Reader comments
Charter funding may get shake-up
39 comments | Read story
Charter Friend | 7:16 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Charter Schools are public education.
Chuck | 7:59 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
This is the right approach, and I commend Rep. Bigelow on it. Good job!
Otherwise we manufacture an average funding from the state, giving some charters way more than the local district and some less than the district they are in. It ought to be reflective of what the locals have voted for their schools.
Otherwise we manufacture an average funding from the state, giving some charters way more than the local district and some less than the district they are in. It ought to be reflective of what the locals have voted for their schools.
Comments continue below
sounds like vouchers to me... | 8:01 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
How is this different from a voucher?
Wayne | 8:03 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
"What's yours is mine, What's mine is mine"
That seems to be the attitude when ever the school districts think someone is about to touch their money. They don't want to compete. They like the monopoly they have had for years. Why is it never about good education....?
That seems to be the attitude when ever the school districts think someone is about to touch their money. They don't want to compete. They like the monopoly they have had for years. Why is it never about good education....?
Anon | 8:09 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
The legislature's first retaliation for the public's refusal to pass
vouchers......
BBKing | 8:33 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
I like this idea.
I am a charter school supporter though they have been living in a slight vacuum for a while. Since they do not have to face the district for funding - the state has been making up the difference - they have been living in a slightly artificial world.
On the other side, since the school districts have not had to cough up the money that should follow the student, they have not had to face all of their policy decisions.
Let's face it, children are enrolled in charter schools for many reasons, to include policies deemed as insufficient by the districts. If we truly believe in reform, and letting the forces of public opinion lead us to higher ground, removing these artificial barriers will only help.
This will do more to help districts improve. I also believe that charters will no longer get a pass from community leaders. If charter schools are doing no better, and since 11 of them failed NCLB, possibly worse, they shouldn't be operating.
Let's remove the barriers to reality and see what happens. I am willing to bet only good comes from it.
Just an idea. Any thoughts?
I am a charter school supporter though they have been living in a slight vacuum for a while. Since they do not have to face the district for funding - the state has been making up the difference - they have been living in a slightly artificial world.
On the other side, since the school districts have not had to cough up the money that should follow the student, they have not had to face all of their policy decisions.
Let's face it, children are enrolled in charter schools for many reasons, to include policies deemed as insufficient by the districts. If we truly believe in reform, and letting the forces of public opinion lead us to higher ground, removing these artificial barriers will only help.
This will do more to help districts improve. I also believe that charters will no longer get a pass from community leaders. If charter schools are doing no better, and since 11 of them failed NCLB, possibly worse, they shouldn't be operating.
Let's remove the barriers to reality and see what happens. I am willing to bet only good comes from it.
Just an idea. Any thoughts?
hmmm | 8:49 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Vouchers for charter schools. Why will this work for charter schools and not for
private schools? This plan sounds like a fight waiting to happen. The charters
will have to fight to get money and the districts will fight to give it to the
administrators. One MORE way to remove competition from public schools. This
will cause even good charter schools to shut down.
Out to Luch | 9:32 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
I cannot believe the rationale of someone that compares this issue to vouchers.
As it currently stands districts get to keep the entire property tax funding for the student that lives in their district, however, chooses to attend a charter school. The state then has to dip into its reserves to fund this lost property tax to the charter school the student has transferred to.
As charter schools continue to grow districts will have fewer students which mean smaller class sizes and more funding per student.
Sounds like the districts have this voucher thing figured out.
As it currently stands districts get to keep the entire property tax funding for the student that lives in their district, however, chooses to attend a charter school. The state then has to dip into its reserves to fund this lost property tax to the charter school the student has transferred to.
As charter schools continue to grow districts will have fewer students which mean smaller class sizes and more funding per student.
Sounds like the districts have this voucher thing figured out.
Frustrated with Charters | 9:36 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
When legislators orginally created charter schools, the charter supporters said
that they could provide education better and cheaper with ONLY the WPU. As the
years have passed they've found out how difficult it is. Each year since,
they've asked for more and more supplemental funding. Now they want the
same funding provided to the districts through property taxes etc.
The legislature created this monster, they should be responsible to fund it with general fund dollars or have charter schools stick to their original promise. They should get only the WPU and have to come up with their own capital funds etc.
As a tax payer, I don't want to fund two systems. Especially an extra system that is not required to serve all students and is not faced with the same accountability standards being imposed on the State's public schools. Charter schools should not be able to skim off the top of district property taxes without approval of the voters.
