Lying A-Holes Out to Sabotage Appo Referendum With Blatant Lies
35% property tax increase my ass. The lying a-holes in this district have no shame. I have a kid with in a math class with 40 other students. I know from first hand experience that the district needs this referendum to pass.
If you don’t like it, don’t vote for it. But the blatant lying is beneath contempt.
The District already raised the taxes by $0.15. They did not need to ask for this part. You are being asked to vote on four years of raises that will culminate in up to $0.3713 increase. You can cannot pick and choose lesser amounts. A yes vote guarantees that final amount of increase.
If you vote yes, your tax assessment rate in four years will be $1.9713. Last year it was $1.45
1.9713 – 1.45 = 0.5213
0.5213/1.45 = 35.95%
Now, is the inclusion of the secret $0.15 in the calculations fair? Maybe not.
Was it fair of the board to apply it in secret? In the run up to the largest referendum ever proposed in Appoquinimink? Without any comparable item funding list as with previous referendums?
Was it fair to propose the referendum without the approval of the board’s state-mandated Financial Advisory Committee?
Bottom line, if people vote yes, their taxes will be 36% higher in 2017 than they were in 2012. If they vote no, they will only be 10% higher. Given that the state cut funding by 10%, we think that’s a reasonable place to start the revised referendum discussions.
We need a referendum. We also need full disclosure and the full attention to detail that has been the hallmark of all previous successful Appoquinimink referendums.
Thanks. I’ll believe my own eyes. What size HS math class does appo truth want? If 40 is too small, 45? 50?
The bottom line is that the impact of starving the district of these needed investments will not be known in 2017, but in 2033 when these kids should be entering their prime earning years.
These scare tactics are trying to do on a small scale in Appo what Republicans have done to the country on a large scale.
“Now, is the inclusion of the secret $0.15 in the calculations fair? Maybe not.” so that really should have been the end of the discussion.
Bottom line… people don’t mind paying an extra $15 a month for kind-of-faster porn download speed, but ask for a few pennies so the US continue to spiral into Idiocracy… People are screaming bloody revolution. Get over it, pay your taxes
Actually, the Appo truther is also lying about the property tax. Property tax consists of NCC taxes as well as school taxes. The only change will be to the school tax portion.
But perhaps Appo-truther was educated in a math class with 50 people, so it’s not their strong suit.
AppoTruther should have known better to lie about an issue in LG’s back yard.
Actually based on his website, his schtick is all about defunding unions, probably with some tea party thrown in too.
I’m certainly not as up-in-arms as Jason. I have had discussions with reasonable people about whether this referendum is the right number at the right time for the right purposes. There are compelling arguments on both sides.
But misrepresenting the tax increase like this is not reasoned debate. And with some of the tea-partiers in the Middletown area lining up against it, I would have found it very hard to vote against it.
The signs dishonestly claiming a 35% property tax increase are all over the middle school grounds this morning. That is some bullshit.
Here’s some more BS. From Appo Truth’s website:
That’s quite an agenda.
Granted, I don’t live in Appo, and haven’t kept up to speed on this referendum (reading now!), but that paragraph would have me questioning where Appo Truth is coming from. Doesn’t exactly sound like he/she has the interest of all students in mind.
J-Blo: “starving the district” …yes, thanks for that with your 2008 and 2012 political picks.
So-Ben: By keeping the $0.15 silent, the district hasn’t been entirely forthcoming. The proposed referendum did not win the approval of the state-mandated Financial Advisory Committee. The discussion should end there.
Puck: Defunding unions isn’t up to us. Denying them increasing access to our economic livelihood is. Make no mistake, this referendum doesn’t come with vaseline. It could have been structured better to share the pain.
LibG: You have some kool-aid on your upper lip.
J-Blo(2): As opposed to the vote-yes referendum signs all over the place? For weeks? At the doors to every school? Isn’t this an “election”?
Panda: Not everything is black and white. Unless you’re facing a binary voting choice, rather than an expanded democratic menu of options. I guess that was so 2006.
On your way teabag. Your moderate pretensions are slipping.
