For those from out of town, the Clinton Community Schools wish to extend the Instructional Support Levy (property tax assessment) a further one percent to a 9 percent rate. This translates into 26 cents per $1,000 of assesed value. On a $200,000 home, that's $52.00 per year. $52 per year, per homeowner to help fund the schools.
More
background here, all the financial details,
here.
There are those who feel that any tax increase no matter how small, no matter in what cause is one more small step towards Communism. They announced a petition drive to force a referendum on the tax increase, as is their Constitutional right, nay duty to do. Of course, they knew full well that no city referendum has passed in Clinton since the original ISL Levy passed
on its second attemt in 2002. And there is one nearly every year.
When the petitions were submitted<, well, things
weren't quite as cut and dried as they seemed as today's article shows:
On Aug. 6, a petition was filed by community members, with Board Secretary and District Business Director Gayle Isaac to submit the following resolution to the voters: “Shall the Clinton Community School District, of Clinton, Iowa, be authorized to levy a 1 percent increase from 8 percent to 9 percent, the assessed rate of 26 cents per $1,000 property evaluation and to also increase to 8 percent the state income tax surtax rate from the support of the Instructional Support Levy; with the collection of the levy commencing July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2013.”
The petition has to have 401 valid signatures. But according to Clinton School District Superintendent Randy Clegg, the petition was worded incorrectly and the petition did not have the required number of signatures.
...
“Their petition actually calls for an election on an instructional support program that is worded in such a way that it will not work,” he explained.
The petition also failed to be presented with the required 401 signatures of eligible voters as required under Iowa Code Section 257.18(2).
The petition was forwarded to the Clinton County Auditor, Commissioner of Elections, Charlie Sheridan. He reviewed the petition to determine if it contained the required number of signatures. An analysis provided to the district showed that only 374 verifiable signatures of eligible voters were on the petition.
During tonight’s meeting, the board will go into closed session as provided in Section 21.5(1)(c) of the open meetings law to discuss strategies with counsel. When the meeting reopens, Clegg said the board will act on a resolution to invalidate the petition.
Does anyone know how many signatures the committee claimed to have? Shocking I know, but the Herald seems to have omitted this salient fact.
410 are required but how many did they claim to have turned in? The article says the Auditor only validated 374. That's a six percent miss.
Six to ten percent is pretty average for a petition drive. People sign twice (deliberately or not) non-eligible people sign ("Here, have my cousin from Sabula sign too!"). So in order to guarantee a good petition drive, you should have, say at least 10 percent more signatures than you need.
Of course, turning in more signatures shows political muscle, so lots of groups will go out of their way to deliver two or three times the required number. But, 28 days is a tight schedule, so I can see where just getting the bare minimum for comfort was the best doable option.
So, a ten percent cushion would mean submitting at least 442 signatures.
If the signature count isn't good enough, then arcane arguments about resolution language are moot. Of course, if one were in deadly earnest about this issue, one would probably also have an attorney familiar with ballot language at least have a look at it first.
The petition language thing is (I suppose) legit. Although I think what it is really about is a big middle finger from the School District to the petition organizers. It is the School District saying, "We can pay for lawyers. Can you?" Hardball? Certainly. Suitable for Clinton? Most would say no, but a great man once said, "Politics ain't beanbag."
Play to win or go home.
The hearing was tonight. More as it develops.
Edit The wife informs me that
this article from last week tells me that 475 signatures were handed in. That's a whopping 25 percent miss rate. So, pretty sloppy work on the petition drive. You have to police that stuff. It's not total signatures, it's total
valid signatures.
Still, if the School Board had any inkling they were that far off the mark, why bother to play hardball with the petition language?
----------------
Now playing:
Duke Ellington - "Mood Indigo"via
FoxyTunesLabels: Clinton, Politics