In some respects, it’s easier to make a case against Proposition 204 than it is to support it. This measure on the Nov. 6 ballot would keep the state sales tax at 6.6 percent with most of the funds from a permanent 1-cent surcharge going to Arizona’s public schools. If it fails, the sales tax drops back to 5.6 percent. And who wouldn’t like to pay lower taxes? Plus, many credible organizations and individuals — from the Arizona Chamber of Commerce to the Goldwater Institute to Craig Barrett, former CEO of Intel — oppose it for a variety of legitimate reasons.
But in this case, the easy answer is not the right one.
Prop 204 is Arizona voters’ chance to take control and decide for themselves that education funding is a top priority — rather than leaving that decision to partisan politics at the state level. It’s our chance to put our dollars into our schools at a time when they need to do more to prepare kids for jobs in science, technology, engineering and math. It will send a message to companies and highly-skilled workers considering a move to our state that we, the taxpayers of Arizona, are willing to invest in education.
And it won’t have us paying any more in state sales tax than we already are.
Next year, a temporary 1-cent hike in the state sales tax, approved by Arizona voters in 2010, will expire. This tax was supported by Gov. Jan Brewer and others to help public schools when the state budget was facing massive cuts. The money it generated went into the general fund so the state wouldn’t have to make even deeper cuts to public schools. In the East Valley, our school districts were already cutting hundreds of millions of dollars. Brewer promised voters then that the increase was only temporary, and she does not support its continuation through Prop 204. While we understand Brewer’s position, we can also see where proponents of this tax measure are coming from. Prop 204 is a grassroots effort by Arizona parents and various organizations who are fed up with a state Legislature that has failed in their view to adequately fund public schools. Prop 204 would make the 1-cent surcharge on the sales tax permanent and require the state to spend most of the revenue it generates on education.
Per-pupil funding — estimated by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to be about $8,784 in 2013 — is a combination of local, federal and state dollars. And since 2008, the state’s share has dropped 20 percent, according to Chuck Essigs of the Arizona Association of School Business Officials, who also points out that decline is closer to 27 percent when adjusted for inflation. Arizona ranks 21st nationally in federal funding for education (although most of that money is for special needs students) and 32nd for local funding. But we rank 48th in state funding.
In recent years, our elected state leaders have been more interested in pursuing legislation to make schools more accountable for learning and spending, and to give parents more choices for their children’s education. We applaud this, but the fact is that despite these reforms Arizona’s students still lag behind their peers on national and international indicators. And if school choice was the sole answer to improving education, Arizona would be out-performing just about everyone else; few states offer the plethora of schooling options – tax credits for private schools, education savings accounts, open enrollment, charter schools – that we do.
Money does matter.
Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric opponents are using to shoot down this important ballot measure. In reality, it is not a tax increase. As Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services has reported, the Prop 204 tax wouldn’t take effect until June 1 – the day after the temporary levy expires. Approval of this measure simply keeps the sales tax where it has been since 2010. And it’s important to note that in that time, this tax has not stopped our state’s economy from improving.
A new report released last week by Marcus & Millichap National Retail Group pointed to numerous examples of how our economy in the Valley is rebounding from the recession. For instance, most major employment sectors have seen growth this year, with Phoenix gaining 20,400 jobs, and job growth in our construction industry — 3,740 new jobs — outperformed most of the nation in the past six months, second only to Houston.
And there is more good news in the group’s 2012 annual retail forecast:
• Employment in the Phoenix metro area will expand by 41,000 positions in 2012, an increase of 2.4 percent.
• Construction development will reach a three-year high at the end of this year as 750,000 feet of retail space is completed.
• “Solid demand and fewer store closures will support a 90-basis point reduction in vacancy this year to 11 percent, representing the lowest level since early 2009.”
There are things we don’t like about Prop 204. Some of the money is earmarked for social programs and transportation. We would prefer that the entire tax go to public schools. It’s also permanent, and the governor and other opponents are correct when they say that’s not good policy. But in this case, the benefits of Prop 204 outweigh those considerations. We’ve adjusted to the 6.6 percent tax and our economy is coming back. Now is the time to invest in education and our future.
Prop 204 faces an uphill battle. The number of politicians, businesses and interest groups jumping on the anti-204 bandwagon grows every day. But it can win if those most vested in it — the parents of the 1,060,000 kids in Arizona’s public schools and the state’s 60,000 public school teachers — get out and vote and urge their families and friends to do the same. Parents and teachers: Now is the time to band together and ensure our schools are adequately funded.
