Can someone provide a succinct explanation of these two items? I have tried to research it myself, but things aren't adding up for me. Any insight would be appreciated!
Post Reply
1 of 1
Leander ISD Prop A and Prop B
3,330 Views |
27 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by Ozzy Osbourne
Going to have to vote against until someone can give an ELI5 explanation.
It's funny to me, that at work you most do this.. but in voting not so much
It's funny to me, that at work you most do this.. but in voting not so much
Against them both and the incumbents.
Go back to the basics of education and live within your means.
Go back to the basics of education and live within your means.
tamc93 said:
Against them both and the incumbents.
Go back to the basics of education and live within your means.
What…
If prop B fails they'll cut 450 teaching positions. Which is hilarious because the current positions can't even be filled. I don't think classrooms without teachers are best for students.
450 too many liberals teaching kids.
They will figure it out. I am only one vote.
They will figure it out. I am only one vote.
tamc93 said:
450 too many liberals teaching kids.
They will figure it out. I am only one vote.
Once again… what? Liberals can't adequately teach students? Why should political affiliation matter… good teachers are good teachers.
Correct… you are only one vote and I'm not changing your mind.
They should just teach .. not promote their liberal socialistic idealistic agenda. They already increased taxes, why allow them to continue?
Make that at least two votes in our household.
Make that at least two votes in our household.
I appreciate all the input thus far. One of the things I'm most puzzled by is how they claim these won't raise taxes, but yet somehow create money for LISD. That money comes from somewhere! I feel like I need a degree in educational finance to make sense of this nonsense sometimes.
It sounds like the conservative voters and candidates feel that it's not an issue of needing more money but of being more responsible with what they already have. I also find it interesting that the district administration did not request this additional funding.
It sounds like the conservative voters and candidates feel that it's not an issue of needing more money but of being more responsible with what they already have. I also find it interesting that the district administration did not request this additional funding.
It won't and it essentially gives them the authority to raise taxes in the future. If they can so easily cut the debt service rate by 13%, why don't they do it without requiring a referendum?
Form their detail link on the website link above.
If LISD voters, by approving Proposition B, ratify the tax rate adopted by the Board of Trustees, the district would raise $32 million. This revenue would fund the pay raises for teachers and other employees approved by the Board in May 2022. Importantly, even if the VATRE is approved, the overall property tax rate in LISD will be 6.24 cents lower than last year's rate, due in part to a decrease in the I&S portion of the tax rate.
An average-value home in Leander ISD has an assessed value of $694,944 and a taxable value of $423,031. If voters approve Prop B, the tax bill due on this home would increase by $453, which comes out to $38 per month more than last year's tax bill.
Form their detail link on the website link above.
If LISD voters, by approving Proposition B, ratify the tax rate adopted by the Board of Trustees, the district would raise $32 million. This revenue would fund the pay raises for teachers and other employees approved by the Board in May 2022. Importantly, even if the VATRE is approved, the overall property tax rate in LISD will be 6.24 cents lower than last year's rate, due in part to a decrease in the I&S portion of the tax rate.
An average-value home in Leander ISD has an assessed value of $694,944 and a taxable value of $423,031. If voters approve Prop B, the tax bill due on this home would increase by $453, which comes out to $38 per month more than last year's tax bill.
jah003 said:tamc93 said:
Against them both and the incumbents.
Go back to the basics of education and live within your means.
What…
If prop B fails they'll cut 450 teaching positions. Which is hilarious because the current positions can't even be filled. I don't think classrooms without teachers are best for students.
Property taxes went up, property values went up at historic rates... And all of a sudden they don't have the money to make ends meet? Why do I get the feeling this will be voted no, and nothing will be finally cut
Like I said to start the thread, if they can't detail this out and ELI5, I'm a no.
Fun fact: the ballot language is mandated by the state legislature.
I'm aware.
There's not a teacher in this world with time to promote a "liberal socialistic idealistic agenda". Teachers are simply surviving.
Sits down to lesson plan… "Better block off an hour Thursday to teach my students to be gay and stuff…"
Sits down to lesson plan… "Better block off an hour Thursday to teach my students to be gay and stuff…"
Voting for prop A is needed because wether it passes or fails, the state is going to get their recapture money back. If it fails, they will have to put it back on the ballot during the next election and then if it fails again, the state will come in and detach property from the district to give to another school district to collect the taxes on.
Now prop b is a hard no for me. Like previously pointed out, appraisals have gone through the roof in this area and LISD has more money than they have ever had, but it still is not enough because the liberals on the board spend like drunk pirates. If you look how school finance was set up by the legislature, it allows school districts to collect two separate taxes. School districts like to confuse you and say they are one tax rate, when they were meant to be separate taxes.