Call Utah's school system what it is. Two separate systems. The question that needs to be answered is should they be funded the same. I think not.
The legislature created this monster, they should be responsible to fund it with general fund dollars or have charter schools stick to their original promise. They should get only the WPU and have to come up with their own capital funds etc.
As a tax payer, I don't want to fund two systems. Especially an extra system that is not required to serve all students and is not faced with the same accountability standards being imposed on the State's public schools. Charter schools should not be able to skim off the top of district property taxes without approval of the voters.
Call Utah's school system what it is. Two separate systems. The question that needs to be answered is should they be funded the same. I think not.
Remember the Alamo | 9:50 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Even as a public ed supporter, I have no gripe with some of the charter schools.
The ones that bother me are those in Utah County and a few areas of SL county
that are operated by elected officials -- many of them members of the
legislature. There has to be a conflict of interests somewhere and it smells
bad.
T-Rex | 10:05 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
This seems like a great idea. Maybe if traditional high schools are forced to
pay when they lose students to charter schools, they'll compete harder to
keep their students. Likewise, Charter schools would have to compete harder to
attract new students. This is like the anti-voucher. I love it.
ptamom | 11:12 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
I hate that legislators are running charter schools in Utah County or anywhere.
Which schools are they? Who are the legislators? Let's get rid of them
now!
Fred | 11:16 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Frustrated is right, the big selling point when charter schools were first
introduced was that they would do it better for less money. Doesn't seem
to be working for them. They have been increasing the level of funding for them
every year since there inception. If there are problems with the public
education system, lets fix them. Take the politics and the power struggles out
of business of education. Lets get lawmakers business leaders, educators and
parents to sit down and make the system work.
beentheredonethat | 11:37 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
There is an old joke heard around the legislature - the old Congressman,
speaking to the press, says, "We agree with the President on the problem,
but we disagree on the solution... He wants US to raise taxes; we want HIM
to." This issue of changing the charter funding formula is similar. Rep.
Bigelow's job is to craft the STATE budget. Simply moving charter school
funding items from the STATE budget to the district budget doesn't change
what is spent, it just changes whose budget carries it. Rather than spread the
cost over the entire system, Rep. Bigleow would place that cost more on the
individual district with the bad fortune to lose students to charter schools.
That will surely create more contention between districts and charters (like
before). But, maybe it will cause better competition between them too.
Personally, I doubt the districts will compete. More likely they'll just
become more hostile and attack charter schools and parents (also like before).
Parent | 11:40 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
This is just vouchers all over again.
Charter schools are going to be the downfall of our school system.
Open one up. Take money. Try it a few years before you realize the public schools actually do know what they are doing. Then close and leave the kids wondering what happened.
Some of my neighbors have had their kids in 3 different schools the last 3 years only to realize that the public ed neighborhood school is the best one around. Unfortunately they are coming back mid year so all of the classes are now overloaded with no money following the students back to the school.
We need to fund public ed only. No charter schools. No vouchers. But we need to fund it better than we are now and watch our kids and teacher accomplish more than we ever thought possible.
Charter schools are going to be the downfall of our school system.
Open one up. Take money. Try it a few years before you realize the public schools actually do know what they are doing. Then close and leave the kids wondering what happened.
Some of my neighbors have had their kids in 3 different schools the last 3 years only to realize that the public ed neighborhood school is the best one around. Unfortunately they are coming back mid year so all of the classes are now overloaded with no money following the students back to the school.
We need to fund public ed only. No charter schools. No vouchers. But we need to fund it better than we are now and watch our kids and teacher accomplish more than we ever thought possible.
Derek | 11:46 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
The legislation sounds like a good idea. And Steven, Charter Friend is right:
charter schools ARE public schools. We're not robbing Peter to pay Paul,
we're robbing Peter to pay Peter.
This bill and the issues it raises highlight a problem with education in Utah: "public education" only defines and defends one method of education with one form of funding and one set of educational values, to the exclusion of everyone else who thinks and feels differently enough choose a different method. The current circumstances are a reflection of those leading and influencing public education today.
It is time that our public education system support the education of Utah's children, period, instead of supporting the education of Utah's children only if their parents agree to follow the educational path that public education leaders feel is best. The philosophy of the current system contains a moral schizophrenia that needs to be reconciled before significant education reform can happen. The funding bill discussed in the article is based on the right principles and way of thinking about education. Unfortunately, that means it is met with opposition from public education leaders who see it as "undermining public education." Actually it just supports education.
