Given all the nonsense, threats, and lies coming out of the district, I decided to once again provide a simple explanation regarding the supposed need for a levy in March. And, I am going to use the district's own numbers so that you can easily verify what I am saying.
By law, the district must file a Five-Year Financial Forecast every October. Here it is: http://www.olentangy.k12.oh.us/pdf/finance/5YrFcst29Oct2007.pdf
Please note line 10.010 for FY09. That entry shows the ending deficit as $2,059,854 -- not the $10.5 million that the superintendent is claiming.
State laws requires districts to show no deficit in the first projected fiscal year; the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2009 (FY09). To remove the deficit, a district can make cuts, avoid new costs, find other funding, etc.
On page 7, you will note that base salary increases account for $1,929,246 million of new expenditures in FY09 (this does not include an additional approximately $270,000 that the district pays into state retirement systems due to these salary increases - page 7).
Also note that step and education increases provide $2.6 million for teachers, even without any base salary increase. So, teachers will still receive salary increases even with a zero percent increase in base pay. In fact, they will receive almost the 4% increase that is standard in the private sector.
By way of comparison: When the state was going through a period of fiscal problems, they negotiated a zero increase for all state workers. Zero; no step increase, no education increase, nothing.
In addition, health insurance increases account for another $2.4 million -- the district is assuming a 12% increase in its contribution per employee covered (page 8) -- note: taxpayers contribute $1005 per month for family coverage.
So, salary increases (base salary plus state contributions) and health insurance are the root cause of the deficit. It's not growth or any other factor. It's simply salaries and benefits.
To protect salaries and benefits, the superintendent is proposing cuts to programs. On top of that, he has created the illusion that he must cut $10.5 million in order to right the deficit.
Look for yourself, the deficit is only $2 million. The $10.5 million is a threatened punishment for not supporting the superintendent.
The district's financial situation is an expense issue, not a "district on the edge" issue.
It's all there in the district's Five-Year Forecast. The truth is easy to discern despite the district's spin and lies. A really convenient truth at that.
Showing posts with label income tax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label income tax. Show all posts
Monday, February 25, 2008
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Central Planning: the shattering mirror
Due to government initiatives and regulations, corn demand is up and, hence, more land is being devoted to corn. Yet, the demand for corn and land is reducing another government intervention -- land conservation. One government program undoes another government program: the definition of chaos.
Take the new unconstitutional1 federal light bulb standard; incandescent is being phased out in favor of fluorescent. So, the feds reduce energy but introduce more mercury into landfills and the water supply. Clean Water Act anyone? Government at odds with itself.
Decades ago, FA Hayek showed that government, unless checked, necessarily becomes more intrusive and more oppressive, ending in serfdom. Ludwig von Mises showed that government planning necessarily leads to chaos. You can see those truths in the interventions above.
Never, never, did our Founders risk their lives for an intrusive central state that taxes an absurd amount of income, robbing the productive for the sake of the nonproductive. Never, never, did they conceive of a nation where the largest employers are governmental agencies.
Yet, here we stand, a nation where the federal government taxes wages for programs that are nonsensical, and at odds with each other. The examples above prove that central planning is an oxymoron; tax-funded chaos leading toward serfdom.
Everything is not lost. On the horizon is the movement of Liberty; a movement that has once again found a leader: Ron Paul.
Paul is the only candidate who will check government expansion. He is the only candidate who actually believes YOU are capable of running your life. That my friends is the essence of Liberty.
notes:
1. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted such powers. In fact, the 9th and 10th Amendments forbid the feds from such intrusions into the lives of the people and the several states. Other than Ron Paul, the Constitution is a dead letter in DC.
Take the new unconstitutional1 federal light bulb standard; incandescent is being phased out in favor of fluorescent. So, the feds reduce energy but introduce more mercury into landfills and the water supply. Clean Water Act anyone? Government at odds with itself.
Decades ago, FA Hayek showed that government, unless checked, necessarily becomes more intrusive and more oppressive, ending in serfdom. Ludwig von Mises showed that government planning necessarily leads to chaos. You can see those truths in the interventions above.
Never, never, did our Founders risk their lives for an intrusive central state that taxes an absurd amount of income, robbing the productive for the sake of the nonproductive. Never, never, did they conceive of a nation where the largest employers are governmental agencies.
Yet, here we stand, a nation where the federal government taxes wages for programs that are nonsensical, and at odds with each other. The examples above prove that central planning is an oxymoron; tax-funded chaos leading toward serfdom.
Everything is not lost. On the horizon is the movement of Liberty; a movement that has once again found a leader: Ron Paul.
