Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sunday, Feb. 10, 2013 | 2:02 a.m.
Lynn Warne is the president of the Nevada State Education Association.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
On Jan. 31, the Nevada State Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision and upheld the will of the people to move the Education Initiative to Carson City for the Legislature to consider. This is a victory for the people, and it brings us one step closer toward protecting our future and the future of our children by addressing the serious problem of inadequate K-12 funding in Nevada. As the court said, “The initiative’s primary purpose is clearly to fund education,” and the next step is for legislators to support this mandate and bring a dedicated, predictable source of revenue to education funded by a revenue source that doesn’t ask working Nevadans to pay more but asks corporations to pay their fair share.
The Education Initiative is a business margin tax that broadens the tax base; it helps the state rely less on one industry and creates a revenue stream that is resistant to economic volatility, but it also asks all large businesses to pay a small amount to invest in our kids’ education.
In his response to Gov. Brian Sandoval’s State of the State address, state Senate Majority Leader Mo Denis said he disagreed with the approach of cutting taxes on businesses while raising the sales tax on middle class families. This acknowledgement will come as great relief to Nevadans who have long been subjected to a state and local tax structure in Nevada more regressive than the United States as a whole, relying too heavily on both middle class and poor families.
Despite this imbalance and even with the voice of more than 100,000 Nevadans delivered to Carson City in the form of an initiative petition, it appears there is little appetite for revenue reform. Instead Nevadans are subjected to empty rhetoric such as: “We cannot tax our way out; we can only grow our way out.”
Such an approach is unrealistic based on our state’s current tax structure. In spite of our low tax burden on corporations, growth in our state has been slow and tax experts observe that growth does not pay for itself initially. Investment in education to support growth must be put in place before the growth itself.
When our children are forced to rely on budgetary horse-trading in the Legislature, education decisions are reduced to poor choices. In an interview with another newspaper, Assemblyman Randy Kirner said that decisions on education will boil down to “What can we afford?” NSEA is saying we can afford more and do better if corporations start paying their fair share. It’s not acceptable to force our communities to make a choice between all-day kindergarten or English-language learner fluency. Who will make the decision which of these much-needed programs takes priority? Perpetuating the status quo and a small-steps approach leaves too many of Nevada’s students behind unnecessarily.
Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick said in opening the session that legislators should not apply nickel-sized solutions to dollar-sized problems. We agree with Speaker Kirkpatrick, but we should also steer clear of trying to create a revenue solution that is all things to all businesses.
Other states have attempted this approach, and it only served to create volatility; exactly the opposite of what is needed to provide the resources our children need to succeed.
Legislators have before them a dollar solution for a dollar problem brought forth by the people. Nevadans reject proposals which would increase sales taxes or ask too little from our business community.
Tax and education experts agree that Nevada should bolster its spending on education because it benefits our state, but only if we commit to a long-term strategy that helps all our children reach their potential and only if it calls on Nevada businesses to acknowledge we’re all in this together.
It’s time the wealthiest corporations pay their fair share.
Lynn Warne is the president of the Nevada State Education Association, which is sponsoring the Education Initiative.
This bill is a bait and switch and will not provide a net increase for schools
Why bother
UNION BACKED
Better still than a margins tax on businesses to fund education is State tax credits for businesses who employ Nevadan students. All benefit.
CarmineD
Our kids also pay when those who work for cash and don't declare income pay less than their share of Federal Income tax. These federal funds come back to fund our schools.
Nevada politicians like to think the state is business friendly because of its low taxes, but guess what? Taxes are only one of many issues businesses consider when deciding where to set up shop. The public school system and educated workers are major concerns as much as anything else.
On the other hand, Nevada's dependence on low-wage service industry jobs hasn't created the demand for a better educated workforce, and thus, a better performing school system.
But that's mostly irrelevent because myopic conservatives are a one-trick pony. Tax cuts and more tax cuts is all they have in their tool box -- besides a meat cleaver, which is used to butcher the patient to good health. Or something.
