, 1961. L E X Y JULY 31 FUMI! T A X A t its regular monthly - - PDF document

CITIZENS LEAGUE REPORT

• No. 136

Minneapolis Board of Education Proposed Mill Increase

July 1961

Citiaens Leagw BOARD

OF

D~RECTORS Mobil O i l Building Minneapolis 2, Minnesota

DATF

JUL

5,1961

STATEENT BY THE CITIZENS UAGUE O

F PlINMEAPOLIS AND HEMNEPIN COUNTY F O R PRFSENTATION

A T THE BOARD O

J ? EDUCATION PIISLJC H E A m ON PROPOSED 1-MILL INCF1EASE I N THE GENERAL

FUMI! T A X L

E X Y IJPIIT , JULY 31

,

1961.

A t its regular monthly meeting on July 5, 1961, the C i t b e n s Leagw

Board of Directors voted t o voice its objections at t h i s public hearing t o t h e Board of Educationts propos~l t o increase its general fund authorised tax lin3.t by one m i l l . Since t h a t League Board meeting we have become cognizant of certain developments with respect t o the School Boardts revenue estimates f o r 1961 and 1962 which, we understand, will make unnecessary any further serious considera- tion of illcreasing the tax limit by one mill, s t a r t i n g i n 1962,

tB r e f e r t o the

receipt of $201,000 from the S t a t e of Minnesota t o make up a deficiency i n the 1958-59 aid payment, and the likelihood now that bank excise tax receipts f o r

1961 and 1962 w i l l be greater by about $150,000 f o r each of the two years than

the previous estimates indicated. Also, an upward repision of the expected per- centage of property tax collections f o r 1961 and 1962 seems justified, which, estimating conservztively, would add a t o t a l of over W100,000 i n the two years,. These increases i n anticipated receipts t o t a l about $600,000, more than enough t o o f f s e t the proposed one m i l l levy increase and possible over-estimation

• f the 1961 taxable valuation increase,

The Citizens League learned of these increases i n the School Board's enticipated revenues through its own research subsequent t o a presentation of background data on the nillege request by school administration officials on June 29. It cg.pars t o us that careful revenue estimating by t h e school adffdn- i s t r a t i o n would have foreseen these increases and therefore would have obviated the need f o r even a tentative decision t o ask f o r a one-mill tax authority in- crease, The essential f a c t s on which the re-estimates are based could have been known a t the time the administrstion recom~ended t h a t the Board c a l l f o r the pub15 c hea ring. These developments i n connection with the School Boardcs revenue out- look serve t o point up one of the basic reasons the League Board of Directors

felt it w

a s necessary t o object t o the proposed levy l i m i t increase.

The f a c t

is that the timing of events i n the current hearing gave too l i t t l e time f o r the

public t o make an adequate analysis of the claimed needs and resources,

On June 29 our Education Committee and School Budget Subcommittee had

the benefit of a presentation by Dr. Fred Hill aad Adner Heggerston on t h e f a c t s and policies behind the School Board's one m i l l request, The committees were impressed with the amount and d e t a i l of the data presented.

However, because of

the amount of information which the two o f f i c i a l s presented, the committees did not have enough opportunity a t the meeting t o digest the information adequately, nor did they have time enough subsequently, and p r i o r t o the m e t i n g of the League Board of Directors on July 5, t o make a careful analysis on which a sound recommendation could be made.

As already noted, our own research l e d us t o question some of the re-

venue estimates t h a t have now been mvised. This research was by no means ex- haustive, nor w

a s it able to get very far i n t o the expenditure side of the budget.

Last year when the League Board of Directors supported the request f o r a five-mill increase i n the School Board's tax limit, we reminded the School Board and administration of their particular obligation a s a new independent school d i s t r i c t t o keep the public informed a t a l l times of the school systemfs

• perations and needs.

T h i s obligation includes giving the public ample time t o

digest, analyze and discuss the f u l l facts and implications of a proposal such a s the one-mill tax limit increase. W e thdrefore respectfully urge the School Board, when contemplating future rises i n the property tax lindt, t o give the public considerably more than three weeks' time within which to reach a studied conclusion, To the extent t h a t w

e have been able to analyse the program implications

• f the 1962 proposed budget, w

e note t h a t almost a l l of the money is asked f o r maintaining the present program with too l i t t l e attention given t o improving the quality of the educational program, I n t h i s connection you w i l l recall that the Citieens League i n March, 1960, presented t o the Board of Education a report of a survey of problems of educating high ability students i n the senior high schools of Hennepin County school districts. W e are gratified that the School Board has taken action t o implement the recommendation calling f o r an increase i n the number of counselors, However, w

e are quite disappointed that action on the other three recommendations

has not met our expectations. The school administration has not pdlfshed an annual ''Report on Educational progressff which could be regarded a s meeting the standards we suggested. There has been no action on centralizing responsibility for coordinating and promoting experfments in curriculum f o r high ability stu- dents. Finally, the Board of Education has not appointed a lay-professional Advisory Comnittee on Education of the High Ability Students,

