Posted by (+2902) 5 years ago
According to an article published in the Miles City Star, March 16, 2018, the Miles City Unified Board of Trustees recently "passed a resolution to seek a $205,000 operational tax levy for the elementary district. The levy will be on the May 8, 2018 election ballot. . . . . At 15.5 mils the levy would cost about $21 per year for a home value at $100,000 and $42 for a home valued at $200,000."
The article goes on to explain that: "Due to the budget cuts from the state legislature, the state aid given to the school district has been cut by $785,000. The district will also lose around $75,000 next year in state subsidies because of declining enrollment." (emphasis added.)
Also, "it was decided to increase the tuition fund by $25,000."
I guess we should be glad to read that: "There will be no new levies for the high school district."
Now when you ask yourself why the school district's funding has been cut by the state legislature by $785,000, you should consider these facts explained by Jim Elliott (in 2017) when you decide to vote either for or against the $205,000 operational levy and the $25,000 tuition fund increase.
"In 2015, a large, multi-state corporation reported Montana sales of more than $1 billion. It paid $50 in tax. In fact, it paid only $50 in tax for five years in a row, 2011 to 2015.
It had company, so to speak; 81 other multi-state firms out of the top 500 companies, based on Montana sales, paid the minimum tax of $50 in 2015. Their Montana sales ranged from $8.6 million to $1.009 billion. Thirty-two of them also paid the minimum tax for five years in a row. (In addition, 156 firms out of the top 500 paid less than $500 in tax in 2015.) Now, sales do not equal profit, on which corporations are taxed, but if you’re not making a profit on a billion bucks worth of sales, you’ve got a problem. Or, maybe you’ve just got a crackerjack tax lawyer, which makes more sense." (emphasis added)
So, the moral of this story is if you keep voting for legislators who give big tax breaks to corporations and rich people, Montana, at the state government level, will not be able to support its local schools. When that happens, as it is happening now, those local schools pass the costs onto the local citizenry -- many of whom have not had a decent raise in years. Go figure!
Read more at:
http://billingsgazette.co...c7854.html
The article goes on to explain that: "Due to the budget cuts from the state legislature, the state aid given to the school district has been cut by $785,000. The district will also lose around $75,000 next year in state subsidies because of declining enrollment." (emphasis added.)
Also, "it was decided to increase the tuition fund by $25,000."
I guess we should be glad to read that: "There will be no new levies for the high school district."
Now when you ask yourself why the school district's funding has been cut by the state legislature by $785,000, you should consider these facts explained by Jim Elliott (in 2017) when you decide to vote either for or against the $205,000 operational levy and the $25,000 tuition fund increase.
"In 2015, a large, multi-state corporation reported Montana sales of more than $1 billion. It paid $50 in tax. In fact, it paid only $50 in tax for five years in a row, 2011 to 2015.
It had company, so to speak; 81 other multi-state firms out of the top 500 companies, based on Montana sales, paid the minimum tax of $50 in 2015. Their Montana sales ranged from $8.6 million to $1.009 billion. Thirty-two of them also paid the minimum tax for five years in a row. (In addition, 156 firms out of the top 500 paid less than $500 in tax in 2015.) Now, sales do not equal profit, on which corporations are taxed, but if you’re not making a profit on a billion bucks worth of sales, you’ve got a problem. Or, maybe you’ve just got a crackerjack tax lawyer, which makes more sense." (emphasis added)
So, the moral of this story is if you keep voting for legislators who give big tax breaks to corporations and rich people, Montana, at the state government level, will not be able to support its local schools. When that happens, as it is happening now, those local schools pass the costs onto the local citizenry -- many of whom have not had a decent raise in years. Go figure!
Read more at:
http://billingsgazette.co...c7854.html