This evening, Thursday May 28, there will be a "Public Hearing on Utility Tax - 7:15 p.m.". That's just before the regularly scheduled Newburgh School District Board of Ed meeting at 7:30 p.m. I guess they're not expecting many questions.
Here's some background information.
BOE and Administration RAISING TAXES UNJUSTLY
The 2009-2010 school budget proposed a near 0% increase in taxes. Now the BOE is proposing to do an end run around the public's vote to approve this budget by raising additional taxes with a UTLITY TAX.
A TAX IS A TAX IS A TAX---PERIOD!
The arguement by Pacella who was quoted in the Sentinel that the utility tax “distributes the burden of covering expenses a little more fairly.” may be technically true, but A UTILITY TAX IS STILL AN ADDED TAX ONTO PROPERTY TAXPAYERS. who just voted on a budget and proposition with a nearly 0% tax increase.
FUTHERMORE -
A UTILITY TAX IS NOT DEDUCTIBLE ON STATE AND FED TAX RETURNS.
this tax can be ADDED TO water, sewer, electric, gas, oil, telephone, cable, and internet bills
the tax is another regressive tax - hurting property owners and others at the lower income levels and those on fixed incomes.
this tax is another ADDED EXPENSE that drives business from this region and New York.
this tax wipes out all or part of school property tax exemptions given to emergency responders, veterans and those on limited incomes.
this tax will rise as utulity rates rise; in times of heavy utility ( heating and AC) use this tax will add much more to the resident's monthly utulity billing
this tax cannot be voted on by the public who are being forced to pay it and thus becomes "easy money for the district,"
this tax is an end run around the budget to fund always rising salary increases, health benefits and pensions and more staff without regard to the public's ability to pay at a time many are in economic hard times.
this tax will distort the true tax - the district can advetise a somewhat low property tax rate on one hand and raise the utility tax rate on the other hand.
this tax can used as a "slush fund" to hold out to special interest groups to fund politically popular, but unneed programs, thus encouraging wasteful spending of taxpayers' money.
And why is "An estimate of the revenue such a tax would bring in was not known" as reported in the Sentinel.
This demonstrates poor, irresponsible fiscal planning - to propose a TAX INCREASE without having any idea of how much it will raie and exactly what it will be used for.
This leads to COUNTER PROPOSAL -
Go ahead and colect the utility tax to raise funds, but only from those who do not pay property taxes. How? by giving each property taxpayer a credit toward their property tax bill equal to the utility tax paid. And dedicate the utility tax collected to offset some general fund purpose - say district utility costs - how clever!
Otherwise, Like the PORT JERVIS SCHOOLS, the NECSD needs to be avoid this ADDED TAX and stick to the approved budget.
Raising Taxes
Thanks for the comment. You make several excellent points.
The most important one going forward is that the new tax should not create a slush fund. Revenue from this tax was not planned for in the budget, and since the budget passed, the Board has authority to decide how this money will get spent. The public must keep a sharp eye on how this money is used. It would be wise to spend as little as possible until the amount of state aid that will be available for the 2010-2011 school year is well understood.