Least surprising headline of year
by David Benzion · 01/12/2007 6:50 amWho could have predicted this one?
“TEXAS LEGISLATURE LOOKS FOR WAY AROUND BUDGET CAP”
There is much in the Houston Chronicle article to be incensed about, but this particular passage gets my goat [Ed: And a damn fine goat it is, too!]:
Legislative leaders adopted a constitutionally required spending cap Thursday and immediately entertained a new idea for getting around it so they can provide local property tax relief without slashing key services.
The idea: Let the voters decide whether to exempt property tax relief from the spending cap through a constitutional amendment. Voter approval could take some heat off of GOP lawmakers who might be reluctant to directly vote to break the cap even for tax relief.
The idea of an amendment met with approval from Republican Gov. Rick Perry.
“I think that’s probably the way to do it,” he said.
In the magical world of government, the only option if taxpayers are provided with the relief they were promised is “slashing key services.”
Question–didn’t most of state government shut down less than two weeks ago so that “non-essential” state employees could “mourn” the death of President Gerald Ford?
By the way, I’ve tried looking and haven’t found a single instance of there being a memorial in honor of Gerald Ford anywhere in Texas on that day. I stand to be corrected–if anyone can find a report about a public service to honor the former President in Texas on January 2nd (the day all “non-essential” state employees were given off to mourn him) please bring it to my attention.
If not, are we supposed to believe that state employees gathered quietly in each others homes to mourn? Can they provide some documentation of this fact?
And if not, shouldn’t they have their pay docked for the day the took off? They weren’t given the day off to run errands or play Guitar Hero II; they didn’t have to go into work on January 2nd for the specific purpose of mourning Gerry Ford.
Maybe we should quiz non-essential state employees–”Do you know who Gerald Ford is?”, and if they can’t answer the question, then we dock their pay.
Anyway, back to my main point.
Let’s get a list of all the state employees who are so “un-essential” that the state of Texas is capable of limping along without them showing up at the office. THEN LET’S KEEP HALF OF THEM.
Heck, I’ll be reasonable and say we should keep 60%–MORE than half.
The rest get fired.
Let’s see if we’ve got enough money to provide property tax “relief” (without “slashing key services”!) then.
God, I love the smell of Libertarianism in the morning.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
49 Responses to “Least surprising headline of year”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
We need to vote these people out of office! If you are not giving our tax money back, then put it in the state parks and schools which are in dire need of the money. This really chaps my behind!
First again? Bunch of slackers!/ducks and hauls butt!
Schools don’t need the money. They have more than they can spend now. We need to fire 70% of the people running the school system.
And I get ticked every time my kids come home with some school fundraiser trying to get money for computers or playground equipment.
What do I look like a turnip?
I would be much more willing to support an ammenment that simply said, if tax revenue exceeds budgeted expenses, that say, 75% of the surplus is returned to the taxpayers and 25% is put into a fund to offset future losses of tax revenue if the taxes fall below the budget requirements.
I will not support this without a 3% cap on appraisals. without this why bother. let them wake up one day and own 20 or 30 thousand houses.
I think the question is David that for state tax revenues to replace property taxes that triggers a cap of 5% or so on increases
In other words lets say we have a great year, the sales tax collect 1 trillion dollars.
we cannot give it back to the people that would be an expense and would trigger the caps
this is why the legislature should not adopt amendments while drinking excessively
Eric, There is a way around this. If the State Leg actually ran their accounting as a non-profit, or not-for profit company, then refunding over paid taxes would not be on the expense sheet, it would be on the income statement as a rebate/refund. Refunding overpaid prices is only an expense on a for-profit balance sheet. Or at least that is what I was taught helping the accountants at the Houston Food Bank, when we had to refund over paid amounts to pantries.
DuhMoose
I don’t think they ever contemplated a surplus - which is kinda scary in itself
According to some - any disbursement is an expenditure by the State even refunds
#7 eric says
“According to some - any disbursement is an expenditure by the State even refunds”
what the h-ll do you expect they all graduated from taxas schools that probably teach accounting that way!!!
