County Referendum on ballot

[PeaceNikki]

"Should the Wisconsin Constitution be amended to prohibit any further transfers or lapses from the segregated transportation fund?"

Can someone explain this issue to me as though I am seven years-old, please? As a Democrat, which way do I go on this?


kthxbai

[mzteris]

1. found this article

". . . Already, all three major candidates for governor - Republicans Scott Walker and Mark Neumann and Democrat Tom Barrett - have spoken favorably about the amendment, Thompson said. One of the reasons they're talking about it at all, he said, is because counties are putting the matter to a nonbinding vote.

According to the resolution that the supervisors adopted, about $1.2 billion has been taken from the transportation fund, most of which is comprised of revenues from gasoline taxes and vehicle registrations. About $800 million of that has been replaced, in the form of general obligation bonds, which is basically borrowed

This hurts not only transportation-related projects such as roads and bridges, Thompson said. The money to pay off the bonds that are put into the transportation fund is state money that could be used for things such as shared revenue and services to communities.

But, asked Supervisor Richard Boockmeier of Portage, if the constitutional amendment is so popular, where is the opposition to it?

A partial answer came from Supervisor Timothy O'Neil of Columbus, who cast the lone vote against the resolution to bring the amendment to a non-binding vote.

Lawmakers and the governor should have the flexibility to move funds around in order to keep the budget balanced, he said.

Amending the state constitution to forbid raiding the transportation fund would not address the state's larger fiscal problems, O'Neil said.

"It flies in the face of the issue: There are not enough dollars to do what we want to do," he said.

And, O'Neil added, by forbidding the Legislature from dipping into the transportation fund for general-fund expenditures, the amendment would "obliquely" lead to increases in property taxes.

Thompson said he agrees that the state's process for collecting and spending money need examination and possible overhaul.

But, he said, money that comes from user fees, such as the money in the transportation fund, should not be used or borrowed for general-fund expenses.

"It's a fundamental issue," he said, "of keeping user fees separate from general taxes."

http://www.wiscnews.com/portagedailyregister/news/local/article_e8860d5a-9553-11df-9a54-001cc4c002e0.html

[PeaceNikki]

2. Thank you! That helps me understand it a bit more.

But I still don't know if I should support the amendment or not. :\

[midnight]

3. This is a great topic..... It is a bit over my head too.... But I like the idea of

moving the money around to keep the flow of projects in the govt. going.... I don't think I like what this amendment will do- which is stop this flexibility....

[ewagner]

4. That's the downside...

If you stop the Governor and legislature from using surpluses in designated funds to balance the budget then, in order to balance the budget they are going to be forced to make cuts in other things....like:

education: then local school boards will have to make up for the cuts by eliminating programs, eliminating teachers, raising taxes to the maximum of the levy limit, or floating bond issues to finance the deficit.



municipal shared revenues: then local city councils will have to cut out capital improvement projects (streets, bridges, storm sewers (not sanitary because they have wastewater utilities which can raise rates without limit to pay for their projects)parks and recreation programs and possibly city staff like planners, engineers, clerks etc.,) or they can raise taxes to the maximum levy amount (2%) above last year, or they can float bond issues to finance everything else but operating expenses.

health care (BadgerCare or Seniorcare)...I'm not even going to get into this because I don't understand the whole system except that if they cut the amount they pay to providers, then more providers will refuse to take patients on these programs and it will become a worthless shell.

In short, there are consequences for this referendum and they are not immediately obvious.

[PeaceNikki]

5. And you've demonstrated the complexity.

It could be useful in the right hands, dangerous in the wrong.

urg.... still undecided.