Fiscal Policy
Over the past ten years Brevard County’s property tax revenues have increased more than 140% while inflation has increased 29% and population has increased approximately 17%. Regardless of the comparative growth measure, Brevard County taxes have increased at a staggering and disproportionate rate. Consider the following growth measures for Brevard County:

Sound fiscal policy of government entities should recognize the importance of keeping tax revenue at the lowest possible amount regardless of the increase in tax base. There is simply no rational explanation for a government’s budget to increase at eight times the growth rate of its population and nearly five times the rate of inflation. Property taxes have increased three times the rate of growth in per capita income and nearly twice the growth of gross retail sales in the county. These trends are not economically sustainable.

For most of us, budgeting is an exercise limited by revenue. If you have prepared a budget, perhaps for your family or small business, then you know spending must be prioritized. As individuals, we do not have the luxury of increasing our revenue with the stroke of a pen. Instead, we compile a list of necessary expenses or uses of cash, and subtract those from our projected income to see what is left – then we begin making adjustments and choices. Items such as savings, mortgage payments/rent, health insurance, car payments, groceries, and utilities are at the top of the list, and other spending such as recreation, entertainment, and vacations falls to the bottom. Should we receive windfall income, we recognize the windfall as something not to recur year after year and use the proceeds to increase savings or possibly pay down debt or maybe replace capital, but we certainly do not increase the type of expenses that recur for years to come. Should income fall, we start at the bottom of the list and begin to cut or eliminate, as needed, to keep spending in check or at the least begin to scrutinize every expense for absolute necessity or look for less expensive substitutes.

In a similar fashion, government spending should be prioritized each year in its budgeting process. A budget is an internal control that works to ensure spending occurs as planned and remains within prescribed limits. Budget growth should be clearly justified and easily verified by a reasonably proportionate increase in the demand on public services. However, what we have seen in Brevard County is a lack of spending priorities and the failure to recognize the past few years rise in property tax revenue as a windfall from the sudden and rapid increase in home prices. Instead of reducing taxes or using the windfall to increase reserves, reduce debt, and/or replace capital, the county increased recurring expenses that will compound each subsequent year.

Again, sound fiscal policy of government entities should recognize the importance of keeping tax revenue at the lowest possible amount regardless of the increase in tax base. Excessive taxing and spending beyond that which is necessary to provide basic public services is nothing short of socialistic wealth redistribution – the taking of private property from property owners and giving to others for services rendered.

Property Rights and Eminent Domain
The right to own and possess property is fundamental and necessary to the economic and moral well-being of any free people, both individually and collectively.

Often discussions of property rights are limited to real estate, and for the sake of this essay, it will be limited to the same. However, the term “property” extends far beyond the notion of real estate to include any good, tangible or intangible, owned by an individual. The accumulation of earnings, investments, patented ideas, business interests, etc., are all “property” and the taking of private property by the government, whether by eminent domain or taxation, must be for public use – and as it pertains to eminent domain, must also include just compensation.

Over the past few decades, we’ve seen a significant deterioration of property rights as the term “public use” has been stretched and construed to mean a host of different things. The most egregious example is the now infamous decision by our nation’s Supreme Court in Kelo vs. City of New London (06/23/05). In that decision, the Supreme Court upheld that the use of eminent domain for the economic development did not violate the public use clause of the constitution. In essence, they ruled if an economic project increases tax and other municipal revenues, creates new jobs, and revitalizes a depressed area; it qualifies as a public use. In this case, eminent domain was delegated to a private entity as the legally authorized agent of the state.

While this decision was not without great controversy and dissent, it became a legal precedent nonetheless. This decision is far-reaching and I share the concerns of Dana Berliner, Attorney with the Institute for Justice, who said of the ruling, “It’s a dark day for American homeowners. While most constitutional decisions affect a small number of people, this decision undermines the rights of every American, except the most politically connected. Every home, small business, or church would produce more taxes as a shopping center or office building. And according to the Court, that’s a good enough reason for eminent domain.”

Eeminent domain, or the taking of an individual's property, must be reserved and exercised as only a last resort. All attempts in identifying alternative solutions and negotiation should be completely exhausted before the government uses eminent domain. And in those rare occasions where eminent domain is necessary for public use, just compensation must be paid and in no case should public use be defined as economic development. The prospect of increased taxes is simply not a public use. Indeed, the opposite is quite true; it is the role of government to protect property rights for the sake of the owner, not to seek its own benefit via increased taxes.

“If the United States mean to obtain or deserve the full praise due to wise and just governments, they will equally respect the rights of property, and the property in rights: they will rival the government that most sacredly guards the former; and by repelling its example in violating the latter, will make themselves a pattern to that and all other governments.” The Papers of James Madison – The Founders’ Constitution, Volume 1, Chapter 16, Document 23.

