There has been plenty of buzz recently about the county establishing a Law Enforcement Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU). Despite having such a long name, the concept is fairly simple. When a county establishes an MSTU for a certain service, they create a specific tax to support that service. Currently, Hernando County has a fire rescue MSTU. Taxpayers are able to see what they are paying for the service on their tax bill. A downside of the MSTU is that it limits the county’s flexibility during the budget process in providing funds for that service. Additionally, it makes it more difficult to share personnel since they cannot be utilized between departments as easily.
Emotions ran high on Tuesday, October 13th, as Commissioners discussed ordinances put on the agenda for establishing a law enforcement MSTU (for patrol/investigative costs and related administration) as well as a special district for non-patrol related costs such as operation of the county jail. For a week prior to the meeting, the Sheriff’s Office lit up their social media accounts in opposition to such a move and rallied their supporters. On June 28th 2015, the issue was previously put on the agenda and subsequently removed. The same happened on October 13th.
Currently the Sheriff’s Budget is funded through the General Fund whose monies are generated by many different types of taxing revenues. At the close of each fiscal year, the Sheriff presents his budget to the County Commission and they determine the level at which they are willing to fund it. It is not readily apparent on the tax bill, what residents pay for the Sheriff’s budget since it comes out of the general fund. It’s impossible to know that residents are paying more for the Sheriff this year than they did last year by comparing the tax bills.
Commissioner Dukes placed an MSTU ordinance on the agenda for the June 28th meeting in order to create greater transparency on the tax bill. Dukes then reasoned that an MSTU would not be the best option since that would lead to separate millage rates for both the General Fund and the MSTU. He reasoned that a special district would be a better choice since the millage rates would be merged. However, this is something that can be implemented with an MSTU through the ordinance. At the June 28th meeting the Sheriff made compelling arguments against both an MSTU and special district sighting a shift of burden from all taxpayers to just property owners. Commissioner Holcomb echoed this concern on October 13th.
This is a compelling argument, but not entirely accurate. The county will still collect the same amount of money from sales and other taxes. They are shifting a portion of the property taxes they already collect to pay for the sheriff’s department. Sheriff Nienhuis additionally stated that a special district and MSTU would lead to municipalities potentially being able to opt out and still receive services, providing the town of Waldo as an example. He worried that property owners of unincorporated Hernando County would carry the burden for the cities of Brooksville and Weeki Wachee. The Sheriff also stated that it would create a larger burden on his HR and operational staff due to greater accounting requirements.
The Sheriff has been using several methods to oppose the MSTU. Before the October 13th meeting the Sheriff’s Office posted letters from the Hernando County Chamber of Commerce and State Representative Blaise Ingoglia against the MSTU. Sheriff Nienhuis has been interviewed on various news outlets. The Sheriff’s Office has been actively campaigning against the restructuring on social media. They put out the following on facebook,
As we examine the county’s new tax proposal, Sheriff Al Nienhuis has major concerns. His concerns are as follows:
• Increases the County Commissioner’s taxing limit by $70 Million Dollars
• Prioritizes bureaucracy at the expense of law enforcement
• Unnecessarily complicates the ability for citizens to understand the Sheriff’s Budget
• Increases taxes for the vast majority of Hernando County property owners
• Requires experts and consultants to implement, costing taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars
• May result in litigation
• Increases uncertainty and conflict during budget time
• Requires two new unnecessary laws/ordinances
• Hasty implementation
• Difficult to undo.
Sheriff Al Nienhuis said, ‘I am surprised and disappointed that the County Commission is considering TWO NEW TAXES on Tuesday, especially since they considered it a bad idea just a few months ago. Nothing has surfaced in the last six months to justify resurrecting their new tax proposal.’
Wayne Dukes made a motion to remove the item from the agenda at the start of the meeting on October 13th. He stated, It’s become obvious to me that any rational discussion of these items is impossible. Having said that, county staff is prepared to go point by point on those items listed in letters and on social media and show they are incorrect assumptions. But what’s the point, we’ve been tried and convicted before this meeting has even started.”
