Questions & Concerns about HB 1776 The Property Tax Independence Act

As stated in my previous post, I think the intention is good, but there are too many unanswered questions & concerns.    (Apparently, I cannot embed multiple documents on the same page, so there will be a separate post with each document).

Here are the documents from Rep. Cox's website:
Solution

The document states:  The Property Tax Independence Act uses our current sales tax mechanism to fund schools, restoring the original intent of hte tax.  The "The PA Education Sales Tax" was enacted in 1953 for this specific purpose and virtually 100 percent of the revenue from the sales tax is still dedicated to education funding.

"restoring the original intent"  and "virtually 100 percent".....If they need to restore the original intent, then that implies that some of the revenue is being used for other things.  And either 100% is being used for education or it isn't.   So this statement is somewhat suspect.

The question is:  Why was it allowed to stray from its original intent?  How will we prevent this increase in tax & scope from being usurped for other purposes?

The expanded list includes "spectator sports admissions".  Does this mean that the school district now has to collect sales tax when people attend sporting events?  My $5.00 ticket to attend a basketball game, now becomes a $5.35 ticket?    (I'm not sure whether the district remits sales tax on cafeteria sales currently.)

Food items not included on the WIC list will be taxed.   My question is whether they will adher to the size limits on the WIC list (which will be in a different post).  I'll comment on some of those items in that post.

I'm wondering how they came up with the $50 limit on clothing & shoes.  Have they priced a pair of shoes lately?  Heck, the jeans I just bought at Kohls were buy one-get-one-half off.  One pair was $54.  So, would I pay tax on the first pair, but not the 2nd pair?  What about the 30% off coupon I had?  Would that be taken off first, bringing the 1st pair below $50 and therefore sales tax free?

This bill claims to eliminate the disparity between districts, but I can't see where that happens in these documents.  It states that schools are initially funded at current levels.  So poor schools are funded at the levels they currently are; where they can't provide the perks that more wealthy districts provide (laptops, ipads, etc.).  Those wealthy districts are funded at their current levels, where they CAN provide those perks.  The only adjustments come from population changes.  So, the funding is still at the per pupil level current at each district.  How does that provide equity?   Are those population changes considered only the number of students or does it take into consideration the types of students?   If a district has a sudden jump in the number of special needs students, will their allocation increase or will they have to take away from non-special needs students to provide additional support?  Per the document:  A per-student expentiture level will be determined for each district and will be re-calculated annually.  Each school district will then receive annual upward or downward funding adjustments based on changes in student enrollment multiplied by the current per-pupil cost.  Where does the equity occur?

Why don't they just make the gambling revenue all go to schools as it was sold to the public?  All I remember hearing when they were trying to pass that legislation is that it would be used to decrease property taxes.  They didn't mention that they wanted to spend money on stadiums & airports.  I guess they thought we wouldn't notice.  We had one of our own state representatives lie to us in our own auditorium.  When asked about the gambling revenue funding the soccer stadium in Chester, he said it wasn't going to happen - when it did happen & he was the one who facilitated it.


How can this bill limit the increase in school budgets to the rate of inflation, when the state legislature has guaranteed that expenses will go up more than that with PSERS funding?   They say there are no mandates attached, but what about the unfunded mandates already in place? 

How are districts supposed to renovate old buildings?  There is no way that the residents of the Octorara District would have passed a referendum to renovate the High School.  Yet, the building was getting to the point of being dangerous.  It was filled with asbestos; the chemistry lab had very poor ventilation; parts of the structure were unsafe.

What about charter school funding?  Will the districts still be responsible for paying for charter schools?  Will those students be counted in the districts totals?