Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us |
|
Thursday, October 31, 2024 |
|
I was WRONG about School Levy |
Post Reply |
Author | ||
Mike_Presta
MUSA Council Joined: Apr 20 2008 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 3483 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: Jun 23 2010 at 12:22pm |
|
As most of you know, when I make a mistake about something I admit it as soon as I learn that was in error, and try to do so in the same (or to an even larger) venue than the original. Well, I was WRONG in some of the negative arguments that I made prior to the May elections about the MCSD conversion tax levy. Not only was my research FLAWED in that I researched versions of the Ohio Revised Code and Ohio Administrative code that were not completely up to date, but also I failed to consider the fact that the school levy conversion provisions contained in the State of Ohio budget bill passed late in 2009 carry the effects of law. Yes, I was WRONG!!! Conversion levies are MUCH WORSE than even I had warned!!! Per the Executive Summary to “The Need for Levy Reform in Ohio” by Joe Testa:“ You can read Mr. Testa’s entire essay (and examine his excellent credentials) here: http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/uploads/files/BUCKEYE002_main_layout.pdf |
||
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
|
||
John Beagle
MUSA Official Joined: Apr 23 2007 Location: Middletown Status: Offline Points: 1855 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Thanks for the post and thanks for manning up on this issue.
|
||
spiderjohn
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jul 01 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 2749 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I supported this issue, and echoed the well-intentioned claims of school admin.
Maybe Ms.Andrew could clariify this situation, ALONG WITH the very disturbing developments coming from Duke Energy's dispute over property valuations and the possible school funding loss allegedly to be made up by the property tax payers.
This could be a very un-expected hit.
|
||
Hermes
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: May 19 2009 Location: Middletown Status: Offline Points: 1637 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
With Duke holding back funds in the millions I wouldn't be surprised to see another school levy soon. I would like to be able to say that this was an "over sight" by the school officials (conversion levy) but I am sure they no doubt did their "homework" on the issue and knew exactly what they were offering us. I feel hood winked is not a strong enough word for this cause. And that is why I do not now or ever support a school levy. (or any levy) |
||
No more democrats no more republicans,vote Constitution Party !!
|
||
spiderjohn
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jul 01 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 2749 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
You had better read the fine print, Hermes.
Looks as if the remaining taxpayers are also responsible to make up the potential shortfall, and it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the recently passed levy. Though the cost will be more due to the new levy millage.
Talked to a school system employee about it today, and he could have cared less about the plight of the stressed local taxpayer. His response and attitude irritated the hell out of me. I would hope that Ms.Andrew might come here to weigh in on the situation.
Compounded by an inference that test scoring has not improved, and the Roosevelt demo should start in the fall.
I think that we need some changes in Admin.
|
||
lrisner
MUSA Citizen Joined: May 26 2009 Status: Offline Points: 330 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Absolutely we need change and I don't mean some other School Admin. Professional. I want someone with ZERO Education background. I feel that all these Professionals are our downfall in all areas. Most Professional training these Days seems to be predominately about how to be an incompetent Bureaucrat. We need some retired Businessperson or someone with no Education Axe to grind. |
||
Marcia Andrew
MUSA Citizen Joined: Jan 09 2010 Status: Offline Points: 365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The levy passed in May for MCSD was NOT a conversion levy. It was a substitute continuing levy. It substituted one continuous fixed sum levy in place of two temporary fixed sum levies. I have not had time yet to read the paper Mr. Presta cited, but I believe it is talking about a different type of levy than the one we passed. I will post again after I review the issue, but I wanted to get on quickly to say I think there is no cause for alarm. The substitute continuing levy passed does not and will not increase if and when the assessed valuation of existing properties increases. It generates a fixed sum for the district. As to Duke Energy's tax appeal, there is not much to say. Duke obviously did not consult MCSD about it; it just decided to pay 40% less. Duke gave the school district no advance warning. This will be a hit to our budget. We don't know yet the actual amount or what we will do to adjust for the lost revenue.
Marcia Andrew
|
||
Pacman
Prominent MUSA Citizen Joined: Jun 02 2007 Status: Offline Points: 2612 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
- Longer Term for Emergency Levies. A school district may submit to its voters an emergency levy for a term of up to 10 years (the maximum term was formerly five years). This maximum 10-year term is authorized for either new or renewal emergency levies.
