Part I - What the law says.
In this first part, we look at what state statutes say regarding the annual meeting and setting a tax levy. As you will see, there is some confusion because in different sections of the statute it says that the "electors" vote a levy and that the school board established a levy. You will also see that when these disconnects occur--and they do occur-- an Attorney General Opinion is in order to clarify law.
We start with a little piece of the conclusions offered in an analysis prepared for the Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB):
"The budget law is aimed at making public bodies more responsive to the concern of taxpayers and for the purpose of checking in some measure the trend in increased taxes. Therefore, the budget process is an important community activity. An adopted budget provides “the legal authorization for the expenditure of money as listed in the budget and for the levying of necessary property taxes to finance these expenditures.”
Therefore, a thoughtful budget planning process with community involvement can contribute to the board’s fiscal responsibilities in the operation of schools during economically difficult times."From, here we should dive right in and see what the statutes say.
---Lathrop & Clark, "The Budget Process" [prepared for WASB]
CHAPTER 120, Wis. Statutes - SCHOOL DISTRICT GOVERNMENT
120.10 Powers of annual meeting. The annual meeting of a common or union high school district may:
(8) TAX FOR OPERATION. Vote a tax for the operation of the schools of the school district.
120.12 School board duties.
(3) TAX FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. (a) Annually on or before November 1, determine the amount necessary to be raised to operate and maintain the schools of the school district and public library facilities operated by the school district under s. 43.52
endnotes s. 120
Under sub. (3), the school board of common or union high school district has ultimate authority to determine the tax levy for operation and maintenance of the schools in the district. 79 Atty. Gen. 46.
79 Op. Att'y Gen. 46 (1990)
The Assembly Committee on Organization has requested my opinion regarding the authority of a school board of a common or union high school district to approve a property tax levy for the school district that differs from the annual tax levy approved by electors at the school district annual meeting. Specifically, the committee asks: "[U]nder ss. 120.10 and 120.12, Stats., which body, the annual meeting or the school board, has the ultimate authority to determine the property tax levy for the operation of the schools of the school district?"
79 Op. Att'y Gen. 46 (1990)
The question arises because two statutes appear to give authority to two different entities to approve the property tax levy for the operation of the schools. Section 120.10(8), Stats., authorizes the annual meeting to vote a tax for the operation of the schools while section 120.12(3)(a) authorizes the school board to determine the amount necessary to be raised to operate and maintain the schools.
79 Op. Att'y Gen. 46, 48 (1990)
The answer to your question is that the school board has the ultimate authority to determine the property tax levy for the operation and maintenance of the school district because section 120.12(3) requires the board to determine the amount necessary to operate and maintain the schools. Prior attorney general opinions concluded that earlier versions of section 120.12(3) gave the board the power "to operate and maintain a school regardless of whether the electors provide sufficient funds for such operation and maintenance." 13 Op. Att'y Gen. 380, 381 (1924), and 25 Op. Att'y Gen. 411, 413 (1936).
THE BOTTOM LINE
It should be crystal clear that the school board has ultimate authority over the tax levy.
But...wait...you say. What about when the taxpayers reduced the levy by $2M in 2009?
COULD the school board have reversed that vote? Sure, one might argue, but history always decides who was right, and history fell on the side of the angry taxpayers. They reduced the levy by $2M only to have the school district come in with a surplus of $1.3M. Clearly, the $2M was not "necessary to operate and maintain schools".
Wanted... Desired... Coveted? Absolutely!
Necessary? Absolutely not.
The law is clear that this is about determining a levy necessary to OPERATE and MAINTAIN schools. Not a levy to add new initiatives. Not a levy to enhance schools. JUST a levy which is necessary to operate and maintain schools.
While we maintain that the 6 budget initiatives were "good" things....they were not "necessary" things. Desired? Yes. But necessary? No.
I'm fixing a hole where the reign gets in
And keeps my tax bill wandering
How high will it go?
I'm filling the cracks caused by the Seabass
And kept tax bills leaping up
Where it will end?
And it really doesn't matter if I'm wrong I'm right
Where I belong I'm right
Where I belong.
---with apologies to Mssrs. Lennon & McCartney
Posts
