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.
Thanks for pointing out that flaw in their methodology. So if I go directly to the PA Department of Education site, the per-student total spending (for the 2018-19 school year) is:
Philadelphia School District: $17.1K
Radnor: $26.3K
Tredyffrin Easttown: $19.9K
Fox Chapel: $24.7K
Lower Merion $32.9K
Mt. Lebanon: $17.9K
North Allegheny: $19.5K
Unionville Chadds-Ford: $21.8K
Wallingford Swarthmore: $21.8K
Upper Dublin: $25.2K
Upper St. Clair: $34.3K
So, per-student spending is lower in the Philadelphia School District, though not as much lower as some may have you believe. However, I highly doubt that the amount provided by the state per-student is lower (though I couldn't easily find that data). Perhaps someone could provide that.
It looks like the City of Philadelphia should raise their property taxes, rather than looking to the rest of the state to cover their fiscal irresponsibility. In addition to state subsidies, many of us pay taxes directly to the city of philadelphia, though we don't even live there (and have no representation in the voting process). I pay as much in taxes to philadelphia as I pay to my local school district (which is one of those listed above).
That's why I'm asking if property taxes will rise as well. Domb's plan is what should have been done a long time ago, but you have a largely impoverished population overall. How can anyone expect that this can be done in addition to the rise in property taxes that has already occurred in recent years? And if there is no rise in residential property taxes, is it sustainable to ramp down the wage tax long-term?
Regarding schools, I would be surprised that schools will improve even if more money is provided because of what's happening outside of these schools.
It looks like the City of Philadelphia should raise their property taxes, rather than looking to the rest of the state to cover their fiscal irresponsibility. In addition to state subsidies, many of us pay taxes directly to the city of philadelphia, though we don't even live there (and have no representation in the voting process). I pay as much in taxes to philadelphia as I pay to my local school district (which is one of those listed above).
Raising property taxes - unless we're focusing on speculators and corporate landowners - would be a risky move. If the taxes go too high in lower-income/working-class neighborhoods then the owners will be compelled to sell, accelerating gentrification and/or corporations turning the homes into rentals. If you raise them too much in the more upscale neighborhoods, some may decide they'd do just as well to head just outside the city into the Main Line or Eastern Montco.
I'd be for ending the ten-year tax abatement for new homes but then developers might lose their main carrot for attracting prospective owners.
I've said before here that it's going to take buy-in not only from the suburban counties but also Harrisburg to right the ship in Philadelphia. Those living outside the city may be loathe to do that, but heaven forbid the Delaware Valley becomes a donut like Metro Detroit, a hole that, despite some promise in the core of the city, they are still digging out from. There for the grace of "eds and meds" go us...
Raising property taxes - unless we're focusing on speculators and corporate landowners - would be a risky move. If the taxes go too high in lower-income/working-class neighborhoods then the owners will be compelled to sell, accelerating gentrification and/or corporations turning the homes into rentals. If you raise them too much in the more upscale neighborhoods, some may decide they'd do just as well to head just outside the city into the Main Line or Eastern Montco.
I'd be for ending the ten-year tax abatement for new homes but then developers might lose their main carrot for attracting prospective owners.
I've said before here that it's going to take buy-in not only from the suburban counties but also Harrisburg to right the ship in Philadelphia. Those living outside the city may be loathe to do that, but heaven forbid the Delaware Valley becomes a donut like Metro Detroit, a hole that, despite some promise in the core of the city, they are still digging out from. There for the grace of "eds and meds" go us...
What if we give 3.5% of our income to the city? Wait, I already do that!
Here's a better idea, how about the citizens of Philadelphia start making more responsible voting decisions. For example, don't automatically vote for anyone with a "(D)" next to their name. Will never happen of course, just as Philly will never be fiscally responsible.
What if we give 3.5% of our income to the city? Wait, I already do that!
Here's a better idea, how about the citizens of Philadelphia start making more responsible voting decisions. For example, don't automatically vote for anyone with a "(D)" next to their name. Will never happen of course, just as Philly will never be fiscally responsible.
110% my thoughts. I'm already giving the city a HUGE amount of my wages and I spend additional disposable income in the city. Yet, the residents vote in Krasner and other fools that waste money. What can I in the burbs do about that? And let's not lose sight that the suburban counties have plenty on their plates as well. The struggles of big cities like Philadelphia are not lost on the counties which have their own issues.
Not actively entice city businesses to move out or compete against relocating businesses against the city.
Realign property taxes on a regional level so that more can go into the city for schools.
As for Harrisburg, they could allocate more funds to fix the city's crumbling infrastructure.
That's just off the top of my head.
I know that might seem like a fantasy to some and a nightmare scenario to others but as the city is working with a low tax base compared to suburban counties, raising property taxes on the average John and Jane Homeowner would not be effective either, IMO.
What if we give 3.5% of our income to the city? Wait, I already do that!
