South-Western City Schools Makes Promises For Levy Passage

OK this is copied from a post on this same article about 20 pages ago…

I got online and did some reading, and thought that these two pages were pretty helpful at explaining it and how it (house bill 920) (doesn’t) work.

http://maps.co.lucas.oh.us/Areis/LevyPages/PropTax.asp

http://www.schoolfundingmatters.org/content/HB920.aspx (and the example link in this page)

  The system itself, while unconstitutional to begin with, shorts the school districts the money they’ve not collected.  If I’m understanding what I’ve read correctly…The district collects a specific amount of money based on a levy vote.  Fast forward 2 years, the district is collecting the same x amount of dollars.  BUT… when the state reviews funding in order to make up the difference, they are looking at figures adjusted for inflation.  So if we collect 4 million in 2006 and in 2007 it’s worth 5 million (but they’ve only collected 4 million per the house bill)... the state will only supplement from 5 million on, and leaves the district on the hook for the missing money.  The district has no recourse other than going back to the voters. 

That explains why school districts here are constantly coming to the voters time and time again… that’s the most convoluted accounting method I’ve ever heard of.  By design, it’s shorting not just SWCS, but all districts… and causing everyone so much more headache and fighting over school funding that shouldn’t happen.

9800 levies since this bill was made state law in 1976.  This is the core of the problem, and this is what has to change.  The state is backing the districts into corners and the only recourse is to go back to the voters time and again for more funding.

average - read the bill - actually it is a state law. I have and I am pretty confident in my interpretation. I’ve been doing the research for quite some time for my own district, which faces the exact same thing SWSD is going through, except all of our levies are permanent, not for a certain number of years.

Isn’t it wonderful how they spin this levy issue.Darn right Deer Creek is a resort and why must they have secret meetings to conspire to get levies passed? We just passed a levy 3 years ago! It raised my taxes 30 per month on a very modest home.6 months (or less) there was another levy on the ballot and SWCS said “Oops,we miscalculated how much Walmart was going to pay,so we need 5 million more”! When actually they had agreed to more fat raises with the unions and had to meet those obligations.Of course we said NO on several subsequent requests for more.It hurt alot then and economically speaking it’ll hurt ALOT MORE NOW!
None of these requests have had anything to do with providing the childrens’ needs-they were for teacher,administrator and principal raises.It’s also not true that other districts just cave into every request for levies as Worthington(rich in per capita income)is trying to fight these automatic raises that have not been linked to quality education as proven in SWCS test scores/ratings.
Stop with the smoke and mirrors please.We cannot afford to continue your previous level of compensation into the future.Admit to the children and the community that if you refuse to reinstate busing and extra curriculars,that this is due to deeming your raises as more important.
Does anyone know if there is a legal way to make the district accountable to use the money that we have given them to operate(which means busing)? Is there no law against misusing these monies for raises at the expense of the students transportation-which is absolutely necessary to educate them?
Stop acting as though the community is greedy when we have given you raises that equal 66%(for teachers) and 74%(principals/administrators)over the last 15 years.If we in the private sector had recieved this amount of increases there wouldn’t be a problem with us busting out with your blood money!

One thing to remember….HB920 states if the value of the property is increased by inflation.  However, the last time I received a notice that my property value was increased (2 years ago)- the cause was due to upgrades on my property - and I have done no upgrades in the 8 years I have owned my property - and the amount for the SWCS was increased along with all other tax distribution.

“There have also been a lot of people moving into the GC area.  That means more students need to be served.  That doesn’t mean an increase in tax dollars though.  For example, when the district passes a 5 mil levy, that is the total they get regardless of growth.  That means if you pay $500 for taxes to the school on your house and you are the only house on your block, when another house is built on your block, your tax dollars that go to the school for that millage goes to $250—the total for your block is still $500.  So, in effect, when more homes are built in the GC area, the tax dollars each household contributes to the school goes down.  It is a total split up among all the homes.  I didn’t know that but when I learned that it made more sense to me why they ask for another levy.“

Wow - I didn’t know that. Just because a lot more houses are built, and everybody pays the same in property tax rates, doesn’t mean the school gets a commensurate amount of money for each house that goes in no matter the quanitity of kids?

Hmmm…I’ve never heard of that. By rights, my property tax should go down as new houses are built, since everybody has to pay into what you seem to think is a static fund.

So, if this is true, what happens to all the extra money generated by new builds for those years inbetween levies? Shouldn’t I be getting a decreased bill as new houses are built?
And who makes up the difference as propery values dwindle and reassessments are done? 

Are there any tax experts in the crowd to explain this fully?