Diane Rowden stated, “I have been very surprised with the tactics and the cyberbullying that has been going on to try to intimidate us as elected officials. In my three terms on the county commission I’ve never seen an elected official in the manner that we’ve seen. With the Sheriff’s Office using social media to frighten the public by sending out misinformation. Also using taxpayer’s money to send out this information… Using his staff time to send out propaganda is just wrong. If the shoe were on the other foot we would be tarred and feathered. ”
Some statements in the press release are debatable. For example, “Unnecessarily complicates the ability for citizens to understand the Sheriff’s Budget.” The whole point of the MSTU is to partition off the Sheriff’s Office on the tax bill so citizens can see exactly what they are paying for. The sheriff’s budget would be directly funded by the taxpayers and any change in funding would not affect the rest of the county’s budget. The millage rate for the MSTU and special district would be set by the county commission in order to provide funding for the Sheriff’s budget. If the Sheriff’s budget increases, then the commission would have to agree to a millage increase and citizens would see that on their tax bill on the lines dedicated to the Sheriff’s MSTU/special district.
“Since I was first elected to the county commission, I have advocated for enacting a Municipal Service Taxing Unit, the MSTU to fund the Sheriff’s road patrol,” stated Commissioner Rowden. She continued, “That way property owners would know exactly how much of their taxes were going to fund the Sheriff’s service by reading the trim notice and tax bill. There is nothing new and has been thoroughly studied for over the last 14 years.”
Commissioner Rowden explained that former Sheriff Richard Nugent and current Congressman was approached with the idea back in 2001 along with the privatization of the jail- both of which he stood against at the time. However, Nugent eventually changed his tune about both the jail and the MSTU. Commissioner Rowden explained that the Sheriff’s office would benefit from being funded by MSTU. They would not have to return unspent money at the end of the year and could maintain its own reserve account. The sheriff would be able to plan its budget without having to worry about what affect it has on the overall county budget. A particular benefit for both the Sheriff and the County in light of the recent budget hearing chaos over the Sheriff’s budget.
Commissioner Holcomb rallied in favor of the Sheriff’s position and supported pulling the item from the agenda. He cited concerns over new taxing potential for the general fund after an MSTU is created for the Sheriff’s Office. Commissioner Holcomb was also concerned over fees for the tax collector, property appraiser and cost allocation that would result.
After the item was removed from the agenda, Sheriff Nienhuis stated, “I think that it’s important for the Board of County Commissioners to understand that everything that my office and I did was in response to absolutely no communication between the board and the board’s staff and my staff or me. If Commissioner Rowden calls informing the public cyberbullying, then I guess I’m guilty of cyberbullying.”
The Sheriff has repeatedly taken offense about the lack of notification he has received on this matter by the county. The county administrator should have notified the Sheriff that the MSTU ordinance was to be put on the agenda once again. However, due to Sunshine Laws, there cannot be discussion between multiple commissioners on the MSTU ordinance since that must occur entirely in public eye. It is not entirely fair for the Sheriff to protest about the ordinance until there is a set plan on the table following public discussions by the Commission and Sheriff. Many issues brought up by the Sheriff and commission could be solved through the implementation of the MSTU as set in the final ordinance. The major issue would be the negotiations over the amount of taxes the MSTU is given.
The concern of having to provide service to municipalities who have not adopted the MSTU/special district is rectified in the current ordinances. Both the MSTU ordinance for patrol related services/related administration and the Special District for non patrol related services such as the jail have conditions stating that funding for service to municipalities would be taken out of the general fund, not the MSTU or special district taxing units. Thus a broad cross section of taxpayers would be paying for those services including those living in the municipalities instead of just property owners in the unincorporated areas.
As with any change, there are pros and cons which need to be weighed rationally before taking action. The Sheriff and Commission agreed to attend to the issue of funding for the Sheriff’s office after the first of the year. Hopefully, both sides will have had time to cool off by then and can rationally discuss the merits of this proposal.