OCR Text |
Show EDITOR'S NOTE The following item is being run not as paid advertising ad-vertising but as a public service to readers of this newspaper so that thoy may read tlio pros and cons concerning the college issue, and vote as they see fit. Some weeks ago this paper also published the pros and cons concerning the reapportionment problem on which voters will also cast their vote next Tuesday. REFERENDUM OF SEITATE BILL 29 PROPOSED BALLOT TITLE IN REFERENDUM OF SENATE BILL 29 (CHAPTER 22, LAWS OF UTAH. FIRST SPECIAL SESSION 1953) An Act providing that Carbon College be discontinued as a state maintained college; that the Board of Examiners dispose of all real and personal property comprising said college in such manner as it deems to be to the best interests of the State of Utah. FOR (continued) AGAINST i from continuing the school as a junior college or of utilizing the properties of the school towards strengthening and improving the local high school program. This recommendation would be consistent consis-tent with the program adopted by nearly all other states. FINANCING THE STATE SCHOOL PROGRAM The action of the Legislature in voting to discontinue state support for Carbon Junior College was prompted, in part, by several economic ec-onomic factors. Utah has a greater percentage of its population enrolled en-rolled in colleges and universities than any other state, but it ranks Last among the states in its financial fin-ancial ability to support such schools. Consequently, to support its colleges and universities, Utah must make a greater effort than any of the other forty-seven states.3 stat-es.3 , One reason for this unfavorable situation is that Utah has twice as many public colleges .and universities uni-versities as it has private. The, national na-tional average is just the reverse twice as many private schools as there are public A comparison between Utah's situation and Pennsylvania's better them. In addition, there is the University Uni-versity of Utah and the Utah State Agricultural College, as well as several private institutions of learning. The educational facilities of the state are more adequate even without Carbon College, considering con-sidering the population demands that exist in most other states. Many of the faculty members devote de-vote a portion of their time to teaching high school courses and performing other high school duties. du-ties. It is readily apparent that where there is such a division of responsibility the school cannot as consistently well attend the complex com-plex responsibilities of an institution institu-tion of higher learning. The argument has been raised that Utah needs Carbon Junior College in order to avoid the necessity nec-essity of students in the southeastern south-eastern counties from travelling to attend classes. Such a position is inconsistent with the geography of , our state. While some students are not obliged to travel so long as Carbon continues in existence, many of those enrolled in that institution in-stitution are even now required, because of distance, to attend a school away from home.8 If travel then is necessary for these students stu-dents in any regard, there appears ARGUMENTS AGAINST SENATE BILL NO. 29 WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE ' ABOLISHMENT OF CARBON COLLEGE The December Special Session of Utah Legislature passed two separate bills pertaining to Junior Colleges: Senate Bill No. 29 closing clos-ing Carbon College and Senate Bill No. 39 transferring Dixie, Snow and Weber Colleges to The Latter Day Saints Church. Carbon College is the only college col-lege to be abolished. The Latter Day Saints Church will operate Dixie, Snow and Weber Web-er Colleges if Senate Bill No. 39 is approved by the votersj but Carton Car-ton College will be transferred to Carbon School District to be used only for a high school if Senate Sen-ate Bill No. 29 is approved. Neither the L. D. S. Church or any other group will operate Carbon Car-bon College. Carbon College wilf cease to exist. There will be no college or other state institution of any kind in Southeastern Utah and if Senate Bill No. 29 is approved, 56,856 peo- go away from home and pay room and board. Utah can support Carbon College. Col-lege. The cost to each person in the State of Utah to operate Carbon Car-bon College for one year is not more than fifteen cents. College education should be considered con-sidered an investment for future prosperity of the state. Where most is spent for education, greater great-er prosperity is always found to follow. Utah need j more junior colleges; not fewer. The bill to close Carbon College was hasty and ill-advised. It was passed in a very short special session. ses-sion. It was first defeated in the senate. It took tremendous outside influence and pressure to persuade two or three senators to change their votes and pass the bill.' Vote