It appears that Anderson County Schools Superintendent-turned-County Commissioner, V.L. Stonecipher, has finally succeeded in gathering enough valid signatures to force a sales tax referendum on elevating the sales tax countywide.

My objection to this effort is not raising the sales tax; obviously, citizens have the right to do that by referendum. My objection is that all it really does is to reallocate tax revenue from four incorporated cities to the County.

Two years ago when Oak Ridge voters overwhelmingly approved a sales tax referendum to fund the note on reconstructing Oak Ridge High School, there was a “gentlemen’s agreement” with county officials to not supersede the tax rate for a period of five years.

Doing so at this point puts a serious dent in the financing plan for the high school renovations, which have already been contracted and begun.

How can these four cities — indisputably, the economic engines of the County — make up the difference in their budgets if the referendum (in which none of their residents can vote) should pass?

1. property tax increases
2. annexation.

The referendum is being sold to County voters as “it won’t really affect the taxes you pay, since you shop in the cities anyway; it’s just taking money from them and keeping it for yourself.”

Maybe County Commission needs to re-think their position on allowing Clinton to annex the property near I-75, which would generate a lot of new sales and property tax revenue for the County. Maybe they need to think about growing the pie, instead of eating someone else’s piece.

People do wonder why balancing a school system budget is trying, even in a generous, supportive city like Oak Ridge.

There are several reasons, but one that affects nearly every school system in the state is that teachers are funded at the system level (according to the number of students), but the state-mandated class sizes must be applied at the school level. So, if we’re one student over the class-size limits at school A, and ten under at school B, we have to hire an extra teacher for school A (who is not funded by the state). If we don’t, there’s a $50,000 fine. The alternative would be to shuffle students between schools every year. I can just imagine how thrilled parents would be with that idea… not to mention that it would be very disruptive to instruction.

The problem is not unique to Oak Ridge; every school system has the same difficulty unless they only have one school containing each grade level.

In our case, the State funds 259 teachers (actually, 65% of the BEP salary for 259 teachers); however, we have 336.65 teachers, most of whom are required to meet the class size mandate. That difference of 77.65 teachers amounts to $10,792,417 that has to be funded exclusively from local sources.

Adding insult to injury are a 20% increase in the cost of electricity; 45% increase in the cost of natural gas to heat the schools; and a whopping 62% increase in the cost of diesel fuel and gasoline.

The key difference between the school system and every other business or homeowner is that we are wholly dependent on revenues allocated by others, and obligated to fund things that are not paid for by those creating the mandates.

Bless the citizens of this city, who do all that they do voluntarily. You just don’t know what a difference you make.

It is most unfortunate that Tennessee’s inadequate method of funding education leads to warring between neighbors — one community fighting for a change that would grant it more money, while taking it from the community next door; or Anderson County’s drive to supersede the sales tax rate adopted earlier by all but one of the cities within its borders.

Yesterday, the Oak Ridger reported that a May 2 sales tax referendum is unlikely, as the petition-filers are 300 signatures short and the deadline looms early next week. The County Commissioner-turned-superintendent of Anderson County Schools who is spearheading the petition drive insists that the signature-gathering continues… but if they don’t have the required number of signatures by the May 2 deadline, there are two consequences:

1. the odds of a vote to supersede decrease in a higher-turnout election (as would be the August County General and State/Federal Primary);
2. if the measure is not passed before July 1, then the County could not begin collecting the additional revenue until July 1, 2007.

This move is seen as hostile by the cities, all of whom depend upon that revenue for municipal operations. Although Oak Ridge would require a lower property tax increase (12 cents) to make up the difference than Clinton (20 cents) or Lake City (38-41 cents), it is particularly sensitive to the move because Oak Ridge voted to raise the sales tax just a couple of years ago to fund a complete makeover of Oak Ridge High School, with a “gentlemen’s agreement” from County officials that the County would not supersede for five years.

Neighboring communities depend upon one another, and success or failure in one inevitably impacts the other. Working together, we could help one another succeed… but it isn’t happening.
As a wise State Senator once told me, the unfortunate truth is that people come to Nashville asking, “don’t tax you, and don’t tax me; tax that man behind the tree!”

Or, in the present case with either fiscal capacity or superseding the sales tax “my neighbor is taxing himself so much, he must be wealthy beyond belief. Give some of that money to me instead!”

HB3180 was deferred in the House K-12 Education Committee until March 13 — next Tuesday.

Fiscal Note: Such increase in state expenditures is estimated to be approximately $43,818,000

Local Elections –
Oak Ridge attorney Judith Whitfield makes a good point in her letter to the editor today (it’s the third one down). The present District Attorney is campaigning for Chancellor on his promise to handle criminal matters in addition to “matters of equity” such as divorce, custody, and adoption.

Ms. Whitfield brings up a valid concern, in addition to my own reservations about a DA who doesn’t prosecute cases — or allow his staff to do so — as it is.

City Council Meeting?
Knoxpatch has a peculiar report on Monday’s City Council meeting… I have to admit I’ve been in too much of a hurry this week to find out if there was any basis for this post. It certainly didn’t make the daily; maybe the Observer will have something tomorrow.