We’re happy to answer any questions you have.
Our agenda is a revised referendum in 120 days.
What’s yours?
Why is it that the people that feel the need to put “truth” or “patriot” in their names are so disconnected from the meaning of the words?
I also love that:
a) my assertion wasn’t addressed, just a pathetic insinuation.
b) that a vote of “yes” or “no” isn’t a binary choice
LibG: Assessment rates were the school portion taken directly from New Castle County website for 2012 and 2013. If you lump in the NCC other taxes, then your arched eyebrow math has some weight. But we are focusing on the increase that will be heading to the schools. You spin it your way, we’ll spin it ours.
Binary Choice — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrete_choice#Binary_Choice
Two choices – taking an action or not taking an action.
the fact that whoever wrote AppoTruth’s website felt the need to call it “Appokleptistan”, shows they aren’t a serious person interested in engaging in a serious debate.
you don’t live in the 3rd world, stop victimizing yourself, shut up and pay your taxes, you arrogant baby.
As soon as the state-mandated Financial Advisory Committee says the numbers are kosher, you have our vote.
Very simple. See you in 120 days.
Please try to define the components of “property tax”. You would have been correct if you said “school tax” but property tax is composed of school tax and NCC taxes.
Even school tax isn’t a pure number since part of my tax bill is for Vo-tech (almost 10%).
So what is it? 35% increase of property tax, school tax or Appoquinimink school taxes?
If you have to resort to truth-bending, I have to assume that you are being willfully and knowingly obtuse to further your own agenda.
And if you have a problem with the referendum learn how to express yourself in an adult fashion. Appokleptistan? Grow up.
Saying “property tax” instead of “school tax” is not a mistake. It is very Luntz-ian, designed to push teabagger buttons. I wouldn’t be surprised if this misdirection is found in a teabagger manual somewhere. Or in old Reagan-era documents from when movement conservatives were successfully working their way into school boards.
LibG: “willfully and knowingly obtuse to further your own agenda” …..yeah, WHERE could have we gotten such in idea??? WHERE??
Panda: Blogs are not for adults. See America, 1994 to 2013.
Puck: Thanks for noticing. People understand property tax much better than school tax. Not enough time for Public Fleecing 101, so we used the Cliff’s Notes.
In other words…”so we lied.” The substance of the post has been fully validated.
BTW – you also lied about taking off and seeing us in 120 days.
You have a real problem with the truth.
Fair enough, mods 😉
Just don’t think we’re not as committed to our reasons, whatever they may be. We don’t require ideological purity. Any “no” is good enough for us.
For the record, I know people of good will who are on the other side of this. This appo truther and the people who put up the lying property tax signs, however, are lying scoundrels.
No, you used a misleading term. If you were trying to be reasonable you could have calculated how much “property tax” was going to go up, rather than create a bogus number from a portion of “school tax” and change the label to “property tax”.
That isn’t Cliff’s notes, that is fraudulent.
J-Blo: We don’t think you know anyone of goodwill. You’re pulling our leg, you cheeky devil.
LibG: School tax portion in 2012: $1.45, in 2013: $1.60. Proposed increase to $1.97 within four years. You call it whatever you want if it makes you happy.
Just pull down all of your lying signs, re-print them and put them back up and we’re cool.
By the way, who is paying for all of those signs?
Now there’s a question, LG.
LibG(1): As soon as the administrators stop using fear tactics, like saying 67 positions will be cut. They won’t….not even close. Or that classes will go to 50 kids. They won’t.
LibG(2): Why, do you want to chip in? We figure we already paid for the district’s signs. Why not some opposed for balance?
I just want to make sure that you are revealing what you are spending and who is spending it. Ya know, that’s part of democracy, too.
But the methods employed by this “shadowy group” seem a lot like the tactics that we have seen by all sorts of Tea-partier psuedo-intellectual mini-Machiavelli’s. Late night sign placement, temporary blog sites and webmail accounts to astroturf an issue and introduce FUD into the equation.