against closing Carbon College until un-til a thorough study and investigation investiga-tion of the junior college issue can be made by an impartial non-political group. The Committee to Save Carbon College will be glad to abide by the group's recommendation. recommenda-tion. Reliable studies indicate a rapidly rapid-ly growing college ' population throughout the United States and pie in six counties ot southeastern Utah will be without the light from any college of any kind. More than $1,000,000 worth of state-owned college buildings in Price will be given away at a time when the number of youths who will enroll in college is greatly increasing. Sound predictions give Carbon College approximately 400 students by 19G2. Why give away state-owned buildings and then have to build more college buildings build-ings elsewhere ? Population in Southeastern Utah has been increasing and continues to do so. In 1940 Carbon County had 18,459 inhabitants. By 1950, it had 24,901. The discovery and rapid rap-id development of gas wells and uranium mines in Emery, Grand and San Juan Counties has resulted result-ed in a great influx of new settlers. On what basis can the closing of a college in a rapidly growing area be justified? Since the industrial wealth jn Southeastern Utah is greatly and rapidly increasing, the added revenue rev-enue to the state justifies the continuance con-tinuance of Carbon College. In 1953-1954 the average enroll- in Utah. The Utah Foundation predicts a 40 percent increase in college enrollments over the 1953-54 1953-54 enrollments by 1962; Jackson Martindale predicts a 50 percent increase in college enrollments, and Ronald B. Thompson of Ohio State Universitypredicts that college enrollments en-rollments will increase 78 percent by 1969. Carbon College can be expected to have 382 students in 1962 if the Utah Foundation is correct; 410 if Jackson Martindale is correct; and 664 equivalent full-time full-time students in 1969 if Thompson's Thomp-son's predictions are correct. Why give away state owned college buildings now and later have to build more elsewhere? The quality of work done at Carbon Car-bon College is equal to the work done during the first two years at the senior colleges in the state. There are strong reasons to justify justi-fy this assertion: a. It is approved by the Northwest North-west Association of Secondary Second-ary and Higher Schools. b. Its graduates have made outstanding out-standing records in other universities uni-versities and colleges. Letters from the registrars of the TT,, f TT(-V, fc TTtnV, illustrates the problem confronting taxpayers of this state because of the large number of public colleges col-leges and universities. Utah, with a 1950 population of 688,862, had 17,137 students enrolled in public colleges and universities that year and only 5,966 in private. Pennsylvania, Pennsyl-vania, with a 1950 population of 10,498,012, had only 13,571 students stu-dents in public colleges and universities univer-sities but 127,799 in private schools.' It was little wonder then that Pennsylvania ranked first among the states in its ability to support public colleges and universities, univer-sities, whereas Utah ranked last. The 1952 report, "Higher Education Educa-tion in the Forty-Eight States," says that, "the great majority of public junior colleges today are locally lo-cally controlled and largely locally supported." This is not true in Utah. As a matter of fact Utah and Louisiana are the only states in which junior colleges are 100 per cent state supported, and Louisiana Lou-isiana has only one such school. The Utah Foundation, in a report re-port on higher education in Utah, disclosed some statistical facts of importance in understanding the no valid reason why they cannot travel as well to one of the remaining remain-ing Utah colleges. CAPACITY OF CARBON JUNIOR COLLEGE Caj'bon Junior College serves primarily as a transition between high school and university work. Students who attend the school are in most instances required to seek specialized training in other institutions before they are prepared pre-pared to contribute to the economy and welfare of Utah. The notable exception to this is in the realm of vocational training which, in any event, could easily and effectively effec-tively be made available throughout through-out the local school district. This is now being done -in many school districts within the state. The need for further academic training is evident upon examining the major courses in which the col--lege students were enrolled for the year ending June 30, 1953. Carbon Junior College provided training in the following major fields: Academic, Aca-demic, 126 students; Business, 44 students; Home Economics, 1 student; stu-dent; Vocational, 56 students; Nur- ment ot equivalent luu-time students stu-dents at Carbon College was 274. A total of 576 were enrolled that