.

City + School Debt How much is too much?

Are the city and schools jeopardizing our tax base? Can you afford for your property tax to double or triple? Current combined debt apx. 120 million. If we lose any We Energy funding which we may if the EPA successfully shuts down unit three and we lose 1.5 mil the only other
source of payment is your property tax base. How much is too much? 

vocal local 1 January 29, 2014 at 09:04 AM
Debt is debt, the money you owe to someone else or an institution for goods or services rendered. The city debt and school debt is debt residents in a community are liable for generally bond debt. The school debt is separate from the school debt and MATC and MMSD on one's property tax bill even though you pay it all in lump sum. Has the city acted in our best interest in exceeding property tax revenue and state aides on the basis of unstable utility funding? Do you know what happens when outside funding sources stop?
vocal local 1 January 29, 2014 at 09:39 AM
On the city side of the equation, we are now totally dependent on debt financing. This debt is to be paid with Shared Utility Revenue. We receive 1,550,400 each for new units one and two or 3,100,800 per year and 1,573,466.67 on the old to pay the debt. My concern here is loss of the old unit revenue. We also still receive 2.5 mil in mitigation funding. Of this funding 1 mil goes into capital improvement the rest to police and fire. The schools receive funding from the city property tax base and state aides to pay salaries, operational costs. On the school side, the board continues to send debt further out reducing the payment but increasing debt with interest rates over time and declining bond rating. I do not have exact numbers but at the last School Board Meeting they did have copy of the latest audit. If you can receive copy, please share.
vocal local 1 January 29, 2014 at 10:09 AM
My concern is: the contracts b/w city and WisPark were made prior to the depression were in. Development has stagnated still the city is pushing deeper into debt spending. I'm content with open space not an asphalt jungle packing people on top of people. In short the re-development and development is too vigorous for our economic climate and NO I don't want my taxes raised for any reason. If new development can't pay it's way government should not tap me for it's folly.
vocal local 1 January 29, 2014 at 10:22 AM
I fully agree commercial development should decrease residential tax liability. Unfortunately, that's not the way it's working across WI at this time considering the huge tax breaks and benefits granted developers to lure them into the communities. By the time the new commercial developer exhaust the breaks and should contribute to the tax base they often leave the community. See WisParks holdings in OC and the tax rate they are paying. If ya wanna see something even more interesting review the land swaps and sales in which the city sold acres of virgin land at less than fair market value to WIS Park then couldn't balance the books and lost money on the deals.
vocal local 1 January 29, 2014 at 10:30 AM
IF you do not believe me you prove me wrong by going to city hall, planning, and pulling and searching the data contained.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »