MPS Looking at 14.9% Tax Increase
Even though the tentative Milwaukee Public Schools budget for next year calls for a 1.5% spending increase, it would require a 14.9% increase in the property tax levy for the district.
That’s because state aid to MPS is expected to fall more than $18 million, and property taxes would increase to offset that, according to a memo that Superintendent William Andrekopoulos sent to the School Board this week.
In other words, the rest of the state needs to suck it up and send more money to Milwaukee or they will jack up taxes by nearly 15%. For you Milwaukee taxpayers…. suck it up and force your school board to cut spending. After all, MPS’ enrollment has been declining for years. It’s about time that they reconciled their budget.
In other words, the rest of the state needs to suck it up and send more money to Milwaukee or they will jack up taxes by nearly 15%.
Well, I mean, the state is punishing us for not jacking up taxes last year. A third of that missing $18m is due to MPS’s fiscal responsibility in not spending the max last year. Can’t we at least be a little resentful about that particularly f’ed up portion of the school funding formula?
Posted by folkbum on July 03, 2008 at 2255 hrs
Folkbum is right. The state revenue caps basically set a school district’s budget and tax levy. Total allowable revenue = membership x allowable revenue per member. Total allowable levy = total allowable revenue minus state general aid (which is based on prior year spending and not affected by anything done in the current year).
MPS has not raised its full allowable levy in at least several years. Thus, compared to the total amount of money it is allowed to raise, the property tax levy has been lower than allowed under the revenue caps. But state general aid is based on spending in the prior year and if you raise less revenue than allowed, you will presumably spend less (unless you have a fund balance you can dip into).
The good things about MPS spending less in the prior years are: the property tax was lower than it might have been and if it finds it needs more revenue, it is allowed to raise it. For the rest of the state, MPS lower than allowed spending in previous years resulted in more state aid to be distributed to other districts.
However, because levy = allowable revenue minus state aid, and because state aid for a year is already set based on a prior year’s (lower) spending, the only way to increase the budget is to increase taxes.
That increased spending this year will result in increased state aid the following school year; but not the school year in which it was spent. And this will draw from other districts but, remember, it has been drawing less than allowed by state law for a number of years.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 04, 2008 at 0617 hrs
it has been drawing less than allowed by state law for a number of years.
Nice spin.
ALL TAXATION IS DRIVEN BY SPENDING. No spending, no taxes. Simple.
In that entire comment, you never mentioned the possibility that MPS is spending more than it should—which it is.
On another thread, “ESL” students were brought up as a reason for additional spending. Curious that “ESL” was never mentioned in Polish/German Milwaukee during the early 1900’s.
Posted by dad29 on July 04, 2008 at 0703 hrs
ALL TAXATION IS DRIVEN BY SPENDING
Okay, Dad29. The budgets are all public, and on the MPS website. Tell us what to cut.
Posted by folkbum on July 04, 2008 at 0850 hrs
To Dad29. My post was explanatory as to the math and the formulas.
Folkbum was right in addressing the fact that MPS raised, and therefore spent, less than is allowed in state law. My agreement with him is based on that.
I do not have a comment on whether MPS is spending too much, too little, or about the right amount. Every school district operates within the context of state law and of both state and local politics. MPS is the largest school district in the state, has the most complicated issues and is driven by politics beyond my comprehension. We can talk all year about it, but its problems seem to be similar to those of most, if not all, urban school districts in the country. Maybe there is someone, somewhere, who is smart enough to offer solutions that can actually be accomplished. But that is not me. I am simply not smart enough. The best I can do is provide some explanation of the formulas and the math.
Validation word = large. School district, budget, problem.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 04, 2008 at 0928 hrs
ALL TAXATION IS DRIVEN BY SPENDING. No spending, no taxes. Simple.
In theory, that is true. But school boards are required to operate school districts. They must spend something.
Once the state established a formula for a revenue “cap,” that cap became the floor in most districts. In fact, many argue that a school board would be irresponsible not to raise the maximum allowable revenue even if it doesn’t need to immediately spend it. It could increase its fund balance (for a rainy day fund), it could put it in a fund for building maintenance and replacement to avoid having to borrow at some future date. If it doesn’t raise the maximum allowed, it still maintains the ability to make that up the following year. But then there is a bigger percent increase. Politically, it’s usually easier to just raise it as much as allowed all along.
