From a Chamber email to membership:
An Open Letter to the Membership:
When it comes to the capital needs in the Champaign County school districts, the Champaign County Chamber of Commerce membership is in agreement-many of the facilities are aging, many are in great need of improvements and most are not energy efficient.
However, after polling our membership on two separate occasions regarding the November 4 Schools Facility Tax referendum, the membership is clearly divided on how to fund the needed repairs and maintenance of local school facilities. Additionally, a large percentage of the respondents were undecided on the issue. This percentage, if it were reflective of the voting public, is certainly large enough to swing the vote either direction.
The role of the Chamber board of directors is to assess where the membership stands on an issue and then develop positions and actions based on the desire of the membership. The Chamber membership is divided on the issue of the Schools Facility Tax. Therefore, the Champaign County Chamber of Commerce board of directors has opted to neither support nor oppose the referendum. It is extremely important to note though, this is not a neutral position. It is a position of respect for the differing opinions of the business community on this issue.
In deference to the differing opinions of our members, we offer both reasons that Champaign County residents should consider supporting this referendum and reasons that residents should consider opposing the referendum on November 4.Reasons to Cast a "Yes" Vote
- If passed, will provide a guaranteed funding stream for the ongoing maintenance of facilities that are currently paid for by property taxes;
- It may help schools to become more energy efficient and be usable longer;
- There is a potential decrease in property taxes;
- Improved facilities may help with recruitment and retention of quality educators;
- It may help to solve many of the maintenance issues in many of the school districts and lessens the need for schools to seek future referendums;
- It may free up other monies in school districts' budgets that could be applied to educational programming;
- Improved facilities could potentially draw new families resulting in additional workforce talent for other area employers.
Reasons to Cast a "No" Vote
- This is a tax increase, not a tax swap. Property tax abatements are not guaranteed under this law and a sitting school board can not bind future boards to promises they made;
- There is no adequate sunset provision in the legislation. If passed, the additional one cent sales tax will be in place indefinitely;
- It does not solve all of the capital needs of the school districts. School districts can and will seek future property tax referendums for large-scale projects;
- While the tax increase may alleviate the financial burden on district budgets for physical facilities, it does not address educational programming, and proof of a correlation between maintained facilities and improved educational performance has not been presented;
- There may be less accountability by the schools to the voters. The residents will no longer have a vote on how large sums of tax dollars will be spent on capital maintenance issues;
- There is no mechanism in the current law which prevents the state from withholding state capital funds from communities that pass this sales tax;
- There is a lack of empirical data to prove that newer quality facilities will drive economic development and bring new business to our community.
In the big picture, the Chamber does support lessening the reliance on property taxes to fund our educational system. On November 4, voters need to determine if a one cent sales tax is the right vehicle to accomplish this. Voters need to decide if paying one percent more in sales tax is financially feasible to help improve school facilities.
We respect that our membership knows that there are compelling reasons to both support and oppose this tax increase. Armed with the knowledge of both sides of the issue, it is our intention for the Chamber membership to vote with the solid knowledge base necessary to make the decision that is best for them.
Let's not take the responsibility away from the state. The state has the tools to fund schools in the most progressive way possible.
Let's follow Senator Meeks lead.
Lots of "mays" and "coulds" under "yes."
Under "no," no mention of chasing consumers out of the county and onto the internet, expecially to buy expensive items.
Tough call. Noticed a couple of "mays" under the "no" as well. While the State of Illinois has the tools and the responsibility for funding, our choices in Springfield have not embraced that responsibility anymore than they have the sad financial condition of the state.
Will things change in Springfield? I do not see that happening in the near future. The only thing which might teach these "old dogs new tricks" would be a Con-Con. Will those 'new tricks' help fund education at the state level and when? That would be up to the voters of this state.
That said I like as does the Chamber, the shift of education funding away from property tax. Actually there are no guarantees either on a funding stream or under any law since all can be changed. Bottom line, I agree with Mr. Rice, school funding should come from the state. Meeks efforts are to be applauded but neither Springfield nor the Governor show signs of doing anything different than they have done for the past decade. The school districts need it now so I voted in favor.
Perhaps it is time for B is for Bias to get his/her own blog and slow down the massive reprinting of the NG on this blog ... ?
"Perhaps it is time for B is for Bias to get his/her own blog and slow down the massive reprinting of the NG on this blog ... ?"
No. If anyone is guilty of reprinting the NG on here, it's me.
Thank you for posting this information. It is a difficult decision to make regarding the How to's on this issue. Unfortunatly, the representation in Springfield in not balanced, therfore, causing this current problem. What is the answer? If this issue does not pass, I think we need to roll up our sleeves and become more involved, simply put. We can not continue to let these buildings fall apart, we can not continue to pass the burden onto the property tax. There needs to be a better way to fund this issue or cut back or restructure the funding. My hope is that there be a more balanced County Board and place the burden upon the elected officials in our area to distribute funds in a better way.
