OCR Text |
Show In Your Opinion Annexation cost greater than told Editor: During the Val Verda annexation meeting at South Davis Junior High on April 26, the question was asked, "What would the cost of annexation annexa-tion be to the Davis School District? ' The answer, as I understood it was, 'There would be no cost. The loss of tax base would be compensated for by the reduced cost of electric power to the district.' Several calls to numerous state, county, Utah Power, and school district offices supplied figures that seem to indicate that the schools would lose if we annexed. In 1991 Utah Power paid to Davis County $909,980 in property taxes. On a 1990 population basis Utah Power serves 73 percent of the county, Kaysville 7.5 percent and Bountiful 19.5 percent. The school district receives 56.36 percent of the property prop-erty tax. If everything were precisely the same, which they certainly are not, and Bountiful and Kaysville paid taxes, the county would receive $335,440 more for a total of $1,345,420 and the school district would receive an additional $189,000 from property taxes. Comparing two randomly selected schools, Sunset Junior High (Utah Power) and Bountiful Junior High (Bountiful City Power), the difference in electricity is 4.75 percent less from Bountiful Power. If this is a fair representation of all schools, the Davis School District power bills would have to be sizable to have a 4.75 percent savings sav-ings equal just the loss of property taxes alone. Utah State taxes, income, etc, going go-ing to the school district are three times the amount received from property taxes. Utah Power s share of this must be considerable, plus taxes from those Utah residents receiving re-ceiving dividends and bond interest. Then there are federal taxes. There are better and more complete com-plete ways to figure this, but I went with the numbers I was able to obtain. ob-tain. I believe the school district h f will lose if we annex. Elvis G. Keysor Bountiful MSG syndrome is serious ailment Editor: On behalf of the "1-2 percent" of the population who suffer from the "Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) Syndrome," I take exception excep-tion to the recent article in the Clipper written by Dennis Hinkamp. I will be greatly pleased if food companies really do start labeling foods which contain glutamate, but that does not go far enough. Glutamates are hidden in many unexpected foods and seasonings. season-ings. When coverage first came out on the Chinese Restaurant Syndrome," Syn-drome," (which Hinkamp seems to find humorous) I began making tests and soon found that, indeed, those containing MSG did cause headaches and illness. These headaches were enough different in nature as to be recognizable and almost without fail I could trace them back to MSG. I have recently found the book "In Bad Taste-the MSG Syndrome," Syn-drome," which sheds light on the physiological changes which MSG causes in different parts of the body, some far worse than the headaches which I suffer. I really wonder how many thousands or millions of people peo-ple are having MSG headaches without knowing what is causing them. The "60 Minutes" segment on this subject could have been a benefit for those who wished to check it out. Back to the "1-2 percent" who suffer from MSG Syndrome as stated in the afore-mentioned article. arti-cle. Let's get a bit facetious and say that only a small percentage of the people suffer from blindness or deafness. If we were to go by Hinkamp's logic, we shouldn't bother with research or taws to herb them because "Oh ya, blindness and deafness are really terrible So what? ' ' Lucille M. Graham Bountiful i. |