Title: Taxing Referendum Gets Little County Support
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00002069/00001
 Material Information
Title: Taxing Referendum Gets Little County Support
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: Clearwater Sun
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
Abstract: Taxing Referendum Gets Little County Support, Feb 21, 1976
General Note: Box 10, Folder 2 ( SF Taxation, ad valorem tax referendum-SWFWMD-1976 - 1976 ), Item 21
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00002069
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text


P O. BOX 10278

(leoarWles M1
PM 42,000
S 45,000


iTaxing Referen
Sun Staff Writer
LARGO-A referendum granting water management dis-
I icts taxing authority has little if any support among
-('inellas County legislators who hope to use the results of the
vote March 9 to force a reorganization of water management
Opposition to the proposed amendment crosses party lines
with the lone Democratic member of the delegation, Rep.
Tom Moore of Clearwater, suggesting that policy matters be
resolved and the question put on the ballot again in Novem-
State Sen. Henry B. Sayler R-St. Petersburg, predicting
deTeat of the referendum, told members of the Clearwater
and St. Petersburg League of Women Voters Friday that he
wll profile a bill March 10 to repeal the 1961 legislation which
creaT the Southwest Florida Water Management District.
"I then would look for (the creation of) a strong state water

Jum Gets Little Coity
% J ... ": '
*' # V'



management office, abolishment of the water boards and a ",::ns hiad' no representation from Pinellas County, said Rep.
technical engineer who knows something about i wtt.r 7o C;irts Kiser. R-Palm Harbor.
servation and distributionY Sayler said. a. ',; e noi seen enough yet that I want to stick my neck out
The Pinellas county legislators opp-'Se the current :.,e.':" and sa, 'iis : amnendrcnt) is the best thing for Pinellas Coun-
management legislation and the proposed funding or. Ln i :. :;ij i. .:idd Kiser said.
philosophical and policy grounds. cr.p i hdrt bf public opposition to the amendment,

"There are some important basic policy decisions !,iu
need to be made," Sayler said. "We need to decide, should
water be financed primarily from property tax, which nut
everyone pays, or from a general tax, and should we em-
power a non-elected body to levy those taxes."
Representation on the water management district boards is
a major concern of the legislators. As the law now stands, the
boards are heavily weighted in favor of rural counties.
Pinellas County, with one-third the population and one-third
the tax base, has only one member on the 9-member board
A legislative subcommittee to study the area's water prob-

i i ;' : fi. hesitant about coming out strongly against it,"
dI.s *:.i,. Someni, of these people might get a little bitter and
;c '..'; ::e to work with them."
;; ,li. i~i:i :um is defeated March 9, Kiser said the Leg-
islati~, w\v;i bo forced to face the crisis, including the rural
urban condirlt.
:-1 think it is high time we do spend a great deal of time on
this. There are some major issues to be decided."
The league will not take a position on the amendment,
Chariolte liubbard said. but will publicize the pros and cons
ol the question.

-p -L ~-S-

_ d -I 1 -I .-I~

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs