![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Here's a thing that's not anxiety-making and more incandescent anger-making.
The Organization went out for a ballot measure this year. Because an initiative passed by an anti-tax wealthy person passed in the 90s, public entites such as The Organization are restricted to only collecting 1% more in revenue from fiscal year to fiscal year, plus the bonus of any new construction taxes for that year, assuming that the taxing entity isn't collecting its maximum taxing authority. This 1% cap applies regardless of inflation, cost increases, or any other event that happened in the year that made expenses go up. And again, there's a maximum levy amount that can be assessed in relation to property values, so if values tank (like they did in the recession), even with your 1% increase, you're going to eventually run into a wall about how much you can raise versus the unchecked ability of your expenses to grow.
There is an exception to the 1% rule - if the voters approve, a taxing entity can suspend the 1% ceiling and assess their maximum allowable rate. Which has the benefit of continuing services and, perhaps more crucially, establishing a new floor from which the 1% increase cap next year will be calculated. This ballot measure is expensive to produce for those entities that have the capability to do so, and really can only be useful in times when property value increases have outpaced the 1% significantly enough that there's room in the rate to do the jump. Unsurprisingly, the ballot measure is generally only used when necessary, so as to not annoy the voters.
This year, it was necessary, or within a few years' time, The Organization's costs due to inflation and expenses would result in the closure of locations and layoffs of the people. The last time The Organization went out for this bid, the voters passed it. That was 12 years ago, and I can owe my career with The Organization to the fact that the voters passed it. The initial time period that The Organization promised to not go back to the voters for another was six years. So they've managed double their promised period from the last one, and they gave promises to the voters that they would increase hours, staffing, and materials available with the extra money. (This year's promise, just for being able to keep the lights on and keep going as we have been, is for making it last for five years before considering going back to the voters to ask again.)
There were no persons who wanted to form a committee to say no to The Organization's ask, so there was no statement against in the voter booklets.
And as of this post, while it looks like Aye has won out, the margin of difference between Aye and Nay is less than a half of a percentage point. And it could have been swayed one way or another if all the people who didn't actually register an opinion had done so.
This should not have been this close.
( And now, about a 500W bulb's worth of heat )
The Organization went out for a ballot measure this year. Because an initiative passed by an anti-tax wealthy person passed in the 90s, public entites such as The Organization are restricted to only collecting 1% more in revenue from fiscal year to fiscal year, plus the bonus of any new construction taxes for that year, assuming that the taxing entity isn't collecting its maximum taxing authority. This 1% cap applies regardless of inflation, cost increases, or any other event that happened in the year that made expenses go up. And again, there's a maximum levy amount that can be assessed in relation to property values, so if values tank (like they did in the recession), even with your 1% increase, you're going to eventually run into a wall about how much you can raise versus the unchecked ability of your expenses to grow.
There is an exception to the 1% rule - if the voters approve, a taxing entity can suspend the 1% ceiling and assess their maximum allowable rate. Which has the benefit of continuing services and, perhaps more crucially, establishing a new floor from which the 1% increase cap next year will be calculated. This ballot measure is expensive to produce for those entities that have the capability to do so, and really can only be useful in times when property value increases have outpaced the 1% significantly enough that there's room in the rate to do the jump. Unsurprisingly, the ballot measure is generally only used when necessary, so as to not annoy the voters.
This year, it was necessary, or within a few years' time, The Organization's costs due to inflation and expenses would result in the closure of locations and layoffs of the people. The last time The Organization went out for this bid, the voters passed it. That was 12 years ago, and I can owe my career with The Organization to the fact that the voters passed it. The initial time period that The Organization promised to not go back to the voters for another was six years. So they've managed double their promised period from the last one, and they gave promises to the voters that they would increase hours, staffing, and materials available with the extra money. (This year's promise, just for being able to keep the lights on and keep going as we have been, is for making it last for five years before considering going back to the voters to ask again.)
There were no persons who wanted to form a committee to say no to The Organization's ask, so there was no statement against in the voter booklets.
And as of this post, while it looks like Aye has won out, the margin of difference between Aye and Nay is less than a half of a percentage point. And it could have been swayed one way or another if all the people who didn't actually register an opinion had done so.
This should not have been this close.
( And now, about a 500W bulb's worth of heat )
