Concerned Friends of Fernandina |
|
|
Amelia Island Assoc. e-mail phillipscanlan@comcast.net
DRAFT – 9/17/05 AIA Position: The city of Fernandina Beach should delay all decisions involving density increases to the City Comprehensive Plan until the Northeast Florida Regional Planning Council has made a decision, expected by the end of 2005, on the recommendation to have all of Amelia Island designated as a Category 1 Hurricane Evacuation Zone, which would put the entire island the Coastal High Hazard Area. By state law Coastal High Hazard Areas have their current Comprehensive Plan residential densities frozen to limit damage to infrastructure and to facilitate evacuation during a hurricane. Supporting Reasons:
_____________**________________
NASSAU COUNTY FINANCIAL PROBLEM ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT Introduction: This analysis of Nassau County financial problems is the result of reviews, over the past year, of Nassau County Financial reports and of published information. I have been directly involved in the analysis of the financial turmoil facing the county and have had the opportunity to discuss many of these issues with County staff or County Officers. Analysis of county financial problems has been performed by three separate citizen groups; the Amelia Island Council (AIC), the Amelia Island Association (AIA), and the Nassau Clerk’s Citizen Committee on Financial Policy. I have been directly involved as a member of all three citizen groups in developing these recommendations for improvement, which have been communicated to the Nassau Commissioners. The county needs to address each specific financial problem it faces to get out of a financial crisis – and there are a number of problems to address. The county must also prevent, or minimize, future financial problems by developing a sound financial management system. This talk will address the problems, the actions needed to address them, and the actions needed to implement a sound financial management system. We will start with analysis of the financial problems and the actions needed to address them. While many dislike talking about the problems, proposed improvements need to be linked to the problems being solved to be effective: A. Analysis of Nassau County’s Financial problems and actions needed: 1. High property taxes: The property taxes paid in Nassau County per capita are the 2nd highest in the seven county area. In 2004 Nassau County property taxes per capita were 40% higher than Duval/Jacksonville ($632/person vs. $452/person) per the Regional Planning Council. There are only 8 counties of the 67 in Florida with a higher property tax per capita. This is causing financial pressure on many small businesses and homeowners in Nassau County. The recent assessment of the property appraisal tax base in Nassau County for the 2005-06 fiscal tax year is up an additional 20% over the current year. This is expected to produce an additional $7 million in tax revenue for the Board of County Commissioners in fiscal 2005-2006. Nassau County increased the property tax rate for 2004-5 fiscal year, and should not do so again in 2005-2006. 2. Budget overruns: Even with higher than average per capita property taxes, Nassau County had the last five (5) consecutive years with expenditures greater than revenues (2000 through 2004). In four of those years, 2000 through 2003, the actual expenditures were about 10% more than the initial budget. We have not completed the year of 2004-2005, but the landfill budget faces a $2 million revenue shortfall, and the current county personnel spending rate could result in a $.5 million overrun on personnel costs. The new County manager has recently reduced staff in the landfill from 19 to 13 as a result of comparing with best in class operations. Therefore, the county needs to reduce expenditures elsewhere or increase revenues to avoid another budget overrun and avoid continued use of reserves for operations. 3. Depleted reserves: Nassau County spent about $25 million of the county’s $30 million reserve fund over the past 5 years due to annual expenditures being consistently higher than revenues. The General Fund reserves decreased from 37% of spending in 2000 to 7% in 2003 and to a further low of 2% in 2004. (According to the Fitch Credit rating report.) The reserves were largely used to fund capital projects. In addition to depleting reserves, last fiscal year the county went a step further and borrowed $4.2 million from a line-of-credit to address end-of-year cash flow problems. As of the 5/11/05 BOCC Mid-Year Budget Review the General Fund Reserves balance had been increased to $3.5 Million, about 10% of expenditures. In addition, $1.4 million in principal had been paid on the $4.2 Million line-of-credit loan, along with $125,000 in interest. It appears the County is on track to begin rebuilding General Fund reserves in 2005; however the Landfill reserves may have to be depleted to cover a revenue shortfall. Reserves should only be used for major unanticipated costs and need to be replaced after being used. 4. Uncontrolled & under funded new growth: Nassau County authorized 10,000 to 20,000 new homes to be built without having adequate new home impact fees in place for the roads and other infrastructure required to serve these new Nassau County citizens. The new County Manager has proposed to change that in Nassau county, and in the next few months we will see if the Board of County commissioners support his proposals to do so. First, he has proposed a