DJ25K
I don’t think they ever had a mechanism to refund sales taxes after all unless people save receipts all year there is no way to determine who gets it
then you try to reduce local and municipal taxes so at least homeowners get a refund - but thats by all means an expenditure
So instead of firing everyone and burning out Austin
Lets see if they can actually figure it out without some backwater school superintendent sending it to the courts again tying it up for another two years like in 2003 and in 2005
Or light the torches (call Dan first)
If we have a surplus, let’s start paying law enforcement more money. Those are jobs that they have problems recruiting due to low pay and they expect these people to exist when they have to put up with who knows what each and every day and they put their lives on the line to protect us and enforce the crazy laws of our cities, counties and this state.
Why can’t our legislators add and subtract without factoring in lobbyists funds? Go figure.
I would even favor keeping that surplus in a ‘locked box’ and reducing the sales tax rate for the next budget.
But the problem is government isn’t a bank - politicians can’t be trusted with the money. Instead of just having a government that provides us with just what we need, it tries to provide everything that everyone could possibly want.
That is the big problem with school districts. They see the funding problem as not getting enough money from the state government. They don’t acknowledge that state money comes from the same taxpayer.
Dan has gotten himself into a “hornet’s nest” of RINOS. Makes no difference which party it is, the objective is the same: SPEND, SPEND, SPEND until there isn’t anymore then get some more tax dollars and start spending all over again. They don’t need no “stinkin’ budget”!!!! What the heck is a budget anyway? Well, a budget to them, is just another thing they have to spend money on preparing. Their antics will only hasten the “Tax Revolution”. Enough is enough you pompous overspending, so-called representatives!!!!!
#10 vlou - I agree. The law enforcement & fire personnel are so very much underpaid and yet they are never mentioned or exhaulted like our teachers. The schools have more than enough money and continue to suck more out of us through a government run monopoly. When my kids’ teachers are absent at least 25% of the time and they have to hire substitutes it gets my blood boiling. I would not mind paying so much to the schools if the following would happen:
1. Do away with redundant administrations - consolidate small school districts.
2. Hire more teachers who are retired folks that are now teaching the subject that they are experts in (my district had a doctor teach anatomy/physiology; a “rocket scientist” teach upper level math courses; an engineer teaching upper and lower level math courses.
3. Require teachers to major in a subject other than “education”. An “education” major doesn’t even have to take algebra to get the degree and then guess what they end up teaching. They can major in a science, math, english, history, etc. and take some additional electives to train them to teach.
But the real issue is that the legislature needs to either refund the money to the taxpayers (after all it is OUR money) or put it in a rainy day fund that can’t be touched without strict requirements.
The schools dont need another dime.
Every HOMEOWNER should be refunded equivalant to the amount paid for the most recent two years.
Educational funding must be cut in half and 75% of all educational funds must go into the class room, and accountabibility is the key word. This would stop the palaces being built and cut the admin staff in half starting at the top. Until this is done our teachers will not be allowed to teach and our teachers will not be given the tools they need to control the class room so the student who want to can learn.
Teachers should first receive a 10% raise then receive merit raises, not across the board raises.
The Texas leg’s shoudl be repleced as they come up for election. No legislaturer should serve more than two terms, then be replaced. We must have citizen legislatures not carreer politicians in office.
#10 and #13 vlou and dcgirl
The sentiment is good, but the problem comes about because this provides the Lege “cover.”
Think about it… they can go to the Constitutional limit by wasting money on illegals and band uniforms and other wasteful expenditures.
THEN, they come and say, “We have to go over the limit because the cops and teachers aren’t getting paid. There’s no money because of this limit.”
No.. there’s no money because they wasted it elsewhere. There’s plenty of money for cops, under the limit. It would just entail the lege not bribing big donors with freebies from the treasury in return for campaign donations.
Got a rino ad from tina bunkhouser about the dems not caring what the voters or constituents thought about or how they wanted their representatives to vote. I sent her back a question “What is the difference between bush, perry, dewhurst, craddick, cronyn, hutchinson and the dems?” Nothing!!!!
