Both Champaign Unit 4 and Rantoul Township High School boards have voted to support a November ballot question asking voters for a one percent sales tax increase to support education. Both Districts are using a miniscule amount of property tax relief to mask their request for the largest-possible tax increase, as have most other area school districts, and most media reports are emphasizing the property tax relief as if it somehow offsets the sales tax revenue which will be generated.
It will be interesting to see if the County Board puts the full one-percent increase on the ballot, or if they settle for a smaller amount.
And it will be interesting to see how long the "this is about property tax relief" storyline is allowed to play out before people realize that the sales tax revenues of a one percent increase are several times larger than the maximum amount of property tax relief allowable.
let me defend the schools for a second (just a second)
yes, its a tax increase. But if you assume that the buildings will be built, then the money must come from somewhere. So, every dollar rec'd from this sales tax is a dollar that won't have to come from property taxes.
"yes, its a tax increase. But if you assume that the buildings will be built, then the money must come from somewhere. So, every dollar rec'd from this sales tax is a dollar that won't have to come from property taxes."
Oh, I understand that perfectly.
Though I find it a little disengenuous that the Districts are going for the maximum possible increase while publicly lamenting that they can only provide a limited amount of property tax relief, all the while not mentioning that a smaller sales tax increase is certainly possible and would still allow for property tax relief.
I would love to see someone in the media ask why the Districts aren't asking for one-half-percent or one-quarter-percent, or to ask how much property tax relief the Districts would provide if a smaller sales tax increase is passed. Maybe we'll get lucky and someone at the County Board will ask those questions when the ballot initiative is discussed there.
Of course, we've seen other referenda defeatedly recently when the public consensus was that the taxing body was asking for too much (Mahomet library, Urbana Parks, Unit 4 several times), although those were property taxes. My sense on this increase is that it's a bait-and-switch: grab as much sales tax as possible while publicly talking about property tax relief and hoping nobody compares the two figures.
Unit 4 teachers contract is up this June,,,,,they are starting those talks now,,,how can the Unit 4 Schools promise anything? But, this has a better chance of passing than the referendum they wanted to put on the ballot for property tax increases.
I do not believe a sales tax increase will result in a lowered property tax, or even holding the property tax at current levels.
If the schools cannot do what they need to do with the property tax already taken, how will they provide the services, maintenace, and new construction they offer without raising the property tax? They run a deficit spending budget now, the increased sales tax might only get them back to a balanced budget, which I doubt, and will not compensate for the deffered maintenance, much less new construction.
While a sales tax increse might provide for a short term benefit, it won't take long for the various school districts to view the new money as just that, new money crying out to be spent.
The county will have a tax increase on the ballot to shore up the nursing home, the City of Champaign Township will have a tax increase on the ballot to shore up a declining budget, and now the schools will, too.
When taxing bodies get more money because they have been unable to work within their means, as soon as they get more money they spend it, and it becomes an endless cycle.
I won't be shamed into "think of the children" any more than I will be shamed into "think of the infirm elderly" or "think of the poor". I'm voting No on all three tax increases if they appear on my ballot.
Governments must first rein in their expenses and not just continually stick their hands out. Show me a bare-bones budget and stick to it, and then I will consider giving the government more money, but not until then.
This sales tax request is yet another 'bandaid' approach to avoid solving the problems with our state government? Its should be obvoius even to Mike, the real BOZOs are in Springfield (Chicago).
I'm voting no on all three as well. Why should we reward any government for failing to live within their means by giving them more money? However, I do expect a campaign on their part designed to shame the voters into supporting these; look for campaigns based on: It's for the children. We can't turn our backs on the elderly. or You're just mean for not helping out the poor. There's so much of this stuff anymore that I'm becoming immune to it.
I believe that once the bonds are sold with the sales tax pledged to pay them off, the sales tax cannot be repealed until the bonds are piad off.
One point here which have been made before - and which I will make again:
The money raised CANNOT be used for the General Fund - it is specific to infastructure - ie new buildings, renovation of existing buildings, tax relief for existing bonds. Can't be used for salaries or other supplies - so that's why the amount of property tax relief will vary from district to district. Right now the only source of funding for Capital improvements is by increasing the levy on property taxes - this use of the sales tax would replace it and more fairly share the burden.
It is not the long term solution to the issues of funding schools fairly - but it is a start
Greg Novak
Questions which I asked above, and which I will continue to ask:
How is use of the sales tax more fair? It's just spreading the burden to people who may not have any interest in the school systems here, such as people who shop here from out of the county. When will Unit 4 answer some of the questions that we have been asking now for several years, the major one being:
What are you doing to reduce costs?