What's New Miami Beach!?!

In case you haven't heard, a new tax plan for Florida property owners is in the final stages of the approval process. This could mean a huge savings for some, but not everyone. Here's a few questions and answers about what's to come...

Posted on Sat, Jun. 16, 2007 (Miami Herald)

Q: How soon will my taxes be cut?

A: It will be months before you actually see savings. Lawmakers passed a bill that requires cities, counties and special taxing districts to roll back their taxes to last year's levels, plus an additional cut. Miami-Dade County government has to cut back an additional 9 percent, Broward 5 percent and Monroe 3 percent.

Homeowners will find out in November, when they get their new tax bills, how much they are saving. They will get an idea in August, though, when tax notices go out alerting property owners to the tax rates cities and counties plan to adopt.

The rollback does not apply to property taxes charged by school districts, which make up 30 to 40 percent of the tax bill.

If voters approve a constitutional amendment in January that expands Florida's homestead exemption, homeowners would see those additional savings on the tax bill they receive in November 2008.

Q: Can cities and counties get around the rollback?

A: Yes, but it will be difficult and costly. It will take a supermajority or unanimous vote by the local governing board, or even a public referendum, depending on how far a local government wants to go beyond rollback rates. Governments that violate rollback provisions will forfeit millions in state money.

Q: Will I get a tax refund?

A: No. Your annual tax bill will go down in the future.

Q: How are homestead exemptions changing?

A: Florida's traditional $25,000 homestead exemption will remain unchanged unless 60 percent of voters approve the constitutional amendment Jan. 29. If this happens, Florida homeowners who now have homestead exemptions may choose between the new ''super-sized'' exemption or the tax breaks they currently enjoy, including the $25,000 exemption and the Save Our Homes tax break, which caps increases on the annual assessment to 3 percent.

Those who choose the super-sized exemption can shield up to $195,000 of the value of their home.

Q: Why would I want to keep the Save Our Homes caps?

A: People who have owned homes for years and have seen their market value rise may do better staying with Save Our Homes. Let's say you bought a home 10 years ago, and your taxable value is $200,000, but the appraised value is higher, say $500,000. Under Save Our Homes, you pay taxes on $175,000 -- $200,000 minus your homestead exemption of $25,000. Under the new exemptions, you would pay taxes on the higher amount -- $500,000, minus the $195,000 exemption, or $305,000.

Q: How does the super-sized exemption work?

A: It is based on the value of your home as determined by the county property appraiser, which the Legislature calls the ''just value.'' In some places, Miami-Dade County among them, it is called ''market value,'' though that number is usually somewhat below the real price the home would get if sold.

For the first $200,000 in value, 75 percent is shielded from taxation. Between $200,000 and $500,000, a homeowner gets another 15 percent exemption. There are no additional exemptions above $500,000 now. But the $500,000 threshold would automatically grow each year by the same percent personal income grows.

Each homeowner under the plan is guaranteed a minimum exemption of $50,000, while the maximum exemption is $195,000. Low-income seniors will get a minimum exemption of $100,000.

Cities, counties and schools will be able to charge taxes only on the amount of your home that is not shielded from taxation.

Q: How do I get the super-sized exemption?

A: If the amendment passes, homeowners who now enjoy the Save Our Homes protection must make a one-time ''irrevocable election'' to receive the super-sized exemption. Otherwise they remain under the Save Our Homes caps as long as they own their home. If the amendment passes, anyone who buys a home on Jan. 1, 2008, or after will not be eligible for Save Our Homes and would receive the super-sized exemption.

Q: Why has there been controversy over the impact on schools?

A: Though school districts are exempt from the property tax rollbacks and cuts, they would be affected if the constitutional amendment passes. School districts, like any other local government, would be able to tax only the portion of a home's value not protected by the super-sized exemption. Lawmakers estimate this could cost schools statewide up to $7.2 billion over four years.

Republican lawmakers say the Legislature will find a way to make up that money for schools, but they did not say how.

Q: If the amendment passes and I choose to keep the Save Our Homes caps on my home, what happens when I sell it and buy another main home in Florida?

A: If you buy your home on Jan. 1 or after, you will not have Save Our Homes on the new home, you'll have the super-size exemption. That's how the Legislature plans to gradually phase out Save Our Homes.

Q: Does the super-sized exemption apply to second homes, rental homes or businesses?

A: No. It applies only to the primary homestead.

Q: What tax breaks do businesses, owners of rental property and second homes receive?

A: Their biggest tax break will come from this year's mandatory tax rollback. The constitutional amendment, however, exempts businesses from paying tangible personal property taxes on equipment if they own less than $25,000 worth. The amendment also gives the Legislature the power to pass tax breaks in the future for waterfront property used for commercial purposes or public access and for affordable housing.

