Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Rendell Referendum Rejected
With results still pouring in this morning, the option for school district taxpayers to shift some of their property tax burden to local income taxes (either earned income or personal income) does not look good. Early numbers show that the voters went 3-1 or 2-1 statewide against the option. No southwestern Pennsylvania school district approved the tax shift plan. We will update the results as specific districts report the totals.
Already the excuse machine is in full gear in the Governor’s office. Recall that Act 1 involves the expansion of the senior citizen rebate (already in effect), the gaming money, and the optional local tax shift to reduce school taxes. The shift would have varying impacts from taxpayer to taxpayer, so it was up to the voter to determine if they would gain or lose from the shift.
“The Governor doesn't believe that the defeat of the local tax shifting question is an indication of anything other than confusion…Many voters didn't have the information they needed to make a good choice.”
Excuse us, but there was plenty of information available to determine if the choice was good or not. Each district had to convene a local tax commission to study the issue, which was then presented to the public at meetings. Many schools had websites and some even had calculators to allow voters to compute where they would stand under the shift. Radio shows and newspapers spent a lot of time on the issue.
Voters had the opportunity to clearly understand what the issue meant to them. To attribute the poor results to confusion and lack of information is wrongheaded and misleading and a disservice to voters—what are they, stupid? After all, this was the product of a special legislative session on property taxes. If there was a possibility that voters wouldn’t “get it”, the legislature and the Governor should have huddled long ago.
Already the excuse machine is in full gear in the Governor’s office. Recall that Act 1 involves the expansion of the senior citizen rebate (already in effect), the gaming money, and the optional local tax shift to reduce school taxes. The shift would have varying impacts from taxpayer to taxpayer, so it was up to the voter to determine if they would gain or lose from the shift.
“The Governor doesn't believe that the defeat of the local tax shifting question is an indication of anything other than confusion…Many voters didn't have the information they needed to make a good choice.”
Excuse us, but there was plenty of information available to determine if the choice was good or not. Each district had to convene a local tax commission to study the issue, which was then presented to the public at meetings. Many schools had websites and some even had calculators to allow voters to compute where they would stand under the shift. Radio shows and newspapers spent a lot of time on the issue.
Voters had the opportunity to clearly understand what the issue meant to them. To attribute the poor results to confusion and lack of information is wrongheaded and misleading and a disservice to voters—what are they, stupid? After all, this was the product of a special legislative session on property taxes. If there was a possibility that voters wouldn’t “get it”, the legislature and the Governor should have huddled long ago.
