ND Ballot Measures 1 and 2

[bisonveep08]

The North Dakota State Board of Higher Education passed a motion on
Oct. 8, 2008, opposing Measures 1 and 2 because it could potentially:

•Force the North Dakota University System to increase tuition
between 8 percent to 12.5 percent just to maintain the current level
of services and programs at the state’s universities and provide 4
percent annual salary increases.

•Delay improvements to campus security intended to further protect
students, faculty and staff in the event of an on-campus emergency.

•Eliminate some academic programs and services on all 11 campuses
resulting in faculty and staff reductions, thereby extending the
time to complete a degree.

•Reduce the ability of the NDSU Extension Service to address the
emerging issues and needs of a strong agricultural economy. The
capacity to help new value-added agriculture and entrepreneurial
ventures could be diminished resulting in a reduction in rural
community vitality.

•Reduce the ability of the North Dakota Agricultural Experiment
Station and its Research Extension Centers to increase the economic
vitality of crop and livestock production.

•Curtail the ability to pursue emerging opportunities through the
development of new agricultural technologies.

•Further delay building and infrastructure maintenance already in
excess of $110 million.

•Limit student opportunities for workstudy, internships and on-the-
job training activities.

•Increase class sizes.

More information can be found here:
http://www.ndus.nodak.edu/news/news-releases/details.asp?id=89

Please research, learn and vote NO on measures 1 and 2.

[ndsubison1]

Im voting yes on Measure 1 but I have mixed feelings on Measure 2

[sambini]

The North Dakota State Board of Higher Education passed a motion on
Oct. 8, 2008, opposing Measures 1 and 2 because it could potentially:

•Force the North Dakota University System to increase tuition
between 8 percent to 12.5 percent just to maintain the current level
of services and programs at the state’s universities and provide 4
percent annual salary increases.

•Delay improvements to campus security intended to further protect
students, faculty and staff in the event of an on-campus emergency.

•Eliminate some academic programs and services on all 11 campuses
resulting in faculty and staff reductions, thereby extending the
time to complete a degree.

•Reduce the ability of the NDSU Extension Service to address the
emerging issues and needs of a strong agricultural economy. The
capacity to help new value-added agriculture and entrepreneurial
ventures could be diminished resulting in a reduction in rural
community vitality.

•Reduce the ability of the North Dakota Agricultural Experiment
Station and its Research Extension Centers to increase the economic
vitality of crop and livestock production.

•Curtail the ability to pursue emerging opportunities through the
development of new agricultural technologies.

•Further delay building and infrastructure maintenance already in
excess of $110 million.

•Limit student opportunities for workstudy, internships and on-the-
job training activities.

•Increase class sizes.

More information can be found here:
http://www.ndus.nodak.edu/news/news-releases/details.asp?id=89

Please research, learn and vote NO on measures 1 and 2.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[roadwarrior]

Voting for either of these 2 measures will kill any meaningful attempt to fix the biggest tax problem in this state. Property taxes are out of control basically due to the state not supporting education like it should. Income taxes are definitely not the problem in North Dakota. And who will gain the most from the income tax reduction? You guessed it, the wealthy.

[ndsubison1]

im voting yes on measure two, 1/3 of the surplus was created from revenue from the individual income tax, corporate tax and such and its time we get some of that back... its tough to reform property taxes the way it is without taking away local control... put money back in the pockets of our tax payers, esp. in this economic crisis!

Vote Yes on Measure Two

[Bison Dan]

im voting yes on measure two, 1/3 of the surplus was created from revenue from the individual income tax, corporate tax and such and its time we get some of that back... its tough to reform property taxes the way it is without taking away local control... put money back in the pockets of our tax payers, esp. in this economic crisis!

Vote Yes on Measure Two

Go ahead and vote yes and get your 80.00 dollars back. But Hoeven has already said there will be no (or hard to do) property tax reform if measure 2 passes.