Of course, most districts don’t have the problem of raising more than they can spend. For many districts the increases involved in cost to continue is more than allowed by the revenue cap.
MPS has not raised the maximum revenue allowed under law. You may still believe it has raised too much. Others believe it has not raised enough.
But, again, the formula comes into play. Property taxes are based on the revenue limit. State general aids are based on spending. So if you raise revenue that you are not going to spend, you will not get state aids on it until it is spent. Because MPS is so big, its decision to spend or not spend money in any given year is going to have an effect on the distribution of the fixed pot of money for state general aids the following year. It’s math.
So here’s my opinion: I think being a school board member has got to be the most thankless job in the state. It’s not for the thin-skinned or faint of heart.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 04, 2008 at 0955 hrs
Look at what MPS spends per student. That should give you some clues.
And - I’m allowed by law to buy 8 homes if I want to - it doesn’t mean I can afford them all.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 04, 2008 at 1450 hrs
Actually, you’re not allowed to buy 8 houses unless you can either come up with the cash or get someone to lend you the money. Other than the bank, the only other person entitled to an actually say about how many houses you can buy is your spouse. Your mother, uncle and the neighbors may have an opinion, but they don’t have a vote.
School board members have to run for election. They then have to get 6 or 8 other school board members to agree with them on a budget and, if they want to keep serving, they will have to run for re-election. For some spending, they must get voter approval. They have a press, a gaggle of politicians, a strong union and a constituency to answer to. Whatever your opinion is, there is no objective measure of how much money is enough or too much for a school district to spend. The state revenue limit is the only hard number the school district has to work with to determine its “allowance.” By that measure, MPS has “underspent” its allowance. That is what my post factually explains. Everything else is politics, union contracts, and the price of gas. “Too much” and “too little” are part of the everything else.
Owen’s original post said that:
...the rest of the state needs to suck it up and send more money to Milwaukee or they will jack up taxes by nearly 15%.
My sense of this blog is that Owen generally prefers to work with facts. So, my (long) answers are to explain that is not how it works. It’s not an either/or. MPS does not hold the “rest of the state” hostage OR it will increase property taxes by 15%. Under state law, if it wants to increase spending by 15%, it must raise taxes to do it, unless it has fund balance to spend. How much money it gets from the state is already set in a formula. If it does raise spending, then it will get money from the rest of the state and there is no hostage-taking required.
Be as critical as you want of MPS or any other school board. They are public bodies and are accountable to the public. But if you don’t wish to understand or acknowledge the context in which they must operate, then your opinion will be ill-informed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 04, 2008 at 1642 hrs
Actually, you’re not allowed to buy 8 houses unless you can either come up with the cash or get someone to lend you the money.
Unlike Joe Schmoe (above,) the School Board can force the taxpayers to cough up the revenues. At the point of a gun.
School board members have to run for election.
And THAT’S done a lot of good for Milwaukee (and Statewide) taxpayers.
You make large paragraphs out of nothing and call it “facts,” and manage to be condescending in the process. Call it “complex,” or “challenging.” Compare it to NYC, DC, or LA. That’s obvious.
The solution is actually quite simple, but no one wants to implement it. Close every school in the District, then re-open under new management, with new workers.
After all, “school boards are required to operate districts, and must spend something,” as you say.
Posted by dad29 on July 04, 2008 at 2125 hrs
You know, Dad29, I’ve always wanted to do a swap. Take all the staff—teachers, paras, principals, everybody—from a suburban school (Tosa East? Brookfield Central? Oconomowoc? West Bend?) and swap them withe staff at, say, Milwaukee Vincent. Give it a year, and see whether the students are doing any better or worse at either place.
My bet is no change. In either school.
Posted by folkbum on July 04, 2008 at 2317 hrs
As a former teacher at Vincent, I would take that bet. There are some terrible employees there, from the top on down.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 05, 2008 at 0026 hrs
You know as well as I do, Jay, that a HS-level ‘swap’ program wouldn’t work. The kids are off-track by 4th grade in the City (by and large—there are always exceptions.)
Given the news of THIS morning, it’s clear: the solution is to burden charter-school faculty with more requirements!
Posted by dad29 on July 05, 2008 at 0649 hrs
I intended to be informative and ended up being condescending. Sorry about the tone. But I still believe it is important to understand how the funding system works.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 05, 2008 at 0757 hrs
Total Entries: 19998
Total Comments: 134037
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 12:32 am
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 96
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 04:27 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).