- New "Substitute" Levy. A school district with an existing emergency levy may submit to its voters a new "substitute" levy for a term of up to 10 years or for a continuing period of time. This new substitute levy must be proposed at an initial specified dollar amount for the first collection year equal to the amount of the proposing district's existing emergency levy. Thereafter, revenues from the substitute levy may experience limited annual growth based solely on new real property improvements made in the school district in each year. As with an emergency levy, the new substitute levy (i) is above the so-called "20-mill floor," (ii) receives the same tangible personal property tax reimbursements as the prior levy and (iii) may be substituted for more than one existing emergency levy.
These new tax levy options may permit a school district to reduce the number of tax levy elections and avoid voter fatigue by extending the levy term or providing for limited revenue growth from new real property improvements.
We wanted to bring these new options to your attention as soon as possible because the deadline for tax levy election filings with the board of elections for the upcoming November 4 general election is August 21.
If you have any questions regarding these new tax levy options or you wish to consider placing a levy on the November ballot, please contact one of us or the Squire Sanders attorney with whom you regularly consult.
MUSA Council
Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Don't understand the comment that the ten years will make it easier on the property owner as to frequency of the schools asking for more money. It also suggests that the schools can ask throughout the ten year period as well, so how is this going to help us bled-dry property owners?
Guess I'm "old-fashion". I still believe that you need to produce, THEN you are rewarded. It's amazing how the schools are rewarded money despite no measureable increase in productivity/performance IMO. Rewarding a person or organization for no increase in performance breeds complacency and stagnation. Why should they try when they know the voters are going to reward them anyway? The voter approvals on these levies are illogical to me. The voters must not care what the schools are turning out these days. Just blindly keep feeding them money, paying no attention to the outcome of their investment. JMO
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Joined: May 19 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 1637
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jun 02 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2612
"Rasmussen said Wednesday, June 23, that Duke estimates Middletown schools would lose $327,000 for the rest of this year and as much as $654,000 annually as a result of the ultility company’s challenge to its personal property taxes to the tune of $40 million."
MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jan 09 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 365
MUSA Council
Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Mike_Presta wrote: (Posted: 11 Mar 2010 at 10:34pm) "The levy does not raise taxes on current properties." Does this mean that the tax RATE on your individual property will not increase? Does it mean that the DOLLAR AMOUNT of taxes that you pay on your individual property will not increase? Does it mean that the "assessed value" of your individual property will not increase? Start asking SPECIFIC questions like those and watch them dance around! What it means is that: They will collect a total of $18.3 million annually on all of the property in this school district as they are currently assessed!! If any "current property" is subdivided or developed, it will be ADDED to the tax rolls (that is, it is NOT a "current property"!) and will be an addition to the $18.3 million! If your neighbor's house burns down, or if a business goes bankrupt and abandons their property, or ANY of the "current properties" for any reason get re-assessed downwards or otherwise fall from the tax rolls, the district will still collect $18.3 million from the remainder of the "current properties"!!! |
Or, more succinctly put, with fewer “current properties” remaining to be taxed, and many of the remaining “current properties” having lost assessed value RELATIVE to the rest, how can the District collect the $18.3 (or has it already been raised to $18.4?) million without raising taxes on the rest of us???
I fear that due to the Duke tax action, we will soon find out.MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jan 09 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Mike_Presta wrote: As most of you know, when I make a mistake about something I admit it as soon as I learn that was in error, and try to do so in the same (or to an even larger) venue than the original. |
MUSA Council
Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Speaking of school funding- the amount the schools are getting should be going down as our property values have dropped by 20 to 40 thou with the re-evaluations done by Rogers in the off-year assessments, right?( I'm being sarcastic here by the way). Has any of our property taxes gone down to the level of our newly established, downgraded property values? I haven't seen a drop in my taxes. They are the same amount as before the recent re-appraisal of property even though my home was re-appraised for 30 thou less than it was worth a few years ago. What gives here folks?
MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jan 09 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 365
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jul 01 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2749
MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jul 27 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 793
What happens to the funding when and if the city ever gets around to demolishing 2000-3000 homes?
MUSA Council
Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Well??? Well?!?! WELL!!!
