Thank you for starting the difficult fiscal conversation, taking the time to load the data into the tool and walk through the output. I'm part of a local conversation group in Sarasota named the Sarasota Mobility Alliance, and we advocate for alternative transportation including biking, walking and transit. It pains me to see so many expensive roadway expansion projects that lead to increased maintenance obligations and often overlook alternatives modes of getting around. Investing in biking and walking infrastructure generates a rate of return of about $3-6 for every $1 spent. If we had viable alternatives to driving, we could get some of these cars off the road with drivers who would gladly choose an alternative if it was safe to do so. This type of infrastructure costs less to build and maintain while at the same time provides a public health benefit and increased safety for those who aren’t in cars.
Thanks again for all that you do. I’m glad to see a commissioner who gets it.
Thank you for clearly explaining this. I’m not a numbers person and really hate having to read anything about budgets. That said, it’s imperative that we all educate ourselves about the county budget and vote accordingly. The message that is coming from the state is not always what’s best for each county and needs to be addressed before we vote. Home rule is so important.
Great deep dive into the budget realities. I think there are a lot of politicized statements surrounding what county budget reduction would mean. There are some that are hard to say out loud if you’re a sitting politician.
Things like EQUAL proportional reductions in constitutional officers budgets - yes that means a reduction in the sheriff, but that doesn’t outright mean you are “defunding the police”.
Another is cutting county jobs - but not just county staff jobs, again an EQUAL and proportional reduction across those offices. Again you are not defunding one place or another - the county as a whole absorbs the burden equally. The O&M cost of the systems we have built cannot continue to deplete the reserves. Any additional demand on the systems we accept either a CIP project county funded or a private county approved project through has to be slowed to a trickle. This is a rebuild period, its halftime in the mass migration to Florida game.
Some adjustments and hard cuts need made at halftime. This means jobs and the sacred LE line item as well. This is not going to be popular but it is needed.
George, This is another well researched and explained article. The points at the summary are strong. Is there a way I can be of service, not only as a resident in Manatee county, but at my day job? Are there surplus properties that Manatee county would look to sell which may add some money to the bottom line while reducing sustaining costs, maintenance expenses and potential debt? We can see where the majority of funds are allocated in the budget breakdown. Is there mitigation or tangible ways of reducing those numbers for the outliers on the top end of the budget expenses? Thanks again for the knowledgeable & informative article.
I agree that the conversation needs to get real, and part of that means looking beyond property taxes. Manatee County already has several major revenue sources that can be better utilized to protect our AAA credit rating, maintain safe roads, and preserve the quality‑of‑life services residents rely on.
1. Use non‑property tax revenues strategically, not reactively.
State‑shared revenues, the half‑cent sales tax, communications services tax, and fuel taxes all flow into the General Fund. These can be prioritized for core services like roads, EMS, parks, and libraries instead of being spread across new recurring commitments.
2. Make the Tourist Development Tax work harder for residents.
TDT is paid by visitors, not homeowners. It can support boat ramps, beach infrastructure, waterfront parks, and recreational amenities that benefit both residents and tourists. Using TDT more effectively reduces pressure on property taxes.
3. Keep impact fees and grants focused on capital—not operations.
Impact fees and federal/state grants are designed for one‑time capital projects. Using them properly for roads, parks, libraries, and EMS facilities protects reserves and prevents structural deficits.
4. Strengthen user‑fee alignment for services that are optional or premium.
Boat ramp fees, recreation program fees, EMS transport billing, and facility rentals can be calibrated to reflect actual service costs while still protecting access for seniors and low‑income residents. This helps fund operations without raising millage.
5. Stop using one‑time money to plug recurring gaps.
If we want to restore reserves to policy levels, we have to stop backfilling ongoing operating costs with cash carryover. Reserves should be used for emergencies and capital—not to mask structural imbalances.
6. Tie every dollar to a visible outcome.
Residents are more willing to support tough financial decisions when they can see exactly what their money paid for—whether it’s a resurfaced road, a renovated park, or upgraded EMS equipment. Transparency builds trust and makes the math easier to discuss honestly.
Manatee County has the tools. The question now is whether we use them in a disciplined, strategic way that protects our credit rating, maintains essential services, and rebuilds reserves without leaning solely on property taxes.
Great explanation! Thank you for taking the time to share this. Hopefully, residents will take the time to read it and ask questions. I wish there was a mini version of this that was relative to condo associations.
it’s the same thing happening at condo associations. COA boards want to “help” residents by underfunding annual reserves so they can get re-elected or make friends in the building. Then, a roof repair or major structural work needs to be done but there’s no reserves to cover it. That board can either do the “politically beneficial” thing and further delay those needed repairs or they can do the “tough” right, thing and assess everyone a huge fee to cover it and fix a major problem before it becomes life-threatening. Same problem. Different scale.
Thank you for doing this work George! How many of your fellow commissioners are ready to join you in tackling the 'next steps'? I am sure the politics is quite thorny as November approaches, but how about calling for a vote to do a 'next steps' workshop so that us voters can see where our commissioners stand on some of these very difficult decisions?