Future Land Use and Comprehensive Planning
Florida Statute 163, Part II, sets forth the requirement of local governments to create and maintain a comprehensive plan for development and land use. Commonly referred to as the “Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act”, this act states in part “through the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units of local government can preserve, promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, law enforcement and fire protection, and general welfare; prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid undue concentration of population; facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing, and other requirements and services; and conserve, develop, utilize and protect natural resources within their jurisdictions.”

While many of the above intended results could be accomplished by free markets, the provisioning of roads and utilities, law enforcement and fire protection, remain an integral part of future development and one that is most efficiently deployed with proper planning.

The 1988 Brevard County Comprehensive Plan (current plan) was prepared to comply with the Florida Statutes and contains a number of policy elements such as conservation, surface water management, recreation, historical preservation, housing, water, sewer, solid waste management, transportation, coastal management, future land use, etc. It is comprehensive, to say the least, but nowhere in its preface does it recognize or acknowledge the property rights of owners. Instead it is “intended to encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and resources consistent with the public interest…” and reads more like an edict of what landholders may, and may not do, with their property as it pertains to the government’s definition of public interest.

While comprehensive planning is necessary, it should also be as flexible as possible in dealing with the desires and wishes of property owners.

Transportation
Next to the issues of law and order, transportation should be a top priority of any local government. Appropriations for new roads, road re-surfacing, and road widening must be sufficient to meet the current demands of vehicle traffic, as well as, the additional roads necessary for our community to grow.

As a matter of priority, funding for the construction and maintenance of infrastructure, e.g. roads and utilities, should take precedence over spending for non-critical services and programs. And just as any institution has a replacement plan for capital items such as vehicles, equipment, computers, etc, so also should the county have a replacement and/or improvement plan for every road constructed. This plan should include the accumulated funding over the expected useful life of the road (useful life of a paved road is 15-20 years). This disciplined approach to fiscal planning will also work to reduce the amount of debt service required of each taxpayer by reducing the amount borrowed to re-surface or improve existing roads.

While the issuance of bonds is often necessary for large capital projects such as roadwork, the debt should be financed over the useful life of the project and not extended beyond. It is fiscally irresponsible to have future generations paying debt service on a project that has exceeded its useful life.

In 2005, there were 984 miles of paved road in unincorporated Brevard County maintained by the county. Of these 984 miles, 750 miles (~75%) were more than 15 years old. Roads in Brevard County are aged, and since we’ve not seen a wholesale resurfacing or reconstruction in the past two years, we can conclude that transportation needs have been low priority for Brevard County government.

Environmental and Land Conservation Concerns
Over the years, voters in Brevard County have approved a number of programs, funded by ad valorem property taxes, to acquire lands. Two programs were designed for the specific purpose of conserving land in Brevard County. They are, or were, funded by a county-wide millage and each of these programs approved the issuance of bonds to fund the acquisition of land. The programs and their respective bonding capacity are listed below:

The Beach & Riverfront Land Acquisition Program (program ended in 2004) and the Environmentally Endangered Lands Acquisition Program (EEL) each have specific guidelines for qualifying lands for acquisition. The programs are somewhat self- explanatory as the Beach & Riverfront Program targeted properties along the coastline or river frontage and the EEL Program identifies environmentally sensitive lands for acquisition and subsequent management.

In addition to the bond proceeds and the taxes collected each year, these programs work with Federal and State conservation programs, private conservation groups, grants, and local matches to increase funding for land acquisition. In fact, the Beach & Riverfront Program acquired an additional $30+ million through various partnerships and the EEL Program has gathered in excess of $40 million additional dollars.

These two programs have worked to conserve more than 20,000 acres in Brevard County, which is approximately 3% of total land area. However, when that number is combined with land owned by Federal, State, and private conservation groups for conservation in Brevard County, and County Parks, the number of acres exceeds 370,000. That is roughly 57% of the total land area of Brevard County. If successful land conservation is measured by the amount of acreage conserved, then Brevard County may well be described as an overachiever.

While it is important to conserve natural resources and endangered habitats, one question needs to be answered; how much is enough? Every parcel of land purchased by the government means more property taxes must be paid by the remaining property owners to fund government at current levels. Now that property values are declining, the reduction in the size of taxable base will only place additional pressure on county government to increase millage rates to maintain its level of tax revenue.

It is now time to turn our focus toward the industrial and manufacturing sector of Brevard County to create an environment conducive and attractive to employers. The role of government, in meeting this goal, is best executed by reducing regulatory requirements and fees on businesses and reducing property taxes and assessments.