Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Pay raise vote this week?
Next Post: Caption contest!
Posted in:
* The setup…
One of the House Democrats’ point people on education, Rep. Mike Smith of Canton, announced that he’ll host a series of public hearings to consider a proposal to abolish property taxes for school funding by 2010. It’s been floated by Sen. James Meeks, a Chicago Democrat who previously threatened to run against Blagojevich for governor in the absence of education funding reforms. Meeks didn’t run, but he also didn’t get what he wanted.
* The question: Do you favor allowing the property tax for schools to “sunset” in 2010 to force the General Assembly to come up with another funding alternative?
Note: This is not necessarily about abolishing the property tax for schools. They may renew it, at least partially. This is about the sunsetting tactic. Will it work? Should it be tried? Explain.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:22 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Pay raise vote this week?
Next Post: Caption contest!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I’m not a big fan of property tax. However, I live in a fairly nice area, and the schools are funded very well.
I don’t have a problem with the taxes, but can understand older people w/out kids who object to the prop tax.
How can we be sure that local gov won’t continue to levy prop taxes even if the state doesnt?
Comment by How Ironic Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:29 am
If the tax was abolished, it would be abolished.
But that’s not the question.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:30 am
yep…it will cetainly level the playing field…how has MI handled it? Should we emulate it/improve it/rework based on IL economic realities?
Comment by Anonymous45 Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:32 am
so, we sunset it. The idea is that it forces the legislature to do something.
With a normal Gov. and normal legislature, that might be a very useful idea.
With this Gov and this legislature, that’s REALLY rolling the dice. More so that I think is wise. I’d prefer a “sunset plus some alternative that is painful” as insurance.
Comment by Pat collins Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:32 am
I do not support the tactic. It just puts off for a few years addressin the problem, and then creates a crisis which needs a stop gap plug. If they have a solution now then put it in play. it seems hypocritical to say they can get support to create a pressure deadline, but they can not work to get support on an actual solution.
A better idea would be to put in place a reform idea with a sunset provision so that it dies off if it is not working well, or can be renewed if it is.
on a side note, the whole premise that using property taxes is bad needs to be rethought. The problem is varying tax rates and funding by location. pass a set rate for all statewide, and put all the money into a single fund to be distributed equally per student regardless of location. basing the raising of fund on a property tax is not really much different then a income tax or sales tax, except that you get everyone who owns land, house, buiness here, regardless of where they spend there money or live etc.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:37 am
I was about to say some of the same things that Pat Collins said in the first two lines, so I will only say “Ditto”.
Past that, I would be fine with allowing the sunset and coming up with a different alternative as long as the alternative is not a net increase in funding levels. Overall (not looking at state vs. local) the funding for schools is pretty high here in Illinois. There are certainly pockets where the funding levels are too low, but many places where the funding is too high. I would worry that if an “alternative” is developed, it would be an opportunity to let funding (taxes) skyrocket.
Comment by trafficmatt Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:40 am
One of the primary purposes of funding education with property taxes was to allow local control of education and priorities be set by local residents.
Doing away with real estate taxes as the primary source of funding would put all the funding powers with State Gov. Considering the current state of Illinois Gov., this proposal would be a catastrophe!
Who in their right mind would want someone like Blago in control of the purse strings? Let history be a lesson; the schools are best off when there is little or no influence from Springfield, or for that matter Washington, DC.
Comment by MOON Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:40 am
I would do some research with our neighbor Michigan, which actually took this route. Of course, their replacement solutions would not necessarily be the same as ours, but it would be interesting to see what worked and what didn’t. And not repeat the same
mistakes.
Comment by Cassandra Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:50 am
Sunsetting a critical funding mechanism without having at least as much funding being immediately replaced from other sources is irresponsible. The likelihood of legislating those replacement sources prior to the sunset is close to nil. If no funding sources were legislated until the sunset, there would be a great probability of panic legislation being passed shot through with “unintended consequences.” It will take true statespersons and financially responsible action to change education funding for the better, including higher education. I would be amazed, but gratified, if the manner in which politics in Illinois is conducted would allow such statescraft.