One tax rate is for the district to collect money for m&o budget. The other is a tax to allow school districts to take on debt by passing bonds and then repaying with a separate tax (IS&S). Both of these taxes are limited by law. If not school districts would continue to raise both rates, because there is lots of wasteful spending and districts living beyond their means.
Prop B would allow the district to move some money tied to the IS&S tax to the M&O tax. This is feasible because past LISD board members placed focus on paying down the bond debt early. Now this board wants to take those saving and pay for all kinds of special programs.
Last thing I have to say is Leander used to have one of the best CFOs in Texas. Ask yourself why did she quietly leave. She could see the ship was sinking due to the 5 board members that continue to vote to spend money the district doesn't have. If prop b does not pass, they will not have to cut 458 positions. Don't get me wrong, there will be cuts, but it will not be all teachers. They could start with the Diversity and Inclusion officer that makes 6 figures and has done absolutely nothing since being hired. They also have like 4 area superintendents that aren't needed, who all make six figures. There is lots of pork to be cut in LISD.
Now prop b is a hard no for me. Like previously pointed out, appraisals have gone through the roof in this area and LISD has more money than they have ever had, but it still is not enough because the liberals on the board spend like drunk pirates. If you look how school finance was set up by the legislature, it allows school districts to collect two separate taxes. School districts like to confuse you and say they are one tax rate, when they were meant to be separate taxes.
One tax rate is for the district to collect money for m&o budget. The other is a tax to allow school districts to take on debt by passing bonds and then repaying with a separate tax (IS&S). Both of these taxes are limited by law. If not school districts would continue to raise both rates, because there is lots of wasteful spending and districts living beyond their means.
Prop B would allow the district to move some money tied to the IS&S tax to the M&O tax. This is feasible because past LISD board members placed focus on paying down the bond debt early. Now this board wants to take those saving and pay for all kinds of special programs.
Last thing I have to say is Leander used to have one of the best CFOs in Texas. Ask yourself why did she quietly leave. She could see the ship was sinking due to the 5 board members that continue to vote to spend money the district doesn't have. If prop b does not pass, they will not have to cut 458 positions. Don't get me wrong, there will be cuts, but it will not be all teachers. They could start with the Diversity and Inclusion officer that makes 6 figures and has done absolutely nothing since being hired. They also have like 4 area superintendents that aren't needed, who all make six figures. There is lots of pork to be cut in LISD.
Thanks for the synopsis. I still don't fully grasp/understand Prop A. My understanding is that we're now one of the "have" districts and now owe $$ back to the state. Is that correct? If so, why do we need another prop to pay the $$? Don't we already have it?penn02 said:
Voting for prop A is needed because whether it passes or fails, the state is going to get their recapture money back. If it fails, they will have to put it back on the ballot during the next election and then if it fails again, the state will come in and detach property from the district to give to another school district to collect the taxes on.
Now prop b is a hard no for me. Like previously pointed out, appraisals have gone through the roof in this area and LISD has more money than they have ever had, but it still is not enough because the liberals on the board spend like drunk pirates. If you look how school finance was set up by the legislature, it allows school districts to collect two separate taxes. School districts like to confuse you and say they are one tax rate, when they were meant to be separate taxes.
One tax rate is for the district to collect money for m&o budget. The other is a tax to allow school districts to take on debt by passing bonds and then repaying with a separate tax (IS&S). Both of these taxes are limited by law. If not school districts would continue to raise both rates, because there is lots of wasteful spending and districts living beyond their means.
Prop B would allow the district to move some money tied to the IS&S tax to the M&O tax. This is feasible because past LISD board members placed focus on paying down the bond debt early. Now this board wants to take those saving and pay for all kinds of special programs.
Last thing I have to say is Leander used to have one of the best CFOs in Texas. Ask yourself why did she quietly leave. She could see the ship was sinking due to the 5 board members that continue to vote to spend money the district doesn't have. If prop b does not pass, they will not have to cut 458 positions. Don't get me wrong, there will be cuts, but it will not be all teachers. They could start with the Diversity and Inclusion officer that makes 6 figures and has done absolutely nothing since being hired. They also have like 4 area superintendents that aren't needed, who all make six figures. There is lots of pork to be cut in LISD.
Why not vote it down now and hold on to the $$ and then make them bring it back up again next time and hope we're not still a recapture district? Will we owe the $$ from day 1 forward? If we don't...what start paying it now?
Long story short...explain it like I'm a 10 year old
I've been asking all thread...