Well, Dan Patrick, you managed to encourage some voters to support the leadership in the last election. Your reasoned pleas failed to convince me. I know you and Edd Hendee were doing what you had to do and I don’t hold that against you. It was a rare case of Dan Patrick and Edd Hendee unknowingly slipping a few steps behind those on the leading edge of conservative thought in this state.
I do expect you, Senator Patrick, to stand strongly and publicly against this attempt to dispense with the voter approved spending caps.
I am more convinced than ever that there is no conservative representation in this state.
Our only hope is that others join us as former Republicans, and that we witness a quick, unbearably painful death of the party as it is now constituted. I am not confident that this scenario is probable, or even possible—because there are so many well-meaning true-believers that think a hog dressed in GOP clothing simply must be preferable to the same hog in a donkey suit. A pen of hogs is a pen of pen of hogs.
Signed,
A conservative from the wilderness
Wino and Shannon - you are both correct. It would be great if we could throw all the bums out and start over. Make the legislators (both state and US) live with the laws that they give us and make paid lobbyists illegal.
I’ve decided that I am going to start referring to the Governor as Don Perryoni.
That’s what happens when you let all those Dems convert to Rep - they don’t change their stripes, they hijack your party.
dcgirl–
I can’t agree with you on lobbying restrictions. Treating the symptoms is understandably tempting.
Not that we shouldn’t have clearly stated laws with midieval penalties aimed at the slightest whiff of bribery,
You and I should be able to hire a person to go to bat for us at the seat of government, where our hired-gun in a white hat encounters statesmen with honor.
It’s a free speech thing with me, which shouldn’t be restricted because of lack of character in the players.
/as he climbs on his bicycle adorned with ribbons, dons his Pollyanna hat, and pedals away….
I keep getting phone calls and letters asking for money to support republicans. I say no! Not until they start acting like republicans and stop taking my money for things I do not approve of.\
I don’t give to school fund raisers anymore either.
My problem is I do not like PROFESSIONAL LOBBYISTS, citizens going to Austin or Washington to state thier case should be different. Buy how to outlaw Profesional lobbyiests and not affect the comman man?
There is a place for professional lobbyists, however, there should be control measures on what a lobbyist can do. Remember, any employee of a political action committee could be considered a profesional lobbyist.
the latest on Austins scare tactics
AUSTIN — Gov. Rick Perry designated the state’s spending limit an emergency issue for lawmakers today, allowing them to discuss the matter more quickly.
The Legislative Budget Board, led by Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Tom Craddick, is required to adopt a spending limit every two years that parallels the predicted growth of the state economy. They agreed Thursday to a limit 13.1 percent over the last two-year budget.
Without any other new spending, about $14 billion to cut property tax rates will push state spending $4 billion over the limit.
That means that unless lawmakers find a way to exceed the constitutional cap, they’ll have to cut $4 billion from existing programs and scrap any new spending on school enrollment growth, Medicaid caseload growth, promised teacher pay raises and other new school initiatives
Isn’t is strange that the legislative body (gov., lt. gov. and speakers) all want to spend
“FOR THE CHILDREN”? Why is it everything is desired “FOR THE CHILDREN”? I say this is a ruse…because they know everyone wants to help the children.
Everything is “for the children”. All the while they are taking money away from the parents who are trying to house, clothe, feed, and educate their own children.
The Legislative budget board in it wisdom unilateraly, and with zero evedinces declares that Texan’s incomes increased 14%.
It’s all a scam to get their money on the surplus.
29
I swear I didn’t type it like that!
If you support receiving the full amount of promised property tax relief for the next two years, then you support busting the spending cap. Otherwise, property tax reductions will be less-than-advertised, yet the state will still collect the money intended to replace the locally generated money.
Sending the money to the Rainy Day Fund is also not an option, since that also counts as an appropriation. The extra money would just sit in the treasury for two years while you wait until 2010 for the state to try to play catch-up on property tax relief.