Comment by Captain Flume Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:01 am
I don’t think anyone is very happy with the new taxes Michigan enacted to replace their property taxes, even though they also repealed the much-hated “Single Business Tax” when they enacted the new taxes. Illinois also had a hard time enacting replacements for the personal property taxes by 1979, as required by the Constitution. Those problems arose because the legislatures delayed acting until the time pressure was so great that it was impossible to do a really good job.
On balance, though, I think that these experiences prove that legislatures need this kind of pressure in order to make the radical reforms necessary to move our school system off its too-heavy reliance on local property taxes. Illinois has since cleaned up its replacement taxes, and Michigan will clean up its current mess, and things will be better than under the old system if a change is forced.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:08 am
Bad idea. I could see schools beginning the budget year in July of 2010 with no funding at all.
In terms of taxes, the property tax is the most stable source, moreso that the income or sales tax. I can’t imagine that schools would want it to be gone. Look at this year alone, take out the increased gas taxes and sales taxes actually decreased.
Comment by 4% Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:08 am
Backfire.
Abolishing the property tax will be politically popular.
Reinstating it, even at a reduced level, will get incumbents NAILED.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:13 am
No. The entire state education system isn’t broken. Some areas need more help, so let’s do that. But let’s not jeopardize districts where folks have approved high property taxes to ensure good schools.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:17 am
I agree with wordslinger.
Comment by Speaking At Will Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:23 am
Sunsetting property taxes seems to take more control away from local issues. If the local economy is changing to much higher valued property and this results in more tax support for local schools that would seem to be a good thing as long as the quality of the local school outcomes are equally high. The local money should stay local. The problem is the other option, when property values drop/stagnate and operating costs exceed the property tax income while school outcomes drop. Without decent education how are local economies going to have good employees to attract businesses or industries to bring dollars to the area or simply maintain their current property values? There will have to be adjustments for low income areas or people taxed out of the homes they paid for before an area started to expand. Sunsetting just allows one more set of finger pointing opportunities that avoids the issue of “who pays”.
Comment by zatoichi Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:27 am
I’d like to echo the wise words of Captain Flume 10:01 and YDD 10:13. Overall, it’s a bad idea. Sure, the tactic has some surface appeal, for forcing the issue. But the potential for backfire is sky-high.
The QOTD is about tactics rather than policy, but I’m compelled to note anyhow: The fact is that our current school-funding formula is not a bad one - we just underfund its state resources so badly that we wind up screwing ppty poor areas.
Retain ppty taxes as a school-funding source, because of their stability. But inject a far healthier amount of new state funding into the system and it accomplishes better what it was designed to do: Channeling a more appropriate level of state assistance to the districts that really need help the most, and reducing our overreliance upon ppty taxes.
Ppty taxes in and of themselves are not a horrible way to HELP fund schools. It’s the overreliance upon them that creates problems. Let’s finally get serious about increasing the state’s responsibility to the correct, “primary” level.
Comment by amomynous Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:32 am
It’s hard to imagine the rich suburbs going along with it.No one really believes in public education.The rich suburbs want to run a quasi-private school system.Buy and expensive piece of property and your kid can go to the expensive public school.Any move to remove property tax funding and public education will have more wealthy people sending their children to private schools.You know,like the Obamas,Rahm Emanuel,and Mayor Daley.
Comment by Steve Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:34 am
When we receive the 2nd Installment property tax bill in Cook County it is itemized to show which taxing districts get what portion of your dollars. Obviously, education (local school districts) get the biggest portion of your taxes. Are they looking to sunset the education portion only? In other words will we still receive property tax bills for other local taxing bodies like police, fire etc after the sunset?
Comment by Orland (D) Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:41 am
As a tactic, it might be useful to force change to a state government that has avoided dealing with structural changess to education funding like the plague.