fair share cost per home of $3,000/home for Yulee developments to pay for roads parallel to AIA to meet the traffic concurrency requirements for new homes there. Second, he has requested a proposal for a new home impact fee study – that based on the recent St. Johns County study could triple the new home impact fees in the county from about $1,400 per home to about $4,200 per home. The County Commissioners on Monday 6/27 proposed that the Amelia Concourse Developers pay the full existing impact fee of $1,400 instead of the 50% reduced rate that was authorized in the past of $700 per home. A step in the right direction. When new growth does not pay for itself – then new growth is being subsidized by existing tax payers while simultaneously degrading quality of life in the community. We will see over the next few months if the Board of County Commissioners supports the proposal of the new County Manager to have growth begin paying for itself in Nassau County. 5. Lack of funds for required new Schools: The Nassau School Board has identified a need for 10 new schools to support the new growth, and the need for a new home impact fee of $3,600 per new home to pay for these new schools. County Commissioners approval is required to implement. The Builder’s Association has openly opposed new home impact fees for the required new schools to serve the new growth in the county – and the County Commissioners have delayed acting on implementing these required fees. New home impact fees should pay for the new schools required to serve them. We will see in the next few months if the Board of County Commissioners supports the school board request and the citizens of the county, or the developer’s wishes. A public hearing on this has been scheduled for 7/25. 6. Lack of roads for increased traffic: Nassau County has authorized many new retail store and strip mall developments, along with new stop lights, along A1A causing increased traffic congestion and increased traffic accidents. The county has not implemented adequate new home impact fees to develop parallel routes to A1A to handle the authorized new home and commercial traffic, even though it has been a growing issue for the past ten years, or more. The new County Manager has prepared a good plan for providing two needed parallel routes to A1A – using proposed fair share concurrency fees of $3,000 per new home and other builder provided support. We will see in the next few months if the County Commissioners support this proposed solution. 7. Lack of basic financial management: After using most of the county reserves, Nassau County opened and used a $4 million line of credit loan, and then failed to make either principal or interest payments in the year 2004. Fully using a line-of-credit loan for recurring costs and then not making required loan payments is not sound financial management. This year the county has made principal ($1.4 M) and interest (.12 M) payments on this loan. In addition, improved financial controls are required to avoid a possible reoccurrence of this problem. 8. Concerns of misappropriation of funds: At the request of the new County Clerk, the State of Florida is currently investigating the misappropriation of $800,000 to $1,000,000 in unaccounted-for Nassau County funds, under the previous Clerk’s administration. In addition, there is a second investigation by the county into work paid for but not done on the new County Court House. This year the County staff and Commissioners are helping the state investigate possible misappropriation of funds in prior years. In addition, an audit of the financial control processes should also be done to ensure use of best practices and sound financial management to prevent, or minimize, potential future misappropriations of taxpayer funds. 9. Credit rating downgrade: The Nassau County credit rating was downgraded by the Fitch Credit Rating Service in late 2004 and the county was put on a credit watch by them at that time. Fitch’s key requirements in a plan to regain financial stability are: -Making required payments on the line of credit loan. - Rebuilding the depleted reserves. -Not overrunning the budget. - Instituting adequate financial controls. The new County Manager and Board of County Commissioners have made progress on the first – loan payments have been made. On rebuilding reserves the General Fund reserves are up at mid-year – but landfill reserves may have to be depleted and personnel cost overruns may require use of some reserves. Reserves should probably be up a bit at the end of the year. The landfill revenue shortfall and the personnel cost overrun are likely to cause another year of budget overrun. Improved financial controls have been recommended by the AIC, AIA and Clerk’s Committee – the next few months will see if they are acted on by the Board of Commissioners. 10. Subsidizing out-of-county trash haulers: Nassau County has been accepting out-of-county trash -about 75% of the total landfill input - from independent haulers for significantly less than the full long-term cost-per-ton and for about ½ the rate charged Nassau County households. In 2005 the county faces a $2 Million shortfall in landfill revenue. The landfill is supposed to be a self- funding enterprise unit. More volume is not a sound financial management solution when you are losing money on each unit. The new County Manager informed me he is working on a proposal to address the lower than required landfill fees. We will see in the next few months if the County Commissioners support his proposal. 