It will be up to you — not our Arizona Legislature — to get that job done right.
Arizona Willie posted at 10:25 am on Sun, Oct 28, 2012.
The problem is that our ultra right wing Legislature has proven time and again that they cannot be trusted.
If we provide more money for education through the special tax, they will simple reduce the amount of money the Legislature spends on education and spend the money they " SAVED " on more private prisons or some other lobbiest's dream.
They already stole most of the Federal money that was given to the state for homeowners mortgage relief ... why would anyone trust our Legislature with a single penny that wasn't locked down tight?
I would have no problem with giving the schools more money -- IF IT WAS ON TOP of the regular education appropriation. But with this Legislature you can bet they will reduce any money they dedicate to education by whatever amount comes in from the special tax.
NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
Mij14I posted at 12:53 pm on Sun, Oct 28, 2012.
The notion we are already paying the tax is all well and good, BUT how many of us have been paying the additional sales tax to put us over the budget hurdles left us by Janet Nepolitano. Yes, it is one thing making car payments knowing it will be paid for and three to five years the payment amount will be freed up, or the loan can be paid off early. Another example, although many homeowners signed on to a monthly payment for twenty five to thirty years, there are opportunities to increase payments to reduce interest costs or all out refinancing. It is prudent financial management to plan for a last payment on expenditures and be alive after it is made. This is the big missing component of Prop 204.
As for the public having power to direct the money raised by the sales tax toward education, What guarantees exist that proceeds from the tax don't go array down the road. Friends and acquaintances residing in Arizona for twenty years and more talk about how the Arizona Lottery proceeds were to be directed entirely to education. Apparently, that well meaning motivation has sizzled and history has a way of repeating itself.
Then the idea that businesses will look at moving to Arizona upon passing Prop. 204 because it says we are committed to providing an educated workforce. It sounds good but it is just another sound bite talking point of the Left. Business likes their workforce to be trained and educated, true. Business also likes its work force to be fiscally efficient also and such a permanent sales tax can just as easily scare new business away from Arizona because of the permanent nature of a high sales tax. The governing boards of the state's school districts need to first show financial responsibility with local funding sources; then take initiative to achieve a level of student achievement and competitiveness coupled with fiscal efficiency. Letting employed administrators of the school district and the administrators the districts' schools tell the governing boards what is efficient and all has to stop. Especially when they enjoy high five digit and six digit salaries at the expense of the classroom teacher and classroom costs. It was a breath of fresh air earlier this week to see the Gilbert Unified School district's board did just that by voting down the district's superintendant of schools bonus for lack of meeting position objectives. All school districts should follow suit.
Parents of present and former students in the state's schools have sacrificed enough. Classroom teachers have sacrificed enough. School and district administrators have hired consulting companies and public relation firms to promote budget override ballot issues, bond issues, and increased mil levy issues long enough. Nothing is going to get solved by Prop 204. There are better alternatives to be addressed after Prop 204 is voted down and the governing boards of the state's school districts demonstrate more efficiency and prudence.
ChillbertAZ posted at 5:35 pm on Sun, Oct 28, 2012.
You people are living in a fantasy world filled with the same old lies. None of the money was used for what it was intended for last time, and you are going to fall for the same dribble again. Where's all that lottery money that was supposed to go to schools? They always use schools and kids to tug at your heart so you bend over and allow them to steal more of your money. Wake up sheeple.
Rich posted at 7:18 pm on Sun, Oct 28, 2012.
If one dime of every dollar voters voted for education actually made the classroom, you wouldn't need the penny. It's always the same old con, money for education, that won't be spent for education. The problem isn't that government doesn't have enough money, the problem is that they have had too much of it for so long that they actually think it's necessary to overspend on virtually everything. Giving them more money is just aggravating the problem. Make them do more with less, No overrides, no tax increases, if it doesn't lower what they get then it gets a 'no'. Until you demand performance, throwing good money after bad is just mindless.
chatmandu002 posted at 8:56 pm on Sun, Oct 28, 2012.
Vote NO on prop 204. There are too many fingers in this pie and it will turn out to bite us in behind down the road. Like the old saying goes, "If it ain't broke don't fix it."
Jacktar posted at 11:13 pm on Sun, Oct 28, 2012.
