Posts Tagged ‘property tax’

The Summit: Necessity is the Mother of Invention

Wednesday, April 6th, 2011

Public education funding in Colorado will decline $1000/per child per year from its high point in 2008 to its projected low point in 2013-14.  The $5600 per student funding in 2003 will be the state’s starting point in 2013.  It’s unknown when the state will return to its $6600 per student funding high hit in 2008.

School budgets going backward in Colorado

School districts across the state will see many more years of declining revenue because roughly 35 percent of school funding comes from property tax.  Property values have decreased, lowering the contribution from property tax payers to public schools.  These revenues will not return until property values increase, and with property appraisals occurring on a two year cycle, a decade may go by before districts get back to their 2008 level.

The state must backfill lost property tax revenue, but it doesn’t have any money either.  The budget gap for public school funding is still to be decided, but it will be somewhere between $250 million to $330 million in 2011-2012, and not any better in 2012-13.  All of this is depressing news, but sometimes out of darkness comes light.

Jefferson County Schools hit hard by cuts

Jefferson County School District, the largest in the state with 85,000 students and 14,000 employees, will be hard hit by the budget gap - at about $71 million in 2011-2012.  The district has $30 million in reserves, but still needs $40 million in additional cuts.  Jeffco was in the middle of its traditional negotiations when it received word from the state about the $40 million gap.

Necessity is the mother of invention.  The school board president, superintendent, and president of the teachers’ union were at a conference discussing new ways of dealing with school reform.  The three heard a presentation on a new negotiation process.  They decided to try it.

District tries new negotiation strategy; good things happen

Called the Summit, the negotiation brought together two board members, two members of the Jefferson County Education Association (JCEA), two members from the Jefferson County Administrators Association (JCAA), two members from the CSEA (Classified Service Employees Association), and the superintendent.  They worked with a federal administrator over three days and seventeen hours to complete an agreement.  The agreement foundation was this: take the whole deal or start over.

With so much at stake, the negotiators hunkered down.  They discussed salaries, work days, class sizes, transportation needs, fees, and programs.  They evaluated school closings.  Collectively, they put together a package to take to association groups and the Board.

Hard choices made together

They recommended closing two elementary schools, shutting down the District’s Outdoor Lab program in the Rockies, reducing salaries by three percent, taking six days out of the school year (four professional development days and two furlough days), charging for bus transportation, and boosting sports fees.

No one is happy, but most realize that it’s the best deal for the times.  One board member disagrees. She wants to take more out of salaries, reduce the district’s contribution to retirement plans, and hold employees to the 2010 work year calendar.  The Board, however, supported the negotiation in a 4-1 vote.

The Jeffco School Board will present the plan to the community in April and will vote on the final budget in May.  So far, the negotiations are well-received.  This successful process will probably form the new template for Jefferson County School District to manage its budget and employee relations.

Cut school funds? Good idea?

Wednesday, February 16th, 2011

Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper (D) announced his budget Tuesday that includes somewhere around $325 million to $375 million in budget cuts for school districts.  He says that K-12 education is the state’s most important priority, but…

Colorado’s public education budget has gradually become the state’s problem since the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) passed in the early 1990s.   What used to be a 40-60 split between state and districts is now a 65-35 split.

The recession has amplified the problem.  Property tax revenues have dramatically declined and will continue to flatline, as it may take a decade before the foreclosure wrench is over.  Since properties are reassessed only every two years, recovery will not come soon.

The state budget is short $1.2 billion for 2011-12.  With school finance representing about 40% of the state’s General Fund, cuts will hit schools disproportionately to other programs funded outside the General Fund.  Which brings us to the state’s severance tax.

Colorado, like other western states, has lots of minerals, oil, and gas resources, but especially gas.  With the price of oil rising over the last few years, the state’s natural gas has become more valuable and has attracted drillers back to our more rural counties.  Northwestern Colorado, the home of Dinosaur National Monument, is experiencing another boom, as drillers are putting down wells and filling our small rural towns with lots of workers and their needs for good roads, clean water, clean air, and education for their kids.  Ah, the rub.

The state collects two taxes to help with the impact of extraction: the ad valorem property tax and the severance tax.  The property tax is assessed against the value of the gas extraction as property.  The severance tax is assessed to compensate for the lost resources, never to be returned to the earth.  Cities, counties, and school districts use the property tax.  Royalty owners can deduct 87.5% of the property tax off their severance tax.  The state is supposed to keep the remaining 12.5%.

Traditionally, the state has recycled much of the severance tax back to the rural counties for roads, clean water, sewage treatment, and other infrastructure needs.  The cities and counties have counted on this money as their towns boom and bust with the energy industry.

But now the whole state is bust, and the legislature wants to retain severance tax money to bridge the state’s budget gap.  Rural cities and counties are crying the blues, as well as other traditional severance tax collectors such as the Colorado Water Conservation Board.  This Board uses severance tax money to give out loans to water districts for water projects.