[Bison15]

We already have the lowest income tax in the nation, I don't think its a big deal to leave it where its at. If measure two passes and eats up 450 mil of our surplus then the oil boom goes away or the price of oil doesn't lead to profitable production, say hello to big time education cuts, infrastructure cuts, and other program cuts, not to mention higher property taxes because we won't have any income tax revenue coming in to the state plus no oil money. This would be a LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE situation.
Vote No, No, Yes, Yes, on measures 1,2,3,4

[WYOBISONMAN]

A very important fact to remember in states like ND and WYO that rely heavily on energy taxes (read Oil taxes) is that prices are down significantly, and have not yet found a bottom. This will translate into huge income reduction for our states and cutting taxes right now would be very foolish. If either of those measures pass it will surely have a huge impact on NDSU.

[Herd80]

I think there is a question to ask here: why do we have a legislature, if we feel the need to manage financial resources by constitutional mandate?

Shouldn't the taxation and appropriations committees, with the most open public input process in the country, decide on how to manage tax rates, revenues and expenditures of the state?

The checks and balances are in place to properly manage both oil revenues (for the long term), and biennial budgets.

[Bison bison]

The North Dakota State Board of Higher Education passed a motion on
Oct. 8, 2008, opposing Measures 1 and 2 because it could potentially:



notice the key word. in other words, everything that follows is b.s..

with respect to measure 1, these oil revenues are a one-time source, a windfall. there are some folks who quickly spend their windfalls: inheritance, lottery winnings; there are others who save at least part of them.

We know oil revenues are a one-time deal, to spend the income as it comes in will lead to serious "withdrawal" issues when it dries up- WHICH IT WILL.

oil is currently dancing in the lower 60s. that means we're taking in a heck ova lot less than our 'friends in bismarck' expected. they've already had to concede that they are going to have to revisit the budget - AND THEY HAVEN"T EVEN GOTTEN STARTED YET!

Anybody else ever hear the words: oil, boom, and bust in same breath - there is a reason for this!

[ndsubison1]

I just dont want the people who vote No on this measure to complain about jobs/buisnesses and students leaving this state after it's turned down (if it is)...

[Bison15]

I just dont want the people who vote No on this measure to complain about jobs/buisnesses and students leaving this state after it's turned down (if it is)...

If they move out of the state they will just pay higher income taxes in another state. ND has the lowest state taxes in the nation. If measure 2 passes they will move out of the sate because there property taxes will become higher because their will be no money left to reduce them.

[ndsubison1]

Go ahead and vote yes and get your 80.00 dollars back. But Hoeven has already said there will be no (or hard to do) property tax reform if measure 2 passes.

this measure will curb spending... the reason we have high property taxes are because of out of control spending at the local level... it has nothing to with the state legislature. something needs to be done about it at the local level

[Bison bison]

it has a lot to do with state.

the state has not increased its support of public schools in twenty years despite the fact that it is constitutionally required to do so.

in that time local property tax support has had to increase substantially.

(although this is imprecise it used to be 75% state, 25% local. those numbers have now switched)

personally, it doesn't make a difference to me. at least property tax is avoidable by living in a modest home. it hurts my ego to do so, but i'd rather pay 2% on 200k vs. 400k.

[Bison15]

this measure will curb spending... the reason we have high property taxes are because of out of control spending at the local level... it has nothing to with the state legislature. something needs to be done about it at the local level

How is measure 2 supposed to control spending at the local level? If you mean that state government wouldn't push money to local gov to spend, i guess but they have to make up for it somewhere which would lead to higher prop taxes

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for giving this surplus back to the people weather it be a check or put into good programs or both but to make it permanent every year on a surplus that is not guaranteed to be their every year would be dumb. :banghead:

[ndsubison1]

How is measure 2 supposed to control spending at the local level? If you mean that state government wouldn't push money to local gov to spend, i guess but they have to make up for it somewhere which would lead to higher prop taxes

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for giving this surplus back to the people weather it be a check or put into good programs or both but to make it permanent every year on a surplus that is not guaranteed to be their every year would be dumb. :banghead:

It doesn't control spending at the local level... I'm just sayin the high property tax problem needs to be assessed more so at the local level than the state

[roadwarrior]

The reason property taxes are high is that it is the ONLY way the school districts have to levy taxes to pay for the school systems. If the state would increase its aid to education (using money collected from the income tax and other taxes), the school districts would not be FORCED into raising property taxes.