11. Under-budgeting of emergency services: The 2005 County Municipal Service Unit (MSU) fund was under-budgeted, resulting in the money available for firemen overtime being used up before the fire season had even started. The county used sales tax dollar revenue, originally dedicated to pay off the county Judicial Complex bond debt, to supplement this shortfall in the budget for operational expenses. Because the county MSU fund was under-budgeted, the county MSU deduction from the county taxes charged to the citizens of Fernandina Beach was lower than it should have been. Hence, city residents may have been charged too high a county tax rate. The county has borrowed from Peter to pay Paul, time and time again, and that is not a good idea. Paying off debt is sound financial management. Under-funding ongoing operating costs in the budget is not sound financial management. 12. Lack of funding for maintenance: Nassau County had insufficient funds in 2005 to do routine road maintenance involving resurfacing, or to help Callahan pave dirt roads that became impassable for school buses in bad weather. In addition, there has been a lack of a funded capital budget for major repair or replacement work on buildings, roads, and bridges. Not having a funded capital budget to maintain the capital assets of the county is reckless and irresponsible, and it is not sound financial management. The county just passed an additional 5 cent per gal. gas tax which is projected to produce about an additional $1.2 million per year for use on road maintenance. The Clerk’s Citizen committee has recommended allocating a fixed portion of the property tax rate to fund a needed capital budget. The AIC and AIA both recommended increases in the new home impact fees to help fund the capital budget. We will see over the next few months if the County Commissioners act on these recommendations. 13. Lack of funds for basics: In 2005, Nassau County did not have sufficient funds for an adequate book budget for the library. Nassau County even planned to eliminate all funding for beach life guards in the initial proposed 2005 budget, made in 2004, before a citizen protest held that to a budget cut, recognizing the children’s lives that would be put at risk. The county promised to provide furniture for the Callahan new library branch when it opened last month – but when it was completed there were no funds to follow through on the promise. In spite of the fact that recently there was $100,000 of unbudgeted funds made available for new furniture and electronics for the Commissioners’ meeting room. This does not set the leadership example needed by the county during this time of financial crisis. The possible need for new meeting room furniture should have been prioritized, planned, and budgeted for the next fiscal year. Basics should be funded and now is not the time for impulse purchases. 14. County debt doubled: The County debt more than doubled from $46 million to $117 million from 9/30/98 to 9/30/03. The largest single item was the new Court House Complex. In spite of objections from the City of Fernandina Beach the county built a 2nd court house at a location in Yulee near Rt. 95. As a result, the county now has two regular courthouses, and a former temporary one which is one now used as a new Administrative Building. The creation of 2 court houses and a new Administrative Building contributed to the creation of the financial crisis the county new faces. While this debt can’t be made to just go away, certainly the 1 cent sales tax could be used as originally planned to pay off this debt – not be used to make-up for an under budgeted Municipal Services Budget. We will see over the next few months if the Board of Commissioner corrects this problem when they set the 2005-2006 budget. 15. Staff increases were very high: The County Commission Staff and Constitutional Officer staff increased from 449 on 9/30/98 to 728 on 9/30/03, a 62% increase in 5 years. Of that 279 increase about 30 or so were for new state funded or self-funding units. So the real increase is more like 55% over 5 years, or about 10% per year. The School Board had 8% growth in same 5 Year period. Five years of double digit growth rates for staff is not sound financial management. Recognizing the financial crisis being faced when setting the 2004-5 budget the commissioners limited new personnel growth in the 2005 budget and have controlled staff growth thus far in 2005. Over the next few months we will see if this control continues and is planned for again in the 2005-6 budget. 16. Support of developers, not citizens: A developer has been chairperson of the Nassau County Planning & Zoning Board for the past few years. The P&Z Board and County Commissioners have continually changed zoning and increased densities at the request of developers, which has accelerated the enormous growth in Nassau County, without having adequate impact fees and ordinances in place to ensure growth pays for itself. The Amelia Island Council (AIC) and Amelia Island Association (AIA) citizen groups have recommended several significant changes to improve the county’s financial management in August of 2004; including making growth pay for itself. The Clerk’s Citizen Committee on 5/11/05 called for growth to pay for itself, and the County Manager and the School Board have proposed impact fees to do just that. We will see over the next few months if the Board of County Commissioners acts on the proposals from the AIC, the AIA, the Clerk’s Citizen Committee, the new County manager and from the School Board. A key part of all these recommendations is to have growth pay for itself with adequate fair share ($3,000/home) and infrastructure impact fees ($4,200/home), and the proposal from the School Board for school impact fees ($3,600/home). If all these are acted on the new home impact fee would increase from the current $1,400 per home to about $10,800 per new home, an increase of $9,400. If they are not acted on these costs will be born by property tax payers or will show up as reduced quality of life in Nassau County due to our inability to support new roads and new schools required by the new growth. 