OCR Text |
Show The Payson Chronicle, April 24, 1996, Page 7 Letters To The Editor What is your opinion? This newspaper welcomes opinions from its readers concerning any subject pertinent to the Payson area. We request that letters use good judgment and are concise. Anything of a libelous nature, or defamation of character, will not be considered for publication. Letters must be signed with the writers name, address, and telephone number. Thanking Brent Dear Editor, I want to thank Brent York for his letter. He is right to question, as we all should! I believe he did a terrific service for all of us by making us aware of what could be happening to us on one front. What he was too polite to mention is that this is happening on several fronts. Our civic leaders should be held accountable for ALL of their actions. They should be able to look each one of us in the eye and answer questions about the status of any aspect of our city. We all MUST take our part in demanding that our taxes are fair, that our tax dollars are not just being taken for granted! Our city government is becoming even less responsive. Such things as meetings held behind closed doors prior to the meetings open to the public scare me. Not because they meet. They may often need to have an executive meeting. But when not a single word of approval is voiced by caring citizens, how can our council vote unanimously and instantaneously to approve expensive and unwanted annexation, for instance? I understand that our council members have a tough job with much criticism. But, doesnt this incident seem odd? Citizens have THE RIGHT to know how and where their d dollars are going to be spent and what additional spending is being planned for our citys future? We have a say in these decisions! As secretary of the Civic Improvement Board in its infancy, I was present when a poll was taken of this newly-forme- d group of civic leaders and concerned citizens. We were asked to state our priorities in order of importance. When the votes were counted, the first priority was city streets and sidewalks - by a landslide! I have never since seen anything but a few patch jobs and new homes putting in curb and gutters because they are required to do so. Then I learn that the department covering street care has been downsized to THREE men! They could not afford to keep more on the job. About this time, or shortly thereafter, the city council and city employees were given a nice (in some cases huge) raise in salaries - suggested and agreed to by recipients! It would appear that, even with our citys building boom and need for more and better streets and sidewalks, no employees have been restored to that department! Yet, we can frequently hear about large amounts being spent for water, sewer lines and much other work being done on our newly annexed subdivision and our industrial park. So far, it appears that jobs created by these warehouse- hard-earne- type operations will be mostly minimum wage. This and the subsidies to lure businesses here finds me wondering where will the benefits be? What employer would keep on paying when their questions went and their roads and sidewalks are left unsafe, causing physical injury andor discomfort, plus damage to our vehicles just driving to Main Street? What boss would allow employees to give themselves a raise under these circumstances; without being consulted? Perhaps, forming a watchdog committee of concerned citizens would help. Employees are more careful when the boss is looking in on them. Sincerely, from one very cerned citizen, Vickie Wheeler 6, Questions Bonding Dear Editor, Paul Blanchards article of April 17 about the proposed school bond seems to assume that if he can just get us couch potatoes out to die polls on May 7 the money will be eagerly approved and the "crisis in our schools averted. I dont deny the crisis; I just dont believe another thirty million dollars will avert it. Weve been pouring money into public schools for decades now, and not only has it failed to solve the problems - it has apparently fed them. For those who may be interested, the true fact is that an inverse relationship exists tween the amount of money spent on education and SAT scores. In 1963, we spent a national average of less than $2000 per student and the average SAT score was 980. By 1975 spending was up to more than $3300 per student but lo, the SAT score was down to 906. In 1991 we spent an amazing $5245 per student for an underwhelming SAT average of 896. Thus, while educational spending rose astronomically over a thirty-yeperiod, the SAT scores dropped almost 100 points. Some will protest that these national averages dont accurately reflect the situation in Utah: we dont spend that much per student, they say, and our SAT scores are higher. Exactly. Thats my point. While Utah was spending $2960 per student and achieving an SAT average of 1031, the District of Columbia spent $9259 per student (no, thats not a misprint) and "achieved" an average SAT of 840. Thats $6300 more per student for neatly 200 points less on the SAT. Obviously money alone is not the solution. Yes, there are solutions to some of the problems in our schools but most of them involve changing our entire system of education rather than just digging deeper into our pockets. If this were a case of child discipline rather than one of finance and politics, theres not a parent or teacher in Utah who wouldnt have figured out long ago that what were doing isnt working and maybe we should try something different. So...if any of you property-holde(even teachers!) out there are feeling guilty about not wanting to increase your taxes again "to do what is necessary for our schools" (according to Mr. Blanchard) maybe you should ask what really is necessary for our schools. You might discover that you neednt feel guilty about voting no on another thirty million. Tamara Hinckley Santaquin, Utah -- ar rs con- Watching Taxes Dear Editor, On March 7, 1990, the city council held a public hearing to receive input concerning imposing a Utility Tax (Franchise Tax?) on gross receipts of the sale of electric energy, natural gas and telephone services by public utilities within the city. The and meeting was were comments Many made and many questions were well-attend- situation; the need for money to develop the pressurized water project, to upgrade the culinary water system, improve and install curb, gutter, sidewalks and the roads. Franchise Tax of 6 was mentioned. When a citizen asked, "Is it necessary to raise to the full 6 ?" the answer was "Yes." "Can it go higher than 6 ? "The reply was "No. Someone mentioned that when the city got in a better fiscal condition the tax could be removed. The city administrator, who has since left Payson, stated, "Taxes dont have to stay on forever. Orem has put it on and taken it off several times." Not one person spoke in favor of this 6 tax. No one wanted property taxes raised. The mayor thanked everyone for coming, called for a motion which was, "Assess the citizens of Payson a 6 Utility (Franchise) Tax." The yes vote was unanimous. If you check your Mt. Fuel bill for 430 to 5301990 you will see an addition of a 6 Payson City Tax, and we have been paying that ever since that date. One individual at the meeting asked if they didnt put this tax on, what was the next choice? He was told, "Raise utility rates." After getting slapped with the 6 tax, it was somewhat of a shock to learn on July 1st the council planned to raise sewer rates by 25. However, since that time that rate seems to have been favorably revised. Thanks to Brent York for his excellent letter - for his continued concern for the citizens of Payson - for informing us of raising an additional tax. If this results in an increase of every utility bill that we pay, my question is, "Is this legal?" Our city cannot afford anymore legal entanglements and should pursue legal advice to its fullest before making questionable decisions. Isnt it about time to give the citizens of Payson a break - a tax break? Not sanction has the state law been another raise? And if they propose any percent higher than the voters? the of without raise such a approval changed that prohibits Citizens are confused and in need of an understandable explanation. Sincerely, Mildred Olson d. asked. Council members explained the seriousness of the citys financial MILITARY NEWS Air Force 2nd Lt. Bradley D. Christiansen has arrived for duty Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio. at Wright-Patterso- n Christiansen, a communication and control systems analyst, is the son of Don M. and Barbara Christiansen of Payson, Utah. He is a 1989 graduate of Payson High School and a 1995 graduate of Brigham Young University. |