Comprehensive Plan Mediation: Cost To Taxpayers
County Commission Meeting, March 20, 2003
The 2002 Comprehensive Plan was carefully crafted to minimize the inevitable impact projected growth will have on the county in the next 10 years. Staff had to consider the costs, both financial and quality of life, that all citizens will have to pay.
Many people believe it is possible for a community to grow its way into prosperity. If that were true, governments in south Florida would be paying people to live there instead of raising their taxes; Orlando would not be running out of drinking water in less than four years; Tampa would not have to spend huge amounts of money on a desalinization plant; and Alachua County would not be facing some millions of dollars shortfall in tax revenues in spite of the growth we have experienced in recent years.
Planners have known for years that the demand for services costs far more than the taxes paid by new development. In our society, people need and expect roads; schools; police and fire protection; emergency services; transportation services; and libraries.
Therefore, any comprehensive planning must consider what proposed growth will cost the community.
Mr. Chair, you and Commissioners Byerly and Wheat and Staff wisely considered costs as part of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan when you approved the Urban Services Line. Leaf-frog sprawl is one of the most costly in terms of taxpayers’ money and in reduction in the overall quality of life in the county.
You also understood that water quality and quantity is crucial for all life. Wetlands provide a vital part in the protection of the aquifer, the source of our water. Nature has formed a system of uplands and buffers that help protect wetland functioning where they are supported by all the hydrological, geological, and soil characteristics that are required. There is no way to estimate the price tag on repairing damage to the aquifer if wetlands are not protected as in the 2002 comp plan.
Mr Chair, even now some commissioners are making the case for additional gas and sales taxes. The mediation settlements can only greatly increase the need for higher taxes over the coming years.
Three commissioners agreed to try to mediate with challengers and interveners. We assume that the commissioners also wished to still protect the county from the ravages of uncontrolled growth. As demonstrated tonight, that mediation was a flawed process and has not produced an equitable solution to protect citizens’ health or purse.
Mr. Chair, you tried the mediation path, but it failed. I urge you to now vote to adopt the 2002 Comprehensive Plan you helped develop and voted for last year. No rights will be lost because anyone who wishes can challenge it in a courtroom as provided for by state statutes.
Respectfully submitted for inclusion in the permanent public record:
Ellie Schwab