole that I'm talking about.  Words such as lobbyists or special interest are demonized, and used as weapons to rebut proposals with little else for evidence.

Contributing to campaigns is an American right.  Corporations, small businesses, and individuals all have reasons to donate money to campaigns.  In close elections, you will have corporations donating to both candidates to cover their bases.  I'm not going to say I like it, but I understand it.  Personally, I wish there was some way to have campaigns be unfunded or publically funded or some other way to purify them.  Good luck.  Frankly, the campaign donation knife cuts both ways.  The money is so public (as it should be), candidates have to be aware that particular donors may bring them negative public attention.

I'm getting a little long-winded here, so I'll wrap up with this fact.  I've been in residential construction for nearly 25 years.  From shovel-in-hand laborer to carpenter to salesman to construction manager (builder).  It is a noble profession.  If it weren't for a builder and a developer, you'd be living in a tent or a cave.  I take personal exception to an entire industry and the hard working, well-meaning, philanthropic, community supporting, and yes - government inolved, people who make it up being demonized and villified by people who can barely do much better than "special interest" and "lobbyist" as criticism.  When caring about your community - and the business that you have built from blood, sweat and tears - do become illegal, then maybe referring to us as felons will be correct.  Until then, I still say your interests are just as special as mine.

Bill Garrison

PS - re e.e. cummings: other than his punctuation gimmick, I don't know anything about him.  Apparently he was a good enough author to be taught in my 10th grade literature class.  I'm more of a John Steinbeck fan myself.

My opposition to impact fees is simple.  By definition, they are a tax.  On a very specific group of people - new home buyers.  I just believe that everyone should fairly share the burden of infrastructure improvement.  It would be one thing if the people paying the fees were the only ones using the improvement - but of course that is impossible.

Obviously, impact fees are here to stay.  They have been challenged in court in many states, and only once if Florida (that I know of) were they overturned.

I think if the government tried to impose a special tax on any product, the business that produces that product will be opposed to that tax.  Nothing earth-shattering there.  I'm no different.  I don't like the fact that our products have a special tax applied to them singularly.  It just seems unfair.  Sorry - I don't like it.  Can't really do much better than that for an explanation.  Maybe I should say it is a "special interest" or was brought forward by a "lobbyist".

Yes, you are correct - homebuyers pay the fee - not builders.  You're right also - I shouldn't care.  For people buying high-end homes, I don't guess it is too big a deal, but for a young family trying to achieve the American dream of home ownership, and buy an entry level $200K home, an extra $16,000 can be the difference between qualifying and not qualifying.

I still challenge anyone who has paid the fee to come on here and say they were glad they had the chance to do so.  I'm sure the rest of us appreciate it though.  Right?

For what it's worth - the County is now trying to figure out how to mitigate impact fees as it relates to creating affordable housing.  Cool, huh?

"Often, it seems the opposition is very personal and vindictive"  In my limited experience it appears to me that anyone who wants to have a say in the way this county grows, i,e, the average citizen they are met with "personal and vindictive". The archives on this site will back that up. 

When profit comes at the detriment to others that isn't success, it's greed.  How much profit is enough?  I don't know about everyone else but the reality that affordable housing in this County now starts at 200k is sad.  Being the most affluent is not necessarily an ideal objective. 

The disparate tax system already burdens the average citizen.  Residents who own non homesteaded properties are used to offset those that are.  Those that link with the beltway project are rallying in Tallahassee to make sure they get out of paying any and all taxes they can and the burdens on down the line will have to be paid for by again, the taxpayer. 

Let us not forget that some of these taxpayers have no medical insurance, no life insurance, live in homes that are well below the affordable "200k" and yet they will pay an increase in taxes for something where someone else made profits in the millions.  I have a problem with that.

My business is in the growth industry, some would say that I am shooting myself in the foot with my views, that is if it's all about the money and it just isn't. The housing market has caused several of our other Appraisers to seek additional employment, but I'm still against mismanaged growth even if it means I have to adjust to a lower standard of living.