As a practical matter, be careful who you give control of the purse strings to, in the alternative. If schools are competing strictly for a statewide educational pot of money, it is likely to result in a loss of local control and an emphasis on clout in determining “who gets what”. And if schools are totally reliant on local initiatives for funding, the gap between rich and poor will widen.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:41 am
Orland, read first, then comment. It’s about the education portion of the property tax.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:51 am
Given the ability of this government not to pay bills I see a lot of schools running out of money long before the bills are paid and since property taxes wouldn’t be there to back borrowing it will be a very expensive venure for the educaitonal system. People may not like the Prop tax structure but it is a safe dependable tax system and right now it’s the only piece of revenue schools can depend on getting. When was last years budget settled? Schools found out the final state aid amounts in January 7 months into the fiscal year 12 months after they contracted staffing.
Comment by frustrated GOP Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:55 am
While I think the idea is flawed, no one at the Capitol seems to do anything without a deadline, and even those aren’t as effective as they once were.
As for Michigan, consider this: They abolished property taxes for school funding and went to state taxes and everyone in the nation marveled at their progressive policies. Then the economy went to hell. What does that mean? It means state taxes go in the tank. What happened? Michigan’s school reform went to hell along with the economy. Schools in affluent areas were the first to see their funding slashed.
Keep in mind, if this scenario played out in Illinois the existence of tax caps would then limit a local districts ability to make up any shortfall if and when state cuts occur. So suburban areas could end up cutting their own throats because they’d be the first to lose their state money in a downturn and wouldn’t be able to make it up with local resources because of tax caps.
If you abolish property taxes for schools, do you also abolish property tax caps?
Nothing is ever as simple as it seems.
Comment by Frank Booth Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 10:59 am
Has sunsetting ever worked to cause meaningful debate on whether a particular statute should be continued, reformed, or allowed to die? If so, that would greatly influence my answer to this question.
Comment by Downstate weed chewing hick Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:02 am
Studying Michigan’s experience with a sunset on property tax funding for schools is an excellent idea.
That approach definitely will force action, but for what? I fear the unintended consequences typical of major Illinois tax legislation.
I dealt with this issue a couple times in the past and each time it came back to whether the State could hold other local governments in check from “backfilling” the reduced property tax bill with new or additional non-education property taxes. Everyone was convinced other local officials could not resist the temptation of saying, “Since your education taxes were cut you shouldn’t mind paying more for…”
Remember also that this proposal only addresses the education fund part of the property tax bill. Buildings, pensions, etc. probably would still be on the local property tax bill.
Comment by anon sequitor Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:02 am
No. Why would anyone from a community where there are high functioning schools trust Springfield, the political leadership and the teacher unions to act in the best interest of all involved?
Local control of property taxes and school districts give an incentive to parents who pay sky high taxes to take a real and passing interest in their children’s education and school district’s performance. Are they supposed to get to vote for bureaucratic budgets in April elections under this system?
Anyway, if you look at the numbers, in aggregate Illinois spends the 7th most of any state on education, with $22,344,947 in FY 2006. The tail is wagging the dog here, why is funding the only source of discussion on education reform.
If we are to turn funding on its head and make substantial changes, let’s at least get some strategic changes in the mix and on the table as well, as Newt Gingrich says, “Real change requires real change.” Make 2009 the year of education reform, but don’t allow the pols to cut some ribbons (or property taxes) and make us think they did the heavy lifting on education reform.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:04 am
What would happen in those districts that are repaying bonds? Most bonds are 20 year issue and bonds are backed by property tax receipts. Is the state going to take up all this debt? Or are local folks still going to be responsible for bond repayment and the state only takes over operating funds?
