The ProblemBudget cuts have negatively affected

Aurora Public Schools.

ProblemAPS has had a $70 million cut in its budget

since 2010.In 2011, APS lost $512 per student.Gym classes, language classes, and music

classes have been cut.Colorado is ranked 40th out of 50 in various

state funding statistics (Senator Heath).

K-12 funding is about $1 billion below what Amendment 23 calls for(calls for a 1% increase in education funding by 2011) (Senator Heath).

Problem Continued…

Aurora Public Schools per pupil funding, as allocated by the state for 2012-13 is $600 below the 2009-10 school year. They have been forced to cut the district’s budget by $75 million  

http://aurorak12.org/category/budget/

2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

Budget cuts annuallyPer pupil funding

Budget Cuts in APS Schools

Fu

nd

ing

in

d

oll

ars

Alternative Policies Educational VouchersMill LeviesSenate Bill 213

Educational VouchersEducational vouchers are money that comes

from state taxes and given to an alternative school of the student’s choice who hope to receive a quality education.

Vouchers are used to receive a better education.

Advantage of Educational Vouchers Providing private school access to everyone

will increase diversity.

Since parents can choose religious or non-religious schools, the government is not imposing religion on anyone.

Disadvantages of Educational Vouchers Vouchers take funding away from public

schools which are already severely underfunded.

Is it constitutional to give tax dollars to private religious schools?

Mill Levies A mill levy is a property tax that the owner

is required to pay. Mill levy changes are approved by voters.

Advantages to Mill Levies There will be fewer classes and sports

programs cut.More teachers will be able to keep their jobs.

Disadvantages of Mill LeviesWhen property values of homes go up, so will

the tax revenue generated.

Business owners would pay a higher property tax rate of about four times the normal owner.

A high increase would not be favorable in the eyes of taxpayers, therefore they would be dissuaded from voting pro.

Senate Bill 213SB 213 proposes a $1 billion dollar tax increase

that would increase school funding in Colorado.SB 213 will divvy out the money by calculating

the percentage of mill levies in each district, according to the number of students and the number of “at-risk” students (“at-risk” = reduced/free lunch or non-English speaking designation).

SB 213 helps the ASCENT educational opportunity program and gives equal funding to the base spending for each pupil statewide.

Advantages to Senate Bill 213The bill would divvy out the money by the

number of students who attend school daily. For example, if a student were to attend school for the first quarter then transfer to a different school, that money would be transferred to the new school.

The bill also gives more money for students if they have multiple designations. For example, an English Language Learner who is also a Free Lunch participant would have funding designated for both that goes to the school.

Disadvantage of Senate Bill 213The money would come out of the taxpayers’

pockets, making it less appealing to voters.

Class Policies We would like the proposed annual $40

million for school construction to be appropriated from Amendment 64 funds.

Possibility of collecting 15% excise tax and 10% special sales tax allows extra funds to be collected for this purpose. (House Bill 13-1318 Recreational Marijuana Taxes for November’s ballot)

We would also like part of the 130 million from marijuana tax monies to be directed towards public schools from Amendment 64 funds (9 News).

Advantages of Amendment 64 taxes Schools would receive more money, so there

would be fewer and smaller budget cuts.More school activities could be offered due to

more money going to schools.Fewer teachers losing their jobs.Possibility of collecting 15% wholesale tax

and 10% special sales tax.

Advantages of Amendment 64 Taxes

Coloradoeducation.bug 2013

 

40 million 58 million 70 million

Aurora Public Schools Amendment 64 Projected Funds Total

2000000 2800000 3460000

$250,000.00

$750,000.00

$1,250,000.00

$1,750,000.00

$2,250,000.00

$2,750,000.00

$3,250,000.00

$3,750,000.00

Projected Money Division for $40/58/70 Million Projected for APS

Mon

ey

Disadvantages of Amendment 64 taxesThis is long-term, not a short-term fix.

Other entities may want the tax money.

Disadvantages of Amendment 64 taxes

Police Judicial Corrections

Total Spending 82676491 340243578 634934029

Amount Spent in Enforcement 3646033 23817050 12698681

$50,000,000

$150,000,000

$250,000,000

$350,000,000

$450,000,000

$550,000,000

$650,000,000

Colorado's Projected Budget Costs for Amendment 64 Enforcement

Tota

l M

oney S

pent

Source: Colorado Center on Law & Policy 2013

Constitutionality Our policy is constitutional because we

request that tax dollars be implemented towards schools.

This policy would utilize the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) laws in order to be implemented.

Action PlanGovernment Persons Contacted Regarding

Amendment 64 TaxesNon-Government Persons Contacted

Regarding Amendment 64 Taxes

Government Persons Contacted Regarding Amendment 64 TaxesContacted Governor Hickenlooper asking for

his opinion on Amendment 64 taxes going to schools. Letter supporting funds with information

Government Persons Contacted Regarding Amendment 64 TaxesContacted all Senators asking for opinions on

Amendment 64 taxes going to schools Senator Heath-Letter supporting with information Senator Cadman-No response Senator Morse-No response Senator Renfroe-No response Senator Nicholson-No response Senator King-No response Senator Bacon-No response Senator Ulibarri-No response Senator Marble-No response Senator Baumgardner-No response

Government Persons Contacted Regarding Amendment 64 TaxesContacted all Representatives asking for opinions on

Amendment 64 taxes going to schools Representative Johnston-Gave information Representative Holbert-Letter informing us to contact our

own districts representative(s) Representative Singer-Letter supporting funds. Representative Ferrandino-No response Representative Waller-No response Representative Summers-No response Representative Fields-No response Representative Melton-No response Representative May-No response Representative Todd-No response

Government Persons Contacted Regarding Amendment 64 TaxesContacted all Representatives asking for

opinions on Amendment 64 taxes going to schools cont.’Representative Solano-No responseRepresentative Schafer-No responseRepresentative Ramirez-No responseRepresentative Peniston-No responseRepresentative Joshi-No responseRepresentative Murray-No responseRepresentative Beesley-No response

Government Persons Contacted Regarding Amendment 64 Taxes Legislative Council of Colorado General

Assembly Letter with information.

Attorney General John W. Suthers-Letter of support with information

Aurora Public School District Superintendent John Berry-No response Ms. Temple (Finance Board of Aurora Public

Schools)-Did not wish to respond

Non-Government Persons Contacted • Doug Wilson (Colorado State Public Defender)-

Letter with suggestions• Mason Tvert (Co-Director of the campaign to

regulate marijuana)-Letter supporting $40 million• Barbara Miller (Executive Director Center for

Education in Law and Democracy)-Letter with information

• Brian Conners (Public Defender)-Letter with information

• Andrew Romanoff (International Development Enterprises)-No response to letters or tweets

Non-Government Persons Contacted • National Association for the Advancement of

Colored People (NAACP)-No response• National Latino Officers Association-No

response• Blacks in Law Enforcement of America-No

response