Nevada spends more per student than Arizona yet we rank very low in education. Why do you think that is. Probably has zero to do with the CCSD, or parents or teachers union right? Minings taxes should be raised. CCSD needs to get rid of all the administrative dead weight, which there's plenty, and teachers should be paid, not according to tenure but results. Added to this should be a system that doesn't allow kids that can't speak English into the schools until they can. This gives them a better chance and doesn;t distract from the others.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of another State that has neither a personal income tax or a business income tax. Our taxation of business is mainly from the gaming tax, mostly generated by the activities of non-residents, and the mining tax which is so paltry that it should be called the "mining annoyance" instead of the mining tax.
Thank you, Commenter Chuck333, who stated it well, "Nevada spends more per student than Arizona yet we rank very low in education. Why do you think that is. Probably has zero to do with the CCSD, or parents or teachers union right? Minings taxes should be raised. CCSD needs to get rid of all the administrative dead weight, which there's plenty, and teachers should be paid, not according to tenure but results. Added to this should be a system that doesn't allow kids that can't speak English into the schools until they can. This gives them a better chance and doesn't distract from the others."
To IMPROVE our educational system, we must also have ENforcement teeth in the taxpayer funded, yearly administered, "PARENT/TEACHER/STUDENT INVOLVEMENT ACCORD"!
In the 76th Nevada State Legislative Session, Lawmakers created laws that demanded tools to make teachers and administrators accountable and responsible via the new evaluation system. But they fell short by not addressing the primary reasons why schools are performing poorly: the students themselves, and their family support/parents/caregivers. Without them, there would be NO problem.
It is past time for Nevada Lawmakers to take courage and tackle problems that have plagued this state for decades.
The business margins tax is a tiny step in the right direction, but can NOT substitute the great need to change the Nevada Constitution's 100+years old taxation revenue laws, especially in respect to where MINING is paying a pittance for the precious minerals and metals it extracts and carries out of Nevada State. At the very least, MINING should pay an average of the taxes Mining pays to the other 49 states in the USA, to be FAIR.
For Nevada to thrive, we must take proper care of its most valuable resource: its PEOPLE-children (future), workers (presently making Nevada productive), seniors (who create need for services, who are "sages" and "mentors" to those after them). Our great treasure is the People and all the potential Nevada possesses. Do good WITH these/them, and BY these/them, and Nevada will prosper.
Blessings and Peace,
Star
MORE money does not mean better education. More money just hides the underlying problems: bad teachers, bad administrators, greedy unions.
Why do conservatives hold public education hostage in their senseless jihad against the teachers union? Our children should not be penalized because GOPers hate unionized government workers.
@FreedomRadio. Please define a "bad teacher". Is a bad teacher an older teacher who has years of experience in a classroom?
Which doctor would you want to do a complicated surgery? Do you want a doctor who has done hundreds of similar surgeries over many years, or a doctor who just graduated and had never done the surgery?
Which lawyer do you want to defend you in a murder case? Do you want the brand new lawyer who has never tried a murder case or do you want the experienced lawyer who has defended murder cases for 20 years?
Who do you want commanding the Army, a brand new officer, or an officer who has years of combat experience?
Then why do people think that experienced teachers are bad teachers and new inexperienced teachers are better teachers?
If you think that unions are greedy, then what do you think is a fair wage for a teacher with a bachelors degree and 5 years experience? Is that teacher worth a salary of $40,486? What should we pay a teacher with a masters degree and 9 years experience? The salary for that teacher is $51,895. That is as much education as a lawyer has by the way.
"Off the top of my head, I can't think of another State that has neither a personal income tax or a business income tax. " @ Jim Weber
I believe Wyoming and South Dakota both rated more favorable for taxs than Nevada, which is third, have neither. Plus, and correct me if I'm wrong, both have lower sales tax rates.
CarmineD
Public education is an obsolete, inefficient failure funded by the evils of public-theft -- what educators should be paid and what quality of educational services should be available to a citizenry should be determined by only those seeking its services in a competitive market in the same manner many other services are offered to the public -- public educational services funded through public-theft propagate unjust servitude upon a citizenry's labor undermining social "fairness" -- the hundreds of thousands confiscated from an average wager earning citizen's life to support substandard services they may not directly benefit from is illogical, unfair and WRONG -- terminating public educational services funded through the confiscation of a citizenry's labor while allowing such services to compete "fairly" in an open market should be the goal of a responsible society not a parasitic one predicated upon the practices of public theft-n-failure.
