OCR Text |
Show Leeway vote deserves support of Alpine patrons l The question local voters need to ask themselves before they go to the polls next Tuesday to vote in the special leeway tax election is whether or not the Alpine School District needs the money. If the leeway is approved in Tuesday's election, it will raise an additional $2.5 million for education each year over the next 10 years - $1.6 million of that coming from local property taxes, and $870,000 from state matching funds for the first two mills. The leeway would add about $40 a year to the property taxes on an $80,000 home. Taxes would also go up slightly on other personal property. The tax would net about $70 for each student in the district - money which can only be used for purchasing textbooks, purchasing equipment and supplies, maintaining existing buildings and paying for aides for teachers of large classes. Opponents to the leeway have noted several points about the proposed tax which, for the most part, are foundless. For example, the accusation has been made that the additional funds will be used simply to raise teachers' salaries. That's' false. In fact, the district is bound by law and practice to use the funds raised from the tax for the four purposes stated in the public notice calling for the election and mandated by a unanimously approved district policy statement. Others accuse the district of being top heavy in its administrative offices, and say the district should cut back administrators' salaries and pare down the number of administrators throughout the district. In fact, the Alpine School District has one of the lowest ratios of administrators per student of any district in Utah. State Office of Education data shows that the district ranks 39th out of 40 in the number of classified employees em-ployees per students and 38th out of 40 in the number of certified personnel (teachers and administrators) per student. Those figures make Alpine one of the most efficiently-run efficiently-run school districts in Utah. Another claim being thrown around this year is that all students in Utah are guaranteed the same amount of funding by the state legislature. This fallacy is spread by the Utah Taxpayers Association -- despite the fact that UTA executive director Jack Olsen admitted the allegation is false when he met with the Alpine School District last year, and was chided for using similar accusations against the last failed leeway vote. In fact, district expenditures per student vary widely throughout the state, and the Alpine School District ranks last in expenditures per student in the state -spending $1,887 per student during the 1984-85 school year. Neighboring Provo School District spent $2,109 per student over the same period. I Even the voted leeway, adding $70 per stude not bring local expenditures up to par with neiehh a districts. Clearly, the Alpine School District ' derfunded. 1 ls t aii if But the biggest complaint about the leeway is that b a poor time to raise taxes. Utah County's econo f suffering from the shutdown of Geneva Steel anin '' steel plant's imminent demise. And Utahns have 1 tually been promised a tax increase when 7i legislature meets in January - a tax increase that & largely be spent for education. i In fact, there is no good time to raise taxes R ' Tuesday's election is a question of need, not venience. The Alpine District can't afford to buy eno 1 T text books, or to pay for the materials and equiprr; needed to continue the task of teaching our children Ecl The remedy for that will have to come from lw ! sources, since state funding is likely to rem? inadequate in years to come. 11 The advancement of our civilization depends on i continued good education which focuses on the basic 1 coupled with developing the knowledge required in on- " technically-oriented society. " A vote for the leeway tax Tuesday will be a statement e of support for good education -- the kind our childrer ' deserve. att ' : . a |