| State should pick up costs of mandated programs |
total $1.5 billion collected in county
property taxes across the state," he
revealed. "If the state took over
those programs, it would reduce
county property taxes by some 25
percent."
If our state legislators are serious
about a TABOR, see if they are
willing to include a well-designed
spending limit that would require the
state to fully fund any services it
mandates local governments to
provide as a way to avoid shifting
costs. Truth in legislation, huh?
Shifting budget shortfalls could be
considered epidemic in Wisconsin.
For example, a recent news story
exposed and discussed a
recommendation by the Department
of Corrections to "boost the rate
charged to counties for housing
juveniles from $187 a day to $226 a
day in order to help the state close
its estimated $1.6 billion deficit."
"The impact of a 20.8 percent hike in
housing juvenile offenders would be
particularly hard on counties that
send more offenders to state
facilities," the article warned.
"Milwaukee County would have to
come up with another $1.8 million
annually, while Racine County would
need another $600,000."
Racine taxpayers will soon be able to
have a say in this matter. Recently,
the Racine County Board
unanimously passed a resolution to
ask voters if they want the state of
Wisconsin instead of property
taxpayers to pay for the state's court
system and human services
programs.
The question will appear on the
upcoming April 5th ballot.
What's the difference? A tax is a tax,
some may argue. The differences
are many, I believe.
Here are just a few:
property taxes across the state," he
revealed. "If the state took over
those programs, it would reduce
county property taxes by some 25
percent."
If our state legislators are serious
about a TABOR, see if they are
willing to include a well-designed
spending limit that would require the
state to fully fund any services it
mandates local governments to
provide as a way to avoid shifting
costs. Truth in legislation, huh?
Shifting budget shortfalls could be
considered epidemic in Wisconsin.
For example, a recent news story
exposed and discussed a
recommendation by the Department
of Corrections to "boost the rate
charged to counties for housing
juveniles from $187 a day to $226 a
day in order to help the state close
its estimated $1.6 billion deficit."
"The impact of a 20.8 percent hike in
housing juvenile offenders would be
particularly hard on counties that
send more offenders to state
facilities," the article warned.
"Milwaukee County would have to
come up with another $1.8 million
annually, while Racine County would
need another $600,000."
Racine taxpayers will soon be able to
have a say in this matter. Recently,
the Racine County Board
unanimously passed a resolution to
ask voters if they want the state of
Wisconsin instead of property
taxpayers to pay for the state's court
system and human services
programs.
The question will appear on the
upcoming April 5th ballot.
What's the difference? A tax is a tax,
some may argue. The differences
are many, I believe.
Here are just a few:
Back to the principles of "truth in
advertising," state legislators would
have to pay for legislation they
enact instead of passing the cost
on.
Revenue to pay for state
mandates would have to be paid for
with real dollars, rather than the
assumed values (the kind that
property taxes are based upon).
The resulting property tax relief
could help people on fixed incomes,
for example, remain in their homes
longer instead of them losing their
property and having to seek public
assistance. Those who experience
injuries or illnesses that affect their
income, including victims of plant
closings and other financial
interruptions, may similarly benefit.
As a Racine County Supervisor for
the past 11 years, I have seen a lot
of budget cutting at the local level.
Projects like ice arenas and other
social pleasures to enhance our
community have had to be denied.
Many services that have enhanced
the quality of life in our county have
also been on the chopping block.
State Rep. John Ainsworth, R-
Shawano, understood this, coming
clean on the matter when he broke
partisan ranks with his Republican
colleagues, voting against the GOP
property tax scheme.
"Generally, in the end, everybody
tends to cooperate," Ainsworth
reportedly said. "I decided if I was
going to make a statement, now
was the time."
Ainsworth's reasoning, according to
Tom Sheehan, Lee Newspapers:
"By locking the property tax rate,
the freeze punishes school districts
and municipalities that already may
be frugal spenders. It also ignores
the fate of towns that lose property
through annexations to cities and
villages."
advertising," state legislators would
have to pay for legislation they
enact instead of passing the cost
on.