Getting around the spending limit equals permitting the state to give you the surplus in the form of lower school taxes. And that’s a good thing.
After leaving Sears the other day, I realized they had overcharged me. When I returned and showed them the receipt, they agreed with me that I had been overcharged. But then they said they had lots of expenses that month, and hadn’t budgeted anything for refunding customers they overcharge, so I was just out of luck. But they said I shouldn’t worry about it; I should be happy to see the new carpet they spent it on.
OK, not really. But that’s exactly what we’re getting from Gov Goodhair and his bagmen. I’m sure as heck not going to take this junk anymore!
#31 jimbow is right on the money. The legislature needs to bust the spending cap in order to give us the promised school property tax relief. We will receive the “surplus” in the form of lower school property taxes. Come on Senator Patrick. Help us so that we can get our promised school property tax break!
Of course, if CLOUT has its way, we will not get our school property tax relief. Isn’t that ironic? What is CLOUT thinking?
#10, #13, #16, #27 and #28
You write that it is all “FOR THE CHILDREN”, but you are mistaken. The great majority of this “surplus” would go to homeowners (mostly adults) in the form of lower property tax increases.
The state is trying to refund some money to us. Let’s support the process. Call your representative and senator and encourage them to bust the spending cap so that we can get our refund of the surplus through lower school property taxes.
You say that you want the state to spend more money on firefighters and police. You say that you want more qualified teachers. You say you want the surplus refunded to you. How do you propose to pay for all of this? Would you be willing to pay more in taxes or could you stand to lower your expectations of government?
N.B. Denying funding for band uniforms/sports uniforms (which I believe are not the property of the students) will not raise enough money and this would upset those of you who hate school fundraisers.
#15 twocute64001
You wrote,
“Every HOMEOWNER should be refunded equivalant to the amount paid for the most recent two years.”
Depending on the district the amount of the funding that is collected through property taxes would be much higher than 50% so this would be cutting education funding by more than half.
You wrote,
“Educational funding must be cut in half and 75% of all educational funds must go into the class room, and accountabibility is the key word. This would stop the palaces being built and cut the admin staff in half starting at the top. Until this is done our teachers will not be allowed to teach and our teachers will not be given the tools they need to control the class room so the student who want to can learn. Teachers should first receive a 10% raise then receive merit raises, not across the board raises.”
Assuming that 60% of education funding currently goes into the classroom (whatever that means) and 40% goes for other needs like transportation and buildings your plan would cut classroom expenditures by 37.5% and other expenditures by 68.75%.
How can a teacher be effective if there is no building in which to teach and less support due to the cuts that you propose? How can a student learn if he/she cannot get to school for lack of transportation due to the cuts that you propose? Would you propose to cut teaching staff by 37.5% or would you reduce teacher salaries? Where would you expect to get money for raises? Do you think that teachers will be more effective if you give them larger class sizes and/or reduce their pay to pay for your tax cut? Who would be accountable for the disaster that would ensue?
You wrote
“The Texas leg’s shoudl be repleced as they come up for election. No legislaturer should serve more than two terms, then be replaced. We must have citizen legislatures not carreer politicians in office.”
We’ll just have to see how Senator Patrick fares.
#14 DanielJames
The schools are going to need way more than another dime if they are going to have a chance of meeting all of the demands of the people of Texas, let alone those voiced or implied on this blog.
#11 digitaldon37
You wrote,
“I would even favor keeping that surplus in a ‘locked box’ and reducing the sales tax rate for the next budget.”
The state government has already committed to lowering the allowable school property tax rates for the next two years. They need to use the surplus to make good on this commitment.
You wrote,
“But the problem is government isn’t a bank - politicians can’t be trusted with the money. Instead of just having a government that provides us with just what we need, it tries to provide everything that everyone could possibly want.
That is the big problem with school districts. They see the funding problem as not getting enough money from the state government. They don’t acknowledge that state money comes from the same taxpayer.”