How much additional funding would Manatee County have collected since 2019, IF every legal IMPACT FEE had been imposed and collected? I bet that would be a lot of $$$.
It would be a lot but that could only have been spent on building new assets and infrastructure, which would require even more maintenance and costs from the general fund in the future. None of those funds could have been used for general cash fund reserves or ongoing repairs and maintenance.
Thanks for your insights. But in the line of building facilities and roads which then require maintenance how can we keep building sport facilities like the new ice rinks and expect to be able to maintain them into the future without cost. One hopes there will be big conversations with groups that use these facilities to fund a great share of the maintenance and costs.
I also understand the use of impact fees and the building and maintenance responsibilities you discuss. Furthermore, being hamstrung by the State. However, single lot development (less than an acre) that occurs in our county has $25,000 impact fees. Maybe if large residential developments had similar impact fees of $25,000 per home it would slow down development and help with the lack of facilities to keep up with needs. Being hamstrung by the state to raise impact fees, a development pause seems appropriate for our County. It seems there are plenty of undeveloped lots that are not being developed where infrastructure already exists and doesn’t involve impacting agricultural land but sales of these lots is near impossible with the high cost of impact fees on a single home.
We do not expect to maintain new ice rinks into the future. The misinformation on that is outstanding on Facebook. All the county is doing is leasing land to a private developer/owner. They will own the ice rink and therefore be responsible for maintenance. All the county will do is collect land lease checks for revenue.
"post covid free money"? That's what you are calling it? Come on. Don't take voters as fools. The "free money" came from a super-expanding tax base, fueled by approval of rezone after rezone after rezone, plus increased property value. You had all that money yet you put animals in cheap trailers and don't care about about the staff and volunteers struggling in the heat. I am going to work at persuading people against the property tax amendment - but that persuasion starts with being honest. The truth is that the property tax amendment is a developer dream come true.
No, the “free money” came from ARP and CARES funds that flooded into communities and excess federal/state appropriations to build things and grow government. The “free money” came from near-zero interest muni market bonds that made borrowing feel free when assessing the option to build ahead of inflation at below inflationary rates. The increased tax base came at the expense of an increased population and an increased need for services and infrastructure so it’s not that simple. Not everything needs to be seen through the prism of “overdevelopment”. Somethings there’s actually a different explanation.
Commissioner Kruse,
Thank you for starting the difficult fiscal conversation, taking the time to load the data into the tool and walk through the output. I'm part of a local conversation group in Sarasota named the Sarasota Mobility Alliance, and we advocate for alternative transportation including biking, walking and transit. It pains me to see so many expensive roadway expansion projects that lead to increased maintenance obligations and often overlook alternatives modes of getting around. Investing in biking and walking infrastructure generates a rate of return of about $3-6 for every $1 spent. If we had viable alternatives to driving, we could get some of these cars off the road with drivers who would gladly choose an alternative if it was safe to do so. This type of infrastructure costs less to build and maintain while at the same time provides a public health benefit and increased safety for those who aren’t in cars.
Thanks again for all that you do. I’m glad to see a commissioner who gets it.
Lance Thomas
Sarasota Mobility Alliance
Thank you for clearly explaining this. I’m not a numbers person and really hate having to read anything about budgets. That said, it’s imperative that we all educate ourselves about the county budget and vote accordingly. The message that is coming from the state is not always what’s best for each county and needs to be addressed before we vote. Home rule is so important.
Great deep dive into the budget realities. I think there are a lot of politicized statements surrounding what county budget reduction would mean. There are some that are hard to say out loud if you’re a sitting politician.
Things like EQUAL proportional reductions in constitutional officers budgets - yes that means a reduction in the sheriff, but that doesn’t outright mean you are “defunding the police”.
Another is cutting county jobs - but not just county staff jobs, again an EQUAL and proportional reduction across those offices. Again you are not defunding one place or another - the county as a whole absorbs the burden equally. The O&M cost of the systems we have built cannot continue to deplete the reserves. Any additional demand on the systems we accept either a CIP project county funded or a private county approved project through has to be slowed to a trickle. This is a rebuild period, its halftime in the mass migration to Florida game.
Some adjustments and hard cuts need made at halftime. This means jobs and the sacred LE line item as well. This is not going to be popular but it is needed.
George, This is another well researched and explained article. The points at the summary are strong. Is there a way I can be of service, not only as a resident in Manatee county, but at my day job? Are there surplus properties that Manatee county would look to sell which may add some money to the bottom line while reducing sustaining costs, maintenance expenses and potential debt? We can see where the majority of funds are allocated in the budget breakdown. Is there mitigation or tangible ways of reducing those numbers for the outliers on the top end of the budget expenses? Thanks again for the knowledgeable & informative article.
I agree that the conversation needs to get real, and part of that means looking beyond property taxes. Manatee County already has several major revenue sources that can be better utilized to protect our AAA credit rating, maintain safe roads, and preserve the quality‑of‑life services residents rely on.
