Ypsilanti has school elections on June 14.  We will be voting on
two proposals and for one school board position.

        Proposal A

        Operational Millage Renewal Proposal

As a renewal of an increase previously approved by the electors which
has expired, shall the limitation on the amount of taxes which may be 
imposed on taxable proporty in School District of Ypsilanti, County of
Washtenaw, Michigan, be increased by Thirty=Three Dollars and 
Seventy Cents per Thousand Dollars (33.70 mills) on the state equal-
ized valuation of all taxable property in the school district for a 
period of one (1) year, the year 1993, in order to provide additional 
funds for operating purposes of the school district?  If the statewide
proposal on the ballot at the June 2, 1993 election passes, such in-
crease would be limited to 8.30 mills over the tax rate allocated by
the Michigan Constitution for operating purposes, to the extent per-
mitted by law.


        Proposal B

        Capital Improvement and Maintenance Millage Renewal Proposal

As a renewal of an increase previously approved by the electors which 
has expired, shall the limitation on the amount of taxes which may be
imposed on taxable property in School District of Ypsilanti, County of
Washtenaw, Michigan, be increased by Seventy Cents per Thousand 
Dollars (0.70 mill) on the state equalized valuation of all taxable 
property in the school district?  If the statewide proposal on the
ballot at the June 2, 1993 election passes, such increase would be 
limited to 0.70 mill over the tax rate allocated by the Michigan
Constitution for operating purposes, to the extent permitted by
the law.


Yes or No for both proposals

                Member of Board of Education
                        Term Ending in 1997

                Vote for not more than one

        David J. Archbold
        Martin Alan Church
        Michael Freund
        Diane Kerr

16 responses total.

I don't know anything about the people running for school board
except that David J. Archbold seems to have the most signs out
followed by Diane Kerr.  

This is simply an informal observation.  I have other goals
rather than take count.

I've always voted in the local elections.  This year, though, I'm
considering *not* voting as a protest due to the fact that *all* the
board members should have resigned when the 4.8M shortfall was "discovered".
 
None of the new board candidates even have made this an issue and it
really irritates me.  I'm afraid if I actually vote, I would vote
*against* the mil. renewal because of this even though I usually
rubber-stamp mil renewal requests.

Actually, that's the way I have been thinking.

IF YOU DO NOT VOTE, THEN YOUR VOICE IS NOT HEARD OUTSIDE WHERE YOU COMPLAIN
HERE, AND WHEREVER YOU GO.  VOTE!  THEN YOU CAN VOICE YOUR OPINION TO THE
WORLD.  

Not enough people vote.  Typically about 50% of people vote.  Don't be one
of those 50% that don't vote.  If you don't like the job that someone's
done, then *DON'T* vote for them.

If they're all scummy, then vote for the LEAST scummy person.  I'd like to
see more participation of the public in politics, instead of people just
complaining that things are messed up, and not give any way that they can
fix them.

50% in a local school board election?  That's pretty optimistic.  The
last local election I took part in, waaaay back when I lived in Ann
Arbor, had about 20% turnout.  And that was for *mayor*.

Anyway, I'll be voting next week, though I'm still not sure for whom.

That's good.

The 50% was the top that they had in a LONG time, back for Prez.  If this
last year, we had more people interested than normal, and we get 50%,
that's still bad.. That's an E in school.  I'd like to see the people of this
country do better than an E.

Once I can vote, I'm going to register, etc... but for now, I've got just
a little more than a year left until I'm 18.

I read something *very* disturbing in the AA News about this Mil renewal.
Because it is a *one year* renewal, it is *NOT* held by the Headleee
rollback.  Even though the mils stay the same, you will be paying an
increased amount *EQUAL* to the assessment increase you got last year
and *NOT* the rate of inflation.
 
If I was going to be in town, I'd vote against this ASAP!  This is
slimy and underhanded and not at all publicized!

I don't know if its "underhanded" or not, but I *always* vote in favor
of the millage renewals for education. I see a lot of not very well paid
teachers working very hard (against almost insurmountable odds!), to
educate our kids, knowing that a better job could be done with better
resources. So I support the millages, but take out my gripes with the
educational establishment when voting for board members. 

I don't agree that it's underhanded.  The school district's voters vote
for a millage rate of X number of mills, they get taxed X number of mills.
The Headlee rollback only applies to later years of a multiple year
millage.

Yes, it was underhanded when it tries to sell itself as "THIS IS NOT AN
INCREASE in voted mills".  Well, sure, but it sure is a *big* increase
in $$$ payed through property taxes because of the 17% assessment increase!
 
When you try to sell something as a "renewal", that implies "no additional
cost".  That is the falsehood.  

Uhhhhhh, did we get tricked? REnewing an existing millage rate shouldn't
make the taxes rise. Raising the SEV would make the taxes rise. 
 
There seems to be the hint of a 'tax increase' under the guise of
a 'renewal'. 
  
"No additional monies taken" is the theory behind a "renewal." Everything
stays *as before* .

Geez, people, the big bad assessors don't get together and plot increases
in SEV.  The assessment is based on *value*.  If the assessment exceeds
50% of the value, you can appeal to the Board of Review and to the state
to have it reduced.  (Most people who appeal get at least some reduction.)

I am prepared to politically support certain kinds of tax breaks, e.g.,
homestead exemptions and such.  However, in the absence of a political
decision to create a carefully delineated loophole, it is grossly unfair
for assessments to be based on anything but real-life market value.

None of us are necessarily complaining about the increase in SEV -- in
this instance.  The fact is, even *after* the assessment reviews, the
assessments for the city *averaged* somewhere between 14 and 17%.
Keeping the same millage rate means the schools will get 14-17% *MORE*
money.  Everybody's tax bill will be 14-17% *higher* because there is
no Headlee rollback to the inflation rate because of the fact that
this is a one-year mill (just like last year).

People's assements are always changing.  Probably some property had its
assessments raised much more; others were kept the same or lowered.
If your asset is worth more, you'll be taxed on the higher value.

But I guess I can see your point.  No reason to get into a big
argument about it.

Since this is the Ypsilanti school election item, I'd like to ask about
the school board candidates.  I think I read that Diane Kerr was the
winner.  The Ann Arbor News seemed to really like her.  Anybody have
any sense of the pros and cons of the candidates?  (I'm a non-Ypsilanti
resident, so I'm not as up on this as on Ann Arbor.)

Also, I hear the school board recall there ran into a barrier with
the Election Commission.  What's the problem?

To be honest, I'm not really sure *why* the recall effort is targeting
only 4 members of the school board.  (It should be targeting *all* of
them.)  If I remember correctly, there was something wrong with the
wording of the petitions that didn't give enough valid reasoning as
to *why* the 4 should be recalled.  

They have resubmitted the recall, giving seven different versions of the
wording.

There is some specific reason why the recall is targeted at four people:
I forget what it was, but I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss