I read on another forum that the ISD taxes we pay are the highest legally allowable in Texas, however the current board has set a goal of getting the law changed in order to be able to raise them further. Is this truly the case, please tell me that person was incorrect.

• mgrayar Said:

AISD's taxes are the highest legally allowed.

Why? Because Ken Paxton, Florence Shapiro, Rick Perry and a host of other Republicans cut the amount of money for public education. Balancing the State budget on students and teachers. The district made cuts and the asked the voters for the increase. It was voter approved.

Did AISD reduce their budget? Yes. Could they have decided to not ask the voters for a tax increase? Yes. But it would have been a horrible experience for my kids.

I don't want my girls in crowded classrooms. My middle child already has 23 in her elementary class. Finding electives that are relevant at the HS level is near impossible because they classes are already full.

If you don't like the school tax rate, start complaining to those running for State Rep or State Senate. They ultimately control the purse strings.

Don't think the new candidates will solve your problem. Zafari can't make a decision. Look at her Facebook www.facebook.com/RonaZafariForAllenSch ools campaign page. She refers everyone to the Allen American article where she supports the new elementary school. But in response to a post, she indicated she is against the school because she wants to reduce the debt.

She can't have it both ways. Either she doesn't think we are smart enough to realize she is taking both sides of the issue or she doesn't have an idea what she could be doing. Either way is dangerous.

• jrob Said:

I would expect that if we are at the legal limit and still unable to sustain our standards, that the goal would be to fix the root problem and not change the tax rate limit.

• mgrayar Said:

Fixing the root problem was addressed by jrob....contact your state-level representatives. The root problem is in Austin. Leadership in Allen is doing the best they can with what they've got. To truly turn things around, our representatives (and governor) need to listen to the people.

But for here at home, we need to fill our school board with educated people that understand school finance so that they can help take on Austin, and keep our school district running smoothly until Austin sees reason.

Thank you for your comments, in not sure if you meant them to come accross argumentative, but they came across that way. I fully understand the tax situation and know its cause, however my question was a bit different.

I asked if a known goal of the current AISD board in the coming years is to change the law to be able to raise taxes again? I would expect that if we are at the legal limit and still unable to sustain our standards, that the goal would be to fix the root problem and not change the tax rate limit.

It was a honest question, no lecture necessary.

• mgrayar Said:

That person was incorrect.

http://www.allenamerican.com/articles/2011/11/16/a ...

• vrs Said:

mgrayar - not sure if you saw this earlier post of mine or not.

Simple answer is no - the school district is NOT suing for the privilege of raising the tax rate.

Which of course begs the question, what ARE they suing for? They are suing for adequate funding and a level playing field. The way the process works is that the courts will decide whether the law in its current form is or is not constitutional. The courts will not decide on the manner in which relief is provided - that is up to the legislature.

Outcome #1 - the courts uphold the current law. The legislature will very likely do nothing in that case and school districts will continue to squeeze until the system springs a leak somewhere else (across the board salary cuts, mega classes, etc.) Eventually the schools will then go BACK to court on an adequacy complaint and win.

Outcome #2 - the court declares the current law fails a constitutional test (does not provide adequate funding, is a de facto statewide property tax with no meaningful discretion at the local level, etc.)

If the past predicts the future, sooner or later we will get to outcome number 2 and the legislature will be compelled to make a change in the law. At that point the politicos are in charge and they are free to create any solution they want which relieves whatever condition the court found unconstitutional in the current version.

Therefore, the school district is NOT suing for the right to raise the local tax rate. The school district is suing to get the courts to declare the system broken and to compel the legislature to "do something."

(I highlighted that paragraph because it constitutes the simplest affirmative answer to your question I can frame.)

So then, assuming outcome #2 (i.e. the legislature is compelled to "do something," what might they do?

Anybody's guess. One outcome I know Allen ISD would love to see is for the legislature to let us have our revenue per student calculated based on our 2012 total property wealth - not stay frozen at 2006 total valuation.All this fabulous growth in the city has not made a dime's worth of difference to our school district when calculated as spending per student. That one change would at least put Allen on a level playing field with the neighboring districts.

I guess it could be because I always vote during early voting and don't wait until election day but I have never had other voters in the room when I voted. Hopefully people will turn out this time. I plan to vote Friday afternoon... maybe I will actually see someone else there this time.

Next round of campaign finance reports were due last Friday - 8 days before election.

Jason Shephard is on modified filing so no reports are due unless his expenses go up.

Carl Clemencich listed $785 additional expenditures.

Neither Alan Hurst nor Rona Zafari had filed a report on the deadline.

PENALTIES FOR REPORTING VIOLATIONS
Any citizen may file a criminal complaint with the district attorney, a civil complaint with the Ethics Commission, or a civil action against a candidate or officeholder for violations of title 15. Any penalty stemming from such complaints would be assessed against the candidate or officeholder, not the campaign treasurer.