We have so many laws telling us what we need and that is the problem that faces school districts. They are mandated to provide various services and it is expensive. They know that state money comes from the taxpayer, but the demands of the state and federal governments also come from the taxpayer in some way. Do we really need to follow the laws for educating disabled students? Do we really need to spend all this money trying to educate disadvantaged students so that they can participate in some meaningful way in our society? Do we really need to try to educate every student as if he were going to go to college? Our courts and elected representatives apparently think so. There are even some people who have posted here who think that more training should be required of teachers. This will cost more money.
So go to your various government representatives and convince them to lift some of these burdens that have been placed on school districts. Then maybe we can have a useful discussion about school spending and whether it is unreasonable.
#32
Your analogy does not hold up. In your hypothetical story if Sears had told you that they had the money, but that they needed to take some accounting measures to be able to refund the money then that would be more like what is going on here. The state did not overcharge us. It was a very good year for revenues. If Sears told you that it was having a difficult time deciding how to pay you because a group was suing to prevent it from taking needed action to release the funds it collected from you then that would be more analagous to what is going on now.
OMG - does Tom Pogo = sargevining on other than military issues? That was a loooooong post.
bigjolly and all,
Sorry about the long post. There were just so many interesting things to comment on.
This probably my shortest post ever.
Hey bigjolly, as my great ol’ GrandPappy used to say, a man’s gotta say what a man’s got to say!!!
Or was that Clint Eastwood……….? Note to self: gotta get some coffee before posting!
Hey Tomagogo, Just which I.S.D. do you work in???
PBF, could’a been the Duke….I’m goin for the coffee…
#35 tom pogo
Oh, I was just messin’ with sarge.
I take it from your comments that you support the plans in Austin to take and keep as much money as they can from us?
#27: vlou; Of course it’s a ruse, and they learned it from neosoc Hitlary & Co.
It’s a clever ruse to, because if you disagree with any of their agenda, they can say’”How can you not want to help the children!!”
“If you don’t want to help children you must be a BAD person(white, anglo, Republican, Vast Right Conspiracy GOP member, 2nd Ammendemnt NRA supporter, Constitutionalist Christian, freedom loving American!)” not to want to help children, and WE are so compasionate because we do and smarter than you too, so that means we’re right!!”
See how that works……….?
#37 GMTinFoilHat: might just have been…..ah, those we’re the days!!
Little late, but I just wanted to say that I am a non-essential state employee (for a local state university here in town…)
My young school age children enjoyed having a day off with Mom, instead of being in daycare (school didn’t start until Thurs.)
We watched the entire funeral on Foxnews. Now before the funeral, I could have told you who was Gerald Ford. And now my 7 year old and 5 year old can tell you also!
Once in a while it would be nice if you could just lay off all the fairly low insults on all “state employees”. We’re not all politicians. Some of us are highly educated professionals who bring a lot of respect and pride to our jobs. To just be lumped into a derogatory “state employees” like we’re all a bunch of lazy, do-nothing, spend tax money, etc. is getting really annoying. State universities are really barely state assisted anymore. So I guess I’m really a student-paid employee now. *grin*
#40 islandgal
With a child in a state college and tuition rates going up so much, I think you might be right.
#37 GimmeMyTinFoilHat,
I do not work in an ISD.
#38 bigjolly
You wrote,
“I take it from your comments that you support the plans in Austin to take and keep as much money as they can from us?”
No. It is my understanding the goal in Austin is to return some of the money to us in the form of lower school property tax rates. I support raising the spending cap so that we can get our promised school property tax relief. I do not understand why CLOUT would not support this.
Those who continue to debunk their strawman, “It’s for the children” should consider that this it is false.
The state legislature is trying to raise the spending limit in part so that it can provide us with school property tax relief. This is for ADULTS.
Most of the money spent on education goes to ADULTS (teachers, cafeteria workers, bus drivers, contractors and others).
To those of you who live on ranches and complain about your property taxes, consider this. If we ADULTS do not pay to educate the children, then the ADULTS will have fewer workers capable of performing needed services in our old age. If we do not have schools that keep the children occupied, then said children might wander on to your ranch and disturb you in some way. Oh, never mind. You would probably just shoot them.
