CTH Public Relations

• Torture by CO2HOG [May 02, 2012, 10:19:42 PM]
• China by CO2HOG [March 31, 2012, 02:24:13 PM]
• Global Warming Watch by TonyBlair [October 09, 2011, 06:41:37 PM]
• Solar Panel Doubts by TonyBlair [September 02, 2011, 08:25:23 AM]
• Barack Hussein Obama, Emp... by TonyBlair [August 10, 2011, 08:57:54 PM]
• National Debt Clocks and ... by Counter [August 08, 2011, 10:30:42 AM]
• Scanner or Pat Down? by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:09:51 PM]
• Rise of the Police State by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:01:03 PM]
• Who can we trust? by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 01:07:59 PM]
• Anthony Wiener's wiener i... by CarolinaBuckeye [June 01, 2011, 11:29:22 PM]
• Democrat's Culture of Cor... by TonyBlair [May 18, 2011, 06:55:46 AM]
• Hey Obama..You want Taxes... by Vince the Fox [April 21, 2011, 03:12:25 AM]
• Obama Policy Watch by TonyBlair [April 20, 2011, 06:56:14 AM]
• George W. Obama by TonyBlair [April 19, 2011, 06:11:57 AM]
• The Religion of Peace Upd... by TonyBlair [April 12, 2011, 06:43:20 AM]

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

Members

• Total Members: 329
• Latest: boborians

Stats

• Total Posts: 40602
• Total Topics: 5158
• Online Today: 21
• Online Ever: 252
• (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)

Users Online

Users: 0
Guests: 16
Total: 16

EducateWorthington.org

The 912 Project - Glenn Beck

912 Group of Central Ohio

Please let me know if you'd like your link added

Unless things have changed the districts from which the teacher's pupils come will pay the tuition.  In any case the district gets the state's funds just as the charter schools do.

 

Shadow: The above would be true if Worthington were not on various state guarantees (specifically, the formula aid guarantee and the transitional aid guarantee). New students in Worthington come to us without any additional funding from the state, and this will probably be true for the duration of the biennium budget.

Tweet: I don't know how many Worthington School District employees live in Worthington, but the number of district employees that take advantage of the 'open enrollment' benefit is very small.

Finally, Shadow: There can be no doubt and no argument that Columbus provides substandard city services. Anyone driving around town the first two weeks of December knows this. I live in an area of Columbus that is literally blocks away from Liberty Township and a few miles from Worthington. Liberty Township roads were completely clear. Worthington Roads were completely clear. My block and my entire neighborhood - well.. two words: skating rink. The ice stayed until the rain took it away this week. From a services point of view, Worthington is paradise compared to Columbus.
 

Well Marc:  The Shadow wishes you all stopped bellyaching about services and confusing apples and oranges.  Complain about Columbus services but a Columbus resident pays only 5.1% of his/her real estate taxes to the City while a Worthington resident pays 5.7% combined city and township (paying for taking over fire department) taxes.  In additon non-Columbus residents pay a surcharge for water and sewer service. So, it stands to reason that services are better.

Worthington residents pay for them (a quaint thought).  The Shadow does not mention the income tax paid by non-residents for minimal services because all municipalities charge approximately the same rate.

The development of Columbus was and is still fueled by developers.  The school districts have (and have had) precious little to say about it. That is why the Worthington-Columbus 1968 agreement was a great coup.

The Shadow knows :ph34r:  

Well Marc:  The Shadow wishes you all stopped bellyaching about services and confusing apples and oranges.  Complain about Columbus services but a Columbus resident pays only 5.1% of his/her real estate taxes to the City while a Worthington resident pays 5.7% combined city and township (paying for taking over fire department) taxes. 

Shadow, my property tax bill is around $4000. Are you suggesting that if only Columbus charged another 0.6%,  my street would be clear? All that for $24?

Is there any problem that can't be solved by government simply by raising taxes?

 

[olde time]

I'm interested in hearing the "official democrat solution for school funding", that is I would like to hear from an official member that answers to the DNC. That leaves good ole Dr. Otto Marxist out of the answer loop.

The last solution the DNC/Hilliary came up with (state issues 2,3,4&5) received a hefty slap down on the last election day. I was the first to report from the DLC (do the dems really have any leadership?) that Hilliary had made the statement there was "legislation coming up in the next election to fix the election problems", look at the state of affairs within the city of Columbus with how Mayor Mike has run it into the ground.

