NTF Worksheet: ops61.doc.  9-08.

 

NEBRASKA TAXPAYERS FOR FREEDOM WORKSHEET:

ANALYSIS OF THE OMAHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS BUDGET: FY 2008 – 2009.

 

BACKGROUND.  The proposed General Fund local budget for OPS in FY 2008-2009 is 6.8 % higher, higher than the inflation rate (p.5)1, which is reaching 5%,  and over $170 million greater than the City of Omaha budget.  The property tax requirement for the OPS general fund has increased 2% and equals about 43% of this fund budget, 5% higher than last fiscal year (p.7); total property taxes required for the total state reported budget would increase by about $5 million (p.9). Your budgeted revenue hike is about $41 million. The graph (p.8) that shows OPS school taxes paid from variously valued homes misleads, because it shows OPS property taxes only a bit higher on 3 valued homes.  This graph does not factor in the average 5 % valuation hikes on Douglas County homes this year.2  Although the projected property tax levy rate would rise only a bit (p.7), property owners would pay higher property taxes because of 5% increased valuations.  The owner of an average $100,000 home in 2007, with increased valuation to $105,000, would pay about $1,260.67 in tax this year, not $1200.  The owner of an average $200,000 home in 2007, with increased valuation to $210,000, would pay about $2,521.34 in tax this year, not $2400 (p.8).    Your total general fund expenditures would rise by almost 18%.  Your total general fund budget rises by about 5%.  Your state aid has increased by 14%, special state aid by 45%, local revenues other than taxes by 14%, and miscellaneous revenues by 36%. (p.7). Generous budget funding support from private foundations we could not locate in the budget.  Your budget growth rate now can reach 2.5% instead of 0%, and the board can vote to spend an additional 1%.  Your spending limitations have a number of exemptions, for special education, interlocal agreements, early retirements, and lease purchase contracts (p.5). Therefore, we urge you to lower the tax levy to neutralize the recent valuation hikes on district property. 

 

POSITIVES.  OPS has increased its utilization of cooperative agreements with other government entities, e.g., an employee assistance program and a consortium for transportation, saving money long-term and creating efficiencies (p. 10).  OPS saves taxpayers money by using lease financing, which allows it to purchase larger quantities without spiking the expenditure budget and spreads the costs over several years.  Lease-purchasing of computer equipment and other large equipment orders will save dollars in future (p. 3). Negotiating with neighboring school districts to purchase food products and working through the statewide coop operated by the ESU Coop Purchase System saves money.  Using “just in time” periodic contracts to get supplies to schools avoids warehousing small school supplies like glue and tape that can degenerate over time. 

 

NEGATIVES.   Projected enrollment for next school year is dropping (p. 2), yet the OPS regular instruction budget would rise by over 7% (p. 5).  Despite these higher expenditures, OPS 2008 CAT composite test scores show that 28 of your 64 grade schools evidenced over 10% of children falling into the low scorers ranking, while 40 of these elementary schools showed either worse scores or no better than the previous year.  In your middle schools, 10 of 11 saw 16% to 41% of kids falling into the low scorer percentile, while 9 of these 11 showed either worse scores or no better than the previous year.   The lowest scoring schools in the metro area on ACT tests were OPS schools.  Each OPS school scored below the state and national average.  Throwing more tax dollars at these problems will not improve academic achievement.

 

BUDGET CUT & EFFICIENCY SUGGESTIONS.  We recommend the following proposals:

 

CONCLUSION.  Your budget document frequently mentions solicitation of community input, but we firmly believe that this board is not paying attention to taxpayer needs or concerns or implementing suggestions for budget cuts. 

 

Research, documentation, and analysis for this worksheet done by members of NE Taxpayers for Freedom, with express prior permission granted for its use by Citizens for Local Control, Cherry County Taxpayers, Dawes County Taxpayers, and other groups in the Tax Freedom Network. 9-08.   C

 

 



1 Page numbers refer to page numbers in the OPS summary and draft budgets, 9-08.

2 Douglas County Assessor office, 8-08, projects a 5 % valuation hike within the City of Omaha.

[1] Initial OPS Budget Presentation, July 7, 2008, p. 11.