Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Maine
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Thread summary:

Decreased state funding for consolidation of towns like Alton, Bradley, Hudson and Old Town results in higher fees paid by towns to school district through fines or higher property taxes

 
Old 01-28-2009, 04:36 PM
 
Location: On a Slow-Sinking Granite Rock Up North
3,638 posts, read 6,167,614 times
Reputation: 2677

Advertisements

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-28-2009, 07:40 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
37,461 posts, read 61,379,739 times
Reputation: 30414
The paper that we got which explained the stuff about consolidating Old Town, Alton, Bradley, and Hudson. Said that if those towns failed to vote it 'in' then the state would decrease funding.

The 'fine' was in the form of decreased state funding.

The funding was the state money which pays for the 'unfunded' mandates the school administrators talk about.


If the towns voted it 'in' then the school costs would go 'up' by so much which would go back to the towns to increase their property taxes.

If the towns voted 'no' then the school budget would remain the same; and the state would drop how much they pay into the schools, so the towns' portion of the school budget would increase, and would go back to the towns to increase their property taxes.

Either way results in higher fees for the towns to pay the school district, and higher property taxes.

'Fines'?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2009, 04:38 AM
 
Location: On a Slow-Sinking Granite Rock Up North
3,638 posts, read 6,167,614 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by forest beekeeper View Post
The paper that we got which explained the stuff about consolidating Old Town, Alton, Bradley, and Hudson. Said that if those towns failed to vote it 'in' then the state would decrease funding.

The 'fine' was in the form of decreased state funding.

The funding was the state money which pays for the 'unfunded' mandates the school administrators talk about.


If the towns voted it 'in' then the school costs would go 'up' by so much which would go back to the towns to increase their property taxes.

If the towns voted 'no' then the school budget would remain the same; and the state would drop how much they pay into the schools, so the towns' portion of the school budget would increase, and would go back to the towns to increase their property taxes.

Either way results in higher fees for the towns to pay the school district, and higher property taxes.

'Fines'?
I guess the "ethical smell" of the whole thing is what bothers me most.
Perhaps I'm just a simpleton, but I think that the whole thing being put on the fast track before the repeal could be voted on is unconstitutional in the first place. Now I hear that the penalties taken from other towns will be distributed to the "good little towns" who cooperated. That's more than a dite "flimflammy" to me. I suppose it would be a moot point anyway since there's no question that the state coffers are draining fast and something had to be done. There's pretty much no question that the high tax rate has to be addressed. People need to be able to pay their bills and keep their homes. I dunno, maybe I'm missing something.

As for unfunded mandates, is that considered part of the EPS? Because I've got to say, that I have seen mandates that have caused property tax increase in the past.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2009, 06:49 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
37,461 posts, read 61,379,739 times
Reputation: 30414
If you sit on a pool of funds, which are ear-marked to go to 200 school districts. But some school districts suddenly are no longer going to receive their full 'share' of those funds, as a 'fine'.

Then as you sit on the pool of funds. You could say that the funding which does not go out in the previous manner, would now be going out to the schools which do continue to get their full 'share'.

Whoever administrates the funds can not sit on them, the funds must be distributed. So either way. If the funds were not all distributed, then the next time you go to the Federal gubbermint asking for funding, your request will be cut [because you have not fully spent all the money given to you the last time]. The Federal money you must spend it, before you can ask for more.

I have seen this with military funding. Even if you can no longer spend it for the prescribed purpose. It is better to spend it on some other 'need', just to get it spent. Otherwise your projected budget goes down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2009, 07:11 AM
 
Location: On a Slow-Sinking Granite Rock Up North
3,638 posts, read 6,167,614 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by forest beekeeper View Post
I have seen this with military funding. Even if you can no longer spend it for the prescribed purpose. It is better to spend it on some other 'need', just to get it spent. Otherwise your projected budget goes down.
Okay, I see what you mean. I know how that scenario works grrrrrr....
doesn't make it "right" by any means, but that's how it goes.

Fuzzy math. Fear it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Maine
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:58 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top