Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 4 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Editorial: Vote for the NRHEG levy
Published Friday, October 2, 2009
Another autumn in Minnesota brings another slew of school levies. Fifty-eight schools districts have levy requests on the ballot for November.
New Richland-Hartland-Ellendale-Geneva is among them. Voters will decide whether to approve another $450 per pupil, which works out to about $460,000 a year in the district’s coffers.
This newspaper endorses the approval of the NRHEG referendum.
The way Minnesota has pinched its schools is atrocious for a state that once prided itself on education. If any district wants to keep up, wants to remain a good place to raise a family, voters must approve levies — often to assist in basic education.
Lest NRHEG voters wish to let their district slip, they should vote yes on Nov. 3.
It is their way of making up for the ways their state leaders have failed them.
Between unequal state funding, state payment deferrals and a convoluted per-pupil funding system, districts are spending reserves or taking loans. Minnesota schools need help.
But until that help arrives, all school districts can do is ask their voters to lend a hand.
If you own a $100,000 home in the New Richland-Hartland-Ellendale-Geneva School District, the levy works out to about $8 a month. That’s a reasonable amount to give to the community’s children. That’s a reasonable amount to show NRHEG pride.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on October 2, 2009 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Predictably, the Tribune comes out in favor of another levy. Can ANYBODY find ANY levy that they haven't endorsed?
Predictably AGAIN, the old warhorse of "It's ONLY $8 a month" is trotted out. Last time locally, it was "the price of a pizza a month." That's $96 a year on a $100,000 house--but consider business and farm taxes.
It wouldn't be so bad if these taxes were set ONCE--but the effect is cumulative--tax upon tax upon tax.
Posted by newyankee (anonymous) on October 2, 2009 at 12:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The way Minnesota has pinched its schools is atrocious..."
Please back this up with numbers. It is not too much to ask that the voters be given all the fact to make an educated decision.
A one page itemized budget summary going back only five years would do.
Posted by toby (anonymous) on October 5, 2009 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The solution is simple. Stop all district sports in all schools. I do not care if little Johnny grows up to play in the big leagues, I just want him to be able to make change. There is WAY too much money spent on the school sports programs. The fields are there let them play and exercise, just no state or tax payer funding. Let those who want it volunteer their time and money, Not mine.
Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on October 5, 2009 at 4:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Amen, Toby! We owe kids an education, not playtime. It's hard to justify cutting teachers and educational programs while keeping sports. Very, very few kids will get a pro contract.
In the meantime, howabout a halfway measure? If "playing sports teaches valuable lessons"--then do intramural sports. No travel, no competing against other schools, just kids playing against themselves.
It gives the same "team spirit" as the as "Big Nine" sports. Those lessons used to be taught on sandlot sports--but that seems to be beyond the organizational ability of kids today. We don't need "semi-pro" organizers for sports--let sports...............BE sports........fun!
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)