Even if you think that most public schools are not able to be very effective with the limited resources and great needs/demands that they face, they are providing some form of day care service so that ADULTS can go to work and earn money so that they can pay taxes to pay for services like roads and law enforcement that benefit ADULTS.
So it’s not for the children. It’s really for the adults.
Hey Tom-a-go,
It is the primary responsibility of us ADULTS (who are earning our money and in turn surrendering too much of it to the ISD’s) to provide for our children things necessary for a standard of life. As much as ISD’s seem to want to relieve me of the responsibilities of raising my children (and doing it with my money) I believe I can do much better with my money since I earned it, and actually have practiced living within a budget. Budget - A limit No ISD seems bound to practice as all it takes is one more refrain of “IT’S FOR THE CHILDREN”. This emotional cry at each bond election along with the ever present guaranteed raise of 10% just fuels the fire of those of us that want to keep more of our money for THE CHILDREN WE ARE RAISING!
Tom nothing personnel but you just sound a lot like the “well educated” ISD type that wants everyone to trust them…since they know best.
Gimme My Tin Foil Hat
Too many days off for government to shut down. We need to do away with all except for one.
#44 GimmeMyTinFoilHat,
You wrote,
“It is the primary responsibility of us ADULTS (who are earning our money and in turn surrendering too much of it to the ISD’s) to provide for our children things necessary for a standard of life.”
That’s right. Supporting the ISDs is one of those responsibilities. The ISDs educate our children and the children of other people. It will not do our children one bit of good if we educate them, but fail to provide in some way for some minimum education for other children through the ISDs. Failing to educate others in some minimum way is a prescription for anarchy and a shameful legacy to leave to our children.
You wrote,
“As much as ISD’s seem to want to relieve me of the responsibilities of raising my children (and doing it with my money) I believe I can do much better with my money since I earned it, and actually have practiced living within a budget. Budget - A limit No ISD seems bound to practice as all it takes is one more refrain of “IT’S FOR THE CHILDREN”.
Are you saying that you will provide the monies to fund science labs for your children on your own? The ISDs do not want to raise your children. They want to educate them and maintain reasonable discipline within the laws set down by our representatives in the legislature, federal government and the courts. ISDs must follow rules that are made by ADULTS. We should leave the children out of it. Perhaps you do have the resources to provide for all of your children’s educational needs. The fact of the matter is that most of us do not have such tremendous resources and it benefits you if our children are educated. Bill Gates understands this.
The ISDs do not have as much discretionary spending as you seem to think. The overwhelming majority of the money goes to pay for personnel and the state and federal government place many constraints on where the money can be spent.
You wrote,
“This emotional cry at each bond election along with the ever present guaranteed raise of 10% just fuels the fire of those of us that want to keep more of our money for THE CHILDREN WE ARE RAISING!”
Bond elections are held to raise monies to pay for new schools and the repair of existing schools. A well run bond campaign should present the facts to the people including demographics that indicate how many new students are expected and details of how the cost of the new schools compare to the cost of other schools in the area. If you have a school with a capacity of 1000 that is full and you are expecting 2000 more students in the next 3 years, then it is pretty clear that you need to build more schools assuming that it is not appropriate to expand the existing school. If a roof is leaking badly and it is at the end of its useful life, then it needs to be replaced. There is nothing emotional there.
On the other hand emotional cries of “blank checks” and “arrogant” administrators coupled with attempts to portray the ISDs as being manipulative by saying, “It’s for the children” really have no place in a reasoned debate.
You wrote,
“Tom nothing personnel but you just sound a lot like the “well educated” ISD type that wants everyone to trust them…since they know best.”
On the contrary, I believe that we should all be involved in the business of our ISD and verify that what they are telling us is true. There is waste (as there is in any human endeavor) and we should look for it. However, there is not as much waste as you think.
Well said Tom, I think we argue to agree, only to diffrent levels.
