MDCPS Claims State Increase in Funds Erased by Tax Collection “Shortfall,” While City of Miami Increases Labor Expenditures Based on Same Tax Source

short link:
UTD’s News Release on Negotiation Status (on a contract that was expired July 1 of this year…come on guys, July 1 every 3 years is schedulable…not unforeseen, let’s get this contract out) explains on behalf of management why there isn’t sufficient money for your step ( ).

Yes, that’s right. Your dues are paying for representation of management’s position, not yours.

And once again, the cloud of smoke to distract you, the voter, is a “tax collection shortfall.”

As I have written before, there is no tax collection shortfall in Miami. In actuality, there is a surplus. The shortfall is a play on words accomplished by the district claiming to expect more money than what is known to be levied by the county – an amount in surplus the last few years. (see article references at end of this post as well as my earlier blog post on this )

UTDs lawsuit against the Miami-Dade Tax Collector is misplaced and a misuse of members’ monies. The SCHOOL BOARD should use its legal resources and grounds (see below) to litigate the county…IF THERE WERE ACTUALLY A VIOLATION.

UTD’s lawsuit would be a better expenditure of members’ dues monies if the suit were against MDCPS for violating FS 1001.42(12) that authorizes MDCPS to levy sufficient tax to carry out its educational mandate (see pertinent excerpt of statute below).

MDCPS actually states, in black and white, in its own document, that there is a short fall because it chooses NOT TO LEVY SUFFICIENT TAX, thus violating its own legal responsibility (see below).

******************statutory requirement to tax sufficiently***********************

1001.42 Powers and duties of district school board.—The district school board, acting as a board, shall exercise all powers and perform all duties listed below:
(12) FINANCE.—Take steps to assure students adequate educational facilities through the financial procedure authorized in chapters 1010 and 1011 and as prescribed below:
(c) Tax levies.—Adopt and spread on its minutes a resolution fixing the district school tax levy, provided for under s. 9, Art. VII of the State Constitution, necessary to carry on the school program adopted for the district for the next ensuing fiscal year as required by law, and fixing the district bond interest and sinking fund tax levy necessary for districts against which bonds are outstanding; and adopt and spread on its minutes a resolution suggesting the tax levy provided for in s. 9, Art. VII of the State Constitution, found necessary to carry on the school program adopted for the district for the next ensuing fiscal year.

*******Excerpt from 2015-16 Executive Summary of the Budget*************
Yet, MDCPS explains away an increase in funds of $84.2 million by stating “This increase in revenue is partially offset by a $38M revenue decrease that resulted from a drop in the funds the District levies to account for the now annual tax collection shortfall. ”

Now, whose fault is this “drop in the funds…?”

the sentence continues “…funds the district levies…”

You see, AC is at his word game again and again.

There is money for a step (and in truth, when steps are granted regularly, they do not cost the district more since each step will have relatively the same proportion of the workforce distributed and the budget doesn’t care about names of people on each step, just numbers, a fairly stable number over the years around 23000. it is only when the district withholds steps and the union allows this that employees distribution becomes skewed – new hires “pile” up on the initial steps, causing a large mass of employees on that step so that the district claims it to be cost prohibitive to advance…but even this is a lie, because the cost is caused by the district spending the money “saved” from the withholding of the step advancement. Money that is owed the workforce and money the union – UTD – should recover for us).

One final question…if AC and MDCPS are correct about tax collection shortfalls…why isn’t every government agency funded by the same source affected the same way? For example, why does the city of Miami continue to meet increased labor costs due to increased property values, the same property values that AC/MDCPS claims are in shortfall?

“Rising property values helped soften the blow of higher labor costs…No matter the property’s location, individual tax bills are likely to be higher, since property values themselves are up about 8 percent this year.”

“Posted Wednesday, July 8th 2015 @ 8am
Miami-Dade County’s latest budget proposal is bucking the trend of cuts and layoffs.

That’s because Mayor Carlos Gimenez’ newest $6.8 billion plan calls for an expansion in some parks and library services — and even an extra $1 million for police body cameras.

The latest surplus coming because property values jumped more than expected.

The 9% increase leading to an additional $48 million in property tax money to spend in 2016.”

Read more:

Once again, it seems we have been lied to by both our employer and our union.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.