All any citizen from across our great state has to do is see how the Dems have financially run Columbus into the ground and that if they believe the rest of the state now is considered ruins that what they see now would be a mere drop in the bucket by letting a Dem gov having control.

Gimme that olde time Democrat......

 

Getting back to the topic of a 3rd operating levy in five years for the Worthington district, let me share another bit of information.

From 1995-2000 taxes on my property went up 3%.  2001-2004 they have gone up 35%, due primarily to 2 school levies, and we will have another one on the ballot this year.  If it passes, I, and every other property owner in Worthington, will likely have seen our taxes rise over 50% in 5 years, versus 3% in the previous 5 years. :blink:

What has changed in the course of only ten years?

Marc:  your $24 + those of your neighbours etc. might pay for the services you are not getting.  Actually your $24 might get the 50 feet in front of your house plowed  

FII:  How much was your house revalued up in the last 2 cycles?  If more than the average then that is the main reason your taxes went up that much.

The Shadow Knows :ph34r:    

Marc:  your $24 + those of your neighbours etc. might pay for the services you are not getting.  Actually your $24 might get the 50 feet in front of your house plowed 

So, the $4000 doesn't get me the services, but the $4024 does. Maybe if I kick in another $50, the city will buy me pizza one night a week, which, of course, is equally likely to my ever getting my street plowed.

 

Hey Marc: come on, you only pay $209.17 in real estate taxes to Columbus, not the $4000 you keep talking about.  

Remember,

The Shadow knows :ph34r:    

[HINTS: A review of the last 3 Worthington contracts shows that an educator with a masters degree, 5 years experience, (and 14 weeks off), went from $39,162 in 2000, to $67,386 in 2007 (7 years, up over 72%.) :blink: Also, the 14% taxpayer contribution for his/her retirement went up the same 72%, from $5,482/yr to $9,434/yr. :blink: Finally, the double digit annual increases in expensive health/dental premiums that most taxpayer get to pay more and more for, have been almost completely absorbed by the school district (i.e. taxpayer). :blink:]

Come on, Shadow, you know that only "inside millage", a very small portion of overall millage, automatically increases taxes in relation to home values, right?

Therefore, revaluations cause very little in the way of immediate and automatic property tax increases, right?  

Therefore, it actually takes new levies to do that.  And as you might recall we've had two new levies for the schools in the last 4 years in Worthington, totalling over 13 mills.  And it looks like we need another levy in 2006-additional millage amount as yet undetermined.  

And I'll bet we will need another before 2010, don't you agree?  Why is that, Shadow?  

HINTS:  A review of the last 3 Worthington contracts shows that an educator with a masters degree, 5 years experience, (and 14 weeks off), went from $39,162 in 2000, to $67,386 in 2007  (7 years, up over 72%.) :blink:

Also, the 14% taxpayer contribution for his/her retirement went up the same 72%, from $5,482/yr to $9,434/yr. :blink:

Finally, the double digit annual increases in expensive health/dental premiums that most taxpayer get to pay more and more for, have been almost completely absorbed by the school district (i.e. taxpayer). :blink:

NOTE:  I'm trying to share these subtle hints, without making this too easy.

Oh, and Shadow, the value on my house went up 20% last time, and 14% this time (below average).  

What have your taxes done, since were just being open and honest here?   (Have they NOT gone up 35% or so in the last 4 years?)

FII

" Come on, Shadow, you know that only "inside millage", a very small portion of overall millage, automatically increases taxes in relation to home values, right?

Therefore, revaluations cause very little in the way of immediate and automatic property tax increases, right? "

Sorry, not completely true.  What you say is true if the percentage increase in the reappraised property is at the same percentage increase as the average percentage increase in the subdivision.  For example, if your property is reappraised up 13% and the average reappraisal increase is 13% then, what you say would be true.  If on the other hand your property is reappraised up by more than the 13% your taxes would increase more than just by the inside millage.  Similarly if your property has an appraisal increase of less than the 13% you could actually see a decrease in your taxes.

The goal of 920 is to keep the amount of money that the subdivision gets from voted levies stable (except for the inside millage) but the distribution changes because the effective rate changes.