Comment by Anon from BB Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:08 am
One issue nobody seems to address is the violation of the voice of the people expressed at the ballot box. What none of the politicians can tell me is, when did it become a tenant of conservative politics to ignore the will of the people? No school district in IL is taxing property more than a majority of their citizens voting in funding referendums have approved. Vacating the results of an election is a very serious matter (as an aside…it seems curious that the legislature feels free to vacate elections but will not allow voters the same privilege). In fact, under some proposals it would be a violation of law for voters to be asked to tax themselves in support of their own schools. Do some districts, particularly in the collar counties, have run-away property values leading to overtaxation? Of course. Should the STATE pay more of the cost of education, relative to local sources? Absolutely. Is this the best way to solve these problems? I doubt it.
I would like to see ALL property tax referendums have a sunset, not just schools. Even county govt. should have to re-ask voters every 25 or 30 years to renew their commitment to all phases of local government. If property values increase, with the corresponding increase in taxation, these referendums may not be renewed. In any case it is the VOTERS that make the decision, not a dysfunctional state government.
Comment by McLean County Farmboy Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:09 am
To the point - Govt is NOT proactive but rather reactive; that means for change it would have to be via a sunset.
(as an aside - Good points brought up in blog comments. It seems that a smaller portion of property taxes could leave it in local control with larger primary funding for every school coming from the state via sales, or income tax.
Is property tax or portion of it deductable for personal or biz returns?
Comment by AsAMom Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:11 am
let’s start simple. get rid of the State Board and return to an elected State Supt. There was fewer change over and there would be one state wide elected offical who was elected basid on his/her focus on educaiton. We have 2 elected state-wide on the finance side but not on something everyone says is so important- Education. We need a Alex or Dan for Educaiton!
Comment by frustrated GOP Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:14 am
I wonder what real estate tax attorneys think of the sunset idea.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:16 am
If the people in Cook County were willing to tax their property as much as the folks in the suburbs are to fund education of their kids, we wouldn’t need any State funding. Moon-9:40 has it exactly right. Get the State completely out of education, and for that matter any position where they can even comment on local property taxes. To me giving the state any say in whether local property taxes sunset is an intrusion by state government in yet another place they don’t belong.
Comment by anon Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:17 am
It was really sad watching Chicago Tonight, last night. That program and this blog are hands down the best political media in the State, for those of you out of the area, Carol Marin does a pretty good job. On the show, the Democrats were falling all over themselves to tell the voters what a bad job they were doing and I couldn’t find a better example of that than this issue.
Any Democrat sitting in a suburban district that stands for this or is in any way a part of any effort to remove property taxes from state funding should start looking for other employment, because voters will hit the ceiling. The meal ticket in the global economy is the quality of education you get, and just because voters in the suburbs want to pay through the nose for that and ensure that their communities are well resourced should not be a reason for that to be taken away.
What this debate is really about is a total copout from communities and political leaders that don’t understand the reality of the global community and that don’t hold their teachers and leaders to account. Instead of taking responsibility they want to take resources from others that do.
The program last night and this debate (where people like Andy McKenna, who live in the New Trier area should be going crazy) go once again to show the lack of a Republican Party and dire need for one.
Comment by yep Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:21 am
===intrusion by state government in yet another place they don’t belong.===
I can see your point, but in our society power flows downward from the state to the local governments. They are a creation of the state.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:22 am
Anon 11:04:
Anyway, if you look at the numbers, in aggregate Illinois spends the 7th most of any state on education, with $22,344,947 in FY 2006
Not surprising, since IL was the 5th most populous state according to the 2006 Census estimates. Sounds like a case to boost IL funding to get to #5 as much as a case that IL already has enough $.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:23 am
It is an example of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Addressing the funding mechanism without addressing the runaway costs of the educational bureaucracy simply will not work.
If you look at the Illinois school report card you will see a large variation in educational costs. How will a combined funding method resolve the differences?
It may be a popular sentiment, but will it work? In Michigan they reduced, but did not eliminate the educational property tax. Property taxes have begun to creep upward, but they have an increased sales tax burden. Illinois sales taxes are already at the high end of the spectrum. Adding several percent will not help our citizens or economy.