Q: What happens to low-income seniors?

A: The proposed constitutional amendment would guarantee that those 65 years and older who verify that they are poor are eligible for at least a $100,000 exemption on their home. Plus, low-income seniors would continue to be eligible for additional exemptions that are now offered by cities and counties. The amendment does not change the provision that lets cities and counties offer an additional $50,000 worth of exemptions.

Miami-Dade kills biotech park deal

Dade officials ended a biotech project that was supposed to provide thousands of jobs in Liberty City after The Miami Herald exposed widespread problems.

BY JASON GROTTO

Two years after local leaders unveiled plans for a massive biotech park in Liberty City, Miami-Dade County on Tuesday killed the deal, severed ties with the developer and vowed to recover public money spent on the troubled project.

County Manager George Burgess sent a letter Tuesday to companies controlled by Boston developer Dennis Stackhouse, saying his firms defaulted on county contracts and a 75-year lease on county land by failing to provide crucial documents about the biotech park.

In a memo to Mayor Carlos Alvarez, the manager raised serious concerns about the validity of key tenants that were to lease space in the park while creating thousands of jobs for urban residents.

''The developer has missed deadlines that place him in default,'' Burgess said. ``The leases and letter of intent are highly suspect.''

In an investigative series that began Sunday, The Miami Herald exposed widespread breakdowns in oversight of the biotech park by the county and the Empowerment Trust, a county-funded agency charged with monitoring the project.

Though millions of dollars have been spent on the project, not a single building has gone up.

Tuesday's move kills an agreement approved by the County Commission in January that pledged $23 million toward a parking garage to be built along with three other buildings -- the first phase of a highly touted development slated to be larger than Miami's AmericanAirlines Arena.

As the county took action against the developer, the Miami-Dade state attorney's office and the Miami-Dade Police Department launched a criminal investigation into questionable spending surrounding the park.

The Miami Herald reported Stackhouse diverted more than $500,000 from the biotech park through doubling billings and dubious expenses while paying a host of political insiders to drum up support for the project.

Among them: former U.S. Rep. Carrie Meek, who received at least $40,000, a leased car and a free office for her foundation while her son, U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek, moved to secure federal dollars for the biotech park.

Kendrick Meek wrote a letter to the mayor Monday questioning the county's oversight of the project and demanding an end to federal funds for the developer.

That prompted a strongly worded response on Tuesday from Alvarez, who pointed to the congressman's two-year role in the biotech park, including his involvement in an organization that provided Stackhouse's companies with millions of dollars.

''As the former chair of the Task Force on Urban Economic Revitalization between 2002-2005 . . . you are undoubtedly aware of the loan review process and how funding is allocated,'' the mayor wrote.

With Meek as chairman, the economic task force approved two loans to Stackhouse companies totaling more than $5 million. Those companies now owe more than $200,000 in late payments, The Miami Herald found.

The demise of the biotech park is the latest in a long series of failures at Poinciana Industrial Park, a vast collection of empty lots set aside for economic development after a riot in 1980.

Since 1982, the county has spent millions trying to lure jobs and businesses to the area, in decline for decades.

In 2001, the county named the Empowerment Trust the master developer of Poinciana, but the county manager is now moving to break ties with the agency, which is run by county employees.

''We have concerns about the pace of several capital programs undertaken by [the] Empowerment Trust, the level and type of investments, and general operations,'' Burgess wrote in his memo to Alvarez.

Aundra Wallace, CEO of the trust, could not be reached for comment.

Records show the agency failed to keep track of millions of dollars set aside for the biotech park, including a $3 million interest-free loan the trust provided to a Stackhouse company in 2006.

The loan -- funded with federal money -- was provided to Stackhouse without any security, raising question about how the county can recover the money.

Questions also abound over issues surrounding the status of county land at Poinciana. Stackhouse secured a $4.2 million loan from a private lender in 2005 using the land as collateral -- with county officials allowing the private lender top priority for any funds recovered.

Miami-Dade Commissioner Joe Martinez, who voted against the parking lot deal earlier this year, blamed the Alvarez administration and staff at the Empowerment Trust for lax oversight.

''The project never should have gone forth,'' he said. ``It seems staff did not do due diligence.''

He said commissioners only learned the back story -- including Stackhouse's history of financial woes -- after reading the newspaper's series this week.

County Commissioner Dorrin Rolle, an ardent supporter of the biotech project and the $23 million parking garage deal, said the paper's findings should be examined.

''Recent news articles regarding questionable oversight at Poinciana Industrial Park clearly requires investigation and a thorough report from county staff,'' he said in a written statment.

Miami Herald staff writer Matthew I. Pinzur contributed to this report.