By Faith Ross

The new buzzword from candidates running for local, public office seems to be “new revenue streams.” To understand why these words have become important, voters may want to know how the State of Florida impacts municipal revenue streams.

State statutes neglect to support the economic sustainability of municipalities. By law, local tax revenues are placed solely in the hands of county governments for disbursement.  And by state law, there is no mandate to send any county property tax funds (paid by cities) back to municipalities for infrastructure or services.  As a result, municipalities resort to funding their own police and fire services along with other essential services.  Roughly 50% of the budget of Fernandina Beach is dedicated to law enforcement and fire and rescue services. As a tourist town, almost 20% of the city’s budget is allocated to Parks and Recreation. Case in point, Nassau County government funds four sports complexes in other towns in Nassau County.  Nassau County sends no recreation monies to the City of Fernandina Beach. Nassau County government is permitted, by state law, to totally ignore any municipality that funds it.

The Tourism Bed Tax is another example of the legislature allowing total disregard for municipal economic development. Though the tourism council freely admits that roughly half of the county’s bed tax revenue is derived from the City of Fernandina Beach, only county government is permitted to decide where and how the bed tax funds will be spent. There is no mandate from the state to disburse the funds equitably. The county can keep all of the funds.

The state also dictates that state sales tax revenue be distributed to municipalities by population. Much of the county’s sales tax revenue is generated by Fernandina Beach. Fernandina’s population of 13,000 is dwarfed by the county’s burgeoning population of over 96,600.  As a result, the county receives roughly half of the city’s sales tax.

To further the case that municipal economic development is not supported by Nassau County government, in April, Nassau County completed a draft, beach, parking study. It recommended the creation of a county-wide parking authority to oversee all of the island’s nonresident, paid beach parking. The new authority would collect all parking revenue from all beaches (including city beaches). There was no mention of how the county would distribute the proceeds, if any, to Fernandina for the use of city-owned beach parking.

How do other municipalities compensate for the lack of support from their counties for infrastructure and services necessary for economic development? Many Florida municipalities use county interlocal agreements. Lake County promotes economic development with an interlocal agreement that equitably funds recreation, stormwater management, and transportation among other items with 14 municipalities within its jurisdiction.

Interlocal agreements are generated by a need for cost sharing and generally brought about with leverage. For instance, Fernandina may have some leverage with the county’s South Amelia Island Shore Stabilization Association (SAISSA). The SAISSA funds the sand renourishment of south county beaches. South county beaches seldom need sand renourishment; the Navy-supplied sand on the city’s beaches flows freely southward.  However, presently, an additional agreement between Fernandina and the Army Corps of Engineers for additional sand (if needed) keeps the city from implementing nonresident, paid beach parking.  Dropping the city’s Army Corps agreement would shift the cost of replacing south county beach sands to the county and SAISSA.  Fernandina would then be free to join the county in collecting nonresident, paid beach parking revenue.

Cost sharing economic development can actually mean “sharing” when tourism and nonresident recreation are jointly funded. Resisting the temptation to build, repair, or maintain city facilities mostly utilized by nonresidents could bring county government and tourism to a possible agreement.  For example, neither the Tourism Council nor the county have been asked to cost share the badly needed structural repair costs of the Island’s lighthouse (an icon for island tourism).  A proposed playground at Simmons Park is 80% surrounded by nonresidents. Over 95% of the participants utilizing Fernandina’s lighted, adult softball complex at the airport are nonresidents. Offering to cost share rather than defund may bring interlocal agreements into existence.

