1 / 25

Tuckahoe Common School District

Tuckahoe Common School District. 1- Property Tax Levy Cap Impact 2- 2012-2013 Budget. Property Tax Cap: A change in the conversation. In the past. The new paradigm. Tax levy increases Property Tax Levy Cap is on the levy increase (2% or CPI whichever is lower) beginning in 2012-13

lona
Télécharger la présentation

Tuckahoe Common School District

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tuckahoe Common School District 1- Property Tax Levy Cap Impact 2- 2012-2013 Budget

  2. Property Tax Cap: A change in the conversation In the past The new paradigm Tax levy increases Property Tax Levy Cap is on the levy increase (2% or CPI whichever is lower) beginning in 2012-13 Allows for exemptions beyond the 2% • Budget to budget increases • Contingency Cap / Budget • Tax rate increases from year to year

  3. Property Tax Cap Facts • Stays in affect until 2016-17 • Allows for exemptions that could go beyond the 2% • Is a “soft” cap not a “hard” cap – does not relate to the increase in taxes that you will pay individually • Changes the 50.1% majority to a 60% super-majority for all budgets over the maximum property levy limit • If the budget proposal is not approved by the required margin, after two attempts, the Board of Trustees must adopt a budget that requires a tax levy no greater than that of the prior year (0% increase in the tax levy)

  4. Property Tax Levy Limit Calculation 15,815,008 X 1.0039 + 29,000 - 383,400 = 15,522,286 X 1.02 - 29,000 + 401,640 = 16,205,372 Prior year tax levy X Tax base growth factor, if any + PILOTS receivable - Taxes levied for exemptions, prior year = Adjusted Prior Year Tax Levy X Allowable levy growth factor (lesser of 2% or CPI) - PILOT for coming year + Available carryover, and any exclusions = “Tax Levy Limit”

  5. QUESTIONS ??????

  6. Budget Planning Questions • What are the priorities for learning. • How do we efficiently align the resources with learning needs. • How do we effectively implement long term fiscal responsibility and communications. • How do we address rising health care and personnel costs.

  7. Challenges Affecting Budget Planning • Increased academic expectations • Increasing tuition, health, and retirement costs • Increases in state mandates for CSE and CPSE • Most ambitious reform agenda from NYSED in decades • Incur additional requirements for teacher training, RTTT, ESL and CSE • Technological Assessments/Instruction • Imposition of a Property Tax Levy Cap • Weary tax base: homeowners bear the primary tax burden • Falling house prices and assessed values • End of Federal Aid (AARA, Jobs Stimulus)

  8. Our Budget Planning Reflects: • A learning environment for all. • A proposed budget to include the following: • Class sizes of approximately 20 students/class at all grade levels • Full day pre-kindergarten • Maintain art, music, and technology programs • Special Education services to support learning and speech • ESL intervention that include Language Literacy Intervention • Science curriculum integrated into the General Education Classroom • Produce a budget that will establish a property tax level below property tax levy cap mandates.

  9. Budget Planning Reflections (con’t) • The 2011 assessment value of Tuckahoe property. • Decrease in educational services. • Changing non-resident funding (Seneca Falls) formula costs • Service for unfunded mandates from the State/Federal Governments

  10. Budget to Levy Increase/Decrease

  11. Budget HistoryEfficient/Effective Changes 2011-2012 Reduction of part-time music teacher Reduction of 1 regular education teacher Reduction of 1 part-time monitor Consolidation of Technology and Tech Ed Teacher Reduction of FLES Teacher Reduced Employer share of health insurance through contract negotiations Eliminated AIS cost while keeping program • 2010-2011 • 2 Special Education TA’s • 1 Special Education Teacher • Reduction in Technology Improvements • Teaching Assistants for Grades 2,3,4,5

  12. School Year 2012-2013 Respects Each Program as a Priority 2012-2013 Roll Over Budget $18,025,029 2012-2013 Proposed Roll Over Budget Levy Increase 4.839% Efficient/Effective Reductions to Stay Under the Cap 2012-2013 Proposed Budget Levy Increase 2.184% 2012-2013 Proposed Budget $17,605,210 Reality Change between Roll Over Budget and Proposed Budget shows a decrease of $419,818 Programmatic reductions for school year 2012-2013

  13. Program changes reflected in 2012-2013 Proposed Budget • Budget items that have been removed or are above the 2.47% include the following:

  14. The Property Tax Caps Real Story We cannot keep up with the increasing costs and stay under the cap! * *This change/percentage is based on 2011 CBA agreement that provides short term financial relief. Long-term projections are 7-9% annual increase.

  15. Tuition Costs and Choice Southampton HS Only Current HS Choices Westhampton HS Only Hampton Bays HS Only

  16. Five Year Projection Summary • Real negative growth for our school • Year-to-Year reduction in future programs • The need to examine the alternatives if we want Tuckahoe Common School District to be Tuckahoe Common School District

  17. Spending Projections for Next Five Years as a Surplus (Deficit)

  18. Shortfalls Unless the Cap is Pierced

  19. What are our Options?? • Attend a less expensive High School • Teach the 9th grade at Tuckahoe Common School District

  20. What are our Options?? (con’t) • Research cost effectiveness of a Tuckahoe High School Grades 9-12 • Consider consolidation

  21. Voting History 2009-2010 2011-2012 Voters approve budget by 8 votes YES – 165 NO – 157 This represents a 51.24% approval • Voters approve budget by 54 votes YES – 135 NO – 81 This represents a 62.50% approval • Voters approve budget by 19 votes YES – 212 NO – 193 This represents a 52.35% approval 2010-2011

  22. Budget Forum Summary • We have one more year to plan for the maiden voyage of the Property Tax Cap Impact before we reach the iceberg. • We have a hard working Teacher and Administrative Staff that will work to route a safe course for your children. • We need your inputs to guide our efforts.

  23. This is your Budget Vote on May 15, 2012 7 am – 8 pm We encourage you to vote!!!!

  24. QUESTIONS ??????

  25. “Some view our schools as burdens as if they were centers for problems. We view our schools as treasures and a citizenship obligation to support our children’s future” Anonymous Author

More Related