Comment by Plutocrat03 Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:31 am
McLean Farmboy has an interesting perspective. But, voters only approve a property tax “rate”. The amount of the actual “levy” depends upon the local board and is constrained by the local Equalized Assessed Valuation of property within the district. Moreover, many special purpose “rates” (such as Public Safety) were established by the legislature…not by the voters.
Comment by Prairie Pasha Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:36 am
== but in our society power flows downward from the state to the local governments. They are a creation of the state. ==
from the Declarationof Indpendence: ” . . . That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, . . .”
I know that the Declaration’s declaration may not be the practice, but it seems backward to think of what government is a creation of. The power flows up from the governed, not down from the government. But like I said, this may not be the practice.
Comment by Captain Flume Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:37 am
CF, the power goes up to the state from the people, and then from the state up to the federal and down to the local. The state at the founding was the center of power. Much, much less so now, of course, but it remains so regarding local government. Local government is a creation of the state, which is originally a creation of the people.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:42 am
This items does sound like a perfect item for CON-CON.
Comment by frustrated GOP Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:53 am
My point is that people are closer to their local governments than the state government. Enough unrest at the local government level should (not will) move the state toward another policy. But there has not been that welling of unrest.
One of the reasons Illinois is saddled with so many school districts is the issue of loyalty to a local government (or taxing body) entity, a school district in this case. It will take supreme statesmanship to move too far from where we are now in the area of educaitonal funding. I don’t any Illinois statesmen, or stateswomen, in or out of government; so we will likely hear the drums but not see anyone marching for a long time.
Comment by Captain Flume Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 11:56 am
My point is that people are closer to their local governments than the state government.
Quick, everyone. Name the governor, then name your township supervisor. You may be neighbors and not even know it.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:04 pm
I agree with Six. You may know your alderman, you may know your mayor, but other than that, probably not. Local gvt gets even less coverage than state government (outside chicago). The last time I voted for school board I realized I didn’t know anyone.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:09 pm
…But let’s get back to the question, please. Thanks.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:12 pm
frustrated GOP and I agree (Rabid Liberal Dem)
Comment by Anonymous45 Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:21 pm
Let’s see if I get this straight…if schools were funded equally than children would be educated equally? Is this what these people believe? Since when has this been true? When has this been proven?
What happened to diversity? You know, believing that different students have different needs, and we need to recognize this and assist them towards similar education goals? How is sunsetting a property tax-based school funding system supposed to accomplish this?
Right now poor students get more state funding to help offset property tax school funding differences. Then the State gives the school districts more funding based on the challenges poor students face. Is this a wrong approach now?
Tell me how much it costs to educate a child in Illinois towards a successful goal of graduation. Then tell me how much it costs a child with learning disabilities to accomplish the same goal. Then tell me how much it costs a child without a functioning family to accomplish the same goal. Then tell me how much it costs a child who has to be taught out of school because of disruptive tendancies to turn them into a graduate.
Then tell me how equal funding can accomplish any of this.
I’m tired of seeing all the finger pointing at wealthy school districts as though their secret is money, and that the challenge failing schools face is a lack of money. It has turned a discussion from educating children into funding inequality as viewed by failing school administrators.
Now we are discussing this? Why?
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:22 pm
===I’m tired of seeing all the finger pointing at wealthy school districts as though their secret is money===
Ask those “wealthy” districts if they could do the same job without that money.
In other words, don’t be silly.
Now, back to the question, please.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:24 pm
To wander from the question along VM’s line of thought, the key issue in Illinois shouldn’t be funding inequity but rather the inequality in educational opportunities. Money is only part of the equation.
Tell me how some rural school in SE Illinois is ever going to offer New Trier type class offerings. What’s it gonna take to get someone to go teach Japanese to a graduating class of 101 in some rural district?
If you’re going to overhaul funding, overhaul education.
