<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>"I think you are off the mark, Donovan. </FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>First of all, any parent of school-aged children can tell you a "free education" is anything but, there are fees for everything."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>No, it certainly isn't free Kai. But I am willing to bet you the fees are pennies to dollars to what the taxpayer's pay for the needs of other people's children. Education doesn't just educate, it does the feeding, raising, medicating, and everything in between. Someone has to pay for that. Parents of children should be the first source, not the taxpayer. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>"I think some costs can be reduced by making the education system less top-heavy and bureaucratic."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Its top heavy and bureaucratic because people except every service from the school districts. If it was just teachers teaching, it wouldn't need seven layers of bureaucracy. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't mind paying for things parents really want and it is a fair price. But I don't think I should have to pay for overpriced programs and equipment. It isn't fair to others in need of tax dollars. I think parents are probably in better position to see where money is being spent well and where it is not. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>"Part of the problem, especially in rural areas, is the fact there are fewer families in which to "spread the pain" of property taxes. Farms have become bigger, but the costs have soared, as well and margins are dependent on the market. Adding a huge increase in property taxes could put an even higher strain on many farms. I really don't know what the solution would be there, although a <SPAN class=yshortcuts id=lw_1237593226_0 style="BACKGROUND: none transparent scroll repeat 0% 0%; CURSOR: hand; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">regional high school</SPAN> makes some sense for <SPAN class=yshortcuts id=lw_1237593226_1 style="BACKGROUND: none transparent scroll repeat 0% 0%; CURSOR: hand; BORDER-BOTTOM: #0066cc 1px dashed">Latah County</SPAN>."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I agree, as I said in my previous post. I think it should be done on a state wide basis, not a county by county basis. Most of the wealth in Idaho is in a few counties. Most parents in many counties could not afford anything for education. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=yshortcuts id=lw_1237593226_2 style="BACKGROUND: #dceeff; CURSOR: hand; COLOR: #000; BORDER-BOTTOM: #0066cc 1px dashed">"Santa Cruz County, Arizona</SPAN> at one time had just three high schools, one public in Nogales, one private, all-girls school in Nogales and one public in Patagonia. There is one more now, in Rio Rico. The county is about 150 square miles larger than Latah County. The populations are similar, as well, with <SPAN class=yshortcuts id=lw_1237593226_3 style="CURSOR: hand; BORDER-BOTTOM: #0066cc 1px dashed">Santa Cruz County</SPAN> having an estimated 42,845 residents to Latah County's estimated 36,299."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I must say it is sort of laughable to try and compare the characterictis of Santa Cruz with Latah. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Donovan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>42,845 residents to Latah County's estimated 36,299.</FONT><BR><BR>--- On <B>Fri, 3/20/09, Kai Eiselein <I><editor@lataheagle.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Kai Eiselein <editor@lataheagle.com><BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] school funding<BR>To: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com>, vision2020@moscow.com, "Kenneth Marcy" <kmmos1@verizon.net><BR>Date: Friday, March 20, 2009, 4:50 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=yiv1125999985>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I think you are off the mark, Donovan.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>First of all, any parent of school-aged children can tell you a "free education" is anything but, there are fees for everything.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I think some costs can be reduced by making the education system less top-heavy and bureaucratic.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Part of the problem, especially in rural areas, is the fact there are fewer families in which to "spread the pain" of property taxes. Farms have become bigger, but the costs have soared, as well and margins are dependent on the market. Adding a huge increase in property taxes could put an even higher strain on many farms. I really don't know what the solution would be there, although a regional high school makes some sense for Latah County.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Santa Cruz County, Arizona at one time had just three high schools, one public in Nogales, one private, all-girls school in Nogales and one public in Patagonia. There is one more now, in Rio Rico. The county is about 150 square miles larger than Latah County. The populations are similar, as well, with Santa Cruz County having an estimated 42,845 residents to Latah County's estimated 36,299.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A title=donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com" target=_blank rel=nofollow ymailto="mailto:donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com">Donovan Arnold</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vision2020@moscow.com" target=_blank rel=nofollow ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> ; <A title=kmmos1@verizon.net href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kmmos1@verizon.net" target=_blank rel=nofollow ymailto="mailto:kmmos1@verizon.net">Kenneth Marcy</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, March 20, 2009 4:12 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] school funding</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>
