| OCR Text |
Show State School Financing Program Recommended by Special Council The Utah Coordinating Council Coun-cil on Education recently adopted adopt-ed a program for financing Utah's schools to be submitted to the 1961 Legislature. The proposed pro-posed program will enable Utah to spend an amount on each school pupil equal to the average pupil amount spent In the mountain moun-tain states of Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. The program was devoloped by a research re-search committee of the Coordinating Coordin-ating Council, according to Chairman Chair-man Leo Crandall, school board member in the Nebo School is-trict is-trict "It Is our convictlon,H said Mr. Crandall, "that In Utah, where we pride ourselves on the great value we place on education, we cannot afford to continue to spend less for the education of our children than our neighboring neighbor-ing states." "Utah is now spending $37 less than the average expenditure per child In the mountain states," Mr. Crandall said. The average per pupil expenditure in Utah this year Is $315 compared with an average expenditure of $382 In the eight mountain states, and $396 in the eleven western states. To finance the program adopted by the Council will require approximately ap-proximately five million dollars per year In additional state funds. The Coordinating Council Is comprised of representatives of the Utah State School Boards Association, As-sociation, the Utah State Eoard of Education, the Utah Congress of Parents and Teachers, the Utah Education Association, and the Utah Society of School Superintendents. Superin-tendents. The committee announced an-nounced its legislative plans at the conclusion of a meeting In Salt Lake City today. Under the plan, the Council proposes to guarantee a program of education costing $6,000 per distribution unit to all school districts In the state. To Qualify, a district would be required to levy a 16-mlll local property tax. The effect of this program would be to combine the present basic and supplemental school program. pro-gram. In addition, the Council plan would permit districts to receive state snririnrt t- 'iarante' n ro-rcram ro-rcram costing $6,900 per distribution distribu-tion unit provided the districts levlerl r 2.1-mill qualifying levy on lis local res-iurces. This pro-pram pro-pram f'einated by the Council as "st.itc supported " leeway" wouiri prvldp an Incentive for districts to make a reasonable effort on their own before receiving re-ceiving further state school assist as-sist r.n. Those districts levying the seven-mill qualifying levy (In addition ad-dition to the 16-mill uniform levy) would receive state funds necessary to provide the difference differ-ence between the proceeds of the five-mill local levy and $6,900 po --" - unit.' I Local boards of education would be permitted to levy additional ad-ditional property taxes within reasonable limits beyond the basic program. I I The Council program proposes I no change in the present voted leeway. This is the local property pro-perty tax levy beyond the taxes levied by boards of education which can be used only with a favorable vote of a majority of the taxpayers residing In the district. Included In the Council's proposal pro-posal is a provision to strength en the guidance services In Utah schools as recommended by the studies of the American high school by Dr. James B. Conant and others. The proposal would provide state assistance to the districts for one nonteaching professional pro-fessional person for each seven regular distribution units. Under the present law, one unit is allowed for nonteaching personnel per-sonnel for each nine regular units. The Coordinating Council Is engaged In developing a number num-ber of other programs which will strengthen Utah's school program but which do not Involve additional addi-tional state finances. |