The Chamber made a great decision by posting a respected view on both sides. I applaud their efforts !
"Perhaps it is time for B is for Bias to get his/her own blog and slow down the massive reprinting of the NG on this blog ... ?"
This is not from the N-G. Biased? Who me? :)
Another argument against the sales tax is the relative volatility of sales tax revenues. They are more sensitive to economic cycles and harder to predict. That's not a problem with prudent planning and conservative management but I'm not sure that our school boards have demonstrated a knack for that in the past. The great, and perhaps only, virtue of the property tax is its relative insensitivity to swings in the economy.
Sales tax revenues are also declining slowly, at least in relative terms.
I just got the mail for the day and I was surprised to see in the mail a very nice mailing about the sales tax issue. I was looking for the “paid for” portion of the mailing and couldn’t find it. Then I realized that the return address was “Champaign Unit 4 schools”
Very nice paid for…..by me. This flyer I would estimate the cost at a minimum of 2 dollars each, probably much more. Thousands of tax payer dollars spent asking us to give them more money. Beautiful.
If there was a viable elected group in Springfield I seriously doubt the schools would even propose such an "add on" tax plan. I do not believe a power imbalance of political party is the problem as we have witnessed in the past neither the Republican or Democrat parties have funded education well. Both political parties have "raided" the school funds, retirement funds, infrastructure funds and litterly any pot of money they could find to put through their election or re-election agenda's. What I do believe is paying the state's bills makes for boring political news at election time. In Illinois you get elected or re-elected by using those funds instead for 'pet' district and/or 'election' promises to organization funders/supporters. We, the voters of Illinois, have assured this process will continue.
Yes, I voted in favor of this tax which is extremely inefficient as an 'add on' to property tax. I feel the districts have made their case need, dispite the cost of educating the public with brochures etc. They have no alternative since the best, most efficient alternative, state funding, will not, in the near term properly fund education in Illinois. We the voters have assured that.
Problem is, this is an "unending" tax.....
Let's see a list of all those 'ending' taxes JohnBoy.
Corbin Rice discusses the "To The Point" newsletter you all should have received in Unit 4...
Mr. Rice, The district has for at least the almost four years I have been on the board published a 3 times per year newsletter and sent it to all homes in the district. I think they specifically use the voter registration addresses. This is the second "To The Point" newsletter of the school year. The first was published in August as is always is. The second is typically published in late November. If you read the entire document (in fact you have to open to the middle to see the tax referendum information), you will see stories about the new academic alternative academy, the recent STOP program (truancy outreach), Franklin Teacher Tracey Jones and a story about two other award winners for Unit 4.
OF COURSE the tax referendum is a big issue. We are criticized about not communicating and have been asked multiple times over the years to publish news letters and www information, etc about the district. This is a pretty big deal to the district and its citizens so I directed the staff to send out the end of november newsletter a bit early. We are certainly allowed to give facts about the referendum and it would be irresponsible not to. No where in the document does it ask voters to vote yes or no for the tax.
As for the cost, we have changed paper from glossy, and changed many other things to make the document readable and cost effective as a means of communication to our stakeholders.
Dave Tomlinson, President
Unit 4 Board of Education
"Stakeholders", oh please not that term,,,
Mr. Tomlinson: I would like your take on a recent memo sent to staff by the principal at Centennial, it detailed how many students are still in the Honor/Award program that have C's, D's, and F's. Is this in lieu of the Consent Decree? PS, I do have to admit to some admiration as to how you have been campaigning on this sales tax. From a purely political viewpoint, you have been working the right crowds, and making the right promises. Reminds me of the old style Chicago Ward heelers that used to go to all the neighborhoods to turn out the vote, it might work for you, too close to call at this point. :)
I suppose I over reacted. This is definitely no worse, and probably much better, then “Congressional updates”.
I think they specifically use the voter registration addresses.
Why not use a taxpayer list instead? Or perhaps a list of parents?
We are certainly allowed to give facts about the referendum and it would be irresponsible not to.
Presenting selective facts can be more powerful then advocating. Many of the facts I think are important were not listed.
No where in the document does it ask voters to vote yes or no for the tax.
This may be technically true but you would have to agree that it is very visually compelling.
"Why not use a taxpayer list instead?"
I assume you mean property taxpayers. The reason they shouldn't use that list is because it would exclude renters.
"Or perhaps a list of parents?"
Because everyone who pays property taxes has a stake in the schools. A parents-only list would exclude seniors, those without children, those whose children attend private schools, etc. and is too narrow IMO. Also, as someone with a child who may someday attend Unit 4, I was glad they included us.