17. Lack of financial management experience and skills: County Commissioners need adequate financial skills, experience, and support to implement and manage a sound financial management system. The number of financial problems uncovered recently in Nassau County is an indication this area needs strengthening. The new County Manager brings with him both management skills and financial skills that should be very helpful to Nassau County. We will see over the next few months if the County Commissioners support his proposals and that of the Clerk’s Citizen Committee in implementing a sound financial management system in Nassau County. 18. Lack of focus on the two basic needs of the county: The Amelia Island area county district’s 1 & 2 (East Nassau) have become tourism and retiree communities and need strong support to maintain the charm of the Amelia Island area, while holding taxes to a level that many small tourist businesses and retirees can afford. The remaining county districts 3, 4 and 5 (West Nassau) are fast becoming bedroom commuter suburb communities of Jacksonville and need a focus on managing rapid growth by having growth pay for itself in order to fund and provide needed new roads and schools, while maintaining affordable property taxes. In addition, support is needed for a light industrial business base that provides higher paying jobs in Nassau County, including adequate land planning in the Comprehensive Plan. We will see over the next few months if the County Commission supports the new impact fee proposals to fund the needed infrastructure and schools required by new growth, by making growth pay for itself. B. Underlying concerns or root causes of so many financial problems: From long list of above problems we can see that there have been in the past three underlying areas of concern that may have contributed to the financial crisis the county now faces: 1. Financial “COMPETENCE concerns”: a. Loans payments not made b. Reserves depleted c. Continuous budget overruns d. Credit rating downgrade e. Selling landfill space for less than cost f. Cash Flow problems g. Not recognizing many of these problems before the AIC report of 8/04. The new County Clerk and new County Manager have developed proposals to address these financial concerns, we will see over the next few months if the Board of Commissioners supports their proposals. 2. Financial “CONFLICT OF INTEREST concerns” a. Higher than average Property taxes per capita b, Higher than average Gas taxes c. A continuous series of Comprehensive Plan and Zoning changes that continue to accelerate growth d. Higher than average new home growth e. Lower than average new home impact fees f. A developer as Chairperson of the County Planning and Zoning Board. g. Lack of adequate action on AIC recommendations made 8/16/04. The new County Manager tells me “The old way of doing business in Nassau County is no more”. Over the next few months we will see if the Board of Commissioners supports him on this. 3. Financial “CORRUPTION concerns” a. A state investigation into an unaccounted for $800,000 to $1,000,000. b. A county investigation into work paid for and not done on the new court house. c. Concerns adequate financial control processes may not be in place to prevent theft. An independent audit of the financial control processes should be required. The new County Clerk has called in the state to investigate past problems and has proposed improvements to the financial control system. Over the next few months we will see if the County Commissioners support these improvements in financial control. C. Key Recommendations for improvement: 1. Reduce debt: Pay off old debt and avoid new debt. Use all of the 1 cent sales tax for this purpose as originally intended. 2. Reduce staff: Benchmark the best operations for each dept. put a freeze on hiring, and don’t replace attrition. The new County Manager has done this for the Landfill. 3. Support Citizens, not developers: Implement required fair share and new home impact fees for new roads and impact fees for new schools, this fiscal year, prior to 10/1/05. Stop accelerating development with zoning and Comprehensive Plan changes. Stop appointing developers and realtors and others in the building community to the Planning and Zoning Board. 4. Ensure County Commissioners have adequate financial management skills, experience and support: 5. Establish a vision for the future that will meet the two basic needs of the county: The tourism needs of the Amelia Island area districts 1& 2 and the new homeowner and new business needs of districts 3, 4 & 5. 6. Implement recommendations for a Sound Financial Management System: (See below list from the AIC, AIA, and Clerk’s Citizen committee for sound financial management, many of which have been articulated as recommendations in response to the individual problems in the list above.)