1. Use non‑property tax revenues strategically, not reactively.
State‑shared revenues, the half‑cent sales tax, communications services tax, and fuel taxes all flow into the General Fund. These can be prioritized for core services like roads, EMS, parks, and libraries instead of being spread across new recurring commitments.
2. Make the Tourist Development Tax work harder for residents.
TDT is paid by visitors, not homeowners. It can support boat ramps, beach infrastructure, waterfront parks, and recreational amenities that benefit both residents and tourists. Using TDT more effectively reduces pressure on property taxes.
3. Keep impact fees and grants focused on capital—not operations.
Impact fees and federal/state grants are designed for one‑time capital projects. Using them properly for roads, parks, libraries, and EMS facilities protects reserves and prevents structural deficits.
4. Strengthen user‑fee alignment for services that are optional or premium.
Boat ramp fees, recreation program fees, EMS transport billing, and facility rentals can be calibrated to reflect actual service costs while still protecting access for seniors and low‑income residents. This helps fund operations without raising millage.
5. Stop using one‑time money to plug recurring gaps.
If we want to restore reserves to policy levels, we have to stop backfilling ongoing operating costs with cash carryover. Reserves should be used for emergencies and capital—not to mask structural imbalances.
6. Tie every dollar to a visible outcome.
Residents are more willing to support tough financial decisions when they can see exactly what their money paid for—whether it’s a resurfaced road, a renovated park, or upgraded EMS equipment. Transparency builds trust and makes the math easier to discuss honestly.
Manatee County has the tools. The question now is whether we use them in a disciplined, strategic way that protects our credit rating, maintains essential services, and rebuilds reserves without leaning solely on property taxes.
Great explanation! Thank you for taking the time to share this. Hopefully, residents will take the time to read it and ask questions. I wish there was a mini version of this that was relative to condo associations.
it’s the same thing happening at condo associations. COA boards want to “help” residents by underfunding annual reserves so they can get re-elected or make friends in the building. Then, a roof repair or major structural work needs to be done but there’s no reserves to cover it. That board can either do the “politically beneficial” thing and further delay those needed repairs or they can do the “tough” right, thing and assess everyone a huge fee to cover it and fix a major problem before it becomes life-threatening. Same problem. Different scale.
Hmmmmm, worth considering.
Thank you for doing this work George! How many of your fellow commissioners are ready to join you in tackling the 'next steps'? I am sure the politics is quite thorny as November approaches, but how about calling for a vote to do a 'next steps' workshop so that us voters can see where our commissioners stand on some of these very difficult decisions?
How much additional funding would Manatee County have collected since 2019, IF every legal IMPACT FEE had been imposed and collected? I bet that would be a lot of $$$.
It would be a lot but that could only have been spent on building new assets and infrastructure, which would require even more maintenance and costs from the general fund in the future. None of those funds could have been used for general cash fund reserves or ongoing repairs and maintenance.
Point we'll made. How could that be be better aligned with County needs.
Thanks for your insights. But in the line of building facilities and roads which then require maintenance how can we keep building sport facilities like the new ice rinks and expect to be able to maintain them into the future without cost. One hopes there will be big conversations with groups that use these facilities to fund a great share of the maintenance and costs.
I also understand the use of impact fees and the building and maintenance responsibilities you discuss. Furthermore, being hamstrung by the State. However, single lot development (less than an acre) that occurs in our county has $25,000 impact fees. Maybe if large residential developments had similar impact fees of $25,000 per home it would slow down development and help with the lack of facilities to keep up with needs. Being hamstrung by the state to raise impact fees, a development pause seems appropriate for our County. It seems there are plenty of undeveloped lots that are not being developed where infrastructure already exists and doesn’t involve impacting agricultural land but sales of these lots is near impossible with the high cost of impact fees on a single home.
We do not expect to maintain new ice rinks into the future. The misinformation on that is outstanding on Facebook. All the county is doing is leasing land to a private developer/owner. They will own the ice rink and therefore be responsible for maintenance. All the county will do is collect land lease checks for revenue.
Good to know
How about different homestead amounts based on house size?
"post covid free money"? That's what you are calling it? Come on. Don't take voters as fools. The "free money" came from a super-expanding tax base, fueled by approval of rezone after rezone after rezone, plus increased property value. You had all that money yet you put animals in cheap trailers and don't care about about the staff and volunteers struggling in the heat. I am going to work at persuading people against the property tax amendment - but that persuasion starts with being honest. The truth is that the property tax amendment is a developer dream come true.
No, the “free money” came from ARP and CARES funds that flooded into communities and excess federal/state appropriations to build things and grow government. The “free money” came from near-zero interest muni market bonds that made borrowing feel free when assessing the option to build ahead of inflation at below inflationary rates. The increased tax base came at the expense of an increased population and an increased need for services and infrastructure so it’s not that simple. Not everything needs to be seen through the prism of “overdevelopment”. Somethings there’s actually a different explanation.