While the adults who are not in the room play “whack the mole” and “starve the beast’, those adults who are in the room (teachers) and the young people whose future is at stake (students), pay the price.
On Nov. 6, Hawaii voters will be asked, “Shall the legislature be authorized to establish, as provided by law, a surcharge on investment real property to be used to support public education?”
Loud and forceful opposition to this measure by the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Realtors and the counties is to be expected.
The Chamber of Commerce and the Board of Realtors, rarely if ever support any tax increases for any reason. This is who they are, and I get it. That is their position, and they are certainly entitled to it.
The county as well is driven by self interest, seeking to protect its primary income source, which is property taxes. I get that too.
Everybody looks after themselves and I get it, but I do not agree or embrace it. I certainly don’t agree with using hyperbole to mislead and scare the public into opposing a worthy effort to support public education.
The concerns expressed by the proposals opponents are centered on the fear of the unknown, and project out worse case scenarios.
When the opponents state “there is no guarantee this money will go to education,” they are being less than forthright. Like most big lies, there is some truth to this statement because in life there are no guarantees. The law can be changed, budgets can be altered, and nefarious means can be used to subvert the language in the constitution.
SB2922 which created the proposed constitutional amendment says clearly: “… revenues derived from a surcharge on investment real property pursuant to section 3 of article VIII shall be used to support public education.”
The ballot question itself says, “Shall the legislature be authorized to establish, as provided by law, a surcharge on investment real property to be used to support public education?”
Should the Legislature attempt to divert the funds from public education, or attempt to “supplant” the funding by decreasing what presently comes in from other sources, you can be sure that teachers, parents, and students across the state would sue. You can also be sure the legislators who supported such an effort would be targeted and would lose their next election.
Of this, I am 100 percent certain.
Yes, the legislature does this fairly frequently with other funds, but unlike the others, the particular purpose of this surcharge “to support public education” is embedded in the state constitution.
The truth is that a law implementing the intent of the proposed Constitutional amendment has not been written and will not be written until the amendment passes.
The Constitution provides the basic framework and the legislature provides the details. While those details are always subject to change, the legislature cannot change the fundamental purpose of “using the funds to support public education.”
Based on the legislative history preceding this effort, the clear intent is to levy a tax surcharge on “high end” investment property that has minimal impact on local residents. The targeted investment property in past discussions at the legislature have been very expensive homes owned by investors that either sit vacant or are used as part-time residence’s or vacation rentals. Legislators could easily exempt all investment properties that are used for long term rentals, or as has been proposed, tax only those properties valued at $1 million or more.
Another increasingly popular argument against increasing funding for public education is based loosely on the fact that a large school system requires a large bureaucracy, and large bureaucracies are inherently inefficient.
I will be the first to agree that yes the Department of Education can and must improve its operations.
However, a strategy of “starving the beast” by refusing to increase funding for public education until “they fix the DOE” is shortsighted and will only perpetuate the arguments of those who claim the public education system is failing. Of course, the more you starve the system of resources, the worse it will perform.
Increasing funding for our schools, while increasing efficiencies at the DOE is the dual path and strategy that must be followed if we are to continue making meaningful improvements in public education.
To borrow briefly from a piece I wrote a few weeks ago on this topic:
“The legislature and the public has been playing a game of “whack a mole” for a long, long time, effectively dodging the question and responsibility of properly funding Hawaii’s public education system. They say no to increasing the General Excise Tax (GET), they say no to raising tourist taxes (except for rail, of course), they say no to taxing sugar drinks, and they say no to legalizing and taxing cannabis. In the past they have said no to taxing retirement income and casino gambling and/or a lottery (all bad ideas IMHO) have never gotten off the ground.
“Whack the mole, pass the buck, and kick the can down the road is how our state has dealt with funding public education, and we all should be a little ashamed of ourselves for letting that happen.”
Somebody has to step up, support, and actually pay for the public education system our children deserve. That somebody, is all of us.
I am voting yes and I encourage you to join me.
•••
Gary Hooser formerly served in the state Senate, where he was majority leader. He also served for eight years on the Kauai County Council and was former director of the state Office of Environmental Quality Control. He serves presently in a volunteer capacity as board president of the Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action (HAPA) and is executive director of the Pono Hawaii Initiative.
On Schools: I am voting yes. No one wants more taxes, I look around at all the things we are short of money on and can’t repair. I drive past a street off of Kuamoo that has deep holes across it’s intersection. Most of the time they are filled with water and I don’t know how those residents drive in and out without being able to see the depth of the holes through the muddy water. It depresses the hell out of me. But nothing is worse than lack of funding for education and teachers. I’m willing to pay. Hard though it may be on my budget and my property taxes. This is not a 3rd world country. Let’s not emulate one.
