Levy may be cheapest option

The school district desperately needs voters to approve the temporary supplemental levy on May 27.

It will be asking for $2.8 million and still plans on making $1 million in cuts so taxpayers will have the minimum cost to cover when the legislature left school districts around the state high and dry.

Apparently, this is the legislature's idea of "local control," shifting the tax burden from the state level to local property tax owners. They should never have taken away the local school district property tax in the first place, but after they did, they were obligated to make up the difference, which went about as far as most politicians' promises normally go.

So now it is our burden and our responsibility. When you ask people what they expect their taxes to pay for, schools usually are at the head of the list.

If it doesn't pass, the district will be forced to fall back on its "nuclear option," a set of further cuts it genuinely doesn't want to have to make. Without the levy, anything that doesn't directly support the classroom and getting kids graduated will pretty much be gone. From axing athletics to lengthening the school day while shortening the school week, the impact would be enormous and disastrous.

Furthermore, it isn't fair to ask only the teachers to bear the bulk of the burden, although that's where most of the cuts will fall -- in reduced wages and benefits. It's tough to tell someone we want them to do a good job teaching our children, and by the way, you get to do it for a lot less than you've been doing it.

The ripple effect of those pay cuts in the local economy would be significant, as well. Ultimately, we'll all pay for it once way or the other.

In truth, the cheapest option on the table is to pass the levy.

-- Kelly Everitt