OCR Text |
Show the standard of the high school and may change the same at pleasure. It is a dangerous proposition to take away from the people and the legislature the right to say what the standard of the high school or the public schools shall be. Think of putting in the constitution "that if the high school of Ogden should run one day less than the state board of education should think proper, not one cent could be paid to the Ogden City High school." To put such trash in the constitution is nonsense. Question Nos. 2 and 3 also repeals the present high school laws regarding the taxation, which is wrong again. There is nothing in questions Nos. 2 and 3 that is of any value but what is a law today. On Question No. 4, the present law provides that the state of Utah can not run in debt more than $200,000 in excess of the debt that was left by the territory of Utah. The amendment proposed in Question No. 4 provides that the state may run in debt one and one-half one-half per cent of the total taxable property of the state at any time. This places no limit on the debt. That is, if the property valuation increases in the state, the state can continue to increase its debt. In view of the fact that we have already recommended that the people vote "YES" on Question No. 1, there should be no reason why the state should be run in debt and force a big interest charge on the people peo-ple to be paid annually, when the state government is authorized to levy an ample tax to maintain the government of the state. Therefore, we recommend that the people vote "NO" on Question Ques-tion No. 4. Question No. 5 does not affect cities of the first and second classes. The present law provides that all cities may run in debt 4 per cent additional for the building of waterworks, eewers and light systems. sys-tems. The amendment proposed in Question No. 5 provides that cities cit-ies of the third class, such as Manti, Nephi, Brigham City and other cities of a population less than 5,000 may create a debt for waterworks, water-works, sewers, etc., not exceeding eight per cent. As this is a question ques-tion entirely affecting the small cities in the state, it would be well enough not to vote at all on this question, but allow the people of the smaller cities to settle that among themselves. The people of Ogden would not like it very well if the small cities of this state were to amend the constitution of the state saddling an increased debt upon the, city, or even authorizing it to be saddled on the city. Therefore, we recommend, do not vote at all on Question No. 5. If Logan and Provo want this question carried, they can easily carry it if Salt Lake City and Ogden will simply NOT vote at all on Question No. 5. Therefore, remember, vote "YES" on Question No. 1, vote "NO" on Questions No. 2 and No. 3 and No. 4, and Ogden people should NOT vote at all on Question No. 5. By so doing we believe you will serve the best interests of the state and the people generally. HOW TO VOTE TUESDAY. We have been asked to explain the amendments to the Utah constitution. The amendments are all important and the people should know just what they are asked to vote. Question No. 1 proposes to amend Section 7 of Article 13 of the constitution of the state of Utah. The present constitution provides that the state rate of taxation shall not be over eight mills on the dollar until tho property valuation of Utah reaches $200,000,000; thereafter the taxes shall not be more than five mills on the dollar. The taxable value of the state of Utah is about $190,000,000, almost reaching the $200,000,000 limit when the taxes must be reduced to five mills on the dollar. The state officials claim that the constitution should be changed to read that not exceeding eight mills on the dollar shall be continued until the property valuation .of .Utah .reaches $400,000,000. This same amendment to the constitution was defeated defeat-ed in this state two years ago, but, in order to make the amendment amend-ment palatable, the framers of the new amendment have held out a sop in this same amendment that half a mill of the eight mills shall be set aside for a high school fund to be divided, among all those localities having high schools, in proportion to pupils in the schooh. The only question for the voter to consider is, "Can the gov-ernment gov-ernment of the state of Utah be successfully administered without this increase of revenue?" The state officials say they will receive three mills less money as soon as the property valuation of Utah reaches $200,000,000, and thus they would be getting less money than they are now getting. On the other hand, there are those who say that, if the state government is economically administered, the income, as proposed by the constitution, will be sufficient to conduct the government gov-ernment of the state. This paper i3 inclined to believe that Question No. 1 should be voted for. It would have been better if the high school feature had been cut out of this amendment so that the revenue feature could have been voted for alone without the high school feature. The amendment required votes, so the high school feature was tacked on to get support. As we must have sufficient money to run the state we advise the people to vote "YES" on Question No 1. Questions No. 2 and No. 3 both affect the same proposition The present law provides that any locality or municipality may levy a local tax for the support of high schools. The constitutional amendment amend-ment m question 2 and 3 should be voted down, as the good features of the proposed amendment are included in the first question, while the bad features are that the state board of education shall prescribe |