No Bull, No Fluff, No Smudges
Your news source for
Flagler, Florida and Beyond

Inaccurately and Incoherently, Fischer Opposes School Tax Measure; Sword Favors It

| September 23, 2010

john fischer flagler county school board member

John Fischer: Read his lips, if you can. (© FlaglerLive)

John Fischer and Raven Sword are in a run-off to decide who will replace Evie Shellenberger, who’s retiring from the District 5 seat on the Flagler County School Board.

A defining issue in that campaign is the school tax appearing on the same Nov. 2 election ballot—a 25-cents-per-$1,000 property tax that equates to around $30 a year for the median home owner. It’s not a new tax: property owners are already paying it. This will be the first time that voters, as opposed to the school board, will decide whether to continue paying it for the next two years.

There’s a clear difference on the issue between Fischer and Sword. Fischer is opposed to the tax. Sword is in favor.

There’s another clear difference between the two. Sword could explain the tax—its origin, its purpose and the reason it’s on the ballot. Fischer could not.

The difference raises disturbing questions about Fischer’s understanding of one of the simpler, if more crucial, issues facing the school board today, as well as his understanding of the school district’s financial conditions. Fischer addresses the issue in generalities, but is incapable of explaining its origins, its implications or its place in the larger context of school taxes or the school district’s budget.

Fischer referred to the tax inaccurately as an increase over existing school taxes: “It’ll be an increase. If they’re going to get another .25, it’ll certainly be an increase in their taxes,” Fischer said.

raven sword flagler county school board

Raven Sword (© FlaglerLive)

Sword was more accurate when asked to explain the measure: “This is a continued tax. Previously it was the board that was authorized to levy the tax, and now the Legislature has basically forced the school board to look to the taxpayers in order to approve it. That tax is already there.”

Fischer was also wrong when he described how the tax proposal ended up on the Nov. ballot. “To me, the school board wants to get it out of their hands and put it to the voters and make them make the decision.” In fact, board members would have preferred continuing to assess the levy as they had in previous years, by a board vote. They were displeased with what members repeatedly called a “shell game” by the Legislature, and just as displeased with being forced to politicize what had been a non-political issue previously.

Fischer was also wrong when he explained the Legislature’s role in this particular levy. He described the Legislature’s role as that of watchdog, rather than instigator, of the referendum. “To get on the ballot, the Legislature has to make sure there’s a reason for it to be on there,” Fischer said of the measure.

Asked what he thought the purpose of the tax was, Fischer said: “It’s actually supposedly that it’s going to help increase—I’m really confused as far as the bottom line of it, but it’s to increase and to pay for schools. Educational system.” He added: “My understanding, and again too is that I don’t have the inside, but it sounds like you’re shifting money from one place to another and is it an increase—there is, it’s moving from one to another, and is it really a new tax, is it an existing tax, will it generate—to me, it sounds like putting money from one place to another.”

He said he would “look in-house” before considering a tax increase.

Sword, who said the tax would raise between $1 million and $2 million (actually, closer to $2 million), was categorical: “I’m in favor of it. There’s a lot of reasons: we need that money, we have a significant financial shortfall that we’re facing, and that’s one of the ways we’re going to be able to address reduced fund.” The shortfall Sword is referring to is a potential $7 million “funding cliff” the school board is warning of after next year, when federal stimulus dollars run out and should the proposed tax not be approved. This week, the board learned of being in line for an additional $2.4 million in federal funds, though the state may deduct that additional money from what state funds are owed the district next year.

School board members agreed this week to each hold a town meeting to educate voters and advocate in favor of the proposed tax continuation.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

8 Responses for “Inaccurately and Incoherently, Fischer Opposes School Tax Measure; Sword Favors It”

  1. George says:

    Is Fischer that out of touch? This gives me even more reason not to vote for this tool. Is he a tea bagger too?

  2. Anita says:

    Asked what he thought the purpose of the tax was, Fischer said: “It’s actually supposedly that it’s going to help increase—I’m really confused as far as the bottom line of it, but it’s to increase and to pay for schools. Educational system.”

    Not only has Mr. Fischer failed to grasp a key issue facing the office he seeks, but he is also clueless about basic sentence structure, and ignorance isn’t a qualification for this job.

  3. Mike says:

    Seriously Fischer? You want to take MORE money away from our ailing schools? Sadly enough, people will probably still be dumb enough to vote him in.

  4. wsh302 says:

    how did he get this far?

  5. Truth Traveler says:

    Sword isn’t a better choice either. What is needed on the school board is change. She has proven she will be more of the same. Unfortunately, we have to decide which candidate is worse than the other.

  6. Not sure says:

    I don’t know much about either candidate, but I do know Raven is a big Obama supporter which concerns me, she may have a bigger government is better mind set.

  7. Anonymous says:

    The Republician party runs on the mantra of “small gov’t and the privatization of everything’ . Hence in
    republican controlled districts (especially those with challenging socioeconomic demographics) they deliberately staff gov’t services with incompetent people so that they can point their finger and say ”see gov’t does not work, that’s why we need to privatize these services” . And people are forced to nod their heads in agreement because they see what they are made to see. This being said I seriously doubt our school system here in Flagler will improve under republican governance.

  8. Joe says:

    He could be out of touch, he could also be very clever, he seems to be very opposed to the .25 mil tax and what better way to confuse the issue then to mis-represent it. In any case, I am still confused as to why he is even running for School Board since he seems so anti-schools anything at the Board meetings with his comments.

Leave a Reply

FlaglerLive's forum, as noted in our comment policy, is for debate and conversation that adds light and perspective to articles. Please be courteous, don't attack fellow-commenters or make personal attacks against individuals in stories, and try to stick to the subject. All comments are moderated.

Read FlaglerLive's Comment Policy | Subscribe to the Comment Feed rss flaglerlive comment feed rss

More stories on FlaglerLive

FlaglerLive Email Alerts

Enter your email address to get alerts.


support flaglerlive palm coast flagler county news pierre tristam
news service of florida
FlaglerLive is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization | P.O. Box 254263, Palm Coast, FL 32135 | Contact the Editor by email | (386) 586-0257 | Sitemap | Log in