Act 388 (Charleston, Rock Hill, Myrtle Beach: sales, house, schools)

[Carolina-Trader]

Who do we vote in our out of office to get this changed or is Fort Mill simply SOL?

The Herald - Life. Captured Every Day. - Serving York, Chester, and Lancaster Counties.

[groove1]

I dunno but my tax bill didn't driop by as much as what I will pay in extra sales tax. I'm not complaining about that because I'd rather have a lower monthly house payment, but many people aren't going to be able to afford $50

[BagongBuhay]

Before we moved to Fort Mill, our town in CT was already doing this...paid to join sports and music courses and our property taxes were at a 45 per mille. I'd rather take a break in property tax. If I wanted them to join the EC activities, I would fork out the extra money. That's why it's called "extra". The kids can have a choice of playing a sport, or getting a new Wii game, not both!

[PharmD/MBA]

At the risk of seeming inconsiderated, cold hearted, and against education, I agree with this bill and that there should be fees to play sports and other extracuricular activities. I played sports and truly enjoyed them, however, the elderly couple on a fixed income down the street should not be taxed out of there homes in order for me to have been able to do so for free. We as tax payers agree to pay to provide our children with an education not an avenue for athletics. I do not want anyone to think I do not support athletics in schools. I think the team building aspects of sports are essential to building well rounded youths that are equally comfortable with defeat as success and will always try harder and train longer in order to be the best. However, again this law was not randomly conceived. It was drafted after years of constituent school boards raising millage rates on an annual basis with out regard to budgeting the money. It is similar to me asking for a raise because my car payment is to high. I should not have bought the car if I could not afford it and I can hold noone responsible but myself. This all began after the 90 mil cap was removed about a decade ago. It gave autonomy to the school boards to increase without regard for the cost to homeowners ability to pay. Many individuals in areas like Charleston (where I am from so have most experience) lost there homes as they could not continue to pay the increase in taxes as their income did not increase proportionately. Perhaps this was extreme in thinking that they should remove the tax all together but now at least the tourist to our area, which there are many (Myrtle Beach, Charleston, Hilton Head) are helping pay for our schools and if a relatively small fee ($50) for Extra activities not related to education means our children will continue to experience great schools in our area then I 110% support that idea. I assure you, again having played, this comes no where close to what the overall costs of fielding a player in a sport when it comes paying all the officials and uniform costs.

Hope I haven't offended as that was not my intent, however, we need to look at this as what it is. It is a plan to charge extra for the "extras" and not mutch different than paying for dessert at a nice meal. You don't have to have it but if you want it you should pay for it and enjoy it.

[Carolina-Trader]

I wasn't clear. I could care less about fees for sports though understand the reasoning.

I was referring to the regressive sales tax and Act 388 which gives monetary increases as a whole across all school systems due to an average statewide student growth. School systems in the slowest growing counties and fastest growing counties receive the same percentage increase year over year as it is calculated per statewide growth and not locally per school system. If your in a fast growing school system such as Fort Mill or Clover this is not to your advantage with the end result being less money allotted to these school systems per student year over year until, if the law is not changed, the state money is capped at a per student minimum. This also results in higher commercial taxes (which by law still do support the school system) and eventually lower property values due to a decline in the local school system.

I would gladly support the local school system through residential property taxes, and once did so, but this is now against the law aka Act 388. If you can't repeal Act 388, it needs to be indexed per individual school system growth instead of a flat percentage increase across the board (per year). You would think this to be common sense.

While I don't agree with taxing the elderly out of their homes I don't quite agree on a regressive tax either. If your going to set up a regressive tax for education at least index the payout per individual school system growth.

[lovethecarolinas]

Originally Posted by Carolina-Trader

Act 388
Who do we vote in our out of office to get this changed or is Fort Mill simply SOL?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't clear. I could care less about fees for sports though understand the reasoning.

I was referring to the regressive sales tax and Act 388 which gives monetary increases as a whole across all school systems due to an average statewide student growth. School systems in the slowest growing counties and fastest growing counties receive the same percentage increase year over year as it is calculated per statewide growth and not locally per school system. If your in a fast growing school system such as Fort Mill or Clover this is not to your advantage with the end result being less money allotted to these school systems per student year over year until, if the law is not changed, the state money is capped at a per student minimum. This also results in higher commercial taxes (which by law still do support the school system) and eventually lower property values due to a decline in the local school system.

I would gladly support the local school system through residential property taxes, and once did so, but this is now against the law aka Act 388. If you can't repeal Act 388, it needs to be indexed per individual school system growth instead of a flat percentage increase across the board (per year). You would think this to be common sense.

While I don't agree with taxing the elderly out of their homes I don't quite agree on a regressive tax either. If your going to set up a regressive tax for education at least index the payout per individual school system growth.

First of all I am glad you clarified what you first wrote. As a parent with children in both band and sports....I think the least of our worries will be the extra $50 fee for sports.

I made a post back in March, 2007 in regard to the lowering of our taxes (after attending a meeting with the superintendent of the FMSD)
I have copied part of my original post: "For me...what I think is possibly a far bigger concern...is the lowering of our (school) taxes...I believe this will attract even more people to the SC area...and then when that happens...what becomes of the schools when they no longer have the monies that they had access to before? (that is what I am keeping my eye on)".

Now here we are a little over a year later...and it's already starting to effect our FM schools (along with Indian Land, Rock Hill, Clover, etc.)

As it stands now the state will disperse the schools funds using the average growth rate of the whole state (which is 1.8 percent) not taking into consideration districts that are growing by a much faster rate....Fort Mill grew by 10.1 percent this year! There are certain districts within the state that will benefit from ACT 388 so of course they don't want to see this changed at all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Sen. Wes Hayes said it’s clear there will need to be some adjustments to how the money is distributed.

“We’re working on legislation that would change the formula to make it more equitable, so that the fast growing districts are not penalized,” he said.

The problem is the General Assembly members from the slower districts don’t want to change it because they gain from the way the formula is now.

“We can probably convince some people that it’s not being done equitably,” Hayes said. “The problem is when they have to go back and tell their districts, which are often the slower growing districts, that they are going to get less money than they would under the old formula, it’s going to be very difficult for them to vote for it.”

Overall, the act has probably caused more harm than good, Hayes admits.

Also, becoming reliant on a sales tax can be risky, he said.

“Sales tax goes south very quickly when the economy goes down,” he said. “Now our schools are much more dependent on the sales tax, which means we are much more dependent on the economy.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Mill to hire fewer teachers

http://www.rock-hill.k12.sc.us/UserF...-Positions.doc

Shortfall may force Indian Land class sizes to grow

Rock Hill Schools Grassroots: Property tax law causing problems for many schools (http://rhgrassroots.blogspot.com/2008/05/property-tax-law-causing-problems-for.html - broken link)

[SatTerra]

A death by a thousand cuts. They move the funds from bucket to bucket, kind of like a shell game. They reduced property taxes, and increased sales taxes. Now they are going to increase taxes on business and second homes. The business owners will pass the tax along by increasing the cost of their goods and services. As for the folks who own 2 homes, their taxes go up, which in my case means it's time to write a bigger check. Americans in general, are being hood-winked!