Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, January 31, 1995                   TAG: 9501310127
SECTION: CURRENT                    PAGE: NRV-2   EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY 
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: RICHMOND                                 LENGTH: Medium

RURAL COUNTIES HIT HARDEST BY PROPOSED SPENDING CUTS

Suburban school districts are less likely to feel much impact from the funding cuts, according to the staff study.

In 95 of 135 localities, more money would be cut from state subsidies to schools than would be recouped by families that could take advantage of Allen's proposed income tax exemptions for children, the study showed.

In Southwest Virginia's Buchanan County, a family of four would get a 1995 income tax cut of about $20 for the two children. But Buchanan County schools would get $136 less in state aid for those two children in 1995-96 than had been promised in the two-year budget passed last year.

Other localities that would take a big hit are Lee, Fluvanna, Greensville, Cumberland, Accomack and Northampton counties and the city of Danville.

``I just want members to see that the tax savings pale in comparison to what they lose in education funding for the same children,'' said House Majority Leader C. Richard Cranwell, who requested the comparison.

If proposed cuts for colleges and police were added in, ``it gets even more dramatic,'' said Cranwell, D-Roanoke County.

Republican legislators dismissed the comparison but some say they will seek more money for schools while still supporting the tax cut.

``It is my hope that we do add additional dollars to education,'' said Sen. William C. Wampler Jr., R-Bristol, a Finance Committee member. He said any spending reductions will be outweighed by benefits to families once tax cuts are fully phased in over five years.

For a single mother earning $15,000, ``over five years, you will see her tax bill cut by two-thirds. To that single mom, that's important,'' Wampler said.

In separate interviews, two other GOP senators who represent rural areas used the same words to dismiss comparisons between school funding and income tax cuts.

``There's lies, damn lies and statistics,'' said Sens. Charles R. Hawkins of Pittsylvania and Thomas K. Norment Jr. of James City County.

Hawkins noted that legislators still would have to close a budget gap of about $250 million even without Allen's tax cut.

He said he's skeptical of statistics from the administration as well. In a recent newsletter, Hawkins told constituents he would oppose some of the governor's proposed cuts.

Norment, on the other hand, said he's happy with the Allen plan. But a school superintendent in his district said the funding cuts would have ``a devastating effect.''

``We're very concerned,'' said S. Dawn Goldstine, superintendent of Northampton County schools on the Eastern Shore. ``Some of the poorest areas would be hit the hardest.''

Allen wants to trim spending by $403 million over the next year, in part to pay the first installment on his proposed five-year, $2.1 billion cut in individual income and business taxes.

The Republican governor has pointed out that almost all school districts still would get more state aid next year. Democrats counter that it's not as much as the schools had been promised.

``It's less than we approved last year and the governor signed,'' said Del. Marian Van Landingham, D-Alexandria.

School districts facing the biggest cuts depend heavily on targeted programs, such as those to prevent students from dropping out and to maintain aging school buildings.

Legislators have set aside more money for rural and inner city schools in recent years to help them catch up to wealthier, suburban districts.

Families in some of those suburban districts would get more from the tax cut than they would lose in promised school funding, according to the study. They include Fairfax, Loudoun, Roanoke County, Albemarle and Hanover.

Keywords:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1995