year. The people have confidence inCarbon College. The enrollment for the Autumn quarter of 1954-1955 1954-1955 will be the highest in the history his-tory of the school. Two hundred seventy-five full-time students were enrolled by September 18th of this year. Several additional night classes will be started soon to bring up the enrollment of part-time part-time students. The cost to the State of Utah for each equivalent full-time student stu-dent for one year is consistently lower in the junior 'colleges than in other state colleges and this cost at Carbon College over the 16 years is at or near the lowest. One of the main reasons Carbon College Col-lege operates economically is that it is operated in conjunction with Carbon Senior High School which has 650 students. The expense is divided between the state and Carbon Car-bon School district, in proportion to the teacher load. Surveys show that at least 80 of the students who attend Carbon College could not meet the added cost of attending college away from- home. Fully 74 of the students attending at-tending Carbon College have either full-time or part-time jobs to help support them. College education should be available av-ailable near the homes of the students. stu-dents. Three to five times as many will take advantage of a college education when the college is located locat-ed near them than if they had to UUIYCIOIIJ VJ. (All, 1.11C IrCU State Agricultural College and the Brigham Young University Uni-versity support this statement. state-ment. More than 17 states operate a total of 47 junior colleges and vocational vo-cational schools entirely at state expense. A junior college located near the homes of the people has several advantages: (1) continuation for two additional years of parent-son or -daughter relationship; (2) natural nat-ural and easy transition from high school to college; (3) teacher-student relationship natural and pleasant plea-sant with the student always as an individual whom the teachers know and understand, and (4) the cost of an education greatly reduced to allow more student? to attend and assist those who do enroll to husband hus-band their resources so that all four years of college education can be afforded. I, LAMONT F. TORONTO, Secretary Sec-retary of State of the State of Utah, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a full, correct cor-rect and true copy of the argument against the transfer of Carbon College, Col-lege, as filed by the "Save Carbon Car-bon College Committee." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Great Seal of the State of Utah at Salt Lake City, this 28th day of September, 1954. LAMONT F. TORONTO Secretary of State. (SEAL) ior colleges. The report shows that Utah's ability to support higher education, as measured by the total to-tal income payments to individuals individ-uals in the state in proportion to the number of students enrolled in colleges within the state, is the lowest in the nation. In some parts of the nation the major part of the higher education burden is borne by private institutions. Percentage-wise, in Utah, only 25 percent of the total college enrollment en-rollment is in private institutions, compared with 49 percent for the nation as a whole. Throughout the United States only 27 percent of the total enducational and general income for all institutions comes from state government sources. However, the State of Utah, while being the least able to support such institutions, pays more than 40 percent of the total educational and general income for all institutions institu-tions of higher learning.' The people of Utah spend a larger lar-ger proportion of their personal income to support education than do the people of any other state. This outstanding effort is reflected reflect-ed in the tax burden the people must shoulder Utah is one of the highest taxed states in the nation.' The tax burden is almost certain to grow heavier in . future years because of the steady increase in the costs of the public school program pro-gram unless the state can be relieved re-lieved of some of its present obligations. obli-gations. This was one of the considerations con-siderations that prompted the Governor Gov-ernor to recommend to the Legis- o, - , - - - Dental, 5 students, and Engineering, Engineer-ing, 16 students. In every instance before a college degree could be granted to these students they would have to seek further' training train-ing at other schools, and in the case of any of the more technical fields, the student would not be qualified to even engage in the occupation he desired without further fur-ther academic work not available to him at Carbon. CONCLUSION The alternatives to discontinuing state support for Carbon College' should be. carefully considered by the voters. Not only the immediate cost of supporting this school is involved, but also the precedent of the action as it concerns other areas of the state. If Carbon should be continued, can we deny granting similar support to other institutions yet to be created in other areas of the state? As desirable de-sirable as it might be, can the people peo-ple of this state afford to support a junior college in every large city t or geographical area, in addition to the four-year college at Logan and the University at Salt Lake City? There will be increases in college enrollment in years to come which the other colleges and universities, uni-versities, public and private, are capable of absorbing and will absorb ab-sorb unless the state's resources are spread too thin trying to maintain main-tain institutions which it does not need and cannot afford. It is better bet-ter that the state maintain superior super-ior colleges and universities at a hip-Vl Ipvpl nf cnnnnrf thnn tr Hiuiflp FOR 1UIU1C llltlU LUC OLabG U1SI.U11 1111UC its support of Carbon Junior College. Col-lege. IS CARBON JUNIOR COLLEGE NEEDED? The Governor, a native of Price, Utah, was one of the original supporters sup-porters of Carbon Junior College and knows from first-hand knowledge knowl-edge of it3 accomplishments and short-comings and its role in community com-munity life. Because of his close identification with the College and the community in which the College Col-lege is located, the Governor would not have recommended that the state discontinue its support if he were not convinced that such a move was in the best interests of the state as a whole. Utah has three other junior colleges, col-leges, which colleges will be in operation regardless of whether or not the state continues control of 'Utah Foundation Report No. 91 'Report on Higher Education in the 48 States Ibid. "Utah Foundation Report No. 91 'Pacific Northwest Industry, Jan. 1953 'The Statistical anc Personnel Report, Re-port, 1953 its resources inadequately among a greater number. Senate Bill 29 was passed by a sound thinking legislative assembly which considere ' all aspects of the measure before acting. The bill best serves the interests of all the people of Utah. The burdening junior jun-ior college problem has .been with us for many years and much thought given toward a solution. Now that a solution bas been reached, rea-ched, it becomes incumbent upon the people of Utah to give full support sup-port to the act of the Legislature in passing Senate Bill 29. I, LAMONT F. TORONTO, Secretary Sec-retary of State of the State of Utah, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a full, correct and true copy of the argument for transfer of Carbon College, as filed by the Committee For the Return of Junior Colleges, as appears of record in my office. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Groat Seal of the State of Utah at Salt Lake City this 28th day of September, 1954. LAMONT F. TORONTO Secretary of State. (SEAL) One of the importantquestions to be decided by the voters this November is whether or not Carbon Car-bon Junior College at Price, Utah should be longer supported as a state school. The First Special Session Ses-sion of the 30th Utah Legislature, through enactment of Senate Bill 29, voted to discontinue state support sup-port for Carbons Junior College. This action is being contested by those who believe the Legislature in this instance should be overridden. overrid-den. It is the considered opinion of those -of us preparing this statement state-ment that the Legislature's action, ac-tion, while controversial in some areas, was taken in the state's best interests and should be supported. The voters, in deciding this issue, should sweep aside personalities and emotionalism and base their judgment solely on the cold facts and hard realities that are involved. involv-ed. HISTORICAL Carbon Junior College, unlike Utah's other institutions of higher foaming, is not an old, well established estab-lished school. It was founded in 1938, next to the campus of Carbon Car-bon High School on land donated by the taxing units of Carbon County. The mixed high school-junior school-junior college campus arrangement arrange-ment still exists. In its short life, Carbon Junior College has not fulfilled ful-filled the high expectations of many of its original supporters. Its enrollment during 1944 dropped to only 22' students and, while it has since increased, there were only 53 students graduated in 1952.' THE EFFECT OF SENATE BILL 29 UPON THE COLLEGE Should state support be withdrawn with-drawn from Carbon Junior College the facilities of the school would not be lost to the state. It is generally gen-erally understood, and the Governor Govern-or has so recommended, that the assets of the institution be turned back to the local school district for operation or other disposition. There is nothing in the bill which would prevent the district itself 'Utah Foundation Report No. 38 'Utah School Report, 1950-52 |