There are a number of other issues associated with how public schools are funded. First is the inappropriateness of imposing an annual tax on the assessed value of homes and other buildings. Buildings are depreciating assets requiring ongoing expenditures by owners for maintenance; then, every decade or so owners must spend considerable amounts for systems replacement. When buildings age beyond a certain point, the cost of ownership rises to a point where the highest, best use of the land parcel is to replace the building altogether. The optimum rate of taxation on a building is zero. Second is the fact that the value of every location in a community is directly tied to the quality of public goods and services brought to the location. This includes the quality of public schools. The economics are straightforward. Every parcel of land has some potential annual rental value. This value is societally-created and is the amount an owner of land ought to be charged as an annual payment (it is not really as tax) for benefits received. Whether the revenue captured via the existing or the more ideal form of property taxation is used to pay for the costs of public schools or other public goods and services is a different issue. A question of fairness occurs because of the fact that the amount a household pays for public education is independent of household income or the number of children enrolled in the schools. Is it fair that a childless person or couple contributes the same amount to the schools, year after year after year, as those households whose child or children are enrolled from elementary years through high school? We do need to recognize that as population increases in a community, the rental value of location will increase over time and sometimes increase significantly. To avoid displacement of households with lower incomes, communities should offer property owners the opportunity to apply to have their annual payment to the community capped based on an analysis of household income and liquid assets. Any amount owed but no paid would then accrue as a lien on the person's property to be paid to the community upon sale or transfer of the property to heirs.
Free housing for all paid for by realistic property taxes paid by folks like Elon would be better than funding schools this way. Housing is for all, period.
There are a number of other issues associated with how public schools are funded.
First is the inappropriateness of imposing an annual tax on the assessed value of homes and other buildings. Buildings are depreciating assets requiring ongoing expenditures by owners for maintenance; then, every decade or so owners must spend considerable amounts for systems replacement. When buildings age beyond a certain point, the cost of ownership rises to a point where the highest, best use of the land parcel is to replace the building altogether. The optimum rate of taxation on a building is zero.
Second is the fact that the value of every location in a community is directly tied to the quality of public goods and services brought to the location. This includes the quality of public schools. The economics are straightforward. Every parcel of land has some potential annual rental value. This value is societally-created and is the amount an owner of land ought to be charged as an annual payment (it is not really as tax) for benefits received.
Whether the revenue captured via the existing or the more ideal form of property taxation is used to pay for the costs of public schools or other public goods and services is a different issue. A question of fairness occurs because of the fact that the amount a household pays for public education is independent of household income or the number of children enrolled in the schools. Is it fair that a childless person or couple contributes the same amount to the schools, year after year after year, as those households whose child or children are enrolled from elementary years through high school?
We do need to recognize that as population increases in a community, the rental value of location will increase over time and sometimes increase significantly. To avoid displacement of households with lower incomes, communities should offer property owners the opportunity to apply to have their annual payment to the community capped based on an analysis of household income and liquid assets. Any amount owed but no paid would then accrue as a lien on the person's property to be paid to the community upon sale or transfer of the property to heirs.
In Arizona the school 'choice' voucher program is decimating public schools. That information needs to be included in future studies.
How is it doing so?
Free housing for all paid for by realistic property taxes paid by folks like Elon would be better than funding schools this way. Housing is for all, period.
No, and that's stupid