By MICHAEL PELTIER
THE NEWS SERVICE OF FLORIDA
THE CAPITAL, TALLAHASSEE, March 31, 2011……Lauded – and criticized – for their fiscal autonomy, water management districts would find their budgets determined by the Legislature and their spending approved by the governor under a pair of bills advancing Thursday in the House and Senate.
More immediately, the districts would see their budgets cut by up to 30 percent, under a Senate effort that would reduce taxes for water management district residents by $210 million statewide.
The Senate Budget Committee on Thursday approved a measure (SB 7154) that would require lawmakers to annually set the tax rate for water management districts to levy.
The Senate proposal, which passed the committee on a 21-0, requires the districts to submit their budget requests to the governor, who would submit the proposals as part of his budget request. The Legislature, however, would ultimately decide funding levels.
“When it comes to the expenditure of dollars, it comes back to the fact that Legislature has the authority and responsibility of looking after (taxpayers) dollars,” said Budget Chairman Sen. J.D. Alexander, R-Lake Wales.
“If somebody says I want to tax the people of Florida a billion dollars, I kind of want to know what they’re using the billion dollars for,” Alexander added.
A measure traveling in the House would also provide for gubernatorial oversight of the water management districts, but the measure stops short of putting lawmakers in charge of the budget purse strings.
The House proposal (PBC SCWP 11-01), approved Thursday by the Select Committee on Water Policy by unanimous vote, would also require the districts to review their holdings every five years and put up for sale land no longer considered essential for conservation or water management purposes. The sales could occur only if the parcels would return to the tax rolls following the sale. Lands held jointly between the districts and a local government could not be sold without the consent of local officials.
Further, the proposal would require the governor to approve fund transfers within the water management districts. Under current law, the governor approves a district’s overall budget but has no control over how the money is spent after that point.
A favorite target of lawmakers because of the massive taxing authority they command, the water districts are again under the microscope as Gov. Rick Scott and Republican lawmakers look to trim government collections and spending.
The South Florida Water Management District, for example, is expected to collect $404 million a year in property taxes from the residents who live in the district. The money is used for flood control, maintenance of canals and other storm water efforts. A significant portion also goes toward Everglades restoration.
“For these people to have the ability to tax without being elected . . . I kind of thought that’s why we had a revolution a couple hundred years ago,” said Sen. Mike Bennett, R-Bradenton.
Scott has proposed reducing water management district taxes by 25 percent for the next two years. The Senate bill would trim the South Florida district’s budget by 30 percent next year, a $120 million reduction, and allow lawmakers to set rates after that.
House water committee Chairwoman Trudi Williams, R-Fort Myers, said earlier this year that even a 25 percent cut would delay discretionary programs such as the district’s long term commitment to re-plumbing the Everglades.
On Thursday, Janet Bowman, legislative director for the Nature Conservancy, said the House proposal largely puts in statute what has been common practice within the districts. The Senate version, however, would break new ground.
Bowman cautioned that lawmakers could run into constitutional problems if they give the Legislature or the governor too much oversight of the districts, which are given constitutional authority to levy taxes.
“There could be some constitutional issues if you go too far in that direction,” Bowman said.
News Service reporter Brandon Larrabee contributed to this report.
Independent and Indispensable