Posted on 05/26/2005 10:14:50 AM PDT by Born Conservative
HARRISBURG, Pa. - It seemed a political masterstroke: Legalize slot machines to lure back residents flocking to casinos in neighboring states, then use the revenue to give Pennsylvania's homeowners a tax cut of historic proportions.
But nearly a year after Gov. Ed Rendell got the Legislature to sign on, the tax-cut portion of the plan has gone awry.
To the governor's dismay, many Pennsylvania school boards are deciding they don't want to participate in the plan - which would provide an average $330 in tax relief per household, or $1 billion in all.
The first-term Democratic governor now feels snookered and says it was a mistake to give school boards the power to stop the tax cuts from being passed along to homeowners.
"It's enormously frustrating to me that the school boards haven't seen or recognized what we've tried to do here," he said Tuesday.
The governor made slot machine gambling and tax relief the centerpiece of his 2002 campaign, and his solid victory gave Democrats the power to finally get the deal through the GOP-controlled Legislature last July.
The idea behind the tax relief plan was not only to shrink homeowners' tax bills but also to reduce school dependence on property taxes. To qualify for a share of the gambling revenue, school boards that decide to participate must raise local income taxes and agree to seek voter approval for future property-tax increases that exceed inflation.
Just days before Monday's deadline, school boards across Pennsylvania were spurning the aid offer by a 3-1 margin - though a majority of homeowners across the state have indicated they want the cuts. Only about half of the 501 boards had taken formal action.
Critics of the plan say it hamstrings the boards by giving local voters the power, through referendums, to block property-tax increases.
"Basically, this does nothing beneficial for the school district," said Ronald A. Weaner, president of the school board in Gettysburg, which has opted out of the tax relief.
School boards say they also are reluctant to sign on now because no slot parlors are licensed yet and the 14 authorized under the new gambling law are not expected to be generating the projected hundreds of millions in revenue until 2007. What's more, they question whether the state's cut will reach $1 billion.
The law that legalized slots also may be in trouble. The state Supreme Court could rule any day on a lawsuit filed by gambling foes and good-government advocates alleging that the process legislators used to pass the law violated the state constitution.
"There's a sense of a lot of uncertainty among our members," said Tom J. Gentzel, executive director of the state school boards group. "They're making essentially an irrevocable decision."
The stakes are huge for Rendell, who is expected to seek another four-year term next year, said Mike Young, a pollster and political researcher in Hershey.
The Legislature reconvenes June 6, and several lawmakers have introduced bills to make participation mandatory or at least to give local voters a chance to override school boards.
Rendell has used the pending bills to prod boards into signing up. He has warned that limits on their taxation authority may be forced on them - with even stricter rules than those provided under the current law.
House Majority Leader Sam Smith, a Republican, sees no majority support for any kind of retaliation against the school boards, his spokesman said.
"We think we need to wait until after the deadline and see who is in and who is out and find out why," said the spokesman, Stephen Miskin. If action is taken, "whatever it is, it should not be out of a sense of retribution."
"Critics of the plan say it hamstrings the boards by giving local voters the power, through referendums, to block property-tax increases."
Hmmm......can't have those pesky taxpayers have any control over how much we decide needs to be confiscated on a year to year basis. Next thing you know they might think that since they are footing the bill they might be entitle to influence things like our curriculum.
The Governor should have enough political acumen to know that school boards never get enough. You simply cant give a school board all they want, they just keep wanting more for doing less.
Well, as much as I dislike Rendell, the casino legalization was a good idea.
Seesh, there are TEN MILLION EXAMPLES of this happening over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and ............
See my tagline.
Somehow I just can't picture any Democrat supporting any legislation that produces tax relief...Rendell must be ill.
-Regards, T.
Well, technically it isn't. The property tax would be reduced but participating school boards would be required to institute local income taxes in addition to the 6% state income tax (7% in Philly and Pittsburg to pay for the blackmail stadiums). It's just typical smoke and mirrors of just taking the same level of money out of different pockets. And of course, the teachers unions must be just salivating at this. As soon as it goes into effect they are going to want a cut of the pie. You'll hear about the casino's obscene profits versus the poor pittance of teacher salaries (in my area they easily hit 50-60,000 per year). And of course, the politicians get to broker the sweetheart deals deciding who is allowed to open the actual casinos....and who gets appointed to the regulatory committees to determine whether they meet license requirements and get to stay in business.
Ah ha! I just knew there was some sort of catch to it.
Thanks for clearing the smoke.
-Regards, T.
Pennsylvania, with a Philly governor, is the only place in the Union where you can say "We have to raise taxes in order to cut them" with a straight face and be taken seriously...
Just another "Fast Eddy Bait and Switch".
Oh, you can be sure that this was to work thusly. The property tax relief comes in the form of a rebate check, signed by the governor, in late October. Mere days before the election. Oh boy, look at this big money the governor sent me! Better vote for him!
This is how it works in New Jersey's Homestead Rebate program.
You forgot New Jersey.
What school district are you in? My district, Northampton, voted against it.
He's also a big proponent of taking money from wealthier districts and moving it to sinkholes like the Philadelphia school system. It would be easy to reduce Philly school taxes - just fire 90% of the administrators and you'd probably halve the tax burden!
Northeastern, York County.
Not sure who your accountant is, but the PA personal income tax is 3.07% for 2005. Your point is valid, otherwise.
One thing a number of people overlook is that a large part of this measure is an attempt to transfer revenues collected locally (like the property tax) to revenues collected by the state. This amounts to a sneaky way of putting extra cash in the coffers of the Philadelphia schools, which are bankrupt.
'This amounts to a sneaky way of putting extra cash in the coffers of the Philadelphia schools, which are bankrupt.'
...That sounds just like the pension fund debacle we're dealing with out here in the city of San Diego.
-Regards, T.
One minor correction: it's the sales tax that is 6% statewide and 7% in Philly and Pittsburgh.
Our Republican legislature bowed to the governor and gave him an increase in the state income tax from 2.8 to 3.07% or something close to that. At least it's a flat tax.
If your teachers are only making $50-60K, they're paupers compared to teachers in some of the wealthy school districts in the northern suburbs of Pittsburgh, who are easily pulling down $80-90K and higher.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.