Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance Code Compliance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission schedules public hearing to assign code-compliance costs as non‑ad valorem assessments

5455698 · July 23, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City staff notified the commission of a required public hearing to consider placing unpaid code‑compliance charges on property tax bills under the uniform method; staff outlined the process, administrative fees and recovery rates and recommended a follow-up resolution in September.

City staff told the Winter Haven City Commission on July 28 that a public hearing will be held to consider assigning unpaid code‑compliance charges as non‑ad valorem assessments on property tax bills. The hearing is required by the city’s prior adoption of the uniform method of collecting non‑ad valorem assessments and local interlocal agreements with the property appraiser and tax collector. Staff said affected property owners were mailed notice and that the city will take testimony before finalizing any assessments. Staff summarized the mechanics and costs: the property appraiser charges an administrative fee of $330 and the tax collector charges $660 to place assessments on the tax roll. Staff recommended the commission, after hearing testimony, deem unpaid corrective‑action charges as special assessments and return in September with a separate resolution to transmit the assessments for collection. Staff said the city has placed 675 assessments on the tax roll since the program began, with total assessed costs of $345,345 and collections of about $266,059, representing roughly a 77% recovery rate; staff said about 17% remain outstanding and roughly 6% were extinguished through property transfers to the county. Commission members asked procedural questions about prior instances when property owners appeared to object; staff said property owners can present testimony at the hearing, the commission may continue the hearing if objections are raised, and staff will review objections and consult the city attorney as needed. No final vote on any particular assessment was recorded at the July 28 meeting.