Bayshore Fire District provides assessment info
For residents who may have missed Tuesday’s public info session, the Bayshore Fire District has provided the hows and whys of a proposed fire assessment that could significantly raise fees, especially for those who don’t live in North Fort Myers’ most expensive homes.
The Fire Commissioners board is continuing to provide information to property owners ahead of the June 24 ballot where voters will decide whether to allow the district impose the proposed assessment to pay for fire services.
Those services are currently funded through property taxes that have been supplemented with grant money that is no longer available.
Fire Chief Larry Nisbet said the assessment is necessary to keep up the level of service those in the district expect.
Opponents, however, maintain the measure disproportionately affects those who can least afford to pay an increase.
Bayshore would be among the many area districts that hope to replace the ad valorum tax rate in favor of a methodology that divides costs among property types based on the percentage of calls for service.
Ad valorem, which brought significant funds during the boom years, dried up when the market went south in 2008-09 with property values shrinking 43 percent.
Even as values go up, the rate in tax increases has been capped at 3 percent annually because of homestead exemptions.
Nisbet said Bayshore, which has 14 full-time workers and 29 volunteers, responds to between 800 and 1,000 calls annually.
For the past several years, the district has had a $1.5 million budget, two-thirds of which is funded by property taxes, with the rest supplemented by grants, which are set to expire and cannot be renewed.
“The larger cities are getting that grant money now,” Nisbet said. “We’re not budgeting station costs or maintenance, so, like other departments, we’re looking at alternative funding mechanisms.”
Nisbet said without the assessment, he will have to lay off six in September and send out only two firefighters to the scene instead of four. This would impact service and could result in a rise in homeowners’ insurance costs, Nisbet said, because the district couldn’t send anyone into a burning building before backup help arrived. That could increase structural damage and so impact the districts’s ISO rating upon which insurance rates are partially based.
A fee-based system, Nesbit said, would distribute costs among all properties, including the tax-exempt, stabilize revenues and ensure future growth of the department.
After some debate by the fire board, it settled on the historical demand methodology, in which the department went back two years to see where most of the calls for service have been.
Nearly three-fourths of the calls were residential, which is where the bulk of the tax will be levied, at a fixed cost per dwelling of $587.78 annually, regardless of the value of the property.
Commercial land would be assessed at 51 cents per square foot, institutional properties (churches, etc.) at $1.26, and industrial warehouse at 5 cents.
Vacant and agricultural land would be assessed at $63.97 per acres, capped at 10 acres.
It is the residential part of the methodology that has created the most controversy, since those who live in homes with smaller tax values will pay double or even triple what they previously paid, while those in more expensive homes would get a break.
“They are ignoring the value of the unit. Some in our unit are assessed at $55,000 and are paying less than $200,” resident Andy Jamison said. “Just like me and just like someone with a home assessed at $250,000.”
The “break-even” point at which a residential property owner would pay the same either way is about $168,000 in taxable assessed value.
Jamison said his 160-unit development contributes $45,000 per year to fire service.
It the assessment passes, the number increases to $95,000, or a half-million increase over 10 years.