Student Population
I was asked to provide data regarding Utah's student population (ages 5-17) relevent to the working population (ages 15-64). This data indicates the relative burden each taxpayer shoulders to fund education. More students = a greater burden. Fewer students = less of a burden.
Utah has 31.2 students per 100 workers, the highest percentage in the Nation. Alaska (29.5), Texas (29.1), Arizona (29.1), and California (29) follow.
The jurisdictions with the fewest students per 100 workers are North Dakota (23), West Virgnia (22.9) and Washington, D.C. (19.3).
The implications of this data are significant. With many caveats and explanations, it should roughly translate that every 100 taxpayers in the most-burdened states are expected to fund an extra 1/3 of a classroom, compared to taxpayers in the bottom states.
You'll notice that many of the states with the highest student-to-taxpayer ratios are western states. Those states are doubly vexed by the fact that their property-tax base is one-half to one-third that of non-western states.
While most states lean heavily on the property tax to fund education, most of the land in the western states is still owned by the federal government, meaning it cannot be taxed by the States. Thus, the vast expanses of federal land in the West don't contribute tax revenues to education (thereby shifting the burden to the remaining base of private property and on taxpayers generally).
Utah has 31.2 students per 100 workers, the highest percentage in the Nation. Alaska (29.5), Texas (29.1), Arizona (29.1), and California (29) follow.
The jurisdictions with the fewest students per 100 workers are North Dakota (23), West Virgnia (22.9) and Washington, D.C. (19.3).
The implications of this data are significant. With many caveats and explanations, it should roughly translate that every 100 taxpayers in the most-burdened states are expected to fund an extra 1/3 of a classroom, compared to taxpayers in the bottom states.
You'll notice that many of the states with the highest student-to-taxpayer ratios are western states. Those states are doubly vexed by the fact that their property-tax base is one-half to one-third that of non-western states.
While most states lean heavily on the property tax to fund education, most of the land in the western states is still owned by the federal government, meaning it cannot be taxed by the States. Thus, the vast expanses of federal land in the West don't contribute tax revenues to education (thereby shifting the burden to the remaining base of private property and on taxpayers generally).
posted by steve u. at 8/27/2006
Subscribe
9 Comments:
You nailed it Steve. We can huff and puff day and night but until the issue of the forced inaccessability and unproductivity of our core natural resource, or land, is effectively addressed, nothing else will change. Reshufeling the remainder of the deck of cards or squabling over what little remains will do nothing to solve the problem of the lack of resources for public education. We must increase our resources. That means, free up most of our public lands. Voin Campbell.
Voin,
As I believe you would know, Marty Stephens, Tom Hatch and I laid out the case that western states need to band together to require that the United States keep the promises it made regarding our lands when we became states. We gave the plan the nifty name of APPLE (Action Plan for Public Lands and Education), and worked our tails off to convince 9 or 10 of the 12 western states to pass resolutions supporting the call for Congress to act.
And, that's where it stalled. No one beyond the legislative level is running seriously with the idea -- except at election time, when all candidates hold their APPLE press conference to wave the banner and beat their chest. And then forget about it again by mid-November. And that's a shame, since ALL the frontier states (except for Tennessee and Texas, for unique historical reasons) have fought and won this same fight.
Details regarding APPLE can be found at http://www.le.state.ut.us/interim/2006/appleinitiative/index.html .
Steve,
You beat me to Marty Stephens. I heard him mention that several times at campaign events when I volunteered for his gubernatorial campaign back in 2004. And yet, I am now a volunteer for Pete Ashdown; I just love life as a political moderate!
Here in Ca we pay about or a little more than 1% of the value of our property in taxes per year. A one hundred thousand dollar house pays about one thousand in property tax. In Sonoma county the median price of about five hundred fifty thousand results in about five thousand five hundred in annual property tax.
Interestly, I find that in Utah most property tax is about less than 1/2% or less than half of Ca property tax and the property is valued less than California.
I recently discovered that in Omaha that they pay about 2 to 3% in annual property tax, maybe that is because most of Nebraska is privately owned.
Utah should be ashamed to be for the RealSL to the tune of using the Jordan School District bonding to give a welfare grant to that world famous entrepreneur, taking from your core natural resource, education, for some supposedly successful franchise that somehow will translate to a better social economy, but I doubt that.
It wouldn't matter who owns the federal lands (me for one) if they were managed for corporate welfare similiar to the sitla thing at browns hole.
Who do you work for and for what is the purpose of your employment?
I'm not sure where Anonymous gets his/her figures. I live in Weber County, and my property tax is close to 1% of my property value. Where is this dreamy 1/2% being charged? I guess I should be happy that I don't live in Omaha.
As far as taking cash from education to pay for circuses (i.e. sports entertainment), a lot of Utahns are ashamed. But this is something that is being handled in a localized area, not on a state level, so the local citizenry has a right and a responsibility to do what they think is best.
Reach Upward,
that is one of many reasons why you should be thankful you do not live in Omaha.
Steve U,
So what can be done to move the APPLE initiative further? You said it seems to get support around election time but then disappears.
Does the general public need to be more informed so they can demand it from their reps?
It seems like the reasoning is sound, the presentation is clear, so what can be done to overcome the hurdles?
Talk about tax rates in other states, with wildly differing property values, is interesting but confuses the issue here. The issue is the economic harm that government ownership of large tracts of land, our most basic natural resource, does to state and local tax bases. It insulates land taxation and obstructs productive economic development, productive use of land. The answer is, free up most of the public lands that serve no real public purpose and blotes the federal budget, doing further economic harm with senseless federal tax burdens. Steve has advocated for a long time, what may well be the best solution available. Voin Campbell.
Steve is leaving out one important fact. It was his wife Sara who came up with the wonderful acronym APPLE which stands for Action Plan for Public Lands and Education. Let's make sure a great school board candidate gets proper credit!
By the way, Carole and I are just leaving to head back up north after watching two more delightful musicals at Tuacahn. What a great facility and setting.
Keep up the good work Steve!!!
Marty
Hey! What a nice treat, to hear from you, Marty. We have phones down hear. Give us a call next time you come down.
<< Home