Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Allegheny Institute: Mt. Lebanon School Taxes Becoming “Nightmare”

The newest policy brief from the Allegheny Institute For Public Policy is about a topic of frequent interest in Mt. Lebanon: school taxes. According to the brief, the effect of upcoming taxes on homeowners will be staggering:
In this budget forecast scenario a Mt. Lebanon household with the municipality’s 2008 median income of $77,167 and owning a home with the median value of $190,000 – that is correctly assessed – will see school real estate taxes go from the current $4,580 to $6,437, assuming the home’s assessed value stays at its current level. This will be accompanied by a $385 per year earned income school tax, more if the household is fortunate enough to have its income increase over the next five years.

Then there is the earned income tax paid to the municipality along with property taxes to the municipality and county: another $2,400 per year – assuming municipal and county tax rates do not rise. In sum, under the projected tax increases the owner of a median value house could be facing well over $9,000 in local taxes each year by 2015.
The full brief is available to the public: Mt. Lebanon Schools Becoming a Taxpayer Nightmare (PDF)

Read More:Updated 2010-02-18 08:13 to include Read More section.
Updated 2010-02-18 17:21 to include link to Post-Gazette coverage of school taxes.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

9 Comments:

Anonymous Bill Lewis said...

Can't wait to see/hear the School District damage control & spin on this one....and the *Real Lebo* hissy-fit reaction !

February 16, 2010 12:56 PM  
Anonymous David Huston said...

Time for President Ed to update his FAQ.

February 16, 2010 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mark Twain said, "Figures don't lie, but liars figure." Funny how so many liars keep coming up with the same figure.
Elaine Gillen

February 16, 2010 4:14 PM  
Blogger Marjie said...

Interesting they use the term "perfect storm" because that has been my concern all along as I speak with Lebo friends. You can't evaluate the impact on the community by just quoting the potential cost of just the renovation. The renovation has to be reviewed against the backdrop of other economic pressures facing the community and its citizens (both residential and small businesses). At the same time the high school must be attended to and it won't be cheap no matter what the plan.

February 16, 2010 6:26 PM  
Anonymous David Brown said...

Bill Lewis said, "Can't wait to see ... the *Real Lebo* hissy-fit reaction!"

That was petty and mean-spirited. It might have felt satisfying at the time, but I wonder if you now regret saying it?

If your aim was to convert anyone's thinking, I doubt you were successful. You might also find more people willing to agree with your ideas if it didn't mean being associated with that kind of behavior.

February 17, 2010 9:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gee, Dave. Where were you when I was admitting on Real Lebo that I can't do math? And John Ewing, Allegheny Institute, Tom Moertel, and James Fraasch are bad guys because they are using the head number cruncher's figures?
Elaine Gillen

February 18, 2010 7:30 AM  
Anonymous David Huston said...

I can't speak for Mr. Lewis, but I seriously doubt he regrets his statement.
We're all waiting for the Real Lebo reaction, whatever it may be.

February 18, 2010 9:06 AM  
Blogger Bill Matthews said...

My letter to Dr. Steinhauer regarding Real Estate & Earned Income Revenues

February 18, 2010 8:09 PM  
Anonymous John Morris said...

I did a post about this and linked.

I have also lived in Pittsburgh long enough to know that the idea I throw out will never be considered.

Most of my life, I lived in Forest Hills, Queens a place with a lot in common. The big difference is that Forest Hills is part of NYC, and believe it or not that means far lower property taxes for single family owners than almost any surrounding suburb. People move in to the city to lower their taxes!

Seems absurd now but a denser, more succesfull Pittsburgh would in theory mean a broader and more viable tax base all around.

February 20, 2010 4:54 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home