My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/22/1999
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1999
>
6/22/1999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/19/2018 11:25:19 AM
Creation date
6/17/2015 12:43:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/22/1999
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r � <br />BOOK D9 PAGE 02 7 <br />Indian River County <br />*$9,053,766 <br />Vero Beach <br />$1,752,663 <br />Sebastian <br />- $1,425,818 <br />Indian River Shores <br />$264,964 <br />Fellsmere <br />$243,187 <br />Town of Orchid <br />$4,434 <br />TOTAL <br />$12,744,832 <br />*We budget 95% of the estimated amount <br />Proceeds of the surtax may be expended on infrastructure as defined in the bill as "any fixed capital <br />expenditure or fixed capital costs associated with the construction, reconstruction or improvement <br />of public facilities which have a life expectancy of 5 or more years and any land acquisition, land <br />improvement, design and engineering costs related thereto." <br />Analysis <br />In the late 198Ws Indian River County found itself in an infrastructure dilemma when developing <br />its Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Based on the capital improvement element at that time, the <br />County had over $400 million of infrastructure improvements over the next twenty years and was <br />seeking adequate revenue sources to meet the levels of service set forth. A review was begun of <br />additional revenue alternatives available to fund future infrastructure needs. <br />Analysis - continued <br />After studying the alternatives, Indian River County found the Optional Sales Tax appealing for the <br />following reasons: <br />1. FAIR ALTERNATIVE - ALL USERS CONTRIBUTE - Everyone pays, including <br />tourists and non-residents; not just the property owners of Indian River County. The <br />roads and other infrastructure within the County are built for peak demand. Tourists <br />and non-residents use the County's roads, parks, and facilities. Optional Sales Tax <br />does not hit just one specific group of people, unlike user or impact fees. <br />2. DOLLARS GENERATED - There were no other revenue sources, besides ad valorem <br />taxes, that could generate approximately $7 million a year in revenues. <br />3. INCLUDED EXEMPTIONS - Sales tax is exempted on purchases of medicine and <br />food. <br />4. CITIES AND COUNTY SHARE - The sales tax is not just received by the County. <br />The Cities get a proportionate share to help them in their infrastructure needs. <br />5. PAY AS YOU GO - It gave Indian River County the ability to pay for capital <br />improvements with existing available funds, possibly augmented by short-term <br />borrowings. This would eliminate the need for ten or forty year debt for these type <br />projects and would substantially reduce overall cost of capital improvements by not <br />having to pay huge financing costs (interest) over a long period of time. <br />6. USED FOR NEEDED CAPITAL PROJECTS - Money could be used for jails, roads, <br />parks and health facilities which would have to be built regardless if an optional sales <br />tax was in place or not. This would place a burden on other resources (i.e., ad valorem <br />taxes). <br />JUNE 229 1999 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.