Sheriff budget: Reducing municipal taxes due to lack of sheriff's patrols - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
 
  1. #11
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    ...a SSO 2nd floor person (who shall remain anonymous for safety) explained that...
    Your 2nd floor spy explained that stuff to a group of us, so it's not a secret. He said that if our budget rises by 6%, citizens currently don't notice it because it comes out of the county's murky general budget ---- and it doesn't show up on peoples annual tax bills. However, if our budget is tied directly to MSTUs, then citizens would see that 6% increase in our budget because it will be visible on their annual MSTU tax bill ---- and citizens will scream bloody murder if they see a 6% increase in their yearly MSTU taxes! He said that our budget should not be tied to MSTUs because it's too transparent. It's politically easier to get big budget increases (and to get a bigger piece of the revenue pie) if it comes out of the county's murky general revenue pot because citizens don't notice that stuff. However, citizens do pay attention to the yearly tax bill that is sent directly to them.

  2. #12
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Your 2nd floor spy explained that stuff to a group of us, so it's not a secret. He said that if our budget rises by 6%, citizens currently don't notice it because it comes out of the county's murky general budget ---- and it doesn't show up on peoples annual tax bills. However, if our budget is tied directly to MSTUs, then citizens would see that 6% increase in our budget because it will be visible on their annual MSTU tax bill ---- and citizens will scream bloody murder if they see a 6% increase in their yearly MSTU taxes! He said that our budget should not be tied to MSTUs because it's too transparent. It's politically easier to get big budget increases (and to get a bigger piece of the revenue pie) if it comes out of the county's murky general revenue pot because citizens don't notice that stuff. However, citizens do pay attention to the yearly tax bill that is sent directly to them.
    Aren't Sarasota County fire services already tied to MSTUs? It does not seem to negatively affect their budgeting process because they are always flush with money and big pay raises every year.

  3. #13
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Aren't Sarasota County fire services already tied to MSTUs? It does not seem to negatively affect their budgeting process because they are always flush with money and big pay raises every year.
    Then what's the real reason Knight (or Hoffman or whoever) doesn't want the SSO budget to be tied to MSTUs?

  4. #14
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Then what's the real reason Knight (or Hoffman or whoever) doesn't want the SSO budget to be tied to MSTUs?
    There are two scenarios. The first scenario is our current practice:

    • METHOD A (our current method): SSO budget taken from Sarasota County general revenue: As it stands now, Knight only has to get the commissioners to approve any percentile budget increase. It is not idemized on any citizens annual bill because it comes from "general revenues" (which generally go unnoticed by the public). It's politically more digestible because the public does not see it "itemized" on their annual tax bill. So if the sheriff gets a 6% budget increase, it does not show-up on a citizens annual ad valorem or non ad valorem assessment.
      .
    • METHOD B (a proposed method): SSO budget is taken from MSTUs: If the budget is tied directly to MSTUs, then whatever the commissioners approve for the sheriff's budget will be itemized and visible to each taxpayer every year (specifically on each taxpayers annual ad valorem and non ad valorem assessments). MSTUs show citizens exactly where money is going, along with how much. MSTUs are not hidden from the public in a "general reserve pot-of-money."

    If you were the elected Sarasota sheriff, which method would you want and which method is hidden from public scrutiny? A sheriff would want method A (which is not seen by the public on their annual tax bill), but the public would want method B for transparency in funding (because it is seen by the public every year on their tax bill).

    The cities in Sarasota County are now aware of this, specifically as it relates to SSO "road patrol services," which is why Venice Mayor John Holic is researching it's viability for implementation in Sarasota County. It is currently in practice in Pinellas County and in Charlotte County because it is legal. As a result, it may be difficult for Sarasota County commissioners to hide money in the county's general revenues, and it may be difficult for the current sheriff to hide money in fleet (or elsewhere) if the authorized budget is itemized each year in MSTU allocations.

  5. #15
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Slow News Day.

    Trolls wasting time dreaming up conspiracies where none exist.

  6. #16
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Then what's the real reason Knight (or Hoffman or whoever) doesn't want the SSO budget to be tied to MSTUs?
    It's too complicated to discuss at a website like this.

    Have your attorney click here to see a MSTU presentation that was given to Florida's Court Clerks & Comptrollers.

    To see a law enforcement MSTU sample from Charlotte County, have your attorney click here and here.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •