Sunday, April 21, 2013

MN Referendum Renewal

What are your thoughts regarding referendum renewals?  It does seem odd that we elect the school board but don't give them the authority to fund their success.  This isn't the case for City, County and State government....

Parents United 4/23/13

Comments from the PU Update.  More detail in linked post.

HF234/SF356 (Authorizing school district expiring referendum renewal by school board action) was recently heard but not included in the Omnibus Bill. Parents United strongly supports HF234. Several additional requirements are necessary for a board to utilize this process, but a renewal would not have to return to the voter. Only referendum renewals already passed by voters qualify under this bill.

  • The Minnesota Miracle passed in 1971 and was a mechanism to provide education funding NOT dependent on the property wealth of a district. An operating levy was to provide extras.
  • A voter-approved levy would grant a school board authority to tax for a certain amount and the dollars would stay within the school district.
  • Prior to the mid-1990s, the passage of a levy granted school boards this tax authority ad infinitum. Yet at the time the legislature placed a maximum length of 10 years on any new levy.
Passage of HF234/SF356 respects the local voters’ decision to elect school board members AND grant those officials the authority to be fiscally prudent in the governing of their schools.

1 comment:

R-Five said...

I'm all but alone on the right on this, but I would give School Boards right to set Operating Levy like City etc. Only bonding should go before voters. I would add to such a bill that ALL bonding goes before the voters. There is a loophole called "Alternative Facilities" that can avoid votes on spending tens of millions on buildings.