Paul is the only candidate who will check government expansion. He is the only candidate who actually believes YOU are capable of running your life. That my friends is the essence of Liberty.
notes:
1. Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted such powers. In fact, the 9th and 10th Amendments forbid the feds from such intrusions into the lives of the people and the several states. Other than Ron Paul, the Constitution is a dead letter in DC.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Olentangy Levy: More nonsense
From a recent district email:
Due to responsible fiscal management and higher than expected revenues, the district stretched the 2004 operating dollars to last one year beyond the board's three-year promise to voters. During that time, the district opened 5 new schools without asking voters for additional operating funds.
If the March 4 ballot issue does not pass, class sizes will increase and additional redistrictings (sic) may be required in order to alleviate the overcrowding.
Response to the first paragraph: I sat on the board during most of this period and can emphatically state that neither the board nor the administration managed its finances with this in mind. Circumstances -- housing market and state funding -- allowed the levy to last another year. In fact, many board members (including the former board president) and the superintendent wanted to go back on the ballot in 2006 and then again in 2007.
Response to the second paragraph: This is the big lie: According to state law, the district must cut $10.4 million in FY09 if the levy fails. A BIG LIE which I have detailed in prior posts. The district only needs to reduce expenditures by $2 million in order to balance its budget. That's it. The rest of the cuts are threats to punish parents if the levy fails. The superintendent is simply stating that he is unwilling to negotiate lower salary and benefit increases. He, instead, will cut programs. Salaries come before programs in his minds. Amazing? Maybe not, he did negotiate a real sweet deal for himself last summer.
Due to responsible fiscal management and higher than expected revenues, the district stretched the 2004 operating dollars to last one year beyond the board's three-year promise to voters. During that time, the district opened 5 new schools without asking voters for additional operating funds.
If the March 4 ballot issue does not pass, class sizes will increase and additional redistrictings (sic) may be required in order to alleviate the overcrowding.
Response to the first paragraph: I sat on the board during most of this period and can emphatically state that neither the board nor the administration managed its finances with this in mind. Circumstances -- housing market and state funding -- allowed the levy to last another year. In fact, many board members (including the former board president) and the superintendent wanted to go back on the ballot in 2006 and then again in 2007.
Response to the second paragraph: This is the big lie: According to state law, the district must cut $10.4 million in FY09 if the levy fails. A BIG LIE which I have detailed in prior posts. The district only needs to reduce expenditures by $2 million in order to balance its budget. That's it. The rest of the cuts are threats to punish parents if the levy fails. The superintendent is simply stating that he is unwilling to negotiate lower salary and benefit increases. He, instead, will cut programs. Salaries come before programs in his minds. Amazing? Maybe not, he did negotiate a real sweet deal for himself last summer.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Olentangy Schools: Big deal, what about my tax burden?
Glad you asked. The Ohio Department of Taxation reports the tax effort -- burden -- for each district in Ohio. Tax burden is defined as the amount of local school district taxes collected as a percentage of personal income. Despite spin to the contrary, Olentangy has a very high tax burden. It's all right here in Appendix D.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Is repealing the 20th century such a bad idea?
My latest post the Blog at Mises.org(Mises.org):
Income tax revolt is slowing making its way to the ballot in Massachusetts, and it's picking up a few enemies along the way. According to a letter in the Boston Globe: "So when Libertarian leader Carla Howell launched a new effort to junk the income tax earlier this year, the powers that be made it clear that this time they would do everything they could to discredit it."
An opponent of the prior attempt to repeal the tax (Howell tried to repeal the tax in 2002) is none other than Michael Widmer of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. As the letter notes, "(T)he Taxpayers Foundation is a business lobby that often opposes broad-based tax relief."
This quote from Widmer regarding the prior attempt clearly defines the issue: "Essentially (Howell's) trying to repeal the 20th century."
Repeal the 20th century? Hmm. So, what's the problem here?
note: Here in Ohio, the income tax is only 35 years old, while a number of states have no income tax at all.
Income tax revolt is slowing making its way to the ballot in Massachusetts, and it's picking up a few enemies along the way. According to a letter in the Boston Globe: "So when Libertarian leader Carla Howell launched a new effort to junk the income tax earlier this year, the powers that be made it clear that this time they would do everything they could to discredit it."
An opponent of the prior attempt to repeal the tax (Howell tried to repeal the tax in 2002) is none other than Michael Widmer of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. As the letter notes, "(T)he Taxpayers Foundation is a business lobby that often opposes broad-based tax relief."
This quote from Widmer regarding the prior attempt clearly defines the issue: "Essentially (Howell's) trying to repeal the 20th century."
Repeal the 20th century? Hmm. So, what's the problem here?
note: Here in Ohio, the income tax is only 35 years old, while a number of states have no income tax at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)