(June 2004) State policymakers are considering proposals to provide property
tax relief for homestead and farmstead property owners through expanded
legalized gambling or other mechanisms.
The proposals are complex, and the potential long-term impact on education
finance is considerable. An important aspect of all the proposals now before the
state legislature, one that continues to gain attention, is the voter referendum
requirement for local school tax increases.
Several of the current property tax relief proposals now before the
legislature include requirements for referenda. Governor Ed Rendell has accepted
the fact that some form of referenda requirement likely will be part of a final
package.
Nearly three-quarters of the states currently have some mechanism allowing
voter approval of school spending. They range from requiring voter approval for
school district budgets to approval for tax increases only, and approval for
special purpose funds such as capital projects. The rules and degree of control
vary from state to state and, to date, there is no comprehensive analysis of the
different processes. IssuesPA examined how local referenda could impact school
finance and educational performance in Pennsylvania's public schools.
What do the proponents say?
Proponents of referenda contend they provide local voters with a greater
degree of control and, therefore, limit increases in tax rates. In their
proposals, voter approval of tax increases passed by a school board would be
required, with a few exceptions. For example, current proposals would not
require voter approval to raise school tax revenues within various measures of
inflation. Other exceptions include raising funds to deal with emergencies such
as natural disasters.
The referenda requirement tied to the recent proposal to fund property tax
relief using new gambling proceeds takes the referenda concept a step further.
It would allow voters to initiate property tax relief by overriding action - or
inaction - of their elected school board. For more on qualifying for gambling
revenue, click here.
And the opponents?
Opponents of school tax referenda make several counter arguments. They
contend:
- Imposing referenda ultimately may have a negative impact on the equity of
funding in Pennsylvania's schools. Voters in wealthier communities would be
more likely to approve revenue increases for education, compared to those in
communities with less wealth, because the impact as a percentage of income
is less for wealthier taxpayers. Wealthier districts already have shown
their willingness to impose higher levels of taxation as exhibited by the
current disparity in local tax levels. Therefore, Pennsylvania's gap in
resources between rich and poor districts likely would become even greater.
- Even without referenda, school districts with an expanding commercial and
industrial base would be able to increase spending per student faster than
no or low growth districts, simply through growth in their tax base.
- Anecdotal evidence suggests that referenda could result in lower
educational performance as school boards avoid referenda by raising the
student-teacher ratio, cutting new program spending, and more.
- The referenda would establish a different set of rules for school
districts compared to other government bodies. City councils or county
commissioners are not required to seek voter approval for tax increases, nor
is the state legislature. But this proposal would set apart elected school
directors from other elected government officials.
- In essence, required referenda would take much of the revenue-raising
authority away from school boards and give it to voters. In many other
states, voters have similar responsibilities. But because Pennsylvania now
depends on local revenues for a greater portion of total education funding
than most other states, the impact of local referenda will be greater for
Pennsylvania's public schools.
So what does all this mean?
While the primary focus has been on gambling revenue and property tax relief
- and the numbers - equal attention should focus on the issue of referenda.
State policymakers, take note. Pennsylvanians, too.