Most of the above recommendations should have been addressed before now, but should be implemented before the start of the next fiscal year (10/1/05), to reduce the potential for even more serious future problems.
Soon the Republican and Democratic Parties will be selecting the candidates they choose to endorse for the two County Commissioner seats up for election in Nov. 2006. Both parties need to make sure their endorsed candidates represent the taxpayers, without an apparent conflict-of-interest by having Builder’s Association connections, support, or financing. Both parties also need to identify and endorse candidates for the two commissioner seats that have strong financial experience and skills. Both parties also need to endorse and support a clear platform, my suggestion is: “Implementing a sound financial management system for Nassau County, without endorsements or connections to the Builders Association.” In 2006 I would like to have two excellent candidates from both parties to choose from. Then the taxpayers of Nassau County can’t lose. As someone once said – “It is all about the money – stupid!”
Phil Scanlan
List of AIC, AIA and Clerk’s Citizen Committee Recommendations for sound financial management. In August of 2004 the Amelia Island Council (AIC) made 7 key recommendations for sound financial management in Nassau County.
(6 specific process changes were recommended) g. Implement a Charter form of government, using best practices, including a separate county Chief Finance Officer (CFO). In Sept. 2004 the Amelia Island Association (AIA) endorsed the AIC recommendations for sound financial management by the county and called for their implementation by the Board of County commissioners. The AIA also asked the BOCC to publicly support these recommendations prior to the Nov. 2, 2004 election, which they did not. In May 2005 the Clerk’s Citizen Committee recommended a new Nassau County Financial Policy and asked for a June 8th follow-up meeting to discuss it. Key recommendations included: a. Growth must pay for itself, b. Reinstitute a revenue-driven budget, c. Establish specific financial control processes (a new Financial Policy ordinance was recommended), d. Establish a formal cost reduction program e. Reestablish the prior credit rating for the county. The major changes in the County Financial policy recommended by the Clerk’s Citizen committee include the following: a. The county shall not fund recurring expenses with nonrecurring revenue. b. Reserves for contingencies shall be budget for a certain percentage of expenditures, and shall be maintained at that level. c. The county shall establish a cash-flow management plan requiring adequate cash carry forward for the 1st QTR of each year. d. Enterprise activities must stand-alone as a financial entity. e. Enterprise liability accounts shall be funded to meet future expected liabilities. f. The County’s budget format shall reflect the organization chart, (to provide organizational accountability.) g. The Clerk of Courts shall be authorized to ensure all budget policy requirements are met, including establishment of adequate reserves. h. Each capital expenditure shall identify the funding source. i. All new capital projects shall also include estimated recurring operating expenses for the project. j. Financing for a capital project shall not have a term longer than 90% of the expected life of the project. k. Capital reserves shall be established for the General Fund, Transportation Fund and Municipal Service fund in support of the 5-year capital plan and shall be funded with a specific allocation from the millage rate for each fund. l. The use of impact fees shall be determined by project priority of the Capital improvement Plan. m. Reserves will only be used for unanticipated mission critical expenditures, with approval by the Clerk of Courts.