Here's a better idea, how about the citizens of Philadelphia start making more responsible voting decisions. For example, don't automatically vote for anyone with a "(D)" next to their name. Will never happen of course, just as Philly will never be fiscally responsible.
I would agree that the "(D)'s" have not always been the best stewards of the city. Unfortunately the "(R)'s", who have had chronic challenges connecting in this majority-minority city, didn't do themselves any favors locally let alone nationally over the past four years and particularly last year. A serious ("R") will have to acknowledge the pain of the city's poor and offer solutions other than immediately zeroing out the wage tax and bootstrapping. Raising property taxes would certainly be anathema.
Closer to topic, Councilman Domb - being sensitive to and having a stake in business concerns himself - is probably the closest one is going to get to an "(R)" in the Mayor's Office but even he will have to rely on more than the Far Northeast, River Wards, and Lower South Philly in order to win.
Not actively entice city businesses to move out or compete against relocating businesses against the city.
Realign property taxes on a regional level so that more can go into the city for schools.
As for Harrisburg, they could allocate more funds to fix the city's crumbling infrastructure.
That's just off the top of my head.
I know that might seem like a fantasy to some and a nightmare scenario to others but as the city is working with a low tax base compared to suburban counties, raising property taxes on the average John and Jane Homeowner would not be effective either, IMO.
So you would want all the school taxes people in the burbs pay (and it's a lot) and you want them to take some away from their own children to send them into the city schools? That will never happen. And there are a lot of reasons. One reason is that suburban school districts are struggling to make ends meet as well. Pensions and unions are a big part of the problem. The other reason is that I would never take money away from my children to send into the incredibly mismanaged mess that is the City of Philadelphia. I don't trust those politicians or administrators at all.
If the city wants to put more into schools, I'm sure there are places where money is squandered. And until changes in the community happen, money put into the schools isn't going to change much for anyone.
So you would want all the school taxes people in the burbs pay (and it's a lot)...
I never said "all the school taxes".
Quote:
...and you want them to take some away from their own children to send them into the city schools?
I didn't say that, either. That sounds like intercounty bussing, which I'm not advocating for.
Quote:
That will never happen. And there are a lot of reasons.
I acknowledged that it would be a challenge getting suburbanites on board so no quarrel there.
Quote:
One reason is that suburban school districts are struggling to make ends meet as well Pensions and unions are a big part of the problem.
That's fair. While I tend to support unions, especially for educators, I can see how pensions can become a burdensome expense for some municipalities.
Quote:
The other reason is that I would never take money away from my children to send into the incredibly mismanaged mess that is the City of Philadelphia. I don't trust those politicians or administrators at all.
Your view is probably pretty common in the suburbs and not altogether wrong about the people who run the city.
Quote:
If the city wants to put more into schools, I'm sure there are places where money is squandered.
You're probably right.
Quote:
And until changes in the community happen, money put into the schools isn't going to change much for anyone.
Well, as I said in another response, realigning regional school taxes is but one piece of the puzzle. Attracting jobs and fixing infrastructure - with the help of Harrisburg and Washington - is also critical.
Ultimately, if there is no intervention then I feel we have two scenarios: Philadelphia turns into an unattractive Detroit...or the city becomes an unattainable San Francisco as the poor are forced out to lower Bucks, eastern Delco, and Camden.
I didn't say that, either. That sounds like intercounty bussing, which I'm not advocating for.
I acknowledged that it would be a challenge getting suburbanites on board so no quarrel there.
That's fair. While I tend to support unions, especially for educators, I can see how pensions can become a burdensome expense for some municipalities.
Your view is probably pretty common in the suburbs and not altogether wrong about the people who run the city.
You're probably right.
Well, as I said in another response, realigning regional school taxes is but one piece of the puzzle. Attracting jobs and fixing infrastructure - with the help of Harrisburg and Washington - is also critical.
Ultimately, if there is no intervention then I feel we have two scenarios: Philadelphia turns into an unattractive Detroit...or the city becomes an unattainable San Francisco as the poor are forced out to lower Bucks, eastern Delco, and Camden.
I guess I'm pretty confused about what you're saying we should do about school taxes then. If you didn't mean that we should take some of the money people pay to their local school district and move some of that around to go to city schools, what did you mean? And I didn't say that I thought you meant I would send all my school taxes to city schools....btw, it's not a "suburban" issue. It's a money issue. People who care about their children's education and make enough money to afford a good school district live both in the city and the burbs. I imagine people who send their kids to Meredith in Queen Village would be equally unwilling/upset if funding from their school was diverted elsewhere as well. Losing resources at an improving/good school that then takes away from that quality education would invalidate some of the high home prices people pay to be in that catchment.
I think the worry that we will become a San Francisco is about as likely as us becoming a Detroit. Philadelphia will most likely continue to sit somewhere in the middle with a select set of neighborhoods being richer and a majority of other neighborhoods continuing the cycle of poverty. The only thing that would change that, IMO, is if Philly exploded from a business perspective and more high-paying jobs were created similar to a San Fran/NYC.
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.
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.
