This seems to recap the system fairly well, except to say that, despite needing to ask voters for support for an expiring referendum, the School Board can always put a referendum on the ballot. I believe any District is limited in the number of referenda presented to voters only by political realities and their chances of passage. I doubt that limitations exist on the dollars raised or the number of ballot questions submitted. This is certainly borne out by the significantly higher funding levels and numbers of referenda submitted and passed by family-rich suburbs for curriculum enhancement and sports programming.
Again, these referenda ought not to be necessary for providing the basics, and that's essentially what has happened to inner city districts versus suburban communities. St. Paul and Minneapolis are forever trying to pick up the slack in basic operations (especially with more students in our population requiring much more attention for income, nutrition, language, learning disabilities and the consequent behavioral issues attendant to all of those. If sufficient state funding from a progressive source (like income taxes) came down based on real needs and fewer political agendas, we would never far fewer, if any, referenda, which too often give taxpayers the mechanism to deprive our children of their inherent right to an adequate education and thus preparation for future participation in and contribution to society rather than an uneducated burden on our social service and corrections systems. The Right's pennywise, pound-foolish attempt at privatizing education right now is the most UNconservative approach to education any society could adopt, and, in every case, yields little more than larger numbers of uneducated adults drawing down on community resources instead of helping build them up through productive work, taxpaying, and leadership. This way is not the most liberal way - it's the best conservation and application of new and existing resources a society can enact. Any other alternative should be viewed as a radical attempt at controlling the learning content of all students to conform to a narrow agenda of religious fundamentalists and enriching private, unaccountable corporations at the expense of all of us who pay taxes. And I haven't even yet touched on the incredibly negative effects of a bad public school system on a city's property values. On that issue, all taxpayers should be concerned that the system, whether they have children in it or not, be a stable, well-operated and effective teacher of all students. Andy Driscoll Crocus Hill/Ward 2 ------ > From: Tim Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:23:40 -0500 > Subject: Re: [StPaul] SPPS "Budget Gap Shocks" > >> [Driscoll]No, it is not true that the Legislature sets budgets for school >> districts. I really don't know where anyone would get the impression that the >> state creates a pool from which all districts must divine their share. > > [Erickson] Thanks to Andy, for helping to clarify this. I certainly did a poor > job. Let me try to clarify, and Andy or anyone else can correct me > where I'm wrong (and I probably am wrong). > > The school board has the power to levy a certain amount of local > property tax for the school district. However, as Andy pointed out - > the amount they can raise is capped by the state. As far as I know, > St. Paul and most other metro districts have already levied the > maximum amount that they are allowed (and pretty much always do). > > So, in practical effect, they cannot raise taxes for schools - in > theory, they could lower them, if they felt the state portion of the > budget was sufficiently well funded. > > The school board can also approve a referendum request - for > additional property taxes. But, the voters must approve the > referendum. I believe that the amount a district can raise by > referendum is also capped - at St. Paul is currently at the cap (I > believe this is correct). I believe that the current referendum in > St. Paul is due to expire in the next year and we will likely be > facing another referendum to replace the last one. Again, its my > understanding that the next referendum will be to replace an existing > referendum, not to generate additional funds. > > Finally, the school relies on state funds distributed on a per pupil > basis, along with some "compensatory" funding to address special > needs. The per pupil funding and the compensatory funding are set by > the state legislature. > > Since the St. Paul school district is already at it maximum ability > to levy property taxes, the school board has no ability to raise > addition funds. As things currently stand, only the state legislature > has the ability to generate any additional funds for the district. > > Unless, the school board decides to "cut local taxes" and increase > the size of the deficit - then there is nothing more that they can do > except to distribute the funds that have been made available to them. > > I am quite sure, that the current school board cannot "raise any > additional taxes." They can only cut the budget to meet the expected > revenues from the state. > > I hope that I've got this somewhat correct. I'd welcome any > corrections or additions from someone more knowledgeable than myself. > > Best wishes, > > Tim Erickson > Hamline Midway > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- > ================================================= > Tim Erickson http://www.politalk.com > St. Paul, MN - USA 651-643-0722 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] iChat/AIM: stpaultim > ================================================= > > > > _____________________________________________ To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________ NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