____________**_____________
___________________**______________________
The Florida
Public Utilities has been granted a rate increase as of 4/15/04. 3/12/04 The Amelia Island Association (AIA) position on taxes is that impact fees for new developments should be sufficient to recover additional costs driven by new developments; including such things as roads, sidewalks, water and sewage, schools, county staff, county buildings, conservation and recreation. Existing homeowners should not have to pay to subsidize new development through increased property taxes. If necessary, the county should hire an expert consultant to recommend the appropriate impact fees for the county, including schools. (The City of Fernandina Beach presently has hired a consultant to do this for the city with a recommendation due in June 2004.) REASONS SUPPORTING AIA POSITION 1. Nassau County already has an above average growth rate. 2. Above average growth rates result in above average increases in taxes due to the higher government costs to build new infrastructure for roads, schools and services. (Based on over 700 studies, including many Florida studies.) 3. Amelia Island is just 3% of the Nassau County area with 40% of the Nassau County population, but in 2002 Amelia Island paid 70% of the Nassau County property taxes. 4. 90% of new development in Nassau County is now taking place between Amelia Island and Rt. 95. If the impact fees are not at the level that can cover all the additional costs caused by new homes, then the existing homeowners will pay the shortfall. Amelia Island property owners, who pay 70% of county property taxes will be the primary ones paying for any shortfall. In effect, existing Amelia Island residents will be subsidizing off-island new development, if we do not have appropriate impact fees. 5. Amelia Island, because it is a tourist and vacation attraction, consists of 52% of homeowners who are not homesteaded. For the 52% who are not homesteaded (2nd homes or rental property) they have faced very significant increases in their home appraisal, which adds substantially to the increase in property taxes. The new off-island developments will likely be homesteaded residents and pay lower taxes over time than Amelia Island residents. 6. A significant portion of Amelia Island homes are owned by retirees, who live on a fixed income. 7. Application of an appropriate impact fee on new development may also have the beneficial effect of slowing growth to the average for the surrounding communities 8. A recent study done by a University of Florida law professor for the City of Fernandina Beach showed the average Florida impact fee is $5,000, with some counties as high as $13,000. Nassau County impact fees as of 3/5/04 are a maximum of $2,484 for new homes, which is less than half the state average. 9. The 3/05/04 Nassau County impact fees currently include zero for school costs and the Nassau County School District has a plan for 10 new schools in the next 20 years, 9 off of Amelia Island, which will cost $176 million. 10. The shortfall in impact fees must be made up through property taxes. Since Amelia Island pays 70% of the county property taxes then 70% of the impact fee short all would fall on Amelia Island homeowners. Since there are roughly 10,000 homes on Amelia Island then for every 10,000 new homes built off the island each island home will be paying an extra property tax of (70% X $2,500) = $1,750 to make up for the impact fee shortfall.
Crane
Island SPOIL SITE POSITION 12/3/03 The Amelia Island Association (AIA) position on the planned Crane Island spoil site by the Florida Inland Navigational District (FIND) is that an alternative location should be found for this spoil site. 2. The planned spoil site is at the end of a highly used airport runway, and the planned location is directly under two runway paths.
Spoil sites are known to attract birds, which can cause a
potential safety problem for the aircraft flying in that area. 3. The
entrance way to Amelia Island is AIA over the Shave bridge,which provides a beautiful view
of Crane Island trees from the Shave bridge. Recognizing
Amelia Island has a large tourist business, this entrance is important to maintaining the
charm of the island for both residents and business.
4. The
2000-2010 Comprehensive Plan states: “Coastal resources offer unique amenities, making them highly desirable: however, they are finite and highly susceptible to degradation. Due to these characteristics, coastal resources are given special consideration. Recognizing the importance of preserving these resources the purpose of the Coastal Management Element is two-fold, to plan for and, where appropriate, restrict development activities which would damage or destroy coastal resources, and to protect human life and limit public expenditures in areas subject to destruction by natural forces.” 5. Crane Island is designated Conservation-Preservation in the Nassau County Comprehensive Plan, and clear-cutting 36 acres on the north end of this island is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
********************** PROPOSED INCREASED ELECTRIC RATES 12/3/03 (Docket No. 030438-EI) The Amelia Island Association (AIA) position on the Florida Public Utilities Company (FPUC) proposed rate increase is that it is an unreasonably large increase on Amelia Island residential customers. The
FPUC proposed Residential Facilities monthly increase of 55% and the proposed Residential
Service usage increase of 37% are both
unreasonably high increases and therefore should not be allowed. The
AIA also objects to the FPUC’s very large proposed increase in residential rates while
simultaneously proposing a very large decrease
20% to 63%) in business rates. It seems unreasonable that such a large increase in residential service rates
and a simultaneous very large decrease
in business rates could both be cost justified. The maximum allowable rate of return for FPUC is 9.01%. Using the FPUC projection of making only 2.73% ROR, then the maximum increase needed to make a ROR of 9.01% is (9.01% - 2.73%) 6.28%. This assumes the total revenue of FPUC is essentially equal to their investment base. The investment base is reported as $39.8 million and the total annual revenue is reported as $38.9 million, which are essentially equal. This maximum increase of 6.28% on the total revenue base is about 1/3rd the FPUC stated residential rate increase of 17% on the total revenue base. Adjusting for the minor difference between the investment base and annual revenue would increase the maximum rate increase to 6.4% on total revenue.
