Analysis of possible school district mergers in Pittsburgh... (Harrisburg, Penn Hills: fit in, real estate)

[eschaton]

A few years ago, I looked at Allegheny County tax rates to see which cities would save money merged into Pittsburgh. I found four at that time.

I decided to update my study, but only look at school districts. Pittsburgh funds its city activities in roughly the same way that most municipalities do in the region - through mainly property taxes with a small income tax. In contrast, the school district gains fair more funding from income tax, meaning property tax rates for the school portion of the mill rate are very low.

All property tax information (mill rates, average housing values) was collected from the county website. Income tax information was collected from a state website. Average household income came from the American Community Survey put out by the census.

Attached is a map of my findings. The colors mean:

Red: Lose-Lose - If they merged into PPS, net taxes on the average family would rise. In addition, these municipalities are poorer than Pittsburgh on average, meaning it would probably cost the city more to service them.

Yellow: Boroughs Win, Pittsburgh Loses - These are also poor municipalities which would bring in less taxes than the average Pittsburgh resident. However, local tax rates are high enough there would be a significant drop for the residents of those boroughs.

Green: Pittsburgh Wins, Suburbs Lose - These municipalities are all wealthier than the Pittsburgh mean, but there would be a significant increase to tax levels if they were in PPS.

Blue: Win-Win - The most interesting municipalities. In all cases, taxes would fall, and the city would make out better as well.

In addition, I made most municipalities dark, and some light. The dark ones are those I don't think there's a chance of bringing into PPS. For the most part this is either due to distance from the city, or a merger not being a good deal. In a few cases there are adjacent districts which theoretically are good deals, but in practice are impossible to imagine (e.g., Mount Lebanon).

The light ones are those school districts which seem to be good candidates for merger into PPS. They are adjacent to the city and have reputations varying from middling to worse than Pittsburgh's. In not every case would taxes fall, but even those which would see a rise would see one of less than $100 per year, which is probably doable with the right politicking.

We've discussed Wilkinsburg before, but I find Penn Hills and Woodland Hills in some ways more interesting. Both are large districts which still have a diverse population, but rank worse than PPS overall. PPS has clear ways to market a merger - not only would taxes fall for many (particularly for retirees), but students would have access to city magnet and charter schools. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

Edit: Fixed to deal with minor problems with net cost to city of Pittsburgh.

[Garvdog]

Many of your "dark blue" areas might be a win-win financially, but the quality of the district schools being merged in would suffer. THat's why it would never happen. Remember, the reason SD's like Mt Lebanon and Upper St Clair can have such high millages without an out-an-out revolt is due to the top-notch quality of the schools. A merger for those areas might bring the taxes down a bit but would kill the reputation of the schools, and just force many residents with children to flee to other places like Peters. Its a nice theory but has never, ever worked in practice in any U.S. city. I can cite many examples in California where a school district was ruined this way.

[Copanut]

Dormont has a higher millage rate than either USC or Lebo.

[Garvdog]

Originally Posted by Copanut

Dormont has a higher millage rate than either USC or Lebo.

Is Dormont part of PPS? I have to admit I dont know what schools they use.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Copanut

Dormont has a higher millage rate than either USC or Lebo.

My Analysis

Dormont - 22.03 mil, 0.5% income tax - Under PPS - a $101.15 rise in net tax burden

Upper Saint Clair - 25.72 mil, 0.5% income tax - $385.21 cut in net tax burden

Mount Lebanon - 27.13 mil, 0.5% income tax - a $760.68 cut in net tax burden

[Copanut]

Dormont has at least 10 mills on it's township, higher than just about anywhere. No doubt due to all the corruption.

[Garvdog]

Originally Posted by eschaton

My Analysis

Dormont - 22.03 mil, 0.5% income tax - Under PPS - a $101.15 rise in net tax burden

Upper Saint Clair - 25.72 mil, 0.5% income tax - $385.21 cut in net tax burden

Mount Lebanon - 21.30 mil, 0.5% income tax - a $760.68 cut in net tax burden

Upper Saint Clair does have a higher rate than Dormont, although Mount Lebanon's is smaller. The reason Mount Lebanon sees a cut, while Dormont doesn't, is Dormont has proportionally higher income than real estate, while Mount Lebanon is the other way around.

That said, looking back at the numbers, I did make a minor error in the gain/loss to Pittsburgh, basing the change in tax rates off Mount Oliver (also in PPS) rather than Pittsburgh. It makes a difference of around $150, so I'll go back and redo the map in a second.

Mt Lebanon's millage is 27.13- higher than both USC and Dormont. I'm not sure where you are getting that 21.30 number.

Also, if Dormont is already part of PPS, why would their millage change at all? Don't all municipalities under PPS have the same SD millage?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Garvdog

Mt Lebanon's millage is 27.13- higher than both USC and Dormont. I'm not sure where you are getting that 21.30 number.

You're right, I have the accurate millage in there. I was just reading from the wrong column. So Mount Lebanon has a much higher millage as well.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by Garvdog

Many of your "dark blue" areas might be a win-win financially, but the quality of the district schools being merged in would suffer.

I agree (within qualifications), and that's why I think district mergers will have to be top-down to succeed, probably from Harrisburg. The state will have to lead, and local leaders would have to be ready to follow, and the entire package would have to be sold more on grounds of necessity, as a public health measure, than because of its immediate benefits. Like late 19th and early 20th century slum clearances: many people liked their neighborhoods warts and all, and many others were happy for the slum to stay slum - but if cholera keeps breaking out, then officials can argue that no matter how many people object, the tenements simply have to come down.

Naturally, that requires a certain amount of courage.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Garvdog

Many of your "dark blue" areas might be a win-win financially, but the quality of the district schools being merged in would suffer. THat's why it would never happen. Remember, the reason SD's like Mt Lebanon and Upper St Clair can have such high millages without an out-an-out revolt is due to the top-notch quality of the schools. A merger for those areas might bring the taxes down a bit but would kill the reputation of the schools, and just force many residents with children to flee to other places like Peters. Its a nice theory but has never, ever worked in practice in any U.S. city. I can cite many examples in California where a school district was ruined this way.

You might be right that it would kill the reputation, but it wouldn't kill the quality by itself. The schools are great not mainly due to the high level of funding, but because they attract upper-middle class people who tend to have smart kids already. Plus those smart kids create a local culture of competitiveness, which makes it so that even average kids study harder to try to "fit in."

There's no reason, absent public perceptions, that such a system couldn't remain in a school system with integrated management which retained existing feeder patterns. That said, as you note, perceptions can lead to a flood of residents leaving, and have a habit of becoming reality. It's one reason I suggested starting with the bad to mediocre districts.