Friday, April 23, 2010

New Paltz School District wants another 3%

A government bureaucracy that faces no market forces, offers a compulsory program, and funds itself with compulsory taxation, only throws the taxpayers a loaded pitch, which gives them the choice of voting on "more" or "more more." There's no such thing as a reduced budget; that's always portrayed as an impossible calamity.

The Freeman of Kingston reports:
NEW PALTZ — School district trustees on Wednesday agreed to ask for voter approval of a $48.83 million budget that would raise the tax levy 2.95 percent.
The spending plan representing a 0.74 percent increase of $360,000 was adopted 6-1 after more than an hour of deliberations by the school board. Trustee Edgar Rodriguez was the dissenting vote.

Under the plan there would be a $32.62 million property tax levy representing an increase of $935,000.
During the recent huge local debate over the proposed renovation of the Middle School, a proposition defeated overwhelmingly by voters, the School District advertised the cost to taxpayers as a mere 1% increase on the tax levy for an average home. In the wake of that vote, I suggested that if a 1% increase was so painless, then the District could surely live with a 1% decrease in its next annual budget, and that it would also absorb the reduction in state funding, as opposed to having taxpayes make up the difference.

So the voters need to decide, again, just how much more of their money they are willing to part with to finance outrageous contracts with the teachers union.

They have no choice about anything but the increase: "More" or "More More" is what it comes down to. But it's a start.

2 comments:

danNYtrack said...

We need to follow New Jerseyans lead and vote these budgets down! http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/score_one_for_jersey_tax_revolt_OBfpgjsRYvvdtFHXCM7ioJ

If we just fold now after our recent win over the proposed school renovation debacle than we cancel out the previous message we were trying to send.

Martin McPhillips said...

I agree, Dan. I think that we have a moral obligation to our neighbors to vote these budgets down and in the future to reduce them. I'm not a supporter of the NP School District's search for a better class of taxpayer to meet the ridiculous obligations they've contracted for with the teachers union. Nothing against individual teachers, but their union has priced them out of the market. If it comes to a choice between the School District and my neighbors, that's not a a difficult one. Neighbors every time. "Good schools" won't do them or their kids any good if they have to move out of the community because the School District wants to price itself for Westchester.