Columbia County commissioners weigh creation of law-enforcement MSTU to make funding more transparent

Columbia County commissioners heard an extended legal briefing and preliminary policy discussion on municipal service taxing units — an option the county could use to levy a targeted ad valorem tax that funds specific municipal services such as law enforcement.

The board heard from county counsel’s outside attorneys Heather and Sonosha of the law firm Neighbors, Giblin & Nickerson, who explained the statutory and constitutional limits on local taxation and why an MSTU is the legal pathway for taxing to fund general law enforcement rather than a property “special assessment” tied to property benefit. “An MSTU is a tax-equity tool available to a Board of County Commissioners,” Heather said, adding that MSTUs can be levied on all or a portion of incorporated or unincorporated areas provided statutory deadlines and municipal consent requirements are met.

The briefing summarized key legal constraints under the Florida Constitution (1968) and implementing statutes — notably article 7, section 9 and statutory sections including 125.01 and 200.065 — that shape how a county may levy millage, how that millage aggregates into countywide caps and the supermajority/unanimous voting thresholds for increases above the rollback rate.

Why it matters: Commissioners framed the MSTU as both a revenue and a transparency tool. An MSTU would place law-enforcement costs on the tax bill for the area served and show residents how much of their tax dollars go to that service. Commissioners raised practical questions about how to split countywide sheriff functions (the jail, courts) from patrols that serve unincorporated areas, and whether cities would consent to being included.

Discussion highlights and next steps: Commissioners asked how other Florida counties had implemented MSTUs; the presenters said roughly 10 counties have versions in place and that courts have upheld county authority where challenged. Commissioners stressed two practical steps before any levy: (1) municipal consent negotiations where an MSTU would include city boundaries, because inclusion reduces the city’s own 10-mill allocation; and (2) an actuarial/accounting study to apportion countywide constitutional-officer costs (for example, the jail) from unincorporated-area patrol costs.

County staff said procedural deadlines matter: if the MSTU will be coterminous with an existing taxing unit (for example, the unincorporated area) the county can create it by July 1 for that tax year; if the MSTU creates new taxing geography, a January 1 deadline applies to levy millage the next year. Commissioners instructed staff and the county attorney’s office to proceed with preliminary outreach to the towns of Fort White and Lake City, to obtain municipal consent options and to commission an implementation study if municipal consent can be obtained.

No final vote was taken at the meeting; commissioners instead authorized staff to pursue municipal consent outreach, refine cost-apportionment options and return with a recommended timetable and model ordinance before any ordinance creating an MSTU is introduced.