I would love to know why the people behind it don’t have the strength of conviction to speak in opposition in the clear. But I’m going to guess that on the 28th the referendum will pass and we will never hear from these jokers again until they pop up in Christina, Red Clay or Smyrna school districts.
I don’t live in Appo, haven’t really been following this whole thing. But the new high school opened in 2008. The current Middletown High School was built in 1997. How did class size become an issue so fast? Was the planning that inadequate? Did these new housing developments and residents appear out of nowhere? Are there plans for a new high school?
Also, according to current state DOE reports, just 1% of classes at Appoquinimink has more than 40 students, and 2% has 36-40 students. Nearly half have 15-25 students, and another 18% has 26-30 students.
At Middletown High, there are no classes with more than 40 students, and 4% with 36-40. Also at Middletown, 25% of the classes have less than 11 students.
LG interesting question–since nobody is running as a candidate, is there even a legal requirement for groups or individuals paying for political signs to identify or identify contributors? (Serious question; I don’t know. I would assume an existing PAC would have to report the expenditures, but …)
As for the people behind it [who] don’t have the strength of conviction to speak in opposition in the clear, let’s recall that the lesson of last year in school board elections was that it was not the Tea-partier psuedo-intellectual mini-Machiavelli’s but the Voices for DE Education SuperPAC sponsored by Rodel et al that covered us in mailers and refused to identify their contributors. Let’s also recall that whatever else is wrong with what this troofer says, he does have this point: in the last Red Clay referendum I believe the district had SuperPAC money there as well paying for pro-referendum signs, so it is not like the districts don’t invite this sort of thing by what they do (that said, I have no idea if Appo has done the same thing or not).
And jason–while I would probably vote for this referendum if I lived there, do you seriously believe it is going to reduce the size of your child’s math class? It won’t.
A. Mike – “The current Middletown High School was built in 1997. How did class size become an issue so fast?”
It is staffing not the number of classrooms, and it is going to get worse if these outside agitators with highly suspect motives get their way.
Steven, I also has a 7th grader and the ability to see beyond the moment, as well as the ability to empathize with other parents and people I don’t even know.
Another Mike –
These numbers are rough and off the top of my head, but yes, that area has had explosive growth. Since the 2000 census, the MOT area population grew by some 160% or so.
I don’t necessarily think this has to do with inadequate planning, though. Not really feasible to build a school system with the capacity to double every 6 years.
Developers should shoulder the burden of infrastructure costs, growth is expensive.
Yes, they should. However, that is a state issue that has not gotten any traction.
Tom I would like to see some examples where your suggestion has been tried (Developers shouldering the burden….)
Developers are (or should be) responsible for some things, not all things.
SussexAnon – It is already the case that developers contribute to the capital programs of the districts that will serve them. However, the current calculation under-predicts the impact.
This was discussed extensively during the Workforce Housing kerfuffle a few years ago.
Developers also have to redevelop roads and infrastructure surrounding their developments *if* an impact study declares it necessary.
It would be interesting to know how the developers’ contributions have been used and spent and how that impacts (if at all) this referendum.
Here is Sussex we just blame DelDot for roads. I mean, who knew that 1500 home sites would have a negative impact?
I think any high school class with more than 25 students is ridiculous. However, I would be concerned if the extra money was really going to reduce class sizes. All districts need to take a serious look at how they’re spending money. These public schools tend to be too top heavy with a disproportionate amount of money being spent on administration. That being said, I would still vote for it. I consider public education an investment.
Just got a robocall and poll from the DSEA about the referendum. Not too comfortable with that. Seems like meddling.
After being contacted by legal representatives of the opposition, the district has responded and agreed to re-post the signs they removed.
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20130227/NEWS/302270045/Appo-district-seeks-7-2-million-higher-property-taxes
This really should have been the lede:
Even though AppoTruther makes my skin crawl, the district overstepped arrogantly in removing the signs. Their automatic assumption they could get away with it needed to be body-checked. The only thing they respond to is lawyers. In many cases the districts are simply ignorant of the law. Making them put them back is delicious.
And in general he has a valid point that applies to any school referendum – in exchange for approving new tax money, there must be more accountability.
