<HTML><BODY>
<div><SPAN contentEditable=false style="DISPLAY: inline-block"></SPAN>
<div>On 27 March, Moscow citizens will vote whether to authorize a levy for $1,970,000 annually for an indefinite number of years to the Moscow School District. I want to provide six compelling reasons to vote no to this $2 million, annual, indefinite levy.</div>
<div>The <B>first</B> problem is that pesky word <I>indefinite</I>. This annual tax increase will last into eternity. The idea that we will pay $2,000,000 every year forever is scary.</div>
<div><B>Second</B> is the plummeting MSD enrollment with skyrocketing staffing growth. While enrollment fell over 13% during the last ten years, MSD employees grew over 30%. Economists call that a “productivity crash.” Measured against the Idaho state funding formula employment caps, MSD has 29% excess administrative employees, 22% excess instructional employees, and 36% excess non-certified employees. </div>
<div>Here are the numbers: </div>
<UL>
<LI>MSD enrollment is down over 13%,
<LI>MSD staffing is up over 30%, and
<LI>MSD expenditures have grown at 3.7 times the rate of enrollment growth (including inflation).
<LI>For administrative spending per student, MSD is number one in Idaho.
<LI>For actual instruction expenditures per student, MSD is in the bottom quarter of all Idaho schools, despite MSD's current spending already being $1,500 per pupil above state average (about $3.6 million every year). </LI></UL>
<div>Do we need to spend more money on declining enrollment while MSD increases staffing? </div>
<div><B>Third</B> is fiscal responsibility. MSD already spends about $2,000 per student more than districts with similar enrollment—that's about $4.5 million per year. MSD’s non-certified pay scales are 27 percent higher than comparable districts, 17 percent higher than the state average, and even 19 percent higher than the Boise area. MSD's current property tax rate is three times that of comparable districts, arguably the highest in the state. Throwing more money at the schools does not guarantee we’ll get better schools; it does guarantee we’ll have more expensive schools—and we’re already too expensive. We need to first correct this extravagant spending before asking for more money. </div>
<div class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: left"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">According to the Idaho Office of Performance Evaluation (<A href="http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/ope/publications/reports/r0302.htm">http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/ope/publications/reports/r0302.htm</A>), MSD's total school property tax rate is already by far the highest among its peers (<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-POSITION: 0% 50%; BACKGROUND-ATTACHMENT: scroll; BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: repeat">202%</SPAN>) and fourth highest in the state (out of 114 districts). MSD's current school property tax rate (excluding bond and facilities levies) is also by far<B> </B>the highest among its peers (<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-POSITION: 0% 50%; BACKGROUND-ATTACHMENT: scroll; BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: repeat">281%</SPAN>) and<B> </B>second highest in the state. Both MSD's total and current property taxes per student are already the second highest among its peers<A name=OLE_LINK1>.</A></SPAN></div>
<div class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Also a<SPAN style="COLOR: black">ccording to the same report, MSD is the most inefficient and spending bloated school district among its peers. MSD has the:</SPAN></div>
<UL>
<LI>Highest General Administrative cost per pupil.
<LI>Highest School Administrative cost per pupil.
<LI>Highest Total Administrative Services cost per pupil.
<LI>Highest Total Administrative costs as a percent of current expenditures.
<LI>Second highest number of administrators per 1,000 pupils.
