The State Assembly has scheduled an April 27th vote on the latest incarnation of TABOR, the so-called Taxpayer Protection Amendment, or TPA.

The TPA is a constitutional amendment that limits revenue growth for state and local bodies of government. Under the amendment, complicated formulas specify the percentage by which units of government are able to increase their revenues.

Numerous versions of the TPA have been circulated in recent weeks, the latest coming on April 21st from Rep. Mark Gottlieb. Rep. Gottlieb’s version of TPA would limit state revenue to 90% of a three-year rolling average percentage change in personal income.

Aggregate revenue for all other taxing entities, including the technical colleges, would be limited to 90% of a three-year rolling average percentage change in personal income. The Gottlieb version directs the legislature to set specific revenue limits on each of the individual taxing entities.

The language proposed by Rep. Gottlieb comes approximately two weeks after controversial amendments were added to an earlier, lengthier version of TPA sponsored by Rep. Jeff Wood and Sen. Glen Grothman. In addition to setting revenue limits, that plan specified that no local government, including technical college districts, could be required to increase annual employee compensation beyond the allowable growth factor for that government.

WEAC President Stan Johnson blasted the provision.

“Supporters of this proposal are looking to use the TPA to impose a Qualified Economic Offer-type restriction—the law that has undermined teachers’ collective bargaining rights since it passed in the state budget in 1993—on all public employees.”

The Qualified Economic Offer – or QEO – is a state law that allows school districts to avoid binding arbitration during labor negotiations if the district provides a compensation increase of a certain size.

Under the QEO, Wisconsin teacher compensation has fallen well below the national average.

“Now some legislators want to extend this losing proposition to all public employees and encourage those who would work in public service to rethink their career choices,” said Johnson.

The attack on public employee collective bargaining in the latest changes to the TPA is draconian. But it is not the only drawback of the TPA. The proposed amendment will also have a significant negative impact on the ability of government, including the technical colleges, to provide vital services.

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau (the Legislature’s non-partisan financial analyst) recently released its analysis of the TPA. The report shows in dollar terms the devastating impact the TPA would have on the technical colleges. The report compares actual revenues collected by the technical colleges in 2003-04 with revenues that could have been collected in 2003-04 had the amendment been in place in 1999-2000.

In 2003-04, the 16 technical college districts actually levied a total of $565.4 million. However, if the amendment had been in place beginning in 1999-2000, the allowable levy would have been only $495.9 million. In other words, under the TPA, in 2003-04 the technical colleges would have been able to collectively levy $69.5 million less than what was actually levied.

According to the report, almost all of the district would have been able to levy less under the TPA than what was actually levied. In 15 of the 16 districts, the 2003-04 TPA limit was less the actual 2003-04 levy, meaning these districts would have had to make budget reductions in order to conform to the amendment.

The report shows the TPA would impact individual colleges by varying degrees. In four districts, the gap between actual 2003-04 revenues and allowable 2003-04 revenues was more than 20%. These districts would be the hardest hit had the TPA gone into effect in 1999-2000. Clearly, these colleges would have looked very different in 2003-04 under TPA. Had TPA been in force, it’s hard to imagine that any area of these colleges’ operations would have escaped significant reductions over the 5 years from 1999-2000 to 2003-04.

Eight districts had a gap between actual revenues and allowable revenues of between 10% and 20%. Three districts had a gap of between 5% and 10%.

While the specifics of competing TPA proposals have differed in recent weeks, all suffer from the same fundamental flaw says WEAC President Stan Johnson.

“Enshrining fiscal policy in the state’s constitution is irresponsible and reckless,” said Johnson. “Legislators should debate taxing and spending decisions in the light of day, as part of the public record, and face the consequences with their constituents.”