The Nevada Policy Research Institute has also criticized the tax. Geoffrey Lawrence, deputy policy director at NPRI, said in a statement issued Tuesday that a margins tax would be a "disaster" for Nevadans.
: {
I'm surprised by chuck333's comment: "Added to this should be a system that doesn't allow kids that can't speak English into the schools until they can." Apparently, he doesn't understand that despite the CCSD having all but eliminated programs for ELL students, school is still the place where non-English speaking children learn English. In fact, for many kids, it's the ONLY place they speak English, as they most commonly use their native language at home. To suggest that children not be allowed to attend school until they learn English is a recipe for economic disaster, as these children will almost certainly never graduate from high school.
Additional revenue earmarked for education is a must if we want to restore programs and teaching positions to help students succeed and eventually contribute to the economic livelihood of our state. Another must-do for the legislature is to scrap the antiquated "Nevada Plan" for distributing state funds to school districts. The plan may have been fine when it was created in 1967, when the population of Clark County was just over 200,000, but it's outdated now. Most of the state's revenue is generated in Clark County, and too much is redistributed to rural counties. Clark County's schools are being shortchanged.
Well of course the Nevada Policy Research Institute has also criticized the tax, Harley. The tax is inconsistent with the plan you and your buddies over at NPRI have for diverting taxpayer dollars into the bank accounts of corporate educrats and their stockholders, with no guarantee the privatizing schools will yield results! The CCSD is already forking out $3.8 million each year to Edison Schools after renewing its contract with Edison in June 2012, despite Edison's failure to perform as promised. Please see Paul Takahashi's report in the Sun, June 22, 2012: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/jun...
You folks are quick to accuse the teachers' union of scamming the public, but in fact, that's exactly what you have on YOUR agenda!
Carmine: Both Wyoming and South Dakota have lower sales tax rates than Nevada - but that's not an exclusive club - 39 other states are also lower. Nevada is fairly good on property taxes - "only" 15 states - NOT including Wyoming and South Dakota - are lower.
Only Wyoming and South Dakota have an overall climate better for business than does Nevada. Why is it that Nevada is among the worst for corporate investment??? Perhaps those who place tax environment relatively low among the factors used by companies in determining where to invest actually have an argument - tax rates may actually be a low priority.
If implemented, the tax revenue would flow to the state general fund and NOT be earmarked for public education, but Warne said the revenue pie would expand and provide more money for the public schools.
"The Legislature will fund education as they deem appropriate," she said. "There will just be more revenue for them to be able to appropriate to education. We hope they do so properly."
"Revenue pie would expand and provide more money for public schools"?
"The Legislature will fund education as they deem appropriate""
PROVIDE more money for public schools --
"We hope"?
LOL
Today's problems cannot be solved with the same level of thinking which created them.
http://www.nevadanewsbureau.com/tag/lynn...
: {
It does NOT benefit anyone to pay incoherent "teachers" more to do less and less and less. Nevada already funds K-12 by $1,000 per student in EXCESS of Arizona--where they get graduates who can read and write.
Regarding other states: most to all don't offer sanctuary to the illegals expelled from Arizona, Georgia.... We keep giving everything away without any increase in business, industry, prosperity. We're giving away our future and our economy. Expect more of the same. 50,000-plus illegal students in CCSD. Even at 25 per classroom (lower in K-6, higher in 7-12) that's 2,000 unneeded teachers. At roughly $100,000 each per year allowing something for the costs of administering each teacher that's $200,000,000 wasted in CCSD alone. Just think what K-12 could be without this. The short-term answer is that we "have to" K-12 illegal kids but we DON'T HAVE TO open our doors and welcome them in. We don't have to provide the endless social services that bring them here. We CAN do something about employers of illegals--more than 12% of employees in Nevada are illegal--just search this cite.
The NPRI is to public policy what the NRA is to policies relating to guns.
