County anger over growth control fades, but help from legislators likely too little

Everyone got along and the focus was on the positives Friday during Collier County's post-legislative workshop.

This was in contrast to a 2005 post-legislative workshop, when county officials were seething over a new growth-management law that had just passed the Legislature. County commissioners were angry at state representatives last year for not opposing that legislation.

Collier officials worry this law will devastate their current growth-management system, which requires roads be built before development can occur.

That 2005 growth-management law hasn't been changed. Most county officials still dislike it. But county leaders no longer are angry at their legislators because they tried to make changes to the law in 2006.

Rep. Dudley Goodlette, R-Naples, said efforts to amend the law were unsuccessful because the Florida Department of Community Affairs opposed any changes to it.

But Goodlette said Collier got a significant concession when DCA sent a letter to the county saying checkbook concurrency, its growth-management system for roads, could be OK'd as existing prior to passage of the new law.

County leaders still will have to pass a proportionate fair share ordinance by the end of 2006, and county officials are dubious that concurrency can survive under that ordinance. A proportionate share policy defines the responsibilities of government and private industry in managing growth. It spells out what each has to do to pay for public services and utilities before a development is built.

Under proportionate share, it's difficult for a county to stop a development. Once the developer has paid its share, its obligation has been met and the developer can move forward, even if the county hasn't yet paid for the public services for the development.

Commissioner Fred Coyle, a vocal critic of the growth-management law, said the county and Southwest Florida legislators needed to be careful in making sure the law wasn't changed in a way that made the situation worse for Collier.

"As we go through with a proportionate fair-share bill we all know this could change next year," Coyle said about the law. "We have to be very vigilant about what changes could be bubbling up (from Tallahassee)."

County officials worry the state is trying to take away their ability to levy impact fees. The county relies on impact fees to pay for growth, with a 2,000-square-foot home now costing about $30,000 in impact fees before it is built.

"Impact fees have been under attack for a number of years," said Keith Arnold, Collier County's lobbyist in Tallahassee. "As you continue to push the envelope on impact fees, there's no doubt others will try to push back."

Friday's meeting also dealt with the issue of whether homeowners in Florida who possess the Save Our Homes property tax cap should be able to take the cap with them when they move.

Homeowners are prohibited from taking the cap with them now, but Goodlette and Arnold both noted that the issue of making the cap portable was gaining momentum in Tallahassee.

Collier officials don't want to make it portable within the whole state because they worry about losing property tax revenue. But commissioners indicated Friday they would be open to making it portable within the same county.

"Opposing portability would probably be useless," Coyle said. "We need to consider supporting something that would be just inside the county."