Heck, make the tax swap/tax hike a condition for doing away with tenure and see which side the teachers unions fall on. Here’s hint, they won’t support that reform no matter how much money goes to the schools.
Comment by Frank Booth Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:38 pm
What’s it gonna take to get someone to go teach Japanese to a graduating class of 101 in some rural district?
Pretty easy to get someone to teach Chinese there. Much more useful skill, going forward as well.
If we did do the sunset, there ought to be a “fall back” which would be painful enough to make it hurt.
I would suggest that the “pain point” be that the state would increase the bottom 10% of school districts funding by 20%. That would be based on 2007 numbers, and would come directly from Casino revenues.
so if CPD spends 10,409 per pupil, then it would get 12409 (roughly) under my scheme.
Comment by Pat collins Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 12:49 pm
I’m not saying I’m voting for CON- CON it’s just that this would be the time and place to change the structure.
BTW, to dicuss equity I think it’s still on the books for the state to levy property taxes. Want equity? Levy and redistribute ptaxes throughout the state.
We also could change our ptaxes so that big property tax payers pay a higher amount and we distribute that. Woodfield mall, nuc plants, Sears tower, oh that will be excepted I’m sure.
Comment by frustrated GOP Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 1:06 pm
It’s unfortunate that we haven’t had the leadership for more than 30 years in Illinois to conduct a reasoned discourse on education reform. All we have seen is political posturing and gimmicks in that time. Perhaps sunsetting the property tax system may be just the incentive needed to finally discuss and resolve the issue. It has worked in other states.
While a sunset may be a good idea to force the discussion, I do not think the property tax should be eliminated entirely as a means to fund our public schools. I actually like the approach taken in the Meeks-Cullerton bill (SB 2288) where the schools continue to do their tax levy as they have, but the state pays 20 percent of the levy in all schools and an additional 5 percent (20+5)in districts which are property tax poor and are taxing at maximum allowable rates. I would like to see the portion the state pays increased to 25+5 or even 30+5, but 2288 is as good a place as any to start.
For those of you who have said schools shouldn’t be given any more money without accountability, I would invite you to look at Senate Amendment #6 to SB 2288. It was approved by the Senate Education Committee a few days before the end of the spring session. It includes many financial and academic performance accountability measures that are well overdue. The bill even provides funds to local school districts might need to pay for implementing these measures.
Comment by Springfield Alum Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 1:08 pm
By the frame of the question and by some of Rich’s posts, I suppose we are assuming they would completly abolish a local district’s right to tax. My fear has been that the state would do a property tax/income tax swap, then if you live in a district wanting a really good school, you have to levy a property tax to get you back to where you are now.
The other problem is will there be a flat, per capita state aid payment to schools, or will Chicago schools get a higher rate then downstate schools. If they do not, some of the suburban schools will probably have to close because I doubt they can operate on a flat per capita amount the downstate schools can.
Comment by the Patriot Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 1:18 pm
Obviously we need more Amish legislators. They fully fund their Educational System and have virtually no debt. The public education system is just so over rated.
Comment by A Citizen Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 1:49 pm
What about a combination of taxes and formulas.
- State income tax that is level for each pupil in the system and ISBE costs.
- State managed local property tax used to offset the cost of living for teachers, admins and other community costs.
- Business tax can be a state and/or local managed mechanism for funding.
- Local sales tax is the community mechanism for additional funding.
Maybe lower and/or higher regional test scores can trigger formula changes of the state managed taxes.
Comment by Suggestion Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 1:52 pm
What do we do with bonds? Ok, get rid of the operational dollars levies, it all comes from the State, let’s say oil well under the mansion, we are’t using it right now, right? Do we continue to allow districts to vote in new bonds for building?
next question.
To open a new building is at least a couple million in operating $$. does the district get an allocation of dollars from the state for that expense? Does the state approve design of buildings so they are effecient? Since larger buildings are more cost effective, do we only allow building of 600+, regardless of what the local community thinks?