“blogs are not for adults” OK, now we know exactly which of our trolls this is.
The wonderful thing about liberals is that so much of what they know isn’t so.
The wonderful thing about conservatives is that you never have to guess what they’re thinking. They just don’t want to pay their taxes.
We would be satisfied with complete transparency and getting what we pay for. This referendum is murky on both counts.
However, your comment about liberals had nothing to do with the referendum. I swear, you are doing more to encourage people to support this referendum than the Appo School District.
That would presume nice liberals actually read this blog. We haven’t seen any. You saving them up during Lent?
Are you using the royal “we,” or are you speaking about your anonymous sponsors?
Actually, the lede seems to be this:
It’s actually a little sloppy not to include the fact that Matt Brown ran unsuccessfully for the school board last year and is trying again this year. Interestingly, I remember that Brown had a ton of signs that appeared magically in the middle of the night also.
@Puck: All that matters is that there is always room for one more.
It’s actually a little sloppy not to include the fact that Matt Brown ran unsuccessfully for the school board last year and is trying again this year
It’s like the immunity Evan Queitsch enjoys whenever the NJ or WDEL report on him as if they have never heard of him before.
@Appo Truth: If you used your name rather than a Tea Party-style name like the one you’re using, you might have more credibility. I don’t live in Appo so I couldn’t care less how this turns out, but if I were working for the pro-referendum side I would try to smear you as a Tea Partier, and your handle would make it easier to do so.
This is a pretty funny thread.
@Geezer: No apologies necessary. We totally understand the liberal aversion to the word “truth”
The good news is that Matt Brown got a grand total of 30 votes out of almost 1300 cast. I think that works out to about 50 signs per vote. In tea-party world that puts Matt in the mainstream of America.
What a foolish response. If you want to defeat the referendum you’re going to need more than Tea Partiers to do it.
Instead you have demonstrated exactly what I wrote — you’re an anti-tax Tea Party crank. Those identifying as Tea Party members now make up a paltry 8 percent of Americans.
Anyone who has to put truth in his name is guaranteed to be engaged in propaganda.
We thought about Appo Facts, but we figured that might scare your lot even more.
I think we’ll find that the teabags have misjudged the mood of the district as badly as they misjudged the mood of the country.
We’ll see tomorrow. Nothing much left to do except get out and vote.
if it werent for all those “free gifts” to moocher kids and their lazy parents of desks, and super cheap lunch, and a dedicated baby sitter for 7 hours a day, the people would see the True American way and vote against giving these part-time public leaches more money.
“free gifts” ……of desks, and super cheap lunch, and a dedicated baby sitter for 7 hours a day
Wow….that has more details than the proposed referendum.
Socialistic Ben for School Board!
Bravo to Nichole Dobo for following up:
http://blogs.delawareonline.com/delawareed/2013/02/27/signs-signs-everywhere-signs-who-is-responsible-for-the-flyers-and-signs-in-appo/
And for quoting me…
Can you cut and paste it here? I’ve burned up my free visits looking for a hover craft in the classifieds.
Clear your cookies.
That would be stealing.
It’s the News Journal, Jason. No jury on earth would convict you.
Besides, stealing is “in”. Even the teachers are doing it. 😉
Hey douche bag. Good luck tomorrow.
Right back at ya. 😀
It would be stealing if reading newspapers in the library was stealing.
It would be stealing if TNJ put up a paywall that actually worked and you hacked it.
Using my web browser in the way it’s intended to be used is not stealing.
http://blogs.delawareonline.com/delawareed/files/2013/02/Appo-letter.pdf
If this is passed a home with an assessed value of 150,000 will pay an additional $360 per year.
I vote NO.
$360 additional in year one
$420 additional in year two
$480 additional in year three
$525 additional in year four
Add another $32 to each year if middle school sports is added.
The majority of new homes are closer to the $150,000 assessment number. The average the district promote is deceptive because of the lower value of properties from before the housing boom.
Also remember that there are three non-votable portions of the school tax. They can raise those without asking the community: Debt Service tax, Tuition tax, and Match tax.
