Superintendent’s Corner

First I would like to congratulate the Music Department on a fine performance at the Spring Music Concert.  Amy Schroder ran a great race at the sectional track meet this past Saturday and missed qualifying for state by one place.  Girl’s Soccer had a really nice win last Thursday evening and the boy’s baseball team finished the season much improved.  We lost in the first district game, but were in the lead for the first couple of innings.  District soccer and State golf take place this week---good luck Bulldogs!

Last week I mentioned that I had received some inquiries regarding the school district putting a sales tax issue on the ballot rather than a tax levy increase.  This is not an option for a school district.  The way the laws are written and educational funding has been established, a school district only has two options to place something on a ballot.  School districts can ask for a tax levy increase or place a bond issue on the ballot.

A tax levy increase is generally used to increase funds needed for operating expenses, while a bond issue is generally on the ballot to support major repairs, building additions, or new construction projects.  To simplify this, imagine that our school district was a business that provides a specific product.  Issuing bonds would be kind of like borrowing money to meet the “one time” expense of completing an expensive project, say opening a new store.  A tax levy increase would be more like increasing the price of our product to cover the expenses to produce it.

Of course, a school district is not a typical business.  There are some similarities, but the constitution and American beliefs and values require a free education for ALL.  The only way to offer a free education for everyone is to fund it through taxes.  The major taxes available are income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes.  Each of these is currently used to help fund education across the country.

Generally speaking, the income taxes and sales taxes are given to the schools by being included in the federal and/or state budgets and then being appropriated for education.  Most of the federal money is restrictive in what it can be used to fund, while the state appropriations provide more district discretion.  The rest of the money used to fund a school district comes from local property tax money.

The amounts for each area vary by district.  Currently for Stover, the local tax money accounts for about 53% of all revenue received by the district, while 30% comes from state appropriations, and 17% from the federal government. So as you can see, for our district a very large share of the funding comes from local money.

I believe the questions about a sales tax to fund education are originating because of the recent discussions of “The Fair Tax” over the past few years.  I have to admit when I first heard of the concept, it sounded like a possible alternative.  However, all of the discussions and suggestions among the educational leaders and education financial experts is that using a sales tax to fund education would cause an even greater shortfall in state funding. Personally, I do not know of one single supporter of the concept that would be considered an expert in educational finance.  I am not saying there aren’t any, but I have not heard of anyone.

We are caught in somewhat of a paradox.  The belief is that all students be entitled to a free education, but somehow the education has to be funded!