This bill and the issues it raises highlight a problem with education in Utah: "public education" only defines and defends one method of education with one form of funding and one set of educational values, to the exclusion of everyone else who thinks and feels differently enough choose a different method. The current circumstances are a reflection of those leading and influencing public education today.
It is time that our public education system support the education of Utah's children, period, instead of supporting the education of Utah's children only if their parents agree to follow the educational path that public education leaders feel is best. The philosophy of the current system contains a moral schizophrenia that needs to be reconciled before significant education reform can happen. The funding bill discussed in the article is based on the right principles and way of thinking about education. Unfortunately, that means it is met with opposition from public education leaders who see it as "undermining public education." Actually it just supports education.
Parent too | 11:55 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
I don't understand how people who are supposedly so passionate about
education can be so ignorant of basic facts.
Charter schools ARE public schools. They are required to teach state mandated curriculum and take state accountability tests. Rep. Bigelow's solution may not be the best one, but let's not intentionally stir up the pot by complaining and spreading misinformation.
The focus should be on providing the best education for our students
Charter schools ARE public schools. They are required to teach state mandated curriculum and take state accountability tests. Rep. Bigelow's solution may not be the best one, but let's not intentionally stir up the pot by complaining and spreading misinformation.
The focus should be on providing the best education for our students
just me | 11:55 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
The thing about charter schools is that they say everyone can attend;however,if
you notice the board of the schools or whomever only picks the students from the
wealthier neighborhoods. I don't think children from charter schools
should be able participate in the public schools sports. You think your too good
for public schools? Then your too good for the public schools sports. Form your
own teams!!
Taxpayer and Parent | 11:55 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Whether or not someone argued ten years ago that charters could operate more
cheaply is not relevant today. First, the "we can do it cheaper"
purpose is not found anywhere in Utah code. Second, children that attend Utah
charter schools are Utah students also, as fully deserving of our best efforts
as students attending district schools. And, third, it will soon become a legal
question of "equity" or "equality." Courts have dealt with
the same issue in other states and they will in Utah too if Utah charter school
students are not funded equitably with district students. Finally, Utah's
charter schools are part of the Utah Public School System just as much as are
schools in the Jordan District. Do parents in the Granite District hate that
the state funds schools in the Jordan District? Do people in Salt Lake County
hate that the State funds education for children living in Sanpete County?
Probably not. So, why all the hate for equitably funding Utah public schools
operating under a charter rather than a district? I wonder if it has anything
to do with "union shop" versus "non-union shop?"
Dennis Lisonbee | 11:56 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Sorry folks, this has nothing to do with private schools and vouchers. Charter
Schools ARE public education. I'm glad we finally have some bold
legislators who are taking a serious look at public education.
RE: Parent | 11:57 a.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Hey Parent,
There is nothing wrong with Charter Schools. Your statement reflects the fact that you are a product of public education, thus you are biased. Public education is crumbling, which is why it is a hot topic across the nation. Have you even looked at the public education funding? More funding is NOT the answer. The answer is providing an environment that is a team effort with teachers and parents. That is why charter and private schools are so successful. They REQUIRE parent involvement. Public education is a tax funded day care, in which you get a pretty diploma after 12 wasted years.
There is nothing wrong with Charter Schools. Your statement reflects the fact that you are a product of public education, thus you are biased. Public education is crumbling, which is why it is a hot topic across the nation. Have you even looked at the public education funding? More funding is NOT the answer. The answer is providing an environment that is a team effort with teachers and parents. That is why charter and private schools are so successful. They REQUIRE parent involvement. Public education is a tax funded day care, in which you get a pretty diploma after 12 wasted years.
Monty Hardy | 12:10 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Utah parents WANT charter schools. They are voting with their feet. Charters
ARE "public" schools. As we sit together at the table (legislators,
educators & parents) to find a long-term funding solution, let's
remember why charters came into existance in the first place. They are usually
governed by a very pasionate parent board and are created through the great
personal sacrifice of volunteer founders. The intent was never to harm the
traditional public school system, only to enhance it. Just walk into one of
these schools, talk to students, staff and parents. You will find it is
WORKING!
We must be careful as we create what some are calling "parity" between charters and tradional schools. Perhaps this is the time to look at the property tax funding inequities in all public schools (charters included). Lets work with both systems to try and create a funding solution that not only supports charters in the long-run, but gives the traditional system the dollars it needs as well. It is worth the work to create a mutually beneficial bill. If we do, Utah children will benefit the most.