Who are you trying to fool.No sales tax increase is ever earmared for school all tax monies go into the General fund and are use for funding by legistrative process.How about giving we citizens a break,its hard enough to get by these days.A sales tax is nothing more than a gimmick by a bunch of so called belly robbers and sales tax is nothing more than an unfair tax on the poor for they can least afford it.School districts raise their cost through property tax and they can set the millage rate as they see fit.
remo303 posted at 4:30 am on Mon, Oct 29, 2012.
Rubes, morons and Sheeple all vote with their hearts and not their heads.
There is NEVER any reason to vote for a PERMANENT tax, as you are implying that the very solution you foist will be ineffective at solving the problem.
Get it?
Morons....
sockratties posted at 7:47 am on Mon, Oct 29, 2012.
Prop 204 is not a school tax, it’s a “bait and switch” tax. A school tax provides money for schools. In this case schools are used to lure tax money into coffers of the politicians. If more money is actually needed for schools, prove it! Reduce administration costs and publicly justify each and every position. Set a transparent budget justifying needed cash and vote for a temporary tax to fund schools on a year by year basis. This proposition sticks us with a tax that is as damaging to business as it is to citizens. And it won't expire even when the economy recovers.
There are ways to save money... have school all year around so we don’t pay for buildings sitting idle while still requiring maintenance and utilities. Let teachers teach all year so they don’t have to take summer jobs just to get by.
Year around school works in many school systems and also helps households when both parents work. Spreading attendance over four semesters reduces class size which is one of the complaints often heard. Students still attend nine months a year but can select which semester to take off. Until the school system has done its part to reduce waste and excess it should not expect to be paid more to do the same mediocre job year after year.
delluser posted at 8:18 am on Mon, Oct 29, 2012.
One important fact that they are not telling you about Proposition 204. Proposition 204 is not simply a continuation of the existing temporary 1% sales tax, it is a permanent tax that will be part of the Constitution of Arizona and can never be changed. Even if you think giving more money to education is a good thing, you need to ask yourself this question; do you really want a tax to be part of the Arizona Constitution that can never be changed? That would mean in the future if we didn't need the 20% that is earmarked for heavy construction to bad it is in the Constitution that it has to go for that and nothing else.
VofReason posted at 12:46 pm on Mon, Oct 29, 2012.
Hmmm. Almost 9K per student for Education funding in AZ. Whatever rank that makes us, how much should it cost to educate children in AZ. Or is the answer just more than what we get now? Another question, we have had the 1 cent tax since 2010. Have we seen a significant boost in tests scores? Details details.......
Rocky posted at 3:19 pm on Mon, Oct 29, 2012.
AZ is hurting itself by not having internet sales tax. Prop 204 continues to hurt local businesses as those who do not want to pay taxes can buy online. This then hurts the local economy as local businesses will start to close, and then there are less jobs and it just continues to get worse. We need to kill Prop 204 and if more state revenue is needed time to start charging sales tax for online retailers (most of which are not located in AZ).
chuckles3 posted at 4:01 pm on Mon, Oct 29, 2012.
LOL the headline implies we have no control over spending now.
We do not have a revenue problem folks. We have a spending problem. If you believe the legislature does not spend enough of current revenue on education, elect someone who will.
The libs and the unions are desperate to shore up their base here in AZ, they will do it 'for the children;' with a tax that has nothing to do with education and everything to do with union slush funds. Read the prop for yourself.
Arizona Willie posted at 7:51 am on Tue, Oct 30, 2012.
Now I'm having second thoughts.
I < was > against the education sales tax because it isn't dedicated to education and the Republican Legislature will steal the money for their pet projects.
I < was > also against the open primary.
I knew that the Republicans were against the education tax because, supposedly, it takes control of money away from them --- basically they can't steal the money. Except that the law doesn't legislate that the money be spent on education. As it stand there is no guarantee the Legislature won't cut their normal funding for education because the people have provided supplemental education funds.
But, I see the Republicans are spending over a million dollars in opposition to these two proposals.
So, I'm thinking, if they are so AGAINST these proposals then perhaps I should be FOR THEM.
I certainly oppose the Republican Legislature 90% of the time or more.
If they are willing to spend a million dollars trying to defeat these proposals then they must view them as harmful to their power.
Which makes the proposals a LOT more attractive.
On the other hand, a million dollars isn't much these days.
Perhaps the Republicans are playing Br'er Rabbitt.
Reverse psychology.
Make the voters think they are against what they are actually for.
Knowing that voters have a dim view of the Legislature and are likely to vote against anything the Legislature wants.
What to do --- what to do.:(
Phxnative1 posted at 11:34 am on Sat, Nov 3, 2012.
