Or is it a “back-page” referendum? Legal Notice found in the back of the MN Sun-Post:
School District 281
NOTICE OF INTENDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND TAX LEVY AUTHORIZATION INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 281 (ROBBINSDALE), MINNESOTA
Notice is hereby given pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 123B.59, Subd. 3a, that the School Board of Independent School District No. 281 (Robbinsdale), Minnesota has declared its intent to levy taxes to finance (part of) the District’s approved facilities plans as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 123B.59. The projects intended to be financed by tax levies are the renovation projects at Robbinsdale Armstrong Senior High School, Robbinsdale Cooper High School, Education Service Center, Bus Garage, District Wide, Lakeview Elementary School, Meadow Lake Elementary School, Neill Elementary School, Northport Elementary School, Plymouth Middle School, Robbinsdale Area Learning Campus, Sonnesyn Elementary School and Sunny Hollow Elementary School. The total estimated project cost of these facilities is $6,550,609.
Dated November 26, 2009
Helen Bassett, Clerk
Independent School District 281
4146 Winnetka Ave. N.
New Hope, MN 55427
281 Exposed 
November 27, 2009 at 1:50 am |
So we get another levy on top of the proposed 2010 property taxes that are 22% higher than Hennepin County and 11% higher than the City of Crystal? I wish I could say this is unbelievable but it’s not. It is mInnesota business as usual. To quote the dialog from “Little Shop of Horrors”, Feed me Seymour Feed me!
How about we change the paradigm from the cost of operating the school district to controlling its spending? The average property owner is doing more with less, using things up, prioritizing spending sacrificing wants to be able to meet needed expenses. Why can’t the school district do the same?
November 27, 2009 at 3:04 pm |
I agree that “WE the PEOPLE” must put the BRAKES on this continuous spending cycle.
I will need to determine what projects this money is going to be spent on exactly. I don’t remember any recent votes, but may have missed it.
Please everyone that is out in the RAS area send emails and call each RAS board member to get your voice heard. They need to hear from all citizens, not just the parents and teachers.
December 1, 2009 at 8:19 pm |
Anymore factual info on this? I am trying to understand the complete story before I post and link…
Is this a typical yearly event that replaces previous obligations, and is therefore covered by the current tax structure?
or
Is it a new obligation being snuck in to avoid voter consternation? Thereby further raising the burden on the already highly taxed RAS citizens without needing voter approval?
Info? Thanks for catching the posting !!!
December 2, 2009 at 6:50 pm |
Well, I got my answer. It is both and neither.
This is a capital levy that is used yearly. The capital raised is used to maintain or improve the existing school buildings. Its high was above $8 million a few years back and it has been declining since.
This will not result in a “tax increase” because it is included in the $53 million amount that is being held constant from last year. Also it will be used for typical maintenance and improvements across most of the school buildings, so it will not resolve the Northport/Lakeview problem. That is still under review.
On the other hand, if the money was not needed. The $53 million could have been reduced… Its a bummer having old buildings…
RAS will post the details of the $53 million as part of the Dec 7th, 7 PM Truth in Taxation meeting information.
December 2, 2009 at 7:07 pm |
Thanks Give for checking into this. We will continue to push to sell off unused properties and hope to hear recommendations from the divestiture committee.