The registered voter list is probably as close as they could reasonably (and cheaply) get to a list that included all residents of Unit 4.
OUCH being compared to chicago politicians... I suppose its better than some of the other things I have been called lately :)
Stakeholders...? since somebody called me vacuous recently I was trying to use big words...
I have no idea what memo you are talking about since the board doesn't typically get involved in principal/staff communications.
Dave
The registered voter list is probably as close as they could reasonably (and cheaply) get to a list that included all residents of Unit 4.
That’s fair enough. Is there not a list then of the addresses of all households to be had?
What about parents who may not be registered to vote? Let me tell you that as I have walked down streets knocking on voters’ doors that they are missing a massive part of the population that pays property taxes (through rent or otherwise) and have children actually attending school.
"Is there not a list then of the addresses of all households to be had?"
Not usually, unless one buys it from a mail marketing firm, and they're usually pretty expensive, and don't match up well with district boundaries. They could have done a generic mailing to all households in specific zip codes and carrier routes, but that's expensive and wasteful overkill, IMO.
"What about parents who may not be registered to vote? Let me tell you that as I have walked down streets knocking on voters’ doors that they are missing a massive part of the population that pays property taxes (through rent or otherwise) and have children actually attending school."
I'm sure they are. But a registered voter list seems like the most cost-effective compromise to me.
They could have done a generic mailing to all households in specific zip codes and carrier routes, but that's expensive and wasteful overkill, IMO.
I suppose it depends on what your motivation is. Is it to reach stakeholders or is it to influence voters?
I actually don't know the exact list we use, but I will find out...
Dave
I actually don't know the exact list we use, but I will find out...
Dave
Dave Tomlinson I want you to know that this is not a witch hunt and I have no ill feelings toward you or your point of view. We all want to have quality schools for the future of our nation. We may just disagree about the best way to accomplish that.
Thank you for your service and willingness to engage the public.
Corbin
I didn't think it was a witch hunt. Good luck on Tuesday!
DT
Why waste the money for a mailer on unregistered voters? They have no decision to make. This isn't a decision for parents, OR stakeholders, OR property owners... It's a decision for Voters, Registered Voters.
Anyone can look it up on-line, or write to request it.
Spending to send this info to unregistered voters is sorta like sending me the info-packet that City Council gets every week. It's information I am entitled to, but it's hardly the City's responsiblity to spend their resources to get it to me, since I am not the one making the decisions. But I can look it up, if I decide I want to know.
I know, respect, like, and trust Mr Tomlinson, and I DO believe the schools NEED the money.. There is no doubt of that.. But I will be voting NO, because there is no sunset date on this tax, I don't believe in taking financial responsibilty off the State's shoulders until they take it off my bill; I think the State WILL use this tax as an excuse to walk away from their resposibilities to our schools. And rural/outta towners should not have to foot the bill of our schools, and their own.
As part of this joint Illinois American Planning Association and American Society of Landscape Architects conference being held in C-U, I went on a mobile workshop to the wind farm in McLean county. Right now there are a total of 240 wind turbines on the farm with a projected addition of another 240. The way the property tax is calculated for each turbine is based on the megawatts generated X the county levy. This method is establish by state law. This is in addition to the farm land property tax. When I asked how much money this is generating for McLean county, the response was that the wind farm is generating a tremendous amount of money for the schools within the county since about 3/4 of the amount goes to the schools. The county gets most of the income from the permit fees. The farmer on the average gets about $5000 for the land under the pad/turbine. The lease for these wind turbines is 30 years.
This seems like a very tempting way to increase funding to support schools rather than the upcoming referendum. :-)
Pattsi Petrie
Why waste the money for a mailer on unregistered voters? They have no decision to make. This isn't a decision for parents, OR stakeholders, OR property owners... It's a decision for Voters, Registered Voters.
That is true but Mr Tomlinson suggested that the reason for the flyer was not the school tax but to reach out to stake holders. If that is the case then it should be sent to all stake holders.
However if it is intended to inform the public on the sales tax issue then you are absolutely correct.
I agree with your reasoning on the sales tax.
"I suppose it depends on what your motivation is. Is it to reach stakeholders or is it to influence voters?"
Keep in mind also that a mailing to all postal recipients in a ZIP code or carrier route includes businesses as well. The amount of overkill in sending via to that sort of universe is pretty large, IMO.
Yes, that would ensure that all "stakeholders" are hit, but would also increase the postage cost by 50 percent or more over just sending to registered voters.
Yes, that would ensure that all "stakeholders" are hit, but would also increase the postage cost by 50 percent or more over just sending to registered voters.
My guess would be more along the lines of 400%. I don't disagree but really it’s a matter of motivation. Are we trying to communicate with stake holders or are we trying to influence votes? As a candidate I don't stop at every door or send a mailing to every house. I am trying to influence voters. If that is what the School Board is trying to do then they are going about it correctly.