At this time, I am a local, long-term renter. I would certainly hate for any increase in property taxes to be passed on to me by my landlord, as was indicated in previous articles on this bill. If there was verbiage in this bill, or as supplemental information along side it, addressing what exactly the state is considering investment property, I would fully support it, but without a clear definition of what this term means, it could be changed or ammended any time to include all investment property, including long-term rentals, which would only exacerbate the already alarming affordable housing crisis in Hawaii.
Gary,
How can you possibly jump to the conclusion that the DOE needs more money without an audit? The Civil Beat posted the salaries (or salary range) for all public employees for the period ending June 30, 2018 (FY18). If you analyze the 20,066 employees under the DOE which range from the Superintendent of Education to custodial workers and clerical office staff, you’d find that the average of the low range is $46,097 and the average of the high range is $73,146. Assuming that the average is closer to each positions respective midpoint, the average salary would be $60,026. That’s straight salary not fringe benefits which would be 60% of the medical insurance premiums and defined benefits upon retirement. It’s also noteworthy that there are 6,189 DOE staff (30.8%) that are eligible to make over $80,000 at their maximum range; 1,535 over $100,000; 365 over $130,000; and 75 over $170,000. Why does the DOE top brass have ranges that exceed Mayors, Police & Fire Chiefs, and County Attorneys? Seems like these monies could be redistributed to up the starting salaries for new teachers if that’s HSTA’s biggest concern. This is a union issue not necessarily a funding issue. I would agree that any schools are in bad shape and need upgraded classrooms, cafeterias, and gymnasiums but those are capital needs not operational needs. I find it insane to ask for money without a detailed plan to spend it. There needs to be an audit before any additional money is poured into a broken system.
Easily said Valerie. I bet you don’t own an “investment” property or live in a rental unit. It’s always easier to have someone else pay for things, just like the rabid socialist Gary Hooser is always wanting to do. And it’s best when the taxpayer is not able to vote in Hawaii. That’s really cool! Taxing without representation. Even better when those forgotten poor folks that rent will be paying more rent due to Gary’s favorite solution for everything: INCREASE TAXES especially on those who can’t fight back. And our local Mom & Pop businesses will have to pay higher rent’s due to the increased taxes on their owned or rented (investment) buildings. That’s the definition of cowardice. Push small business out of business so the big guys like Costco, Safeway, etc. will have less competition. Typical socialist mis-thinking. They always try to sell something the uninformed like hearing and haven’t the intellect to dispute.
What in the crazy mixed up right wing lunatic white trash trump world does “Big Box forcing out Ma & Pa” have to do with “socialism.” That whacked out remark just proves it’s your big Boogey Woogey word for this election year and, I might add, the ONLY thing you have to try and divert us from the white trash stuff trump says and does EVERY DAY!
“Big Box forcing out Ma & Pa” is Chapter 43 in the “I’m a Capitalist” book, and in the popular song:
“I’m a Capitalist and I’m OK,
I sleep all night and I work all day,
I’m a Capitalist and I don’t care,
I put a box here and put a box there,”
How many schools could we fund with the price of that rail system in Honolulu. Oh, great, let’s burn some more money! Spoil the child, he spends the money sooo well.
Gary knows “whack a mole” well. It’s the game he and another anti-GMO/anti-ag activists love to play! Once again, his hypocrisy reigns!
The funny thing, Just Saying, is that you socialists are so ignorant of basic economics that you don’t even know you’re doing it…killing the mom & pops, hurting low income renters and actually advancing the big corporate boxes you constantly criticize. No brains behind your mouth.
The resources of this country was meant for all of us, the money changers have zero incentive to lend money for the greater good. You think the 1st $700 billion 2008 TARP + the 2nd $700 billion will prevent them from over lending causing gigantic tax losses on investment property (that do not expire that can be used for decades to subtract from taxes due even after bankruptcy) was a travesty……….wait until the next bailouts. That is how Trump resolved his debt problems and there is a long line of developers wAiting for their DEAL.
I’m leaning toward a no vote on this, even though I agree with your arguments for it. I also believe with some of the other commenters that the money DOE has is ill-spent, wasted, and poorly accounted for. I know some teachers who suffer under mindless, cruel, revenge-driven, power mad principals, and are even forced to do janitors’ jobs in their schools. I also don’t believe administrators should be paid many times teachers’ salaries, or that “special education” students should be allowed to disrupt classes or that they should be expected to perform the same as normals on standardized tests for teachers to be considered successful. The way the proposed amendment is worded, there’s no guarantee the money would go into the classrooms or teachers’ pay. I see this powerful paragraph in this writer’s article about the other proposal on the ballot about holding a constitutional convention applying here as well:
“A majority of the elected delegates (barring a major miracle) will in all likelihood, consist of forces representing the status quo establishment and institutions now in power. Their natural agenda is to preserve the status quo and to strengthen their own power and influence.”
The entrenched anti-education forces in the state legislature would probably see to it that the money would go to enrich their superintendent and director and manager cronies, not where it’s needed most.