[Bison15]

The reason property taxes are high is that it is the ONLY way the school districts have to levy taxes to pay for the school systems. If the state would increase its aid to education (using money collected from the income tax and other taxes), the school districts would not be FORCED into raising property taxes.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[TAILG8R]

The reason property taxes are high is that it is the ONLY way the school districts have to levy taxes to pay for the school systems. If the state would increase its aid to education (using money collected from the income tax and other taxes), the school districts would not be FORCED into raising property taxes.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[extremerouge]

Something I got in Email...

Initiated Statutory Measure No. 2
This initiated measure would amend sections 57-38-30 and 57-38-30.3 of
the North Dakota Century Code for tax years beginning after December 31,
2008 by lowering the state corporate income tax rates by fifteen percent
and the adjusted state income tax rates by fifty percent, except for one
taxpayer bracket where the reduction would be forty-five percent and for
two other brackets where some income would not be taxed.
YES - Means you approve the measure as summarized above.
NO - Means you reject the measure as summarized above.
If this measure passes with a YES vote, the following may occur:
* Cutbacks in higher education and other state services. Our
current approved expenditure budget from the general fund is $2.457
billion. This tax reduction would cut $415 million out of the $2.457
billion budget and would eliminate 17% of our available revenue, which
would necessitate decreases in planned expenditures in health care
services, public safety, K-12 and higher education. In addition, if this
passes, it would eliminate the Governor's proposed property tax cuts.
Under this proposed measure, families with modest incomes would
experience very small tax cuts and families with low income would
receive no benefit at all, while still paying property taxes at the
current level. For details, see Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
article from September 18, 2008. http://www.cbpp.org/9-18-08sfp.htm (http://www.cbpp.org/9-18-08sfp.htm)
<http://www.ndsualumni.com/NetCommunity/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fw (http://www.ndsualumni.com/NetCommunity/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fw)ww.cbpp.org%2f9-18-08sfp.htm&srcid=4368&srctid=1&erid=987372>
* Higher education tuition increase of 8% to 12.5% each year. The
Student Legislative Affairs Committee (statewide student committee that
is part of the North Dakota Student Association) and the NDSU Student
Senate are opposed to Measures 1 and 2. They have also partnered with
AARP of North Dakota and the North Dakota Education Association to
oppose these measures. Students and parents are already facing great
challenges regarding the cost of higher education. An educated work
force is vital for North Dakota's future. As NDSU alumni, we need to
support our students and assist them to stay in school by keeping costs
down. For details, see:
ND Student Association Resolution

<http://www.ndsualumni.com/NetCommunity/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fw (http://www.ndsualumni.com/NetCommunity/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fw)ww.ndsualumni.com %2fNetCommunity%2fDocument.Doc%3fid%3d46&srcid=4368&srctid=1&erid=987372>

NDSU Student Government Resolution
http://www.ndsualumni.com/NetCommunity/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fw (http://www.ndsualumni.com/NetCommunity/page.redir?target=http%3a%2f%2fw)ww.ndsualumni.com %2fNetCommunity%2fDocument.Doc%3fid%3d45&srcid=4368&srctid=1&erid=987372
* Services for agriculture could be curtailed. Passage of this
measure may reduce the ability of the North Dakota Agricultural
Experiment Station and its Research Extension Centers to increase the
economic vitality of crop and livestock production. It may also reduce
the ability of the NDSU Extension Service to address emerging issues and
needs of a strong agricultural economy. It may diminish the capacity to
help new value-added agriculture and entrepreneurial ventures which
could result in a reduction in rural community vitality.

[Bison bison]

The reason property taxes are high is that it is the ONLY way the school districts have to levy taxes to pay for the school systems. If the state would increase its aid to education (using money collected from the income tax and other taxes), the school districts would not be FORCED into raising property taxes.

+++

and don't forget that the state limits the amount that districts can raise (ie there is a cap on the mill levy). for property poor districts there is no way to raise ANY additional funds.