"The short-term answer is that we "have to" K-12 illegal kids but we DON'T HAVE TO open our doors and welcome them in."
Once again, Roberta, you prove yourself all show, no pony. the bottom line is SCHOOLS ARE REQUIRED TO OFFER EDUCATION TO ALL STUDENTS. End of discussion.
If you are soooo up in arms about "Dem Illegal Brats Stealin' our stuff and doing all that Readin' and a Ritin'" then get off your booty, go to Washington D.C. and lobby for them to rewrite the law. because until you change Federal law, your daily rants just continue to prove to the world your ignorance on this matter....
Allow me to point you towards a few facts:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oc...
Patrick: Reading problem again? I suggested we discourage them moving into Nevada. I specifically said we "have to" k-12 illegal kids. I suspect you'd find lots of places in K-12 to dump an extra 200 million a year.
Roslenda. How do you know that there are 50,000 "illegals" enrolled in CCSD? If the students are enrolled as required by court decisions, how are 2000 teachers "not needed"? As long as the student is enrolled, you need those teachers.
Tnaker, CCSD recently told the Governor that CCSD has MORE THAN 50,000 English Language Learners. Even allowing for languages other than Spanish, that's more than 50,000. And, let's add in say ANOTHER 50,000 for the siblings who were younger when they arrived and can speak English as well as anything else so those illegal students are not officially ELL.
The million LEGAL immigrants we take in each year must pass an ENGLISH TEST and a physical exam--to preclude contagious diseases and chronic conditions like dialysis at UMC costing us upwards of $120,000 a year each.
You too Tanker, limited reading comprehension. If we send them away, the families, the kids won't be in our K-12.
If you want to compare Nevada with Wyoming and SoDak then make sure to factor in taxes or lack thereof on mineral and energy production.
@Roslenda. So if a student speaks a language other than English, say for example, Spanish, they are by definition illegal. I would point out to you that a person born in the US is an American citizen regardless of the immigration status of the parents.
And you would send them away how?
@wharfrat. Don't forget the population difference both in size and make up.
Nothing draws the bigots out of the woodwork faster than an article about taxes.
When did Arizona become a mecca of good education? Are you kidding me? AZ has one of the worst educational records around. The rank 44/51 if you include DC. Doesn't seem like much to aspire to to me. And agreed on the ignorance being expressed in so many comments. I wonder where some of those with such narrow views were educated?
"The Nevada Policy Research Institute has also criticized the tax. Geoffrey Lawrence, deputy policy director at NPRI, said in a statement issued Tuesday that a margins tax would be a "disaster" for Nevadans." The NPRI is NO expert when it comes to education. They are a biased, right-wing funded organization with their own political agenda. Do not be fooled by their pretense of being a non-profit, unbiased, non-partisan organization. They are not.
No one is asking for money to be "thrown" at education. But if Nevada doesn't come up with a long-term solution to funding education, things will only get worse.
For too long Nevada has listened only to big money and lived with the consequences of those with the power of the purse.
Business will spend millions of dollars on public relations campaigns against being taxed -- public relations campaigns to convince the public that schools are failing, teachers are failing, and students are not receiving anything from schools. I think it says a lot about big money motives - when they could have given those millions to students but chose instead to point the finger at women who teach people to read like we have done something wrong. Selfish. Greed.
Let me say - public schools are worth the investment. 18,000 teachers and 300,000 kids go to schools and try every school day. While students may not be able to choose multiple choice answers on a test - that does NOT mean they are not learning or will fail life. Students are more than a score. Teachers are working. We are all doing our job.
Enough is enough. There is money in this state. We need to stop the hoarding, hiding, and stashing by millionaires and billionaires that line their pockets with gold and dollars on the backs of labor using Nevada's resources.
Real people are tired of the unproductive whiny rants from selfish haters. Our community needs to invest in the children and the people will be heard. Im sure that teally irks the paid corporate shills and the lobbyists who drown our media with anti-school, anti-teacher, and anti-tax propaganda. Our community deserves balance and fair treatment on this issue.