<DIV>I think parents should take on a higher cost of their children's education. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There was a time when everyone had lots of children, so it made sense that every gave so much to education. But now not everyone has so many children, or any children at all. The cost of education is huge, especially with parents demanding everything little service for their children from pampers to college degree. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think parents in the top 25% income bracket should have to pay 100% of the costs of their children. I think parents in the middle 50% bracket should have to pay 50% of the cost on the first two children they have. The bottom 25% should have to pay 25% of cost of their first two children. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This would make parents responsible in both the academic wellbeing of their children, but also share in the costs of how the government spends its limited resources. They want a new program, they want a new bus, they want a gym? OK, but match the taxpayer in their commitment to your child's education. If no ones is on the line for the cost of a school bus or new jungle gym bars, the costs go from a $70,000 for a good used soild bus, to one that $185,000 brand new with every single feature to take kids just two miles a day. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I also think the funding should be collected and spent on a statewide basis, not on a county by county basis which has huge disparities in income and quality of life standards, as well as the number of children. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Donovan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>--- On <B>Fri, 3/20/09, Kenneth Marcy <I><kmmos1@verizon.net></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Kenneth Marcy <kmmos1@verizon.net><BR>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] school funding<BR>To: vision2020@moscow.com<BR>Date: Friday, March 20, 2009, 3:38 PM<BR><BR><BR>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>On Friday 20 March 2009 14:06:38 JLBrown wrote:<BR>> On a different note: do folks think it is time to re-visit how we fund our<BR>> public schools? Below is Marty Trillhaase's column from a couple of days<BR>> ago.<BR><BR>Yes. Better economic activities make local goods available in exchange for <BR>non-local dollars brought to a locality. Rescinding tax-favored property <BR>status for out-of-state owners would bring dollars into the state to lessen <BR>the amount of internal funds necessary.<BR><BR>Encourage those college-educated taxpayers with student loans outstanding to <BR>stay in Idaho to work by granting an Idaho income tax deduction for some <BR>percentage of the interest paid on student loan repayment during the tax <BR>year. I have not done calculations to determine the overall net revenue <BR>effect, but I suspect that such a benefit would encourage enough students to <BR>stay in Idaho who would
otherwise move elsewhere that the net Idaho revenue <BR>would be positive.<BR><BR>Another problem related to Idaho school funding is that some towns, often <BR>smaller ones, have populations whose ages skew toward older, fixed-income <BR>adults. Such folks may feel less inclined to support local schools than <BR>younger residents with school-aged children, with the result that local <BR>maintenance and operations levies are more difficult to pass. A possible way <BR>to offset this problem would be to create a senior resident education <BR>equalization that would adjust the state-to-local transfers to school <BR>districts so as to offset inter-district funding differences based on higher <BR>percentage older local populations.<BR><BR>More generally, we should recognize that those who earn higher business <BR>incomes are benefiting from the availability of better-educated Idahoans, and <BR>those higher business incomes should be asked to contribute to the
continuing <BR>supply of better educated Idahoans. Economic progress is better facilitated <BR>with progressive tax structures and rates. Regressively foisting the larger <BR>portion of education funding onto the backs of less prosperous Idahoans is <BR>not only less equitable, it is economically inefficient in supplying the <BR>workers businesses need and the jobs families want to provide for themselves.<BR><BR><BR>Ken<BR><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.fsr.net</A> <BR> mailto:<A
href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Vision2020@moscow.com" target=_blank rel=nofollow>Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR>
<DIV>
<HR>
<DIV></DIV>=======================================================<BR> List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR> http://www.fsr.net <BR> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table><br>