Hopefully, in the future, candidates interested in gaining new sources of revenue, will include the words “Interlocal Agreement,” “leverage” into the discussion of future cooperation with tourism and county government. Interlocal Agreements between Nassau County or the Tourist Development Council to support or promote any municipality’s economic growth or sustainability will likely only be accomplished with the assistance of a very large carrot and a massive stick.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Notify of

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Nicholas Velvet
Nicholas Velvet (@guest_65891)
3 months ago

A proposed playground at Simmons Road? Whattttttttttttt? Just where could you put that and what “non residents? That’s one side City, other side county no? I’ve been going past the “park” that got put in there over a year ago and I have to see anyone even there although I do acknowledge one woman’s comment months back, “it’s got a convenient bathroom”. Expensive facility if you ask me but heck…..I’m only the Fool taxpayer footing this stupidity. I thought the tree protection Committee would stop tree removal there if now The Recreation Komissioners want a playground. What happened?

Source of funds folks. In terms of general taxes 13,000 payers vs. 96,000 off island payers. Island looses. In terms of bed tax I don’t see squat in Nassau County vs. Ameilia Island ON ISLAND. Island wins. Logical so it’ll never happen. Come on man, just write the tax check you’ll feel good about yourself. Yea right.

Karen Thompson
Karen Thompson (@guest_65895)
3 months ago

You’re so right Faith. I’ve been complaining about this unjust city/county situation for years. You make it very straightforward and suggest changes which make so much sense. I wish you would publish it in other media outlets too.

DAVID LOTT (@guest_65898)
3 months ago

While I think some of the inequities Faith points out are items that the County should correct, the idea of dropping the ACOE beach nourishment agreement is flawed. Yes, much of the sand placed during the nourishment operation eventually finds its way to the middle and southern parts of the island; but the beaches of FB need that nourishment operation every 5 – 8 years to maintain their elevation. That is a project with a pricetag of millions of dollars.
As to the Simmons Road park, the critics called out that project as a poor decision from Day 1 yet the Commission decided to move ahead. Then to make matters worse, due to the reconfiguration of the “playground” area to save increased tree removal, the playground equipment ordered for the park wouldn’t fit and got relocated to replace the worn out but much more expansive playground at Central Park.

Joyce newlin
Joyce newlin(@newlin12gmail-com)
3 months ago

Excellent explanation Faith! I’m surprised that more citizens aren’t expressing their concerns. Thank you for pointing out these issues.

Doug Mowery
Doug Mowery (@guest_65903)
3 months ago

“In terms of general taxes 13,000 payers vs. 96,000 off island payers.”

A lot of on-island folks are not in the city limits, yet they enjoy the “value” of doing so. East side of Citrona south of Jasmine, for example. The city map is interesting to look at.

Gloria Adams
Gloria Adams (@guest_65914)
3 months ago

Ms. Ross, please stop. The County does not have parks within ANY of the towns. They are all outside of the Towns so to insinuate that the City is being treated unfairly is just not true. Why would the County be expected to fund the City’s parks? The City of Fernandina collects its own impact fees which are supposed to fund their projects. What are they doing with that money? Also, why did the City continue to defer maintenance for YEARS of Central Park (consistently removed it from the budget year after year after year) and neglected it to the point that it needed to be torn down? Perhaps if they actually had a plan to maintain their infrastructure, the wouldn’t be begging the County for help. They also have over $2 million in salaries for Parks & Recreation, despite the fact that they don’t actually offer any programs other than their preschool and after school program (which generates tons of revenue for the City), aquatics and adult softball. All other programs are contracted out and not actually run by the City so they should be making money off those contracts/services for use of the facilities. The County needs to continue funding recreation for those that do not leave in the incorporated areas and the City/Towns need to use their own tax base to fund their needs.

DAVID LOTT (@guest_65947)
3 months ago
Reply to  Gloria Adams

Gloria, the last time I checked, residents of the City of FB were ALSO citizens of Nassau County and paid Nassau County taxes. That is reason enough as to why the county should allocate funds to support the City’s parks and recreational as well as beach facilities.

Robert S. Warner, Jr.
Robert S. Warner, Jr. (@guest_65950)
3 months ago
Reply to  Gloria Adams

See Dave Lott, below.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x