OCR Text |
Show Community jo Comments 1 In September when Grand ounty was asked to remain a part of the 4-county Community Action Program, the plea from other member counties was that without Grand County's population base, thj region would not qualify population wise for the program under federal guidelines, and thus the program would be lost to the entire region. Comments by one Moab resident, however, who testified at a public meeting called by Grand County Commissioners proved more prophetic. He said, "don't worry about the guidelines, they'll find some way to keep this federal program going whether or not they have enough population base." And that's apparently what has happened. In a news release from the Price CAP administrative offices Wednesday, we learned that Grand County's decision to withdraw will probably not jeopardize the program in Carbon, Emery and San Juan Counties. Ms. Marie Tibbit, SEUCAP Executive Director has contacted the Denver CSA Regional office to request that a waiver be granted to Insure continuance of CAP projects in Carbon, Emery and San Juan. "Although the decision to grant such a waiver could entail several months. ..it does not appear that any drastic changes will take place in the near future and that CAP will continue to operate in San Juan, Carbon, and Emery counties until such time as any official action is taken to instruct her to do otherwise," the release said. Not only that, the Headstart program will continue to function not only on the above-mentioned counties but also In Grand County, even though we have officially disengaged ourselves from the CAP program. "Notice of funding has recently been received for, fiscal year 1977 which assures continuance for at least another year at which time the question of a waiver being granted should be resolved. ..Headstart programs will be continued in all four counties. Grand County parents have expressed grave concern at the possibility of losing their Headstart program and Ms. Tibbits stated that the parerits may be assured the program will continue to operate either under the existing program or until such time as another acceptable sponsor applies for and is approved to operate the center.'1 For the sake of those parents of Headstart children who feared the loss of what they believe to be a worthwhile program, I am glad that the program is not going to be jerked away with no substitute program or alternate sponsor in the offing. But, it seems to me, there has to be a better and far less expensive way of doing the job. If it were possible, In some way, to completely sever our connections with a program the community obviously doesn't want, I believe the community has the ability and the desire to put together a pre-schooler program built to our own real needs, and not bridled by a long list of federal guidelines that tend to make the program ineffective for a large number of children who really need pre-school help. But to sever those connections appears to be a lot harder done than said. -sjt- A Utah Foundation feature this week (Page B8) talks about studies now centering around "zero-base" budgeting by our state agencies. What that means, in a nutshell, is that agencies would have to justify their ENTIRE spending program to the Appropriations Committee of the Legislature each year, rather than simply justifying ADDITIONS to existing programs, as has been the practice in the past. I'm delighted that the Legislature is finally getting around to zero-base budget thinking. There is little question that much in existing programs needs to be examined each year by the lawmakers, not just expansion and addition. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Legislators discovered under zero-base budgeting budget-ing that there is a whole lot being done in state agencies today that could be done very well without. I hope the Legislature goes on with their studies and adopts this budgeting method. sjt One state agency that has to ask for very little money each year from the Legislature is the Division of Wildlife Resources, which is allowed to build a budget based on the revenue it receives from license sales. With that guaranteed income, has to come a somewhat unconcerned attitude toward those who appropriate tax money each year, and allocate it to agencies on the basis of need. Perhaps this is one of the biggest problems facing the Division today. It is one that a lot of lawmakers are looking at. As long as a program can be financed from license sales, it appears to me that to sell more and more licenses would be a terrible temptation. And, speaking about Wildlife Resources, don't forget that Director Don Smith will be in Moab Saturday at 3 p.m. for a public hearing. Go bear your testimony. That's what he's here for. sit |