<LI>Third highest Business and Central cost per pupil. </LI></UL>
<div><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black">Is there any wonder that MSD school taxes are second only to Blaine County?</SPAN> </div>
<div><B>Fourth</B> are the pressing economic issues facing Moscow taxpayers. Foremost, the <A href="http://right-mind.us/blogs/moscoweducation/archive/2006/09/08/UI-enrollment-down-6-percent.aspx">University of Idaho’s Moscow campus has declining enrollment</A> despite renewed recruiting efforts.</div>
<UL>
<LI><A href="http://www.ucm.uidaho.edu/default.aspx?pid=86737">Fall 2004</A>: 11,541
<LI><A href="http://right-mind.us/blogs/moscoweducation/archive/2007/01/30/49520.aspx">Spring 2007</A>: 10,184</LI></UL>
<div><A href="http://right-mind.us/blogs/moscoweducation/archive/2007/02/05/49640.aspxhttp:/right-mind.us/blogs/moscoweducation/archive/2007/02/04/49629.aspx">Henry Robison</A>, Senior economist with Moscow’s <A href="http://www.economicmodeling.com/">Economic Modeling Specialists</A>, stated that “if we lose 1,000 students, in the long run we can expect to lose about 800 jobs.” We’re already down 1,357 students. </div>
<div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><A href="http://right-mind.us/blogs/moscoweducation/archive/2007/02/04/49629.aspx">Robison informs us</A> that there are about 17,000 jobs in Moscow with 5,000 on the UI campus. UI also accounts for the creation of an additional 2,400 ripple-effect jobs. On top of that, student spending leads to another 2,400 jobs in the community. So 9,400 jobs are linked to the university, about 55% of the jobs in town. </div>
<div>Given our City Council’s hostility to local business growth, I have no confidence that UI’s malaise will turn around any time soon. Most students who come to Moscow are not independently wealthy. Many are looking for part-time jobs to supplement expenses. As long as the current City Council prohibits economic growth and opportunities for UI students, fewer students will come to Moscow. The word is out that no jobs are available in Moscow. A death-spiral has begun. Now it falls upon residential property taxes to make up the lost revenue from businesses.</div>
<div><B>Fifth</B> is Moscow’s already insatiable appetite for more property taxes. Recall that a city’s revenues are <A href="http://tax.idaho.gov/propertytax/PTpdfs/ProperTaxSystem_sm_320x240.wmv">a combination of the <I>assessed</I> <I>value</I> and the <I>tax</I> <I>rate</I></A>. According to <A href="http://www.moscowrealestate.com/default.asp?PageID=1">Moscow Realty’s website</A>, the average cost of a residential home in Moscow is over $235,000. If your assessed value has doubled, then you are already paying twice as much in property taxes even if your salary hasn’t increased.</div>
<div>While <A href="http://tax.idaho.gov/propertytax/pt_homeowners.htm">the rest of Idaho lowers rates</A>, Moscow suffers increases. Other city councils realized that their coffers were overflowing with money just by having assessed values increase. In fall 2006, Kootenai County slashed their tax rate 30-50 percent. Not so in Moscow. Mayor Chaney increased property taxes 3% — the maximum allowed by state law. These property tax increases come alongside previous increases in water rates, sewer rates, and assorted fees and permits. Moreover, all of these increases fall squarely upon the shoulders of those who can least afford them: the poor, the elderly, those on fixed incomes, students, etc.</div>
<div><B>Sixth</B> is the affordability of this levy. Tax support for MSD requires a thriving tax base. You cannot strangle the local economy without expecting that the tax base will suffer.<B> </B>With UI’s enrollment declining and Moscow’s city leaders busy chasing businesses out of town (or preventing new businesses from coming to town), the taxes fall squarely upon the residential property owners and the remaining businesses.</div>
<div class=MsoNormal style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; MARGIN: 6pt 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Moscow has champagne tastes on a beer budget. Moscow taxpayers shouldn’t have to foot the bill for MSD’s voracious appetite and expensive tastes now and to eternity.</div>
<div class=MsoNormal style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; MARGIN: 6pt 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; TEXT-ALIGN: justify"> </div>
<div class=posthead>Monday, March 19, 2007 1:00 PM <A id=ctl00___ctl00___ctl01___Entry___AuthorLink href="http://right-mind.us/user/Profile.aspx?UserID=2100">Right-Mind</A> I wrote an editorial that ran in today’s <EM><A href="http://dnews.com/story/opinion/16726/">Moscow-Pullman Daily News</A></EM>. </div>
<div class=postcontent>
<div>The editorial needed to be shortened in order to meet the 700-word requirement -- especially in points #3 and #4 below. </div>
<div>What follows is the full column. Important are the words <B>levy, increase, $2 million, annually, </B>and <B>indefinite.</B></div>
<div>You can also find this over at the Moscow Levy website: <A href="http://moscowlevy.com/March2007.htm">http://moscowlevy.com/March2007.htm</A></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="AOLPromoFooter">
<hr style="margin-top:10px;" />
<a href="http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100122638x1081283466x1074645346/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaim%2Ecom%2Ffun%2Fmail%2F" target="_blank"><b>Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail</b></a> -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection.<br />
</div>
</BODY></HTML>