Coalition defends feasibility study

LAKEWOOD RANCH — The Community Coalition, an advocacy group for the incorporation of Lakewood Ranch, is defending its position that becoming a city would be both feasible and sustainable.

The Friends of Lakewood Ranch, a group opposing incorporation, presented its stance against economist Dr. Hank Fishkind’s feasibility study and portions of the proposed city charter during a public presentation June 9.

The Community Coalition met with members of the media last week to respond to statements made by the Friends that they believe are “inflammatory, misleading or just plain wrong.”

“We felt it was important to respond point-by-point so (residents) can get an accurate understanding of what the real facts are,” said coalition member Tom Thomaides, who chaired the Lakewood Ranch Civic Action Forum Incorporation Study Committee. “We tried to capture the essence of their position and respond.

“We’ve reached a conclusion as a group that incorporation would be beneficial for the residents of Lakewood Ranch,” he said. “We want people to look at it critically. We want to make sure there isn’t something important we missed.”

The coalition has offered to meet with members of the Friends organization several times to go through the results of the feasibility study. But so far, the group has declined, Thomaides said.

Bob Stepleman, one of the lead members of the Friends group, admitted that was true and said, based on the group’s research and study, the study contains so many flaws that it cannot be a basis for discussion. And even if it could be proven correct, the group would still disagree because incorporation, as proposed, would eliminate the governing aspect of the CDDs.

After meeting with members of both the coalition and the Friends organizations, The East County Observer compiled a list of statements from the June 9 forum the coalition said were untrue and a response from members of the Friends group.

1: Incorporation is not right for Lakewood Ranch. It might be OK to consider five to 10 years from now if everything gets back to normal.

Coalition: There is no benefit to wait. Even if Lakewood Ranch experienced no growth for the next 10 years, incorporation would still be feasible. As soon as Lakewood Ranch incorporates, it qualifies for $3.7 million in revenues from the Municipal Service Taxing Unit and state-shared revenue funding, assuming the Legislature grants a density and millage waiver.

Incorporating now also gives residents more control over decisions that impact their community, such as planning and zoning, permitting, code enforcement, assessment and use of impact fees and road repair, among others.
Friends: (See related box.)

2. Taxes may increase substantially if we become a city.

Coalition: Incorporation will not cause taxes to increase and will result in increases in revenues without raising taxes. The $1.5 million from MSTU revenues and $2.2 million from state shared revenue (both numbers projected for 2011) would produce a revenue surplus every year going forward, and allow for the building of reserves.
Sarasota residents may see an increase equal to the MSTU tax, which Sarasota County does not have. However, any increases to them could be offset by reductions in other taxes or fees.
“There’s no reason to conclude incorporation would increase taxes,” Thomaides said. “If anything, it could do the opposite.”

Friends: Fishkind’s revenue estimates are too high. (See related box.) Plus, a city council could raise taxes.

3: Incorporation will result in a significant loss of control.

Coalition: Incorporation would give residents more control over decisions that impact them such as planning and zoning, which are currently services provided by Manatee and Sarasota counties.

Residents also would have a more direct influence over local elected officials, who would all live in Lakewood Ranch, rather than other parts of the county.

Friends: “To say incorporation gives people more local control is disingenuous,” Stepleman said. “The thing people care about is day-to-day life. (Currently) neighbors in your CDD decide how your’re going to spend your money.”

Under the charter, it is conceivable no elected officials will live in your CDD are or neighborhood.

4: During the Fishkind presentation, Friends members asked for more specific information on the source of the 2011 data, which Fishkind said he would provide. Fishkind later responded that, “We can’t give you those numbers because we never had those numbers. They were given to us by a committee.”

Coalition: Fishkind and Associates did not have access to the CDD budgets, so that information was provided by the Incorporation Study Committee.

Friends: Fishkind did not independently analyze the numbers he was given. He accepted them as they were. He used what people gave him.

5: Fishkind said in the study residents desire to control their own zoning and planning. The Friends disagree. Residents are not concerned with planning and zoning.

Coalition: Residents are concerned with planning and zoning decisions. Although they have generally been supportive of the developer, they also have been very vocal when they had objections, such as when the Manatee County commission wanted to put an arterial east-west road through Heron’s Nest Nature Park.

Friends: Planning and zoning control is an illusionary benefit since much of Lakewood Ranch’s expansion already has been approved.

6: The study shows a compounded average growth rate of 8.4% for revenues and 9% for expenses.

