To the editor:

The following letter has been sent to the Lehigh Acres Fire Control and Rescue District:

To: Fire District Commissioners

Reference: Proposed Assessment

Our firm represents Lehigh Acres Lot Owners Association, Inc. The Association objects to the proposed alternative non-ad valorem assessment to fund the District’s annual budget because the assessment methodology is unlawful, unfair, unreasonable, and disproportionately burdens the owners of approximately 90,000 vacant lot owners.

The vast majority of the vacant lot owners are non-residents of Lee County and cannot cast votes in the referendum on whether the current $25 assessment should be increased to $162. If approved by the voters, lot owners contribution to the District revenue would increase from $2,250,000 to $14,580,000. The District will set aside funds “over the next 10-12 years to fund, finance, build, equip, and staff” 4 to 6 new fire stations. The Fire Chief has been quoted as stating that a new fire station outside of Sunshine Boulevard would be built “to reduce EMS response time.” Vacant lots do not benefit from EMS services as do homes.

In order to induce the 51,000 registered voters to shift the cost burden to vacant lots the District promises that “11 out of 12 homeowners will pay less for fire protection and EMS services” as will owners of commercial buildings. Vacant lot owners will pay a 700% assessment increase.

The District rationale presented to the public is that vacant lots may contain dried brush that would fuel a wild-fire and that the current $25 fee does not adequately share in the fire-fighting cost of brush fires. The Association believes that the real reason for the unconscionable increase to vacant lot owners who cannot participate in the referendum is to fund the construction of new fire stations — and that a $162 annual fee is not a proportionate share of the cost of fighting brush fires.

If the District was more concerned with mitigating brush rather than building new fire stations it would work with Lee County Code Enforcement and the Forest Service to alleviate the problem.

If the proposed assessment methodology is adopted and levied, the Association may challenge its legality in the courts and seek refunds of amounts unlawfully collected from vacant lot owners. The Association urges the District to reconsider its position and cancel the referendum.

Richard Bennett

Bennett & Bennett

Coral Gables