Date post: | 26-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | estella-lamb |
View: | 219 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Park R-3 School Board Resolution – Sept 21,2009
Mr. Miller made a motion resolving support in the January 12 initiative to abolish EPURA. Mr. Richardson seconded the motion. All Board of Education directors voted aye in a roll call vote to approve the motion resolving support in the January 12 initiative to abolish EPURA. (Motion carried.)
Park R-3 School District Supports Yes Vote
Colorado Association of School Boards (CASB) position:
Urban Renewal does negatively impact school funding.
CASB legislative delegates, representing all 178 school districts in the State of Colorado voted to support a resolution asking the Colorado Legislature to limit the effects of Urban Renewal Authorities (TIF) on school district finances.
Colorado Constitution ARTICLE VIII State Institutions Section 1. Established and supported
by state. Educational, reformatory and penal institutions, and those for the benefit of insane, blind, deaf and mute, and such other institutions as the public good may require, shall be established and supported by the state, in such manner as may be prescribed by law.
Public School Finance Public School Finance Act of 1994 – Funding is
distributed to schools on a per pupil basis.
Total Funding = Local Revenues + State Revenue (Backfill)
Local Revenue Sources:1. Property Taxes2. Local Ownership Taxes
State Revenue Sources:3. State Sales Tax4. Personal Income Tax5. Corporate Income Tax
Sources of School Revenue Erosion:
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts Gallagher and TABOR Amendment 23 sunset (2011)
Effect on Park R-3 School District:
20% cut in funding over the next 3 years
It’s Your Money! - It’s Your Choice!
Your $20,000.00 Buys:
- The EPURA mural in the left photoor
- A teacher for a semester
First 25 Years:
About $10 million property tax increment
About $40 million sales tax increment
EPURA gave $30 million back to Town
The Old EPURA—Town funded half the Projects
New EPURA called a “funding mechanism” for Town Hall
Over 97 Percent of Tax Increment Comes from other Taxing Districts
Zero Sales Tax Increment Committed by Town Board
The New EPURA—Takes 97 %+ of Money from Other Districts
Park R-3 School District (mill levy & bond issue)
Larimer County Park Hospital District Estes Valley Library District Estes Valley Parks & Recreation District The New Fire District
Who Will Lose Revenue in Estes Park?
Constant Dollars TIF—Districts Lose Growth
Year 0 TIME Year 250
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
BaseGrowth
Assessed V
alu
e
Study of TIF in Denver, Front Range Economic Strategy Center (FRESC) 2005:
Performance Falls Short.
TIF-Projects Create Service Needs They Don’t Pay For.
Denver’s Other Tax Payers Pick Up the Difference
TIF Means Taxpayers Pay Subsidies for Developers
Money is lost by taxing districts. “Denver’s other tax payers must either
make up the difference or suffer cutbacks in these services.”
TIF Transactions Lack Transparency, Making Them Unaccountable to the Public
Front Range Economic Strategy Center (2005)
TIF—The Hidden Tax
Swenson & Eathington, Iowa State Univ., 2002:
“Stated differently, existing taxpayers, its householders, wage earners, and retirees are aggressively subsidizing business growth and population via [tax increment financing.]”
Who Pays for Urban Renewal? You the Taxpayer
2009 Fire District Mill Levy Adopted.
2008 Parks & Rec. District mill levy increased to pay for operations.
2006 School District mill levy increased.
2004 Estes Valley Library District mill levy increased to fund operations.
EPURA: Districts Needed Mill Levy Increases as TIF Increased
The Town wants to build $9 million-plus in Fairgrounds improvements.
The Town can fund it with a) cash reserves; or b) a public vote on a bond issue/mill levy
EPURA can issue bonds without a public vote, and repay those bonds with money from other taxing districts
Bond Issues—Voters Should Decide
2008 Town Survey in Utility Bills:
61% of respondents opposed passing a mill levy to pay for Fairgrounds Projects.
Keeping Urban Renewal will allow the Town to finance Fairgrounds and other Projects without Voter Approval.
Should Voters Have a Say?
The Town has increased its tax revenue by:
passing the lodging tax (2008) and the Fire District Mill Levy (2009)
In the midst of a recession, General Fund spending will grow 8.5% from 2008 to 2010—and the Town still had money to transfer to capital projects
The Town Has Plenty of Money for Capital Projects
Downtown Development Authority general improvement districts special improvement districts (municipal) local improvement districts (county), business improvement districts covenant-created public improvement fee
financing
Options that Won’t Take Money from Other Taxing Districts
Regional Tourism Authority: State Sales Tax Increment Independent Review of Plan for unique
economic benefit Could fund Parking Structures, Performing
Arts Center, Fairgrounds Only 2 new projects per year
An Even Better Option
The Ballot Question Provides that If the Town wants an Urban Renewal Authority in the Future, we the voters have the right to approve it.
Yes Vote Provides a Final Option