Dr. Hartman consistently maintained that the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) estimates for tax relief above $500 million are unrealistic and unachievable. He stated the only one that he feels is "realistic" is the lowest level that would generate $500 million in tax relief.
If he was really sincere about presenting both sides of the issue, he could have mentioned that the Governor has stated that there have been four (4) independent studies done that indicate that the tax relief estimates are conservative, achievable, and would probably be more than 1.25 billion dollars.
Again, in the spirit of presenting both sides of the issue for the benefit of the audience, Dr. Hartman could have stated that Secretary of Revenue Fajt has stated publicly that "The revenue estimates on which the property tax cut figures are based were done by the Department of Revenue. They are solid, conservative and achievable."
Dr. Hartman chose not to.
Dr. Hartman never did anything but deride the PDE estimates. To illustrate his bias, Dr. Hartman even stated that: "Every adult Pennsylvanian must lose over $250 annually to reach $1 Billion Real Estate Tax Relief Fund." He even made a comment that he personally was not going to contribute his $250 so somebody in the audience was going to have to lose over $500 for the tax Relief Fund to ever reach $1 Billion.
The fact of the matter is that every adult Pennsylvanian does not have to gamble and lose anything for Act 72 to provide tax relief at the $1Billion dollar level. Even after I had stated that he had made a false statement and was purposefully misleading the audience, he insisted that his statement was true.
When you consider that there are over 60 million people in, or adjoining, Pennsylvania in NY, NJ, Del, Md, Va, West Va, and Ohio, his statement is inane, illogical, and presumably intended to convince the audience that the tax relief estimates are unrealistic.
To illustrate the absurdity of his assertion, I even asked him if there were going to be border guards to prevent tourists from entering Pennsylvania to gamble?
When Dr. Hartman was explaining the need for the tax relief fund to reach $900 million before any tax relief could occur, he stated that the license fees will bring in $400 million to fund the reserve portion of the tax relief and then $500 million more would need to be raised before any distribution can be made to the school districts who have Opted-In to Act 72.
He went on to say that, in his opinion, there would only be a few months to collect the remaining $500 million and that he thought that the chances were "slim" that that would actually happen. He then stated that the estimated time that any district could actually see any tax relief would be in the 2008 time frame rather than the Governor's estimated 2007 time frame.
If he was really sincere about presenting both sides of the issue, he could have stated that the Governor, the head of the Community Block Grant Program, and other key spokespeople out of Harrisburg have publicly stated that the license fees will bring in $610 million in revenue.
Dr. Hartman chose not to.
This is a fantastic $210 million variance from Dr. Hartman's assertion that license fees will bring in $400 million. This is not a trivial issue as $210 million is extremely significant in terms of possibly getting tax relief a year earlier than Dr. Hartman negative prediction.
Slide #18 - "Opt-In decision required before slot money known."
Dr. Hartman stated that the school boards must decide to Opt-In to Act 72 before knowing how much slot machine money would actually materialize.
He even commented that "the school boards need to know if the revenue flow will be stable and whether or not it could be counted on, year after year."
The fact of the matter is that Act 72 is "revenue neutral" in that the school district is guaranteed to receive the same dollars associated with the property taxes from residential owner-occupied households regardless of when the slot machine tax dollars start to materialize.
The school boards will receive word from the PDE in May of each year that specifically states how much money the PDE will be sending to the school district from the tax relief fund that has been getting a 34% tax on slot machine revenue. The PDE will send two (2) checks each year for this purpose.
The tax assessor, Ken Tucker in Huntingdon County, will send a certified report to the school board that specifies how many approved homestead and farmstead exclusions there are.
The tax assessor will also certify the median value of the approved homestead properties that determines the maximum tax relief each homestead can get as per the Pennsylvania Constitution.
This will occur in May of each year and the school board will meet to determine the value of the homestead/farmstead exclusion to be printed on the school real estate tax bills.
The school board will then instruct the tax assessor as to precisely how much each approved homestead/farmstead's annual school real estate tax bill will be reduced. In effect the school board is guaranteed to receive all of the tax money they would have received had they not "Opted-In" to Act 72.
Since there is absolutely no risk in terms of the school district getting one penny less from the approved residential owner-occupied segment of the real estate taxes, I am thoroughly confused as to what the problem really is with fluctuating slot machine revenue.
If there is less slot machine revenue, the residential homeowners will pay more.
If there is more slot machine revenue, the residential homeowners will pay less.
In all cases, the school districts are guaranteed to receive the total dollars regardless of slot machine revenue fluctuation.
Dr. Hartman's assertion that there is a problem in not knowing precise slot machine tax revenue is deceiving and illogical.
His positive response to a questioner asking if the school board can increase taxes if the slot machine dollars drop was even more inane and insulting.
Robert K. Wargo