AIA SUPPORTING REASONS1. A
monopoly’s cost increases and rate increases should be held to be somewhat in line
with the inflation rate, which is about 3%. 2. The proposed FPUC rate increase is being communicated as a 17% increase in an average customer’s bill. However, this calculation includes the large separate fuel charge (which is $37.45/1000 kwh or 75% of the total residential usage charge) masking the actual increases in the remaining costs that are managed by FPUC. 3. The
Residential Usage service charge is proposed, by FPUC, to increase from $12.20 to $17.40
per 1000 kwh in 2004, a 37% increase. 4. The FPUC has simultaneously proposed a 33% reduction for General Service Demand (GSD) and a 63% reduction for General Service Large Demand (GLSD). In addition, the FPUC provides no explanation for this in their proposed rate notice to customers. FPUC Energy Usage Charges (per 1000 kwh)
Current Proposed %
Change Residential (RS) $12.20 $17.42 + 37% GSD $ 5.48 $ 3.68 - 33% GSLD $ 5.48 $ 2.04 - 63% Currently Residential usage charges are 2.2
times higher than GSLD Business usage charges. The
proposed rate changes would result in residential usage charges being 8.5 times higher
than GSLD Business. 5. The FPUC
has also proposed a significant rate reduction in both the Demand charge and the
Facilities charge for the General Service Large Demand -1 (GSLD1). The proposed reduction
is 20% for both charges. 6. The
Residential Customer fixed monthly charge is proposed by FPUC to increase from $7/month to
$10.84/month. This is an enormous increase of
55%. 7. The Customer Entitlement Service Charge (new home owner serviceconnection) is proposed by FPUC to increase from $13 to $44. AIA also objects to this 238% residential rate increase. ******************************** TREE
POSITION The Amelia Island Association (AIA) position on Amelia Island Trees supports the Nassau County Comprehensive Plan (6.05.01) (2000-2010) in implementation of measures to conserve native plant communities in a healthy environment for the enjoyment of future generations. The following measures are proposed to protect Amelia Island trees: 1. Implement a County Tree ordinance for the un-incorporated southern part of Amelia Island to enable tree protection on all of Amelia Island, recognizing the Fernandina Beach Tree Ordinance (No. 2001-18 implemented 12/4/01) already provides tree protection for the north part of the island. 2. Approve a
section of Amelia Island Pky. and Scott Road as a Canopy Tree protected roads. (Completed.) REASONS SUPPORTING AIA TREE POSITION 1. Amelia Island is in the Coastal Zone. The County Comprehensive Plan recognizes this area is highly desirable however finite and susceptible to degradation. “The Coastal Management Element is to plan for and where appropriate restrict development activities which would destroy coastal resources.” Having some means to protect trees is appropriate for the Coastal Zone, which has limited natural resources. 2. The Fernandina Beach City portion of Amelia Island already has a Tree ordinance for the northern part of the island. The proposed County Tree ordinance, which was developed by a County Commission appointed committee, would provide similar protection for the southern part of the island. 3. The northern part of Amelia Island developed, without a tree ordinance, many years before the southern part of Amelia Island and as a result it has lost much of its tree cover. Adding a tree ordinance after the trees are gone is too late. Recent developments on the south end have left significantly less trees than earlier developments. Without a tree ordinance the character of the community on the south end of Amelia Island is currently being degraded. 4. The new developments that leave much fewer trees degrade the character of the community and the property values of all in the community – for both existing and future homeowners. 5. The proposed tree ordinance is aimed at simply minimizing the loss of trees above that necessary for a site development. 6. The Tree ordinance and protection of Canopy tree roads is necessary to preserve the unique aesthetic character, and value, of Amelia Island. 7. Amelia Island homeowners, who are taxpayers, want to protect trees for both aesthetic and property value reasons. 8. Developers who protect trees, where possible, are rewarded with an increased value for the property when they sell it. 9. The citizen Tree Committee appointed by the County Commissioners included representatives from the Builders Association and the Plantation, as well as development professionals and concerned citizens. Back to Top |
For problems or questions regarding this web contact webmaster@fofgroup.org
"cfof" are residents of Fernandina Beach, Florida.
|