The vote is required by law, but like I said if it is eventually not passed then the state removes taxable land from the district. If this happens, then the tax burden for educating kids in LISD will fall onto a smaller geographical area to tax, but are still required to educate the same amount of kids. If this happens then you will see tax rates sky rocket for the areas that remain under the district, because the district will have to make up the tax dollars lost from the removal of property under the district.
Due to the growth in the area, it is highly unlikely that the district will ever fall back under the recapture cap. Recapture is based on the tax roll each year, so even if the district did fall back under the cap, they would still owe for this tax year. The only way the district would fall back under the cap, would be if the legislature significantly raises the per student cost, or the housing and land values completely crashed, which we know either one of those scenarios is not likely. Recapture is not something they can really get out of.
Due to the growth in the area, it is highly unlikely that the district will ever fall back under the recapture cap. Recapture is based on the tax roll each year, so even if the district did fall back under the cap, they would still owe for this tax year. The only way the district would fall back under the cap, would be if the legislature significantly raises the per student cost, or the housing and land values completely crashed, which we know either one of those scenarios is not likely. Recapture is not something they can really get out of.
One last point, if you go back and watch a couple presentations by the old CFO at the board meetings during the summer, she spelled it out below a ten year old level. She had too, because the dunces on the school board do not understand finances either. She gave them three scenarios, the one that made my taxes the least amount was if prop A passed and Prop B failed. The average tax increase would only be like $73 on average.
If this happens It will require LISD to dig into their savings to pay for the teacher raises they already voted through but they have the money to cover it.
If this happens It will require LISD to dig into their savings to pay for the teacher raises they already voted through but they have the money to cover it.
In Pflugerville we also have the same Prop A to vote on.
There has never been detachment done at this level before. Everyone else has passed their election (Houston ISD took two elections to pass but it got done).
When you are a recapture district, you can't just give your property tax money directly to the state. It's against the state constitution. So districts must "purchase" attendance credits from the TEA that have a fixed dollar amount. The general public has to hold a one-time vote to purchase these attendance credits.
If Prop A passes, everything is good. The district buys their credits and money is exchanged.
If Prop A fails, TEA will detach enough properties from the district until it is no longer a property rich district and give it to a contiguous poor district. If students are in the detached areas, they must attend the new district unless they work out an out-of-district transfer back to the old one.
Detachment can only happen once, so the next time the now-smaller district becomes eligible for recapture again they cannot detach more property and they must buy the attendance credits at that point.
The detached property can never be reattached to the original district unless all the funding laws change, which is not really being pushed for the next legislative session currently.
It's a crappy system and it's basically lose-lose for the district. There's no way to say no and refuse to become a recapture district. Texas is going to get their money one way or another.
There has never been detachment done at this level before. Everyone else has passed their election (Houston ISD took two elections to pass but it got done).
When you are a recapture district, you can't just give your property tax money directly to the state. It's against the state constitution. So districts must "purchase" attendance credits from the TEA that have a fixed dollar amount. The general public has to hold a one-time vote to purchase these attendance credits.
If Prop A passes, everything is good. The district buys their credits and money is exchanged.
If Prop A fails, TEA will detach enough properties from the district until it is no longer a property rich district and give it to a contiguous poor district. If students are in the detached areas, they must attend the new district unless they work out an out-of-district transfer back to the old one.
Detachment can only happen once, so the next time the now-smaller district becomes eligible for recapture again they cannot detach more property and they must buy the attendance credits at that point.
The detached property can never be reattached to the original district unless all the funding laws change, which is not really being pushed for the next legislative session currently.
It's a crappy system and it's basically lose-lose for the district. There's no way to say no and refuse to become a recapture district. Texas is going to get their money one way or another.
I hope they detach my home from Leander and move us to Lago Vista. Much closer.
I did find the post card sent out to be informative.
Prop A - likely
Prob B - still a no.
Prop A - likely
Prob B - still a no.
Thanks.jakester03 said:
Good FAQ on Prop A and B:
https://sadeforlisd.com/props-ab/
Prop A - Maybe. I would love to see Vandergrift go to AISD and I also see that the State should take care of this.
Prob B - No. Live within your means and also allow future taxes to be increased.
If you did not watch last nights board meeting, they had a former TEA person there to discuss recapture. It was pretty good. The presentation begins at about the hour mark into the meeting.
The LISD board should not be rewarded for setting a budget with the assumption that prop B would pass in the future. If they have to tighten their belts, it's their own fault, not the voters.
Featured Stories
See All
9:33
16h ago
4.4k
Aggies run-rule Purdue as 'Lefty' keeps no-no on scorekeeping oddity
by Kolton Becker
5 Thoughts: No. 10 Texas A&M 67, No. 15 Missouri 64
by Luke Evangelist
5:17
13h ago
1.1k