Hudson |
Tһе St. Croix County Finance Committee һаѕ endorsed a request asking tһе Wisconsin Legislature tο allow school districts tο charge impact fees fοr חеw development.
Tһе proposal, presented bу tһе Hudson Area Intergovernmental Advisory Council, іѕ expected tο ɡο tο tһе full County Board March 21.
No related posts.
This section is widgetized. If you would like to add content to this section, you may do so by using the Widgets panel from within your WordPress Admin Dashboard. This Widget Section is called "Feature Bottom Left"
This section is widgetized. If you would like to add content to this section, you may do so by using the Widgets panel from within your WordPress Admin Dashboard. This Widget Section is called "Feature Bottom Middle"
This section is widgetized. If you would like to add content to this section, you may do so by using the Widgets panel from within your WordPress Admin Dashboard. This Widget Section is called "Feature Bottom Right"
Notice in the article that not a single interviewed member of the country board suggested more private schools!
Instead of asking the legislature for a statewide universal education tax credit for families, they are looking for ways to sock it to new home buyers.
Someone on the country board should propose either a UETC, or simply implement county-wide educational tax credits to provide direct incentives for the development of additional private schools, and to eliminate the double jeapordy that currently exists for families that use non-government schools.
Instead of increasing people’s property taxes, why not provide incentives to to businesses and individuals to invest in non-public schools. These options are built with far less cost, run more efficiently and typically produce students with higher levels of academic achievment.
Why do these elected officials always propose “solutions” which always mean raising taxes or, in this case, an “impact fee?” When an elected official talks about an impact fee, this is nothing more than a statist euphamism.
Why not propose ways to form a partnership with the private sector instead of alienating the private sector?
bildanielson, you are so correct! This is even worse than a referendum on the teachers because this is another income revenue source into infinity………………………!
This is a tax, plain and simple. A really big tax! Can you say TAX? Let’s all try it one more time TAAAAAAAXXX! Now a little faster…TAAX! Now really fast…. F@^!>*.
It’s time to watch how the county board members vote, because I think (I’m a Deer the “Buck” ) Malick is playing a little PEPPE with this one. With $20 million in the bank already, why would someone need to support stealing more money. This is a tax increase like no other. It’s no more a fee than :
License plates Up 25%
Hunting License Up as high as 120%
Park Fees Up 30%
Everything is a fee now. Your right bildanielson, this is nothing more than a statist euphamism!
We heard about this last month and my first take was they’re a little late with this idea. I first thought this might be something worth looking into. After all, cities have been doing this for years where they require developers to pay the up-front costs for streets, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks of any new subdivision being built. Why not schools?
There is, however, one very big difference between a city budget and a school district’s budget. The city isn’t allowed to carry forward a surplus whereas state law does allow a school district to do so.
County Board members would be wise to keep that point in mind as well as a few other high powered benefits of school boards. For instance, cities, towns and counties tax homeowners per their property’s equalized assessed value, school district’s get to tax at the market value (which is most generally higher). School district’s are allowed to carry a debt of up to 10% of the market value of the district, municipalities can only do 5% of assessed value. A school district’s rate of tax increase is set by the State Legislature, municipalities are controlled by the demands of the local voters.
Another issue that county board members fail to recognize is the fast changing dynamic in how people are finding other ways to provide an education to their children. Non-government funded public education is growing quickly and could make the need for further expansion of tax-fed buildings obsolete.
This idea that school district’s are somehow cash poor with little power to better their situation is pure nonsense. Dr. Danielson has the answer and it is the most logical option. Haven’t our elected representatives figured out the lesson of “Give a person a fish” versus “Teach a person to fish”?
Besides that, what makes a county board feel they have the power to trump the voting public regarding referendums?