Whole new mindset to how we manage school resources if we change the source of revenue.
To the issue of coverage of local schools: Thank you greedy newspaper mogals for cutting local newspaper staffs and not covering local govt. Sure there are a buch of know-it-alls making stuff up and blogging, where is the detail research based reporting on local govt. it’s gone all gone. that’s why we don’t know what’s happening.
How about that as a topic, but I digress. Sorry.
Comment by frustrated GOP Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 1:52 pm
Bad idea. Costs are not the same throughout the state, so a uniform per-pupil state payment would be unfair. It would average-down the best schools in the state, where voters often choose to tax themselves extra for good schools. It would vitiate local control. And it would hurt education in years when the income or sales tax revenues decrease. At least property taxes are stable. And quality of education does not always correlate with dollars spent per pupil.
Comment by Legal Eagle Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 2:08 pm
Before we abolish property taxes as a source of funding for schools, there are a few things that should be said in their favor:
1) Everyone pays. Years ago, I remember Sen. Denny Jacobs observing that in his district John Deere avoided paying income taxes by making sure they did not show any profit. Yet, they paid property taxes because they owned property. He pointed out that businesses can maniupulate their books to avoid or reduce their income tax obligation, but they can’t avoid paying property taxes. Eliminating the property tax will shift the burden of paying for schools to the individual;
2) The taxpayer has some control. Sales taxes and property taxes have one thing in common. The taxpayer can alter their habits to reduce their tax burden. If you don’t want to pay high property taxes, then choose a more modest home. I can’t choose how much I pay in income taxes, but I can reduce my sales and property tax burden by making choices in what I buy and where I live;
3) Local control. I think this is often overstated, but it is true that most areas with high property taxes have high property taxes because the locals agreed to tax themselves at a higher rate through local referenda. We don’t get to vote directly on an income or sales tax rate (usually) but we do get to vote on our property tax rate;
4) A fair mix. No single form of taxation is perfect. Instead, it makes sense to combine several types of taxes to try to reach a fair balance. In combination, the property tax, income tax and sales tax work to make sure that almost everyone shares in the burden. Eliminating one source skews the mix and increases the inequities of the other taxes, which end up going up to compensate.
Discussion of education funding always reminds me of the Churchill quote on Democracy. The current school funding system in Illinois is the worst possible system of funding schools, except for every other system that has ever been proposed.
Comment by Old Elephant Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 2:27 pm
What does all of this have to do with Education? It’s all about money, especially in Cook County. The tax should sunset (preferably each year), so the people could evaluate things.
As the McLean County Farmboy mentioned above, there are electeions. Does anyone show up,
Comment by Fearless Leader Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 2:45 pm
We are greatly underestimating the ablility of the open market to deliver services to our children. A low, statewide number could do wonders with innvations like computers and electronic textbooks. It isn’t really a need for money, but a sincere desire to educate our children; they will follow and teach us.
Comment by Fearless Leader Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 2:48 pm
We build one giant school in Springfield for all of Illinois. CNR will run lines to a central hub located at the new super school so that kids may be trained to and from school. The school will grow its own food as part of its agriculture program. A slot machine will be placed in every household to help pay the costs of “The” school.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 3:01 pm
Let’s look at the last item the GA let “sunset”: utility deregulation. We saw how that turned out… they sure took the bull by the horns when it came time to deal with the results. I actually am in favor of sunsetting education property taxes, but with 2 kids in public schools I am scared of the consequences by a government who, time after time after time, shows they have no backbone to tackle tough issues.
Comment by Millstadt News Guy Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 3:19 pm
School funding has been an major policy issue in Illinois for at least the thirty years. I’ve been working on the issue as a legislative staffer and advocate with groups like the Metropolitan Planning Council and the Chicago Urban League. I hope to continue my work on the issue as a member of the General Assembly in 2009.
Let’s reflect on the history of school funding reform efforts.
