Laserfiche WebLink
Paqe 2 <br /> <br />Explanation of Page 5,. continued: <br /> ANOTHER EXAMPLE of DISPARITY: Please note AEMR bracket <br /> of "21". 'The HIGH city in that bracket receives $190.00 <br /> per capita, the LOWEST, $44.00, a difference of $146.00 <br /> within cities of the same AEMR bracket. <br /> <br />EVALUATING THE COMPUTOR PRINT OUT: <br /> The print out is divided with horizontal lines, encasing <br /> cities having the SAME AEMR, colunun F. <br /> Column J shows the per capita aid for ALL cities and the <br /> HIGH and LOW within each AEMR bracket. (designated by H <br /> and L in margin) <br /> We refer to column K as "People Unit" or "Aid per.capita <br /> <br />per Average Equalized Mill Rate". <br />puted as follows: <br /> col. "I" ('1980 State Aid) <br /> <br />This column was com- <br /> = Column "K" <br /> <br /> (People Unit) <br /> <br />Col. "F" (AEMR) X Col. "G" (Population) <br />Column F (AEMR) X column G (Population) produces a fiqure <br />of 66,311,612 total Mill Units in the State. <br />The $208,283,079.00 was taken from a 1980 State Revenue <br />Department Publication. The total of column I will be <br />an approximation of this figure. <br /> Therefore, $3.14 was established as the MILL RATE [~IT. <br /> If $3.14 is the established rate, IDEALLY distribution <br /> should be based upon THAT figure ($3.14)! Why then, do <br /> disparities of $$ distribution per unit VARY from $56.53 <br /> to $0.00?? (indicated in Column "K") <br /> Upon COMPLETE ANALYSI~ of Colunu~ "J" (and/or page 5) and <br /> Column "k" of YOUR Computor copy, the disparities become <br /> very obvious! There is NO Correlation between cities with <br /> the sAME AEMR range. <br /> <br /> <br />