We both agree that we need to educate our children, all of them. While this is true I do not recieve a gaurenteed 10% raise every year to my salary nor can I expect to get a bonus no matter my needs. Therefore I must budget and plan ahead to meet my needs within my capacity. I believe the texas ISD’s have had over 10 years of 10% compoumding raises at the homeowners expense. To this point I say ENOUGH!
(I am not sure what happened to that last post but here is the rest)
Tom,
You seem to have intimate knowledge of the financial efficiencies, as well as the good intentions (or lack of manipulation) of the ISD’s…do you mean all of them? What exactly do you base your claims on? How would you know? How do you know?
It is also a bit of a leap, to say that you somehow know what I think, or more to the point somehow know that I do not speak of first hand experience. At least I fairly offered that credit to you!
To be fair I know a great many decent people in a few ISD’s and I found many of them through my involvement as well as honest debate that I found enlightening.
Here are several facts, bureaucracies are never more efficient than the private sector, in every group there are good and bad people, it’s always easier to spend out of someone else’s wallet, it’s our money and we should have a say about it even if we do not agree, and there is always a limit to what people can and will endure. Many people because of past history have adopted the attitude to just say no to any bond election. This is not a good attitude either.
I think we would all be best served to find tax relief for the legal citizen/home owners sooner than later. To believe that the state politicians will do the right thing if we just trust them is a bit naive.
Tom you seem to be a decent fellow and I am sincere when I say we are closer to agreeing than or debate would portray.
#47 and #48 GimmeMyTinFoilHat
You’re right. I should not presume to know what you think about the level of waste in government. It is also incorrect of me to assume or imply that you have no experience in these matters.
My recent experience with ISDs is limited to Katy ISD and while it is by no means perfect, I think that it is well-run financially given the demands placed upon schools by the state government, federal government and parents. I learned this through attending public bond committee meetings in 2006 and listening to how school district officials answered tough questions coming from the community regarding standards, buildings, finances, maintenance and other matters. I have heard horror stories about other ISDs, but I have not investigated any of them in enough detail to know if they were true. I do not pretend that every Texas ISD is run as well as Katy ISD, but I am in no position to judge.
I know that we have a 10% appraisal cap in Texas, but there are people in Katy ISD that have not seen their appraisals rise at all in the last three years so I do not think that it is accurate to say that there is a guaranteed 10% raise every year for the budgets of ISDs. Still, if ISD expenses rose at a 10% clip due to state or federal requirements, then something would have to give. The school would need to borrow money to meet those expenses, the State would have to lower standards, or the people living within the ISD would have to accept that the ISD would not be able to do as well on the standards as in years past due to lack of funding. It’s easy for me to decide that I will drive a compact car instead of an SUV so that I can cut expenses and live within my means. I can live in a smaller house so that my expenses are not as high. A school district cannot as easily decide that it will no longer bus students that live within 2 miles of the school or that it will no longer bus students at all. If a school district is experiencing increased enrollment, then it can only defer new building construction for so long and it must hire new teachers so that it can keep class sizes at state standards.
You wrote that
“bureaucracies are never more efficient than the private sector, in every group there are good and bad people, it’s always easier to spend out of someone else’s wallet, it’s our money and we should have a say about it even if we do not agree, and there is always a limit to what people can and will endure. Many people because of past history have adopted the attitude to just say no to any bond election. This is not a good attitude either.”
I agree with all that you wrote. I would add that the private sector would probably not agree to take on the management of the public school system as it is because all of the state and federal regulations make it unprofitable. The public school system, as it is constituted, is built to deliver a service that deals in people, not to turn a profit. It cannot downsize or refuse to serve certain clients who cost “too much” to serve for the bottom line or whose presence leads to inefficiencies that would not be tolerated in the private sector.
School property tax relief for the next two years has been promised. The state needs to find an appropriate mechanism to release the funds for this relief. We should all be contacting our representatives and encouraging them to do the right thing.
Thank you for your clarifications. I have enjoyed our exchange and look forward to more in the future.