Well, I may have erred in what it is called. And, well, even pro-levy posters referred to “conversion levies“ without challenge. And, well, I didn’t want to argue about this any longer and perhaps “moot” was not the correct legal term to use, but, then again, well, I am not a lawyer. And, well, at least to me, what the dang thing was called was NOT the issue!!!
So, let’s get back to what was the issue (at least in MY mind):
1. “It is a fixed sum levy, that will generate the fixed sum ($18.3 million) for the district.” [Your words, Ms. Andrew, not mine, but we agree on this!!!]
2. The “population size is not directly relevant to taxes. It's a property tax, not a per capita tax. The people can leave town, but the property cannot. Someone owns it, and a tax is assessed against it.” [Once again, your words, Ms. Andrew, not mine, but we agree on this!!!]
Now, back to the original point, regardless of what the thing is called:
As hundreds (and possibly even thousands) of properties are demolished, land banked, converted to parks, or otherwise turned into properties which NO TAX-PAYING ENTITY OWNS (such as municipal government), exactly how will this “fixed sum” be “generated” without “raising taxes” (as that term is commonly understood by the layman) on the rest of us???
ONE single levy was substituted for TWO, and, at the same time, converted from a fixed term to a never-ending proposition. Call it a "duck" (even though it doesn't quack), or call it a "unicorn" (even though it has no horn), that is NOT the question!!! The paragraph immediately above in BLUE is the question!!! (And, at least in MY MIND, that has been the question from the start!!! Go back and read theMUSA Council
Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
MUSA Council
Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
VietVet wrote: Mike- are you trying to suggest that if the schools are guaranteed 18.3 mils and there are fewer residents in town(say 48,000) to pick up the tab, that we all will be paying more than if we were at full capacity (say 54,000)???? That makes too much sense and is too logical on the math scene for me. Speaking of school funding- the amount the schools are getting should be going down as our property values have dropped by 20 to 40 thou with the re-evaluations done by Rogers in the off-year assessments, right?( I'm being sarcastic here by the way). Has any of our property taxes gone down to the level of our newly established, downgraded property values? I haven't seen a drop in my taxes. They are the same amount as before the recent re-appraisal of property even though my home was re-appraised for 30 thou less than it was worth a few years ago. What gives here folks? |
Not quite!!!
First, the schools are (I believe) guaranteed $18.3 million per year, not 18.3 mils.
Second, (and once again, this is just what I believe--i am NOT a lawyer, thank goodness!!! ) if your property is reappraised, it has been said, that it will not affect the "school" portion of your taxes, as long as you have not made substantial improvements to your home!!! For example, if by some miracle all properties in Middletown rose in value by 25%, the school tax rate would go DOWN so that your tax bill would remain the same. Conversely, if all Middletown properties sank by 25% (AGAIN), the school tax rate will go UP, so that portion of your tax bill would remain the same!!!
However, if you add six rooms to your home, a swimming pool, a three car garage, tennis courts and a wine cellar, and thereby raise the appraised value by 10%, the school portion AMOUNT of your property taxes will go UP about 10%!!!
Conversely (and once again I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY!!!), if my house burns down, and I decide not to rebuild but simply to clear the rubble and to fill in the hole and simply hold onto the lot, the school levy component of my property taxes should go DOWN substantially, perhaps by 75 or 80%!!!!
The thing is that, YOU, Hermes, Randy, Pacman, Spiderjohn, Nagy, Bill, Wasteful and the rest will all have to ADD to YOUR taxes to make up the shortfall my empty lot leaves in the $18.3 million per year that we guaranteed to the MCSD on May 4, while I take the insurance money move to the outer banks of the Carolinas.
At least that’s the way that I, as a non-attorney, see it!!!
Attorney Andrews may disagree.
MUSA Council
Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Mike
Soon we will have another big problem here in
If the New Section 8 Inspection Rules are passed by City Council none of the foreclosed properties that are now up for sale will be purchased here in
Then we have all the commercial property that has been sitting empty for years.
I can’t wait for the census report to confirm that we do not have 50,000 people left here in
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jun 02 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2612
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Joined: May 19 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 1637
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Joined: Jun 02 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2612
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Site by Xponex Media | Advertising Information |