Coalition: The forecast starts with growth rates based on residential and commercial business development plans of Schroeder-Manatee Ranch and others and includes the development of the Stewardship District. The assessment revenue forecast is based only on growth and does not include inflation. If inflation were added, the annual compounded growth rate for revenues would be 10.3%.
The model follows the more conservative approach. Additional scenarios were studied with growth rates of one-half and zero. Both showed incorporation would still be feasible. Those studies can be viewed at www.lwrdv.com/incorp.

Friends: (See related box.)

7: The study assumes revenue sources that may not materialize. Communications Services Tax revenue assumes $45 per household in 2011. Services revenue is $63 per household and fines and forfeitures is $32 per household in 2011.

Coalition: These revenue streams already exist. The Communications Services Tax is paid to the county on your cable, satellite or other service media that transfers voice, date, audio or video. Service revenue and fines and forfeitures also go to the county. After incorporation, those fees would come to the city rather than the county.

“The dollar amounts shown here are overstated because some of them also are being paid by businesses,” Thomaides said.

Friends: The group admits its calculation did not include businesses. But as a point, the city council will be responsible for enacting the tax rate.

8: Fishkind is assuming the Legislature will approve waivers for the density requirement and the three mills requirement. What if those don’t happen?

Coalition: If the three-mill waiver were not granted, the Coalition would request withdrawal of the bill. However, the Florida legislature has granted the three mill waiver in every case in the past 15 years, as shown in research conducted by the group.

Friends: The group has not seen information to support that claim. Also, another group could come forward to champion incorporation and may not care whether the legislature grants the waiver.

9: What happens if revenues are reduced by five or 10% and at the same time, expenditures are increased by five or 10%? This would result in a huge budget shortfall.

Coalition: This scenario is not realistic. The city would not continue to run on a deficit. Only the ad valorem taxes, which are 10% of the total revenues for the city, are highly sensitive to the economy.

Friends: No one can accurately predict expenses to 5% for 10 years from now. A small change could produce a deficit. (See related box.)

10. There are several additional risks. The irrigation system in Summerfield, street lights, sewer system, lift stations, additional cell towers. Today our county taxes cover most of these. If we incorporate, the city would have to fund these things.

Coalition: Not true. The irrigation system and lights are the responsibility of the CDDs, not the county. The lift system remain the responsibility of the county.

Friends: Several CDDs are in negotiations for the county to take over maintenance of street lights. Some lift stations are maintained by CDDs, while others are maintained by the county.

12: The study counts on revenues coming in the future from areas within the Stewardship District such as The Lake Club and Country Club East. These areas all have homeowner’s association assessments, not CDDs, so the revenue would not come to the city.

Coalition: The Stewardship District collects the non ad valorem assessments, not the homeowner’s association. After a subdivision is complete, an inter-local agreement would be signed between the city and the Stewardship District for the city to maintain the public infrastructure in exchange for the non ad valorem assessments being paid, less the portion that is for bond debt service.

Friends: Only the operations and maintenance revenue will come to the city.

“That assumption is nonsense,” Stepleman said. “Do you think people in The Lake Club are going to give up their private roads?”

Contact Pam Eubanks at [email protected].

QUESTIONING THE STUDY
Friends of Lakewood Ranch oppose the idea of incorporating now largely on the premise that the feasibility study conducted by Fishkind and Associates is inaccurate.

“The Fishkind report is so severely flawed that no conclusions can be drawn from it,” member Bob Stepleman said.

Mike Spring, another member of the group, did his own analysis of the study’s numbers for the Stewardship District’s operations and maintenance non ad valorem assessment values. Using the 2011 CDD assessment numbers projected forward for 10 years at 3% interest and the projected 2020 CDD assessment projection, and doing the same for debt service expenditures, Spring calculated that Fishkind’s report estimates operations and maintenance assessments of more than $800 annually in the Stewardship District. Spring said based on assessment costs provided by sales offices for communities within the district, annual operations and maintenance assessments are closer to $350 annually.

However, Fishkind’s study assumes only population growth for CDD assessments post 2011. Even with that said, Spring maintains Fishkind’s projections are off, especially because assessments are based on non ad valorem revenues.

Spring also said Fishkind’s use of the 2010 CDD budgets plus 3% inflation for the 2011 assessment numbers is incorrect. The assessment numbers include one-time expenses for each district.

Tom Thomaides, who led the Incorporation Study Committee, said committee members spent about a year working with Fishkind going through the study line-by-line and are confident Fishkind’s report is valid.