A s the League stressed i n the above-cited report, the improvement of

education& quality should be a matter of highest concern to the citizens of Minneapolis and their School Board and administration, W e are certain that the Board has this concern, but w e believe t h a t its proposed budget and its reports t o the public might communicate t h i s concern more effectively, The League Board of Directors is also concerned about the major factor affecting the proposed budgetary increase, t h a t is, the salary schedule increase for employees. The Citizens League acknowledges the importaht progress the School Board has made i n adopting a five-year policy of equalizing the compensation package of its building trades employees and those of outside industry, although w e believe the School Board's equalization program is defective i n not taking account of pension costs i n the public-private compensation comparison, However, w e are particularly concerned that the School Board has not undertaken t o establish salary policy objectives with respect t o the biggest group

• f school employees, the teachers.

What are the School Board' 8 long-range ob- jectives i n its proposals t o change teacher salaries? Is the bigger problem the retention of the present teaching force or the attraction of new teachers? What recognition should be given t o fringe benefits i n considering future salary in- creases? The implications of the answers t o these and other questions involved i n setting salary poUcy objectives are obviously far reaching, but it is difficult

f o r the citizen t o appraise the direction of year-to-year salary schedule increases unless such objectives are established. The large dollar significance of salary decisions, a s well a s the profmund effect on the quality of the faaching faculty, argue strongly for the Board's early development of suoh salary policy objectives, based on studies i n depth by the administration staff, Another aspect of employee compensation that concerns the Citieens League about the proposed millage limit increase is that the Board of Eduoation seems t o be moving irrevocably toward adopting a hospitalieation and medical care program f o r its employees, estimated t o cost the taxpayer about $500,000 a gear,

• r another 1.2 mills, which is outside any exisUng limits. W

e are concerned about three aspects of this program: (1) There are no firm details available about the program, and w

e

haw seen no indicatinn that the Board plans t

x have a public discussion about

the details i n advance of committing i t s e l f to the program.

(2)

Adoption of the program clearly would move Minneapolis teachers ahead of the general level of other local school districts i n this category of fringe benefits. This is i n the face of the fact t h a t Minneapolis teachers al- ready are more than 4350 per year better off than suburban teachers with respect t o the value of their pension program. (3) Adoption of the program probably woad set off preaaure f o r adopt- ion of a similar program by the other agencies of the c i t y government, without benefit of consultation among a l l the agencies concerned t o see whether this is the type of pmgram t o enact and the time to do it. Obviously, the $120 per employee per year value of this proposed health and welfare program must be evaluated as a part of the employee's total comperzc sation package, I n that light, and i n view of the other points mentioned above, w e wodld suggest that the School Board s o l i c i t public reaction t o the details of any proposal f o r a hospitalization and medical care program before it moves to adopt any such program.

A final matter of League concern about the proposed millage limit in-

crease is the faniliar problem of the ovewuse of the property tax i n Minneapolis. Statistics are frequently cited t o show that the school tax rate is much smaller i n Minneapolis than i n the suburban school diatrlcts, and that even the overall property tax rate is lighter i n Minneapolis than the average i n the r e s t of Hen- nepin County, Considering the burden of the property tax, these comments miss the point, f o r under the present law and administration of the property tax i n Minneapolis there can be no denial of the f a c t that the tax bears heavily a

m

commercial and industrial property and on the pocketbooks of residential property

• wners on fixed income.

For t h i s reason the Citieens League has consistently urged action to achieve a major alternative t o the property tax i n Minneapolis, Such action has been unsuccessful so f a r and w i l l continue t o be unsuccessful until there is much more of a coordinated drive among groups i n the community, official and unofficial, for legislation t o achieve such a property tax supplement. W e have urged i n the past that the School Board assume its responsibiL i t y as a major independent taxing body to cooperate with other public agencies i n working f o r a new tqx source. W e take this occasion again t o urge the School Board, i n anticipation of continuing needs f o r increase revenues, to act now i n concert with other public bodies t o work f o r a solution t o the local revenue problem,