The constitutional amendment failed in 1992. State courts have refused to enter the discussion. I have watched reformers pin their hopes on gubernatorial elections, gubernatorial leadership, redistricting, and blue ribbon commissions.
Deadlines force legislative action.
Two years is a long time to develop consensus on alternatives. None of those have worked.to the status quo. I have my own ideas on solutions, but the point is to force a serious discussion of this issue in the House and the Senate which can lead to reform.
Comment by Will Burns Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 3:39 pm
Thank you Will Burns…now you just have to convince every other leg who bothers to show up this week…
Comment by Anonymous45 Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 3:47 pm
Outsource all public education to India. For every grad student they send to the University of Illinois, Bradley, etc., they have to take 10 K-8 students. Use tax monies to pay for flights to India. India spends no money on sports. They have won one individual Olympic Gold Medal in 74 years. No money would be wasted on Christmas programs. Music would sound different but we could get used to it. High school could be eliminated as the drop out age should be lowered to age 12. Students not headed for graduate school could recieve vocational training in sweat shops. If you want patriotism, start some military schools. We eliminate public school expense and produce computer programers in grad school willing to work for peanuts. This could work. As a previous commentor noted, if the leaders had their children in a public school, this issued would be solved quickly.
Comment by Enemy of the State Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 4:03 pm
I think allowing it to sunset will force debate and more importantly it will draw the attention of average joe voter. It’s is difficult to get the average voter interested in this debate at a level that forces action.
I am not sure anyone believes that a a reduction in property tax will actually occur. There may well be a swap or change in the funding mechanism for ed.
I do not believe there will be a significant drop in what I pay in property taxes….
As a side bar, more money for education has not improved education.
Comment by Larry Mullholand Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 4:23 pm
Any swap of property taxes to income taxes will be a major boon to the retirees who do not pay a state income tax while collecting large sums of money from the state.
This will further decrease the number of people who are paying for the schools.
Comment by Plutocrat03 Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 4:53 pm
Realistically, we should consider the following options in my opinion:
1. We can’t afford to completely sunset the property tax but we could reduce it. This would be a popular move.
2. To generate additional revenue we need to increase the state income tax on a progressive scale (higher incomes pay at a higher rate). This will be a very unpopular move but we need to bite the bullet.
3. We can’t trust those mopes in Springfield (plus Blago on the northside) to pass a balanced budget on a timely basis, so
4. Let’s throw out ALL the incumbents and then start over. It could hardly be much worse than the present situation.
The rank of Illinois in terms of funding education is shameful and it isn’t going to improve without some sacrifices on everyone’s part.
Comment by BobW Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 4:55 pm
To stray off subject a little bit, I think Rich and Capt. Flume’s discussion pokes at the 800-pound gorilla in the room, whether it’s education funding, roads, or any other state issue.
I’ve lived in Illinois all my life, and I get around the state on business and pleasure as much as I can. More so than any time that I can remember, there seems to be no sense of community among the state populace.
By that I mean, people in Chicago don’t give a hoot about Rock Island, people in Peoria don’t give a hoot about Mt. Vernon, people in Naperville don’t give a hoot about Belleville, people in Charleston don’t give a hoot about Quincy and on and on and on.
We’re a big state, in every sense of the word. And we’ve always had regional, ethnic and class differences. But now we seem to have indifferences.
Citizens have a responsibility to give a damn about their neighbors. Leaders — the gov, the Four Tops, anyone who claims to be one — have a responsibility to encourage, no, insist on that.
How about eighth grade classes taking an overnight trip to Springfield to learn about their state like we did when I was a kid? My kids went to Washington and New York. Illinois teachers, school boards, state leaders, how about it?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Aug 12, 08 @ 9:08 pm
[…] Question of the day * The question: Do you favor allowing the property tax for schools to “sunset” in 2010 to force the General Assembly to come up with another funding alternative? […]
Pingback by Imitation is the sincerest form flattery | Extreme Wisdom Wednesday, Aug 13, 08 @ 10:30 am