Revenue to pay for state
mandates would have to be paid for
with real dollars, rather than the
assumed values (the kind that
property taxes are based upon).
The resulting property tax relief
could help people on fixed incomes,
for example, remain in their homes
longer instead of them losing their
property and having to seek public
assistance. Those who experience
injuries or illnesses that affect their
income, including victims of plant
closings and other financial
interruptions, may similarly benefit.
As a Racine County Supervisor for
the past 11 years, I have seen a lot
of budget cutting at the local level.
Projects like ice arenas and other
social pleasures to enhance our
community have had to be denied.
Many services that have enhanced
the quality of life in our county have
also been on the chopping block.
State Rep. John Ainsworth, R-
Shawano, understood this, coming
clean on the matter when he broke
partisan ranks with his Republican
colleagues, voting against the GOP
property tax scheme.
"Generally, in the end, everybody
tends to cooperate," Ainsworth
reportedly said. "I decided if I was
going to make a statement, now
was the time."
Ainsworth's reasoning, according to
Tom Sheehan, Lee Newspapers:
"By locking the property tax rate,
the freeze punishes school districts
and municipalities that already may
be frugal spenders. It also ignores
the fate of towns that lose property
through annexations to cities and
villages."
| By Dan Sharkozy Racine Journal Times – 3-22-05 |
Wouldn't it be nice if we could hold
politicians to the same legal
standards as businesses and
marketers? Imagine what it would be
like to hold the president, Congress,
and yes, state and local legislators to
standards similar to truth-in-lending
laws and truth-in-advertising laws that
require business ethics and
accountability.
I am convinced that if legislators were
held to similar principles we would see
real property tax relief, and there
would be a lot less political
shenanigans and gimmicks such as
the politically charged spin as TABOR
or the Tax Payers' Bill of Rights.
Unfortunately, many of the same
partisans that have sent our state and
federal budget deficits skyrocketing
out of control are the same ones that
have been ushering their
shortcomings onto the backs of
property taxpayers via non-funded
and under-funded mandates.
Prominent examples of these
expensive spending shifts at the
federal level include homeland
security, transportation, health care
and education.
State legislators, not to be outdone,
have been passing more and more
economic responsibilities off onto
local governments and the backs of
property taxpayers. For example, who
do you think has been paying the
lion's share of the state's court
system and human services?
Property taxpayers, that's who.
How much money are we talking
about? Well, Mark D. O'Connell,
executive director of the Wisconsin
Counties Association put the numbers
out in a recent news report.
"State-mandated court and human
services programs together spend
$300 million to $400 million of the
politicians to the same legal
standards as businesses and
marketers? Imagine what it would be
like to hold the president, Congress,
and yes, state and local legislators to
standards similar to truth-in-lending
laws and truth-in-advertising laws that
require business ethics and
accountability.
I am convinced that if legislators were
held to similar principles we would see
real property tax relief, and there
would be a lot less political
shenanigans and gimmicks such as
the politically charged spin as TABOR
or the Tax Payers' Bill of Rights.
Unfortunately, many of the same
partisans that have sent our state and
federal budget deficits skyrocketing
out of control are the same ones that
have been ushering their
shortcomings onto the backs of
property taxpayers via non-funded
and under-funded mandates.
Prominent examples of these
expensive spending shifts at the
federal level include homeland
security, transportation, health care
and education.
State legislators, not to be outdone,
have been passing more and more
economic responsibilities off onto
local governments and the backs of
property taxpayers. For example, who
do you think has been paying the
lion's share of the state's court
system and human services?
Property taxpayers, that's who.
How much money are we talking
about? Well, Mark D. O'Connell,
executive director of the Wisconsin
Counties Association put the numbers
out in a recent news report.
"State-mandated court and human
services programs together spend
$300 million to $400 million of the
 | |  | |  | |  |