The Shadow knows  :ph34r:  

FII: An illustration

Because of the differences in subdivisions a $100,000 owner occupied house in Worthington would pay $1875(effective rate 61.23) while the same house in Columbus WSD would pay 1864.15 (effective rate 60.84)  They would pay the same amount to each subdivision they have in common.  The $ 11 difference reflects the difference between Columbus City and Worthington City taxes

Hope that helps

The Shadow knows :ph34r:  

Thanks, Shadow, that does help.     The illustration does also indicate that the impact of these factors are very minor, when compared to the impact of oh, let's say two school levies, for example.

I do hope you will find the time to respond to the other, more important points in my last post.  

With the very vague HINTS that I gave, I'll bet you have a thought or two on why our SHRINKING district would need a third levy in only 5 years, and whether we would face a fourth levy by 2009 or 2010.  What does The Shadow know? :ph34r:

(And I'll bet your former sidekick, The Skull, might have a thought as well.)  :lol:  

FII

The impact on any one property can be very substantial on reappraisal years.   For properties reappraised at the average it is levies that influence the most.

What happens in the next 4-5 years depends on what the Legislature does or does not do.  One way or another we will pay.  Note that  the cost per pupil in Worthington was 6th in the county.


And a Happy New year to you


The Shadow knows :ph34r:  

[school levy millage that has increased from 62 mills in 2000, to 75 mills now (school millage up 21% as a result of 2 levies in 4 years, and don't forget there is another levy "needed" in 2006!)]

I just came up with a new name for you, Shadow, the artful dodger!  

As to reappraisal, given that the automatic increase is on 10 mills of "inside millage" only, that impact is minimal compared to the school levy millage that has increased from 62 mills in 2000, to 75 mills now (school millage up 21% as a result of 2 levies in 4 years, and don't forget there is another levy "needed" in 2006!)  PLEASE COMMENT, Shadow.

Shadow says- "What happens in the next 4-5 years depends on what the Legislature does or does not do."   Doesn't it also depend on something we DO have complete control of.....DISTRICT SPENDING?  Also, the state funding "guarantees" hold us harmless for now.  Unfortunately, for now we appear to have decided not to worry about our spending or the eventual loss of these guarantees, as evidenced by the very generous 3 year contracts the board has recently approved.  :huh: PLEASE COMMENT, Shadow.

I guess they, and you, would prefer to worry about tomorrow....tomorrow.  Pretty short-sighted, and overly optimistic, don't you think?

Shadow says- "Note that the cost per pupil in Worthington was 6th in the county."  Yes, I did see that.  But based on the treasurer's new 5 year forecast, and our declining enrollment, our cost per pupil will likely rise by $2,000 -$4,000 per year in the next 4-5 years

Seriously, Shadow, since you know the treasurer personally, ask him to forecast the cost per pupil in 2009-2010, and see what he says.  It's not complicated or time consuming, and he has even more current data than I do.  Please report back with your findings, so I don't have to bother him further by asking him myself.

BTW, those increases should put us in the running for #1 in cost per student in Franklin county in no time!  (And if you can't be #1, what is the point!)  PLEASE COMMENT, Shadow.

I need to know what the Shadow knows......that I don't?  

FII

"As to reappraisal, given that the automatic increase is on 10 mills of "inside millage" only, that impact is minimal "  Again YES and NO depending on how much your propery increased in appraise value.

Unfortunately because of  anonimity on your part the Shadow can't deal with a specific example.

"school levy millage that has increased from 62 mills in 2000, to 75 mills "

However now collected at approximately (but close) 41.8 mills.  Approximately because of the 12.5% rollback factor that makes it difficult to calculate exactly from the auditor's on line data.

Since 2000 there have been 2 reappraisals and I MUST REPEAT what happens to ANY given property depends on the increase on the appraised property value.  So, unless actual numbers are given it is not possible to agree or disagree with your conclusions.

"Yes, I did see that. But based on the treasurer's new 5 year forecast, and our declining enrollment, our cost per pupil will likely rise by $2,000 -$4,000 per year in the next 4-5 years "

The enrolment decline has not been as steep as projected.  So, those figures are just that, projections. At some point the total decline will be such as to justify closing another school or two and then the cost er pupil will decrease (or not increase) significantly.

The contract is paid for.

As far as the guarantees go I would predict that unless the legislature changes significantly nothing will happen.  Hold harmless will be forever.

Remember that you helped elect this bunch that will tell you that they cut your State taxes.  They will not tell you that they did that by cutting cities, townships, counties, libraries, school districts etc. etc. thus forcing them to raise theirs or severly cutting services.

The Shadow Knows  :ph34r: