Save OKC Schools Initiative

[OkieDave]

http://http://newsok.com/article/5553817

Filing of an Initiative Petition is imminent which would raise city funds through a temporary quarter percent income tax for a four year period in which the funds would be granted to the 24 school districts in which children of OKC attend school in order to assist schools with annual bonuses for teachers and support staff along with decreasing class sizes. Any increase in the income tax causes this measure to automatically sunset.

[Pete]

To be clear, the money raised through this would be much like MAPS 4, whereby OKC Public Schools would get the most, but other districts in Oklahoma City (Putnam City, others) would get a share in the same proportion as the MAPS formula.

[Swake]

Jenks has tried this before and it's illegal. No raising local taxes for operating funds.

[LocoAko]

https://freepressokc.com/income-taxe...pport-schools/

[TheTravellers]

At least OK isn't quite as bad as Florida...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...us_contributor

[SoonerDave]

Jenks has tried this before and it's illegal. No raising local taxes for operating funds.

Glad I'm not the only one who thought that. When I read the first post, I thought surely I had heard something in that vein before regarding this kind of notion - illegal. I believe its expressly against the state constitution, is it not?

[OkieDave]

Short answer: It is constitutional and allowable.
In 2003 State Senator Mark Snyder posed the question to then AG Drew Edmondson who concluded in his AG opinion:
As to your question of municipal funds paying teachers' salaries, under the Statute, there appear to be no statutory restrictions. See id. Within 70 O.S. Supp.2002, § 5-117 and other statutes setting out the powers, duties and limitations of school boards, we find no prohibitions against schools receiving money from municipalities and using the funds for any lawful purpose, (including payment of salaries), subject to any restrictions in the sales tax or other municipal funding legislation. However, any municipal ordinance levying a sales tax for a special purpose must specify the purpose for which the tax will be used, 68 O.S. 2001, § 2701(B); Okla. Const. art. X, § 19, and any municipal appropriations must be made as required by applicable municipal charter provisions, ordinances and State statutes.
¶6 It is, therefore, the official Opinion of the Attorney General that:
Monies raised by a municipality for the benefit of local schools may lawfully be expended for general revenue items of day-to-day school operation, including, but not limited to, teacher salaries, pursuant to 11 O.S. 2001, § 22-159.

[SoonerDave]

In reading the article, I note that Shadid (which makes me immediately suspicious of the whole thing) points out it is legal only if the city gives the monies to the districts as "grants." That just screams of something someone can challenge.

Just can't support this idea. Realize school funding is a crisis issue, but imposing an income tax at the city level is surely not the answer. What happens after the four years are up?

My property taxes are among the highest in the area, and they primarily support Moore schools; an additional tax going to support 23 other districts (given that Moore would receive a portion) just smells like bad policy and, frankly, a bit of a cash grab. The funding issue should be solved at the state level.

[shawnw]

Short answer: It is constitutional and allowable.
In 2003 State Senator Mark Snyder posed the question to then AG Drew Edmondson who concluded in his AG opinion:
As to your question of municipal funds paying teachers' salaries, under the Statute, there appear to be no statutory restrictions. See id. Within 70 O.S. Supp.2002, § 5-117 and other statutes setting out the powers, duties and limitations of school boards, we find no prohibitions against schools receiving money from municipalities and using the funds for any lawful purpose, (including payment of salaries), subject to any restrictions in the sales tax or other municipal funding legislation. However, any municipal ordinance levying a sales tax for a special purpose must specify the purpose for which the tax will be used, 68 O.S. 2001, § 2701(B); Okla. Const. art. X, § 19, and any municipal appropriations must be made as required by applicable municipal charter provisions, ordinances and State statutes.
¶6 It is, therefore, the official Opinion of the Attorney General that:
Monies raised by a municipality for the benefit of local schools may lawfully be expended for general revenue items of day-to-day school operation, including, but not limited to, teacher salaries, pursuant to 11 O.S. 2001, § 22-159.

I don't think people are questioning if giving money to schools is constitutional, I think they're questioning if the city imposing a sales tax in this manner is constitutional. Or am I misunderstanding entirely (quite likely)?

[SoonerDave]

I don't think people are questioning if giving money to schools is constitutional, I think they're questioning if the city imposing a sales tax in this manner is constitutional. Or am I misunderstanding entirely (quite likely)?

Keep in mind - this is an **INCOME** tax, not a sales tax, unless I've had a complete brain failure and misread it.

[OkieDave]

I don't think people are questioning if giving money to schools is constitutional, I think they're questioning if the city imposing a sales tax in this manner is constitutional. Or am I misunderstanding entirely (quite likely)?

Yes people are questioning whether giving money to schools is constitutional (it is).

This is a temporary income tax as opposed to a sales tax. State statute gives municipalities the right to tax themselves (with a vote of the people) whether it be sales, property or income tax.

[Jersey Boss]

Seems to this writer that an income tax is preferable to raising the sales tax again. A income tax is progressive and not regressive meaning it does not disproportioally affect those in the lower strata. Another reason is that it is aimed at those who work in the city, not just those who just shop there. I would hazard a guess the pool is larger in the former. As I recall sales tax revenues in the city have been dropping for quite sometime. Thirdly, the state has been lowering the income tax on a regular basis for the last few years, not so the sales tax. Keep raising the sales tax and people will shop around it. Not so easy with an income tax. That being said a "wealth" tax would be even more preferable.

[Martin]

Another reason is that it is aimed at those who work in the city, not just those who just shop there.

i would think that any local income tax would be based on address of residency rather than address of employment.

[SoonerDave]

Seems to this writer that an income tax is preferable to raising the sales tax again.

And OKC is seriously considering trying to do *both*!?

A income tax is progressive and not regressive meaning it does not disproportionately affect those in the lower strata. Another reason is that it is aimed at those who work in the city, not just those who just shop there

This makes no sense. You don't target an income tax based on where someone works. In fact, this would be better for me, because I don't even *work* in OKC, technically. Neither do many of the folks you're trying to snag here (Edmond, TInker AFB, Norman, etc)

. I would hazard a guess the pool is larger in the former. As I recall sales tax revenues in the city have been dropping for quite sometime. Thirdly, the state has been lowering the income tax on a regular basis for the last few years, not so the sales tax. Keep raising the sales tax and people will shop around it. Not so easy with an income tax. That being said a "wealth" tax would be even more preferable.

Do you not even notice (or care) how predatory the tone of this is? Just seems like its the mode of a hunter looking for prey..."people will shop around it...Not so easy with an income tax..."

By all means, lets tell the world whose jobs we're trying to attract that, if they come here, part of the brochure the Chamber of Commerce will hand you is a list of the taxes we're going to put on you - especially if you're one of those higher-paying jobs that some nameless, faceless bureaucracy deems "wealthy."

And if you don't think people are starting to exit the city, you might take a look at the new construction going on in the Yukon, Mustang, Tuttle, Newcastle and similar areas. There doesn't need to be additional incentive for them to leave the city.

Bottom line: a city-based income tax at this time is a horrendous idea for a growing OKC, particularly when we're trying to attract people to come here.

[SoonerDave]

i would think that any local income tax would be based on address of residency rather than address of employment.

Spot on.

[RodH]

The state income tax is based on both residency of the earner and the location where the income is earned. Income earned in Oklahoma is taxed regardless of where the earner lives. Oklahoma residents are taxed regardless of where their income is earned. I would expect that any city income tax would function in a similar manner. I am not endorsing a city income tax but merely speculating how it might be applied..

[Martin]

The state income tax is based on both residency of the earner and the location where the income is earned. Income earned in Oklahoma is taxed regardless of where the earner lives. Oklahoma residents are taxed regardless of where their income is earned. I would expect that any city income tax would function in a similar manner. I am not endorsing a city income tax but merely speculating how it might be applied..

most of the local income tax implementations i've seen assess residents only but i do admit that there are a few that assess non-residents at a lower rate... however, i'd have to wonder if a local income tax levied specifically to help fund school districts within a city's boundaries would be levied in such a way.

[shawnw]

In some cities, such as Philadelphia, the city wage (income) tax is owed whether you live there OR just work there.

The City Wage Tax is a tax on salaries, wages, commissions, and other compensation. The tax applies to payments that a person receives from an employer in return for work or services. All Philadelphia residents owe the City Wage Tax, regardless of where they work. Non-residents who work in Philadelphia must also pay the Wage Tax.

https://beta.phila.gov/services/paym...tax-employers/

[ChowRunner]

This seems like a horrible idea. So if you are required to pay the tax just for working in OKC, even if you live elsewhere you could be taxed but not be allowed to vote on the measure?

I live in OKC limits but my children go to Mustang schools... Will the money raised in my area go to the schools in my area?

[ChowRunner]

Also is this something that employers are going to be taking out of checks each month? Or will I now be required to send my W2 and a check to city hall each April? If its the latter this has no chance in hell in ever passing.

[shawnw]

I do not believe that is what is proposed for the OKC income tax, I was just adding to the context of the discussion about the methods that exist.

[OkieDave]

Correct. Oklahoma State Statutes go out of their way to specifically restrict municipalities from implementing an income tax on "non-residents" (those who work in the city but do not reside there).

[NoOkie]

In some cities, such as Philadelphia, the city wage (income) tax is owed whether you live there OR just work there.



https://beta.phila.gov/services/paym...tax-employers/

KCMO is the same way. I lived in Overland Park, worked in Missouri(By all of literally 3 feet). Paid KCMO income tax. It wasn't huge, though. Maybe a couple hundred bucks a year total.

[SoonerDave]

This seems like a horrible idea. So if you are required to pay the tax just for working in OKC, even if you live elsewhere you could be taxed but not be allowed to vote on the measure?

If this is a work-location-based tax effort, then you are correct. Live in Mustang, but work in OKC, you'd be levied a tax for which you had exactly zero representation.

I live in OKC limits but my children go to Mustang schools... Will the money raised in my area go to the schools in my area?

Yes. My understanding is they would cook up some redistribution/reallocation formula ala MAPS for Kids from a few years ago to provide funds to the outlying 22 school districts within the OKC city limits.

[SoonerDave]

Also is this something that employers are going to be taking out of checks each month? Or will I now be required to send my W2 and a check to city hall each April? If its the latter this has no chance in hell in ever passing.

If you take a closer look at your W-2, you'll likely notice an additional copy for "local or municipal taxes" (exact wording escapes me). So yup...you'll be filing an OKC tax return along with the state and federal. Now whether OKC would go to the steps to mandate withholding for it is another story.