Once more - another brillant analysis by Dennis York. Scot Walker is a phony. He has led Milwaukee County to the brink of bankruptcy and now he is looking for a bailout by the state. AND Yes if Scot Walker is really for 2/3 funding of schools, he should demand that clause in TPA but then WMC and the road builders would abandon both TPA and Scot Walker.
Jake - How can you say that Scott has led Milw County to the brink of bankruptcy. From my recollection, Tom Ament and his cronies are the people responsible for the pension deal, and that is what has put Milw County in its current financial situtation. Then you have the court house cronies that still believe that they have a bottomless wallet in Milw County.
Some of the things that Walker's campaign have done mey not make the most sense, seeing how he has handled the financials of Milw County and done everything he has regarding my taxes speaks volumes.
Bankruptcy occurs when revenues do not cover obligated expenses. The pension deal is an obligated expense. Therefore, the county must legally comply with covering that expense. The only way out is bankruptcy. So I am not surprised that Scot Walker is now suggesting Milwaukee County could go bankrupt. He has no intention of meeting obligated expenses. I would think Clint would agree with this bankrupt Milwaukee County strategy unless he wants to pay higher taxes.
I find it interesting that the Walker campaign is taking a page from Team Doyle: More state spending keeps property taxes in check.
Something tells me that this wacky move by the Walker camp could come back to haunt them.
I wouldn't be surprised if Walker's campaign manager leaves "to explore other opportunities" in the coming weeks.
Dennis,
TPA certainly leaves the door wide open for local units to drop the full inflationary cost permitted under revenue limits on the local property taxpayer. This is Walker's point. He identified a loophole in TPA that is almost impossible to close. Of course, the leggies supporting TPA don't like Walker talking about a loophole that they want to keep quiet about.
Dennis - you mislead with this comment
"It doesn’t say that a school district can raise their levy to make up for lost aid below the two-thirds mark."
Unless this practice is specifically forbidden, I don't see why a school district would not raise their levy to gain any balance of dollars allowed under the revenue limit. Either you mislead or you simply don't understand how loopholes are created. Don't claim Walker is wrong when he actually is right
Commenting by HaloScan
