Difference between revisions of "Ovid-Elsie School District Non Residential Property Tax Increase (November 2011)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m
m (Text replace - "ategory:School property tax,(.*)]]" to "ategory:Local property tax,$1]] Category:Local school tax,$1 ")
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown)
Line 13: Line 13:
 
* '''YES''' 19 (31.67%)
 
* '''YES''' 19 (31.67%)
 
* '''NO''' 41 (68.33%){{defeated}}<ref>[http://www.saginawcounty.com/Docs/Clerk/Elections/Election%20Results/Summary%20Report.pdf ''Saginaw County Clerk'', Current Election Results]</ref>
 
* '''NO''' 41 (68.33%){{defeated}}<ref>[http://www.saginawcounty.com/Docs/Clerk/Elections/Election%20Results/Summary%20Report.pdf ''Saginaw County Clerk'', Current Election Results]</ref>
 +
 +
Shiawassee
 +
* '''YES''' 166 (47.29%)
 +
* '''NO''' 185 (52.71%){{defeated}}<ref>[http://www.shiawassee.net/Government/County-Clerk/Election-Results/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/81/November-8-2011--Summary-Report ''Shiawassee County Clerk'', November Election Results]</ref>
  
 
This measure sought to increase the current non residential property tax by a rate of $.60 per $1,000 of assessed property value for a further three years in order to continue to pay for soperational costs in the school district.<ref>[http://www.clinton-county.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=WNQEpXLF9GI%3d&tabid=169 ''Clinton County Clerk'', November Sample Ballot]</ref>
 
This measure sought to increase the current non residential property tax by a rate of $.60 per $1,000 of assessed property value for a further three years in order to continue to pay for soperational costs in the school district.<ref>[http://www.clinton-county.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=WNQEpXLF9GI%3d&tabid=169 ''Clinton County Clerk'', November Sample Ballot]</ref>
Line 26: Line 30:
 
{{Michigan}}
 
{{Michigan}}
 
[[Category:Michigan 2011 local ballot measures]]
 
[[Category:Michigan 2011 local ballot measures]]
[[Category:School property tax, Michigan, 2011]]
+
[[Category:Local property tax, Michigan, 2011]]
 +
[[Category:Local school tax, Michigan, 2011]]

Revision as of 17:01, 13 October 2012

School bonds
& taxes
Portal:School Bond and Tax Elections
Bond elections
2014201320122011
201020092008
All years and states
Property tax elections
2014201320122011
201020092008
All years and states
How voting works
Other
State comparisons
County evaluations
Approval rates
A Ovid-Elsie School District Non Residential Property Tax Increase measure was on the November 8, 2011 ballot in the Ovid-Elsie school district area which is in Shiawassee, Saginaw, Gratiot and Clinton County.

This measure was defeated
Clinton

  • YES 396 (47.7%)
  • NO 434 (52.3%)Defeatedd[1]

Gratiot

  • YES 21 (51.2%)Approveda
  • NO 20 (48.8%)[2]

Saginaw

  • YES 19 (31.67%)
  • NO 41 (68.33%)Defeatedd[3]

Shiawassee

  • YES 166 (47.29%)
  • NO 185 (52.71%)Defeatedd[4]

This measure sought to increase the current non residential property tax by a rate of $.60 per $1,000 of assessed property value for a further three years in order to continue to pay for soperational costs in the school district.[5]

Text of measure

The question on the ballot:

This proposal will enable the school district to levy the statutory rate of 18 mills on all property, except principal residence and other property exempted by law, required for the school district to receive its revenue per pupil foundation allowance. Shall the limitation on the amount of taxes which may be assessed against all property, except principal residence and other property exempted by law, in Ovid-Elsie Area Schools, Clinton, Shiawassee, Saginaw and Gratiot Counties, Michigan, be increased by 0.6 mill ($0.60 on each $1,000 of taxable valuation) for a period of 3 years, 2011, 2012 and 2013, to provide funds for operating purposes; the estimate of the revenue the school district will collect if the millage is approved and levied in 2011 is approximately $471,778 (this millage is to restore millage lost as a result of the reduction required by the Michigan Constitution of 1963 and will be levied only to the extent necessary to restore that reduction)?[6]

References