So traditionally, the severance tax money has been kept pretty far away from public education.  With the budget gap, the state needs to pull back some of this money from water, agriculture, cities and counties to prevent complete public school funding catastrophe.  As Hickenlooper says, “Public education is our most important priority.  What can be more important than educating our children to prepare them to be quality workers for our future?”

What can be more important?  Water projects for dam repair and storage?  Roads?  Tourism?  The Governor has chosen to put $17 million into tourism, money that might otherwise go to public education.  He has also chosen to put dollars into economic development and job expansion.  He has chosen to pull out only $31 million from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, out of $116 million.

What he has not done is set a water conservation policy that will reduce the need for agriculture and municipal water storage.  He has not set an extraction policy that will ensure the state receives the best value for its minerals, oil, and gas property.  He has decided that the state is not in the mood to raise revenue, because Coloradans have to vote to increase any tax, including the severance tax.  He has decided not to make the case to the state’s population that now is the time to review our tax policy and contradictory tax constitutional amendments.

The Governor has decided that now is the time to cut state revenues, even though the state has been cutting for the last three years.  He is apparently receiving advice from the business community that its interests are more important than public education, and six year olds can take it on the chin.

Unfortunately, the 2011-12 budget is just the beginning for school districts.  The revenues look bad for several years out.  And the Governor has already committed to at least two years of every government worker sucking it up, even though they have already experienced two years of up sucking.

State Republicans are firm against raising taxes, and are even trying to restore tax credits lost last year, including for bull semen, a uniquely Colorado tax feature.  Many Republicans want tax decreases, even as they say that education is their most important priority.  Frankly, with public school teachers unionized, public education will never be the Republican’s most important priority.  And with the Democratic Governor in thrall of cutting state revenue, public education, no matter what he says, is not his top priority.

Watering and feeding business and agriculture supersedes watering and feeding the brains of the state’s children.

Fiscal Relief Maps

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009

Fourth graders are still excited about school projects in the Fall.  We’re about to make relief maps of California, a product of fourth grade since-well, no one can remember when they didn’t make one, even my mother, fourth grader in fall 1956.

I don’t know about other states, but California is perfect for the papier maché model, mountains high like Mt. Shasta and Mt. Wilson, deserts low like Death Valley. Lots of chance to use different color paint, white for snowy mountain tops, yellow for desert, green for valleys, blue for Lake Tahoe and Salton Sea as well as for long rivers up and down the Central Valley.  Don’t forget orange and brown to indicate the high and low mountain ranges.

If only depressing money woes didn’t get in the way of teaching.  The last staff meeting introduced projections for discretionary funding in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012.  In brief, discretionary funds (also known as general funds) are provided from California state property tax revenue for the most part, divvied up to each school district depending on the number of students in the district (called ADA-average daily attendance).

Why would my district talk about the budget for the next two years after only two months of the current school year?  To warn everyone-the picture isn’t pretty.

Next year for Cupertino Union School District, where I teach, a fiscally well-managed operation with strong students and highly-qualified teachers, the ending budget balance is expected to be -$4.46 million and double that for the year after.

So much money has been cut from local school revenues, in spite of the various laws to guarantee stable school funding, that even my district is in deep trouble.  This year’s state budget fiasco will leave my district with $1.5 million in July 2010, a miracle in the general calamity for most districts.  Not in July 2011, however, nor the year after that.

It’s only October, and I’m already worried about a job for next year.  I should be concentrating on parent conferences coming up in November, finishing up the math and science units on the fall quarter schedule, planning field study trips to a mission and rancho in the San Jose area, all typical duties for a fourth grade teacher in California.

It’s crazy.  Evidence from surveys like the Field Poll as described in “Voters want to change state law,” by Wyatt Buchanan, San Francisco Chronicle, October 14, 2009, show that 51% of California voters believe change is needed to the state Constitution.

As anyone who lives in California knows, however, the voter feels responsible in his heart for the local schools, but, calculator in hand, votes NO on most state proposals to untangle the severe fiscal quandary our laws have generated.  In the October Field Poll 52% of the voters opposed changing the requirement for a two-thirds legislative majority to pass a budget.

Even so, my favorite proposal is to pass a constitutional amendment to Proposition 13 (passed in 1978).  It would lower the approval threshold for any monetary measure to 55%, instead of the nearly impossible 66% (two-thirds) required by Prop 13.  See information in September 2009 Edsource, Local Revenues for Schools: Limits and Options in California, p. 6.

It took a tremendous effort to pass the May 5, 2009, Measure B. The six year parcel tax commitment will offset drastic state cuts, providing an annual $4 million to keep the Cupertino district schools going this year and the next two years.

I haven’t heard any more about the crisis, except that today I understand I probably won’t get another “pink slip” in March 2010, but should be prepared to change grade levels or schools.

It would be fabulous if piles of money floated down into Santa Clara Valley turning it green like my students’ relief maps.