OCR Text |
Show assistance Is not the fault of any teacher, teach-er, not the fault of any trustee or school official, It is the fault of the sys tern. Redisricting offers absolutely no relief, for It is simply a continuation of a system already Inadequate and inefficient. ineffi-cient. I propone county consolidation as the best and most practical remedy for our school difficulties In Millard county. coun-ty. Consolidation mentis organising alt tbe schools In Millard county Into one district of the first cluss. The law briefly Is this. (For a full expo sit Ion of the law I refer school patrons and teachers to chapter 16 of the school laws of Utah, and Senate bill So. 80, recently passed, which amends tbe old law In certain particulars.) . Auy county having a population of 2.000 or over may be consolidated upon petition of one-third of the taxpayers tax-payers to the county commissioners. Tbe county commissioners shall divide di-vide the county Into not fewer than five nor more than nine, sections, each section shall be entitled to one trustee. These trustees take over the school affairs af-fairs of the whole county. They have power to appoint the county superintendent, superin-tendent, to levy taxes, to catl bond elections, to purchase alt supplies for the county, to employ teachers. In fact to dr all the work necessary for the oiieratkm of the schools of the county, la the matter of tax levy they may not levy over IS mills. This board Is also the board for tbe county high school. This board receives all the school money due the county. They do not distribute to any school on a basis of population, but they are bound to , see that a school Is established and conducted in every locality where one H necessary. It Is not so much money for Garrison and so much for Suthor-bsd. Suthor-bsd. but It la enough for Garrison and enough for Sutherland on which jthey can run a school Jut as long and jjKt as efficiently as their attendance and circumstances Justify. Without (1)tng lta the saving on purchases ilwW syatiBNtSvilhld mean the Increased efficiency of teachers, the belter supervision, super-vision, the fairer grading and opportunities oppor-tunities for better Instruction, let me further discuss the financial pbsse. Many patrons, especially In the larger districts, may object to this system sys-tem and refuse to consider It because It apparently Is favoring the small district dis-trict over the large one. t know men who will argue, "We have a fine school house in our town; It's all paid for and we are out of debt, then why should we assume liabilities for other districts." That argument Is popular; It will appeal to a great many, but It Is poor logic and cannot be defended upon any ethical basis whatsoever. Those who offer It assume that consolidation consol-idation means an added burden for them, tbe fact la It does not. From no county that Is at present consolidated has the complaint come of Increased school tax. In many cases tbe tax has actually lowered. For Instance, prior to consolidation In Sevier, Monroe taxpayers tax-payers paid 17 mills, after consolidation consolida-tion the levy was 11 mills. Tbe tax will doubtless increase In the districts now levying only five mills, but whenever any district needs buildings or Improvements, Instead of their levying the limit and bearing an extraordinary burden, the whole county coun-ty will be back of tbe expense. And It Is right that the whole county should help every district In the county, coun-ty, for education to us is not a matter of having good schools alone In this district or that district, but good schools In every district. The district having most taxable property cannot object to helping other districts, with any more reason than the rich man without children can object to paying acbool taxes. There are a great many other phases of this question which I hope to take up la later articles. I Invite correspondence corre-spondence on this question from all school patrons In the county. 1 shall be glad to answer questions about It, or If I cannot answer them, submit them to the state superintendent. A. J. ASHMAN. County Superintendent. WHY NOT CONSOLIDATE MILLARD COUNTY SCHOOLS. The county commissioners have set! March 27 as the day upon which they J shall meet for the purpose of redisricting redis-ricting Millard county with respect to public schools. There Is absolutely no doubt In the mind of any person who baa any Information at all upon the subject that tbe present division Is thoroughly unfair. And the whole contention arises out of the apportionment apportion-ment of the railroad running through the county. There are In Millard county nineteen organized districts, six on the east side and thirteen ou the west. Each of these districts Is entitled to a fair portion of railroad and tbe county commissioners have aimed to give every district a square deal, but they have met with certain obstacles, which I believe cannot he overcome by any redisricting, and redisricting re-disricting will not provide certain reforms re-forms that Millard county schoolr need. In this article I desire to call attention atten-tion to some of these obstacles, the need for certain reforms and suggest consolidation as our remedy. ; 111 Tbe matter of arbitrarily shifting shift-ing private property from one district ta another. A year ago when Cf Sutherland and Rock districts were jp-1 ganlzed the problem of getting a s , J-Hon J-Hon of railroad for each of them wti the difficulty. Naturally the comm! sloners turned to the districts best 4.2 with respect to railroad Leamington : and Clear Lake, ! found It IroponufUs to sogregate a foot of, track from either. The obstacle was private property) Leamington Includes Lynn, and Is 'trying 'try-ing to shift the southern boundary flue oi this district In order to let Sutl er-land er-land In the county surveyor discover ;J certain private property now In Lj - n would by tbe change become a part cf Sutherland and of course would l taxed In Sutherland, while the owr would find It much more convenlent r; send his children to Lynn school.' It Is' obvious that a man would certainly object ob-ject to paying taxes for tbe support of a school ten miles from bis home, when there Is a school In his own neighborhood neighbor-hood which his children can conveniently conven-iently attend, and toward which he pays nothing. When tbe commissioners turned to the Clear Lake boundary they found the same situation. As a reault the railroad had to be taken from districts less able to bear loss than Ieamlngton or Clear Lake, Tbe present board may have some practical method of solving or avoiding avoid-ing this difficulty, but from the fact that 'We have nineteen districts, each of which will ask for a strip of railroad consistent with Its school population, and from the further fact that the boundary lines would perhaps bave to be greatly distorted to arrive at even a tolerable adjustment. I am to believe that redisricting would still find us far from a fair apportionment and far from what we actually want N (2) Granted for tbe moment that re-divlslon re-divlslon would give every district an amount of railroad In proportion to the district's school population, school funds would not then be equitably distributed. dis-tributed. Though the state usee population popu-lation as a basis for a distribution to the county, yet It Is none the less unfair. un-fair. To Illustrate, take the districts of Sutherland and Garrison. Sutherland has a school population of 50, Gsrrlson a acbool population of 25. Distribution based on school population allows Sutherland $100 where Garrison gets only $50. Yet each employs one teacher teach-er at practically the same salary, each district Deeds a school bouse, gur-nlshed gur-nlshed and equipped In practically the same way, except as to number of desks. Garrison will use Just as much fuel as Butberland, but Garrison under un-der present methods of apportionment, receives only half as much money as Sutherland. Redisricting, be It ever so perfect will never adjust this discrimination. dis-crimination. (31 Under organization as separate districts, there caa never be uniformity uniform-ity of instruction. Tbe five months school caa never accomplish what the eight month acbool accomplishes. There are pupils In certalo Millard county schools who, by age. should be In the sixth grade, but are only la the fourth, and tbey are good pupils, but a short school term and a consequent crowding la studies, has not only kept them down, but In many cases discouraged dis-couraged them. But this opens tbe whole field of supervision aad administration, admin-istration, and space forbids a discus-itoa discus-itoa of these la this issue. But permit per-mit sae to add that this lack of aai fonnlty aad absence of much needed |