Minutes - 20031023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Chapel Hill. I would like for Chapel Hill people to understand why they have unwittingly become involved in our funding problem. A recent Chapel Hill school board document refers to their district as aSelf-Contained Community and also states, "This community identifies strongly with the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, not with other towns and not very much with Orange County." Nothing could be further from the truth. The funding inequity exists specii:lcally because they are not self-contained. Here are some examples that show we do not and cannot live in isolation from each other. The use value tax plan and the Cane Creek reservoir are two examples. The first allows farmland to be taxed at a greatly reduced rate. One hundred million dollars worth of farmland would generate the equivalent of what a $60,000 house would generate in taxes. Approximately 50% of land in the County district is in this program, ar 105,000 acres in the County to 6,000 acres in the City. The reservoir also generates minimal tax revenue due to restrictions on property and density. This reservoir serves City water needs only. Orange County people cannot even tap into this source of water that exists in the Orange County district. I don't think anyone here would argue that we should not assist farmers, and I think we all realize that our quality of life is improved by living in a County that has this beautiful countryside. And I don't believe that anyone would argue that Chapel Hill shouldn't receive this water. But there is a significant cost borne by residents in the County district by way of a lower tax base for these policies that benefit the County as a whole; and that includes the City. And I do believe in the opening statement, we did have a statement that said we did indeed have a lower tax base - 22.4 for Orange County to the 20 cents for Chapel Hill. The law tax base from these policies makes the district tax a poor solution. Additionally, a district tax would not solve the inequity, as it would always have to keep pace with the City tax. The bar, the per pupil funding allocation, is set by the largest, fastest growing, wealthiest district. The fact that the City district tax adversely affects the per pupil allocation for County schools provides another example of haw we cannot say one part of our County is self- contained, unaffected by and having no impact on the rest of the County. Back when the inequity was 5% and the tax was a supplement far Chapel Hill schools, the tax had no impact on us. But now the inequity has grown to 34°~ and is used far operating costs, we are seeing the success of one school system at the expense of another. Children in the Orange County schools are not receiving educational opportunities that Chapel Hill students take for granted. And so my request to the rest of the speakers tonight is to think about problem solving instead of just saying no and to acknowledge that we are all part of the problem, that the funding inequity is not just the problem of Orange County residents. Just say no is too easy. Thank you. Robin Staudt: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I thank you for this opportunity to speak with you again this evening at this second public hearing. My name is Robin Staudt and I live in Efland. With so many eloquent speakers and the fact that last week I spoke to you about many facts, this week will be another story. I come before you tonight as a CSE, Citizens for a Sound Economy, representative as well as a County citizen. I've lived here for mare than seven years and plan to be here for many mare. As a CSE representative, Istand for local control of our schools and property, especially where our children are concerned, time and research has shown that smaller schools and united communities produce a better learning environment for our children. CSE is