Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, April 17, 1995 TAG: 9504180058
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-6 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Their elected officials have as much as said they don't care about these citizens' input, or about their desires for quality education for county children. They've as much as said that Montgomery's schoolchildren aren't as important as keeping the tax rate down.
The Board of Supervisors voted 5-2 last week for no increase in the real-estate tax rate. Votes against tax increases are usually sure winners with the public. In this case, though - no cigar.
The supervisors' decision effectively left a $2 million hole in the School Board's proposed $49 million budget. To plug the hole, school officials say they'll likely have to eliminate 16 Focus 2006 initiatives that they'd hoped to get firmly on track in the coming year. Said School Superintendent Herman Bartlett, those initiatives ``are probably all out the window.''
Bartlett is under no obligation, of course, to focus so much budget-cutting on the citizen-proposed initiatives. More money certainly does not assure improvement. And the supervisors did agree to increase county spending for schools by $833,500 over the current fiscal year. Those who voted to keep the real-estate tax rate the same rather than raise it to fully fund the School Board's requested budget will doubtless say, straight-faced at re-election time, that they're strong supporters of quality public education. (Four supervisors' seats will be filled this fall.)
That's a hollow claim, however, if their actions bring to a standstill the educational reforms identified by 18 citizen task forces that drew up the Focus 2006 plan. The residents who took part in that effort, and hundreds of others who responded favorably to it, said advances in public education should be the county's No. 1 priority.
Now, in failing to provide adequate funds for the School Board to meet that mandate from citizens, supervisors risk the possibility that Montgomery County schools will not advance, and may even backslide vis-a-vis other local school divisions that are moving ahead with comprehensive improvement plans.
Reflecting growing division in county sentiment and demography, the supervisors may be sincerely concerned about the impact of real-estate tax increases on property owners - especially, as they noted, on retirees living in Montgomery. But the supervisors, along with other county residents, should bear this in mind:
It's no favor to current taxpayers if public schools are not of a quality that helps attract new businesses that will expand the tax base so that tax rates can be kept reasonably low for all.
And it surely won't benefit future taxpayers if the children now being educated in Montgomery schools are unable to qualify for good jobs enabling them to help maintain the county's tax base.
Yes, it's an election year - a tough time for a tax increase. But an election year does not mean time off from responsible decision-making on matters of such critical import as the public schools.
by CNB