Dear
Friends,
Good morning. Is Act 72 dead? Only
111 of Pennsylvania’s 501 school districts voted to opt in, versus 390, which
opted out. “Act 72 seems to be in a helpless state, without life support,”
State Representative Paul Clymer (R-145) told me last week.
Locally, Quakertown, Palisades,
Pennridge and Upper Perkioman school districts opted out. In the Call’s
circulation area, only five of 29 districts opted in. What went wrong with the
act which promised property tax relief?
I think there were two reasons. First, school
districts were skeptical about the state legislature’s predictions on slot
machine profits. But the larger factor was the fear of the referendum. If
annual school budgets exceeded the state’s imposed rate of inflation index,
districts faced voter referendums before approval. That was a risk few school
boards were willing to take.
“Property owners have sent the General Assembly a
loud and clear message,” Clymer continued. “Expectations are high for the state
legislators to provide solutions to property tax reform…and soon.” He listed
eight proposals but the one, which may have the greatest appeal, is “The Plan
for Pennsylvania’s Future.” This plan is commonly referred to as the five-
percent sales tax across the board plan, which abolishes the school property
tax within three years. It lowers the state sales tax from six to five percent
but eliminates food and clothing exemptions. The increased tax revenue would fund
the 501 school districts.
This is the plan to which Haycock resident Richard
Yost referred at a public hearing on Act 72 in Quakertown several weeks ago.
“There are five bills in a package,” State Representative Sam Rohrer (R-128)
began. The Berks legislator has a website: www.samrohrer.org, which explains the
plan’s positive nature.
Rohrer says that a nationally-recognized (but not
identified) firm determined that the plan does work and that there will be
sufficient revenues generated to replace revenues lost from eliminating the
[property] tax. “The evaluation also ascertained that the economic impact of
the plan on the Pennsylvania economy is substantial,” Rohrer added.
“Specifically its impact on the state’s competitiveness is positive. It will
make Pennsylvania the most competitive state in the northeast.
“The legislature has the option of either applying
another band aid, or fixing it,” Rohrer added referring to previous failed
attempts to provide property tax relief. “The plan gives every district the
revenue which they’re presently receiving. It makes quarterly adjustments for
changes in student populations. All districts get an inflation rate. And, very
important, districts learn to spend money smarter.”
Rohrer believes that a Data Management System would
measure performance of every school program and reward those, which are
effective. He didn’t explain what would happen to programs, which didn’t pass
muster.
“Districts could impose either an earned or personal
income tax to pay for things over and above regular educational items,” Rohrer
said. “For example, if a school board wanted to add a swimming pool, the
district would first have to get permission [via a referendum] from the
voters.”
What are the chances that Rohrer’s plan will
succeed? “Our proposal will take center stage,” he replied. “Yes, some
legislators won’t want to give Governor Rendell the credit. Some state
bureaucrats don’t like any change. Some legislators like the property tax. But
we’ve got a good chance. This plan gives the taxpayer a true, true tax break. I
hope we have the courage to fix it.
“The window of opportunity is open
and before us,” Rohrer concluded, “Carpe Diem (seize the day).” We’ll stay
tuned
Sincerely,
Charles Meredith