I am really glad the Chamber posted this note (also found on their web page); I really respect the conclusion they have come to, given the various viewpoints of the individuals, and I hold their presentation in high regard. It makes me wish that the other units/entities (both for and against) had published such a list earlier; the pros and cons are a very clean way of getting a look at both sides of the issues without the passionate resolve (aka, bias). High thanks to the Chamber for publishing this.
One thing that does concern mean, and I am not certain if this is intentional or not, but the language of the Pros is very passive ("may help", "may free", "potentially"), while the language of the Cons is stronger ("are not", "is no", "does not"). If these statements are in fact true, it paints an interesting picture.
I also share a respect for Dave Tomlinson and the current members of the Board. While I am dismayed that there is no "Plan B", I strongly hope that they move to address the Cons. In some ways they already have with the "Promises Made, Promises Kept" report card idea - that is an excellent concept, and I can only hope that we as a community hold the Board accountable to this, for our mutual benefit. And about "Plan B".... ok, I understand there has been a lot of time invested in the Visioning Committee, a lot of time getting out in the public (and kudos!! to both Dave Tomlinson and Greg Novak for being as open as they are). But I believe Pattsi has presented a few alternative ideas, not to mention the fact that it seems to me there needs to be more pressure on our legislators to properly fund education. Where are those action steps? What is being done to bridge the socio-economic classes, to ease the tension that all too easily comes to the forefront when talking about the Consent Decree? There are bigger problems than just having the money to pay off bond debts and renovate buildings. And those problems will not go away if the Tax passes or the Consent Decree expires.
I wanted to comment on the mailing issue. There seems to a lot of concern that the newsletter (and its ultimate mailing list) was sent out only for political purposes. It seems appropriate to remind everyone that this is the same mailing list that they use every year for the newsletters (at least I assume that that is the case). While the timing may seem somewhat political in nature, this is a regular newsletter that is sent out to the community, referendum or no referendum. Trying to surmise that the newsletter's mailing list is somehow political in nature seems somewhat erroneous given that I assume that the distribution list has been consistent over the years.
I want to make clear I am not advocating some major mass mailing. I am just making sure we are being intellectually honest with our selves.
Here a few fun questions I posed to my self last night.
My personal answers to the questions may not be what you would expect but I think these are important questions to ask yourself in regard to these mailings.
Xian, I guess this is a query to you as much as anyone,,,,,the Sun-Times has the breakdown of all the schools in the state,,Centennial is kind of dismal,,,,,,,,some of the Chicago schools are doing well,,,which school is yours? If you dont mind disclosing that info, Thanks
For Corben Rice-
Any chance of getting you to scan the piece from the school district and emailing it to me?
Thanks,
cal skinner, McHenry County Blog
Any chance of getting you to scan the piece from the school district and emailing it to me?
sure. Email me at corben@ccboard5.com with what email address you would like it at.
The reason for the to the point was to communicate with the people that we have communicated with on every other to the point mailer. The reason to highlight the Sales Tax and answer questions was and is to give factual information about our plans. However it leads a person to vote on the issue is up to them. We are trying to present the facts about what Unit 4 will do if the tax passes.
As to the questions above about consent decree and plan B and program issues, because this tax can only be used for facilities stuff, it is only logical that the conversation would at this time would center around facilities repairs and construction. We have taken the Programs and Community engagement parts of the Vision Document and are working those into district operational plans right now.
Plan B? only related to facilities, we cannot fund MAJOR facility repairs and renovations as planned or pay off the debt or do any of the other things we have been discussing without a funding stream (READ: Property taxes). Like it or not that is the way schools are funded in Illinois.
I would be absolutely happy to work with the General Assembly on changes to existing law and developing future law concerning school funds. The SB 750 resurrection talked about by Sen Meeks is one idea though I am not sure it is the best one in its current format. Wind energy is certainly another. I don't know that it is in the domain of the school district to push private business to invest in WInd Energy for the tax benefit, but I certainly remain open to the idea.
Dave Tomlinson
BTW if someone wants a copy of the newsletter, simply call 217-351-3800 and ask for the HR department and they would be happy to send you one.
To Dave Tomlinson--again thanks for responding to various posts. I can easily make the argument that a school board ought to have beginning conversations within the county about bringing wind energy to the county for many reasons, one of which that a wind farm will bring increased property taxes, aka increased school funding, let alone be a superb tool for farm land preservation. In addition, there is a school district in the state that has installed a wind turbine that is generating all of the power for the school, albeit this is a smaller district. This does not, however, negate the concept. :-) I think the bottom line of most of the posts is that there certain are more creative ways to fund school than increase an already regressive tax that will hurt the lower income population.
Pattsi Petrie