Lets hope Arizona with students in School and College in-state vote for Proposition 204, if you do and you don't vote to approve 204, your children and NOT you will suffer, I beg you to vote for 204, but if you don;t I HOPE your children suffer as a results, because they will.
Vote for 204
You'll pay no more in taxes than you do today, so thats good yes?
chatmandu002 posted at 12:25 pm on Sat, Nov 3, 2012.
Vote NO on prop 204. We don't need a sales tax as a permanent part of the state constitution. Taxes should be controlled and regulated by the legislature. The legislature can be changed but not a constitutional tax. Again, vote NO on prop 204.
wangly posted at 6:38 pm on Sun, Nov 4, 2012.
me that I thought, thought, cheap north face thought, Man, maybe I could turn film into a career.
just kept working hard at it, until I got here here cheap designer handbags here to USC." Chan is working with Victoria Alonso, the
vice president of Visual Effects at Marvel, to hone his his cheap north face jacket his skills as a filmmaker. He recently finished a short
titled, "Choice" about a young boy who decides to enlist enlist moncler down jackets enlist in the military after Sept. 11. Chan is currently
on featured length script titled, "End of Active Service.""I want want cheap replica designer handbags want to make films that are honest. I want to
DonMey posted at 3:39 pm on Mon, Nov 5, 2012.
If I review your historical editorials, will I see you supporting the tax in 2010, claiming it is only "temporary"? And now, when the tax is set to expire, you're claiming making it permanent won't be a tax increase? This is exactly why people are against temporary tax measures; they know temporary is simply sleight of hand.
wangly posted at 8:51 pm on Thu, Nov 8, 2012.
the encounter, Obama stood up, took a place at the the cheap authentic air jordans the front of the stage, then addressed Romney over his
suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of of cheap replica handbags of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would
politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, own, discount designer handbags own, governor, is offensive," Obama said, a severe look in
eyes. "That's not what we do. That's not what I I cheap designer handbags I do as president, that's not what I do as
PHOTOS: Romney's 'Binders Full of Women' Goes ViralWATCH: The Second Second cheap jordan shoes Second Presidential DebateWould-Be Terrorist Tried to Bomb New York Federal
Bank: FedsBangladeshi Man Arrested with Phony 1,000 LB Car Bomb Bomb cheap designer handbags Bomb in New YorkBy RICHARD ESPOSITO, JASON RYAN, and
THOMASOct. 17, 2012 — Authorities today arrested a "lone actor" actor" cheap replica handbags actor" who thought he was about to blow up the
Reserve Bank in New York City's crowded Financial District on on designer replica handbags on behalf of al Qaeda but instead discovered he was
target of a law enforcement sting.Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis, Nafis, cheap real jordans Nafis, 21, a Bangladeshi national, allegedly parked a van filled
what he believed to be 1,000 pounds of explosives outside outside cheap jordan shoes outside the building in Lower Manhattan near the New York
Exchange, and was arrested after he tried to detonate the the knockoff designer handbags the "bomb" with a cellphone. Officials say there was never
wangly posted at 9:44 pm on Fri, Nov 9, 2012.
labor union made up of law enforcement officers.McNesby said that that knockoff handbags that it remains unclear what happened in the moments leading
to the punch."The investigation wasn't even complete," he said.McNesby said said cheap jordan shoes said the union plans to fight the decision and he
Josey to be reinstated, according to WPVI.The woman who was was cheap replica designer handbags was punched, Aida Gusman, is pleased with the decision to
Josey."We never asked for the officer to be let go, go, replica designer handbags go, but we do agree with the decision," Gusman's attorney
Latoison told ABCNews.com. "This one officer's actions have made the the moncler outlet the whole police department look bad. We do recognize the
from seeing the video, that he was the only officer officer cheap moncler jackets officer that did what he did. He acted alone."Latoison said
Gusman is cooperating with police and will be meeting with with cheap moncler jackets with the department of Internal Affairs today as the investigation
the incident proceeds.The Philadelphia District Attorney's Office said on Wednesday Wednesday moncler outlet Wednesday that it would be dropping the disorderly conduct charge
Gusman.Gusman denied throwing anything at police and said she did did cheap jordan shoes did not know why she was punched."I'm 40 years old.
don't have time to play games like that," Gusman told told cheap jordan shoes told WPVI earlier in the week. In addition to her
injury, she has cuts and bruises on her arm and and fake designer handbags and hand.The video was taken at Sunday's Puerto Rican Day