I'd be all for an equitable taxation for the infrastructure to catch up and be maintained if there were no rooftops added until that was achieved but that isn't going to happen.  I voted against Amendment 1 because I knew it wouldn't fix the problem but exacerbate it.  Now, education in the millions of dollars has been cut from our own little hamlet of Clay County, yet we're having to fight to eliminate 2 more lifetime adoptions in the BCC.  As my personal income has gone down I've made adjustments, tightened the belt, it's time for the County to do the same thing and that's just common sense.

Efforts at the state and local levels to "shut out" the voice and power of the citizens is what tee's me off the most.  If this were an honest and out in the open contest then I would agree with alot of what you say Bill but it isn't and you know it, and anyone who is paying attention knows it as well. 

The impact fees are here until the legislature(state) passes some new law that will have to be litigated in court to overturn.  HDA was stopped by such things, and was overturned in court but was an immediate fix to stop the citizens who believe they should have more of a voice in the way their neighborhood grows.

I will continue to pursue what I feel is the right thing for this county, and I won't toss my integrity out the door to achieve it, it's unfortunate that both sides don't operate this way but two wrongs don't make a right and at the end of the day that will have to be enough for me.  The end does not justify the means, and I'm sorry but the opposition appears to believe it does.  There are no doubt people with integrity that exist within the machine, but the machine as a whole does not. 

In the larger picture, apathy is our worst enemy, like many have said, we've gotten what we deserve.  Those that benefit from that apathy are going to do everything they can to see it continue. "We're selfish, we're stupid and we should just shut up, bend over and take it"  If there is any motto or creed that fits my view and I don't believe I am alone in it.....is Apathy No More!

Isn't there a limit to how much an individual can contribute to a campaign? $250 or $500 or something?  Sunflower is saying that those three developers gave $48,000 to the Cummings campain, while Terry got $1100 just from friends and family.  That just can't be true.  Either there's a some funny math going on, or there are a lot of non-developer supporters for Mr. Cummings.

myclayhome;

A quick math lesson in campaing financing.

Let us say that you own a company called ABCD Inc.

Under that company you have:

A LLC, B LLC, C LLC, D LLC, AB LLC, AC LLC etc etc.

ABCD Inc can contribute $500. A, B, C, D, AB, AC LLCs can also each contribute $500. See how that works? So however many iterations that person has put on the books can contribute $500 each.

Even though they are all owned by the same person and have the same address, they are all seperate and distinct entities under the law.

The people that work for these companies can also contribute as individuals. It's all on the SOE site. You just have to do some looking and make a few notes and you can track a lot of it back to its source.

I would not expect that even one of those contributions is illegal. That would not serve them well. You can go to jail for that.

Mike Heemer

Myclayhome:  The names I mentioned were samples of contributors to the District 3 candidate as listed on the SOE website, thus the "etc." after the names in parenthesis.  With a maximum of $500 each, obviously there are more than those three and Finder's comments were helpful in clarifying how groups can have more than one contribution to a single candidate.  Nothing illegal there - although there might be another word for it.

http://www.clayelections.com/CandidatesAndCommittees.htm.  Click on the candidate and then "List all Contributions & Expenditures" link.  A list of all the reported donations and expenditures is shown there for each candidate that you choose.  That is where I found the information. 

I do not know that Deborah Terry's contributions are from friends and family, but the amounts are indicative of that and that is all I meant.

My comment did not contain any thoughts of illegality by any contributors as my only source was the link posted above - the Supervisor of Elections website - available for all to read.

Judy B.

Marsha pretty much said it all.  If we don't all start getting involved and making our voices heard (loud and clear), we are never going to see any changes and will be stuck with "the way it's always been done".  It makes my blood boil when I hear those words from our "leaders".  'Stay the course', 'it's always been done this way', etc.

I want leaders who will embrace change and if that new idea doesn't work, change it again until we find something that does work for everyone - not just the elected and their cronies and this should be on all levels - local, state and federal.  I am tired of the same ol' people, and generations of the same ol' families being in charge.  They should realize their political life is only until the next election because the people are paying attention.

Term limits for congressional and senate leaders would be a good thing for all of us, in my opinion.  Maybe the CTLAC should go national.

Thanks again Marsha for your excellent and thought provoking post.

Judy B.

Thanks, Sunflower, for that info.  Now that I've looked, it seems that the overwhelming majority are unrelated private citizens, with no connection to builders whatsoever, so I'm glad I took the time to research.  I hope all voters can do the same.