@roslenda So many times you have referred to CHILDREN in a racist manor in many articles, so why don't you move to Arizona where you find it so much better? You can thank the racist Jan Brewer every day in that newspaper. You can share how Las Vegas disgusted you when you lived there by caring about ALL of its children, equally.
The arbitrators decision will "save" CCSD a total of 43 MILLION for the rest of this year and possibly next year.
Did anybody notice that Sheldon Adelson gave the Adelson School 50 MILLION the same day. Yes, one school 50 MILLION. He also gave 150 MILLION to right wing PACS the last election cycle.
The Adelson schools have less than 750 students.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/feb...
The 2011 Barrick Mining annual report is out. If you read it, there are some very interesting facts that emerge. This is a link to the Barrick Annual Report for 2011.
http://www.barrick.com/investors/annual-...
Barrick Mining either owns outright, or is a partner in a joint venture in 7 gold mines in Nevada. To determine my estimate a profits for 2011, I assumed the price of gold at $1500 per ounce, or less. The current price for gold is in excess of $1750 per ounce. The first four mines listed are totally owned by Barrick Mining. In 2011, according to their own figures, Barrick Mining produced almost 97 TONS of gold from their Nevada Mines. That is same weight as 16 full size, original HUMMERS. Barrick Mining has reported record profits and dividends in both 2010 and 2011.
The Cortez Hills Mine produced 1.42 Million (44.375 tons) ounces of Gold at a cost of $245 per ounce. If you assume a conservative profit of $1000 per ounce, you get a profit for the Cortez Hill mine of $1,420,000,000. Barrick paid a total of $47,300,000 in local and state taxes last year.
Bald Mountain Mine produced 93,000 ounces (2.9 tons) at a cost of $558 per ounce. Assuming a profit of $900 per ounce for the Bald Mountain Mine, you get a profit of $83,700,000.
The Gold Strike mine produced 1.09 MILLION ounces (34.0625 Tons) at a cost of $511 per ounce. Again assuming a profit of $900 per ounce for the Gold Strike mine, you get a profit of $981,000,000.
Ruby Hill mine produced 127,000 ounces (3.96875 tons) at a cost of $334 per ounce. Assuming a profit of $1000 per ounce for Ruby Hill, you get a profit of $127,000,000.
Barrick Mining is involved in three joint ventures in Nevada.
Barrick owns 33% of the Marigold mine. Barrick's share of production was 51,000 ounces (1.59675 Tons) at a cost of $761 per ounce. For the Marigold mine, assume a profit of $700 per ounce. The total profit would be $35,700,000.
Barrick owns 50% of the Round Mountain mine. Barrick's share was 178,000 ounces (5.5625 Tons) at a cost of $612 per ounce. Assuming a profit of $800 per ounce for the Round Mountain mine, we get a total profit of $142,400,000.
Barrick owns 75% of the Turquoise Ridge mine which produced 135,000 ounces (4.21875 Tons) at a cost of $569 per ounce. Finally for the Turquoise Ridge mine, assume a profit of $700 per ounce. This would give a profit of $ 94,500,000.
Barrick is actively exploring in the Carlin Trace in Nevada. The Carlin Trace is one of the richest gold deposts in the world. Barrick's annual report shows that 44% of the companies income comes from North America. Don't forget that Barrick is also mining silver along with the gold in Nevada. If you add all of the projected and conservative profits, the total is $2,884,300,000. This is a conservative estimate.
Let's look inside the numbers on the Business Margins Tax. The tax applies to those businesses in Nevada who have a Million dollars in revenue for a year. The tax would be 2% or 20,000 on a million in revenue.
If you look at a daily average, the business must generate a revenue of approximately $2,700 per day. The tax on that amount per tax would be $55. I wonder how struggling a business is that has revenue of $2,700 per day?
If you want a list of businesses that could be paying that tax, I suggest you look in the Yellow pages. That is a good start for the list.
This are just a few of the business that might be taxed. Costco, Sam's Club, Wal-Mart, Target, K-Mart, Penny's, Sears, Ross, TJ Maxx, Ann Taylor, Office Depot, Office Max, Staples, PetCo, Petsmart, Walgrens, CVS, and any other national chain you can think of. Is it fair that those businesses take advantage of the services provided by Nevada, but don't pay the cost of providing those services.