They quietly raised the Tuition tax by $0.15 for 2013, so everyone in those $150,000 assessed homes already experienced an increase of $225 for this year.
At least Eric Ready has the courage of his convictions enough to use his name.
Maybe “Eric Ready” doesn’t fear the retribution of union thugs that have infiltrated all corners of state employment.
You do realize you sound like a crazy person?
You obviously know nothing about assessments in New Castle County. A property assessed at $150,000 is well above both the median and the average, because assessments are pegged to what the house would have been worth 25 years ago. A house assessed at $150,000 would probably sell in the $400,000 to $500,000 range, or higher.
The bill for the average homeowner will be $20 in the first year. That’s $340 less than the scare number you’re pushing. Your facts are weak.
That’s $20 per month, not per year. Bill for the year is $240. That’s $220 more than the number you’re claiming. Your math and reading skills are weak.
@Paul: You’re correct, I was incorrect. I had not read the number but heard it over the air and missed the “per month.”
It’s still 50% below the number Mr. Truth is pushing, but I admit that does sound very high for the local portion of a single referendum.
Without having the tax records in front of me, I would guess that the bill for homeowners is so high because Appo doesn’t have as much commercial and industrial tax income as the northern districts.
Well…..240 is 33% less than 360, while 360 is 50% more than 240, so it depends on how you frame it. I do respect the point that of the “new” homeowners in the district, especially in Odessa National, Parkside, St. Annes, etc., their taxes are far more likely to be closer to the higher number, not the lower one. The average assessment as it is being touted is not the median, where 50% of homes are higher and 50% are lower. The average $89,500 assessment applies to properties. That includes a lot of undeveloped properties. So of properties with a living, breathing taxpayer maintaining a domicile, the taxes are not going to have a balanced distribution according to that “average” figure. Play with the New Castle County parcel view. You can get the number on any property as long as the information is current.
I’m afraid my work computer doesn’t have the juice to use the site.
Again, even $240 sounds like a very high number. I’m in Red Clay and I can’t recall ever having a hike that large. It may well be that voting “No” on this one will force them to come back with a more realistic number in the near future.
Current school tax on $89,500 assessed at $1.60 rate is $1,432 per year. This represents a home that sold for approximately $295,000.
Current school tax on $150,000 assessed at $1.60 rate is $2,400 per year. This represents a home that sold for approximately $475,000
New tax rate after final hike will be $1.97. That means $1,763 for the “average” property. It means $2,955 for the $475K home.
Where people fall in that spectrum is not an exact science, since recording selling price and assessments may vary, but that gives you some rough bookends to gauge the situation.
It is a substantial hike. The lack of spending details in the referendum have left a lot to be desired. I think the do-over would be the best path. Maybe it comes out as the same number, but with more details of where it will be going.
A little less political posturing would be nice as well, but that might be asking too much.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk0D16mNbp4
Come on Appo “consumers” of education. We’re all quibbling about whether or not to come up with money to fund education reform. These decisions were made before our school-aged kids were born so can’t we all agree to agree on finding a common agenda? Whether the referendum passes or fails, we all need to get on that page and engage!
This is bigger than Appo. and bigger than Delaware and I see the district as needing it’s community’s help in being really vocal about all of this. I believe our district’s only screw up was that it trusted and took people on their word. But that’s our Middletown community.
Just curious why people aren’t more pissed about this. Any un-hostile thoughts? Hostile thoughts are welcome, too. I’m all for equal opportunity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zDZFcDGpL4U
I don’t live anywhere near Appo, but everything I’ve read leads me to believe the Appo district is either at or near the top as far as the state goes.
I grew up in Red Clay & my kids still go to Red Clay schools. Red Clay isn’t what it used to be, even after deseg.
Note to Appo residents–VOTE YES if you want to remain at the top.
And yes, I realize RCCSD came into existence post-deseg. I lived that shit. It sucked for me & it sucked far worse for my classmates who lived in the city.
I was bused for 1 year. They were bused for 9 years. That’s fair, right? hahahaha!