Save Our Homes

At the CC Civic Association this month Lee County Property Appraiser, Ken Wilkinson will be the keynote speaker. Nov. 24, 7-9 p.m. Cape Coral Yacht Club. The meeting will focus on Save Our Homes and the issue of the SOH Portability amendment that is expected to come before the voters next year.
The portability issue is extremely important for any homesteaded homeowner who might be contemplating selling their home, but doesn’t, because of the horrific tax consequences in giving up their SOH protection when purchasing a new home. In effect, many people feel trapped by the benefits of SOH that caps property tax increases to 3% maximum per year in the face of skyrocketing property values. Join with us for a thorough discussion on SOH portability.
Civic meetings are provided by the association as a public service to the community. There is no cost to attend meetings and refreshments are served following the meeting. Civic meets on the fourth Tuesday of the month, 7 p.m. at the Cape Coral Yacht Club.

The following appeared in today's News-Press Guest Opinion news-press.com November 02, 2005 Tell the truth about Save Our Homes amendment Let's clear up a bunch of misunderstandings about how property taxes are affected. In response to a recent week-long bashing of the Save Our Homes amendment by the Sarasota Herald Tribune and other editorials in Florida: I have served 25 years as the Lee County property appraiser and am the "proud father" of Save Our Homes. In my experience, local government taxing authorities (of which we have more than 100 in Lee County) do not lower millage rates. Very few exceptions exist, and they usually involve only a minuscule amount. These taxing authorities then postulate to the public at budget time that taxpayers "should be proud of us because we held the line on taxes by not raising the millage." In government, I call this the big lie even though we, as county appraisers, tell the authorities the millage rate (rollback) to apply to the new values to compensate for assessment increases.
I am not trying to tell taxing authorities how to budget, just as I don't want them to tell me how to appraise property. I only want full disclosure to the public, which is why it is named "TRIM" (Truth in Millage) not "TRIA" (Truth in Assessments).
By the way, the media are culpable because they report the big lie, as opposed to reporting the percent increase over the rollback. If the millage is left the same, and the property values in a jurisdiction go up 49 percent — such as occurred in Cape Coral, the second-largest incorporated city in Florida — ones gets essentially 49 percent more money. Or, how about the Lehigh Acres Fire District (68,000 acres), whose values went up 98.94 percent this year? It's simple math.
The argument that Save Our Homes merely shifts the burden is not substantiated by the facts. For example, before Save Our Homes, Lee County had an approximate 2 percent effective tax rate, which is to say that every $1,000 of taxable value equated to $20 in property taxes. So the owner of a million-dollar home would pay $20,000 in taxes.
Twenty-five years later, we still have a 2 percent effective tax rate. Since the tax rate is never lowered, this means that owners of non-homesteaded properties would pay the same with or without Save Our Homes. The only difference is that, under Save Our Homes, our homesteaders pay substantially less. This is a good thing!
To say this another way: Without Save Our Homes, local governments would just have more to spend (on the backs of permanent residents), but owners of non-Save Our Homes properties would still be paying the same.
DEBUNKING MYTHS Let's talk about fairness:
Recent arrivals create the problem. What they paid to move into our neighborhoods, prior to Save Our Homes, created the taxable value for every homeowner, regardless of whether the current homeowner paid $160,000 10 years ago and the new arrival paid $600,000. Is this fair? When and if the new arrivals become homesteaders, they can benefit from Save Our Homes and not become taxed out of their homes when, 10 years later, that $600,000 home is selling for $1.2 million. This is fair!
Another myth is that Save Our Homes benefits only the rich. We chose a 3 percent cap because percentages do not discriminate and are relative to ability to pay. This trumps the argument that Save Our Homes only favors the rich, as 3 percent on a $300,000 home is greater than 3 percent on a $30,000 home. Three percent times $300,000 equals a $9,000 value increase, which would create an additional $180 in taxes at a 2 percent effective tax rate. Yet, 3 percent times $30,000 equals a $900 value increase, which would be an $18 tax increase.
Save Our Homes could in essence be categorized as "socking it to the rich." The initial argument against Save Our Homes was that it would destroy the real estate market. We know that didn't happen. Actually, Save Our Homes has performed beyond our expectations, and I could not be prouder of the benefits to our homesteaders. I shudder to think what their plight would be if Save Our Homes did not exist.
Last, as we did not consider the concept of portability 15 years ago when drafting Save Our Homes, I think its time has come. And if someone writes a constitutional amendment for rent control to protect renters, I will sign it.
Kenneth M. Wilkinson, Lee County Property Appraiser