Ms. Warne wants to tax business more--and so does Tanker. It might be hard to squeeze more money from Penney's and Sears since they are doing so poorly. Corporations are not ATM's with free money. Apparently Ms. Warne or Tanker didn't read the NY Times series on the very nasty business of tax breaks and what states will do to attract jobs. Ms. Warne wants to do the opposite--drive businesses away by raising taxes. BTW I can't believe how much money was spent building the sets for "The Great and Powerful Oz" as explained in the NYT series.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/us/how...
Sorry teachers, we're not paying you and your union masters more money to get the same results. Teach our children and improve graduation rates. Teachers have plenty of casino buffet money already funded by taxpayers.
@Manfromuncle. Nevada has one of the most favorable business climates in the country. Why do we have the highest unemployement rate in the country? I don't see businesses lining up on I15 ro move here.
@MootheCow. Gaming taxes amounted to just over $500 Million last year. CCSD budget is just over 2 BIllion. By my figuring that is about 1.5 BILLION short of what CCSD budget is.
What don't we have? AN EDUCATED WORK FORCE!
Robert:
Tell me, how are Wyoming and South Dakota doing economically compared to other States?
Both are RED States, not Blue. ;-)
Nevada is offcially purple I believe.
CarmineD
Most Nevadans would support increased education funding if it would identify and help those who need help graduating from high school the most. The funding needs to support programs aligned with this objective. Admittedly, it's bad optics to have a union boss posting a letter asking for money without a dedicated purpose for the funds. Most will assume the funds will go to teacher pay increases with zero benefit to the students needing the most help to graduate high school. I'm in favor of spending funds to give minorities the help and resources necessary to graduate high school. Personally, I'm in favor of turning around the graduation rates for Nevada minorities: Black =43%,Hispanic=53% and limited English-proficient students=29%. In Texas where I hail from, the state allocated $500 million in state and federal funding for dropout prevention and recovery initiatives in 2010-11. Texas has a higher high school graduation rate among Hispanics at 81% versus 53% here in Nevada. IMHO, Texas has focused on Hispanics from Mexico learning english helping them learn and graduate from high school.
Reducing the number of high school dropouts has been identified as a key issue for the state's economic success. A Texas A&M University study from 2009 found that one year's class of dropouts costs Texas $9.6 billion in lost wages, reduced sales tax and welfare expenses.
Lifetime earnings
Young people who receive their high school diplomas earn about $630,000 more during their lives than those without diplomas or GEDs, according to a National Council of La Raza report released earlier this year.
I would be much more interested in seeing an article introducing programs that impact those students who need a bit more assistance learning and graduating from high school.
Again, here are the graduation rates for different student subgroups in Nevada:
Alaska Native/Native American: 52%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 74%
Black: 43%
Hispanic: 53%
Multiracial: 80%
White, non-Hispanic: 71%
Children with disabilities: 23%
Limited English-proficient students: 29%
Economically disadvantaged students: 53%
What steps need to be taken to address lower CCSD graduation rates among minorities and students with special needs including limited English-proficient students? Would tutors help including online tutoring resources? Those are the questions we need answered. Sending more money into the education funding pool isn't seen as a remedy.
@RefNV. CCSD has slashed funding for ELL programs, online and other tutoring. There used to be an online tutoring program for math proficiency called Succede in Math. Gone due to budget cuts. There used to be free math proficiency tutoring programs in the public libraries on weekends and in the evening. Gone due to budget cuts.
BT4 says: I'm surprised by chuck333's comment: "Added to this should be a system that doesn't allow kids that can't speak English into the schools until they can."
Really? Went to high school with a guy from South America. When he moved here he could not speak English. His parents held him back one year till he was ready. This man ended up not only as our class president he went on to become a doctor. Children given the chance to learn our language will fair far better then those thrust into our education system and have to try to catch up.
I did not know this, no wonder they come from Mexico and live here. What a deal!
>>Allow me to point you towards a few facts:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oc......