We must be careful as we create what some are calling "parity" between charters and tradional schools. Perhaps this is the time to look at the property tax funding inequities in all public schools (charters included). Lets work with both systems to try and create a funding solution that not only supports charters in the long-run, but gives the traditional system the dollars it needs as well. It is worth the work to create a mutually beneficial bill. If we do, Utah children will benefit the most.
Charter Accountability | 12:32 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Who has oversight over how charters will spend this money? What elected body
decides how these public dollars will be spent? The locally elected school board
decides if a district school is opened and public money spent. If a group of
parents organize a school they are automatically entitled to state, and now,
local property tax revenue. Who do I hold accountable if I don't like what
a local charter school is doing/teaching?
Parent | 1:37 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
If a student and parent choose a charter school, then they should have to stay
there for the whole time. Seven years of elementary, three of junior high,
three of high school.
I'd be willing to let them come back to public ed after elementary or after junior high, but they shouldn't be allowed to switch back and forth each year of even mid-year.
Too many kids are getting left behind by parents running to the next greatest thing only to be switched back after the parents see what is going on.
Of course this isn't every case but it is happening too frequently.
Kids need stability. Pass a law that says that can't keep switching and I'll support any type of funding they want.
I'd be willing to let them come back to public ed after elementary or after junior high, but they shouldn't be allowed to switch back and forth each year of even mid-year.
Too many kids are getting left behind by parents running to the next greatest thing only to be switched back after the parents see what is going on.
Of course this isn't every case but it is happening too frequently.
Kids need stability. Pass a law that says that can't keep switching and I'll support any type of funding they want.
Another problem | 1:45 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Too often kids come back to their home school after trying a charter school, In
a couple of areas, they came back in droves and created staffing/class size
issues for the school mid-year. The law should require them to remain at least a
a year.
Anonymous | 3:46 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
I'd be more supportive of charter schhols if the traditional public schools
were also allowed to limit the class sizes in same fashion as charter schools.
Charter schools want financial parity with public schools, yet they are allowed
to limit class sizes, a perk the public schools are not. Charter schools are
nothing more than publicly-funded private schools with parents who would think
the solution to public education is to run away from the perceived problems of
the public schools and form their own. They are often the parents who would
prefer to send their children to private schools but either cannot afford it or
unwilling to pay for it. And there was a poll a while back of charter school
parents in which something like 60% of parents indicated the number one reason
they send their kids to charter schhols is to give them the "private school
experience".
ummm | 3:48 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
You can only require students to stay a whole year at a charter school IF you
force the same on district schools. They are both PUBLIC schools. A family could
not move during the school year or they would have to provide transportation for
their child to continue with the same school. No more "open"
enrollment so you could allow your child to attend a different school. Think
before you decide to punish others.
Lining their pockets | 4:33 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
This money, if diverted to charter schools, will only serve to line the pockets
of those charter school developers who build schools, lease them to charter
schools for a lot of money, and then sell them back to the school down the road
for even more money. Now we want to give them the added kicker of tax money
every year for debt service? Follow the money trail, my friends, and see where
it leads.
Parent | 5:50 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Dear Lining their pockets,
You are right, follow the money. I've followed the money and found it is costing taxpayers more per square foot for the new Alpine School District schools than for charter schools. Also take a look at the fees being paid by Alpine School in architect fees to a current legislator. (That is the same legislator ASD and the teachers union got elected.)
All those costs are public record.
You are right, follow the money. I've followed the money and found it is costing taxpayers more per square foot for the new Alpine School District schools than for charter schools. Also take a look at the fees being paid by Alpine School in architect fees to a current legislator. (That is the same legislator ASD and the teachers union got elected.)
All those costs are public record.
They're not better | 9:01 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Actually, most charter schools have shown that they're no better, and some
worse, than public schools. Why divert any money when the public schools still
need it? Get the public schools to 14 students to a classroom like you can get
in a charter. If this is a program that the legislature supports they should
support it fully, but leave public schools out of it.
Karen | 9:27 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
To those of you who suggested that the property taxes represent money per
student --- WRONG! Only the state WPU is money per student. Your tax bill
doesn't depend on how many people there are in your household. If charters
start to get money from a district, it means that the district will have to
increase it's property tax collections. Yeah, that'll go over really
big,now, won't it.
beentheredonethat | 10:22 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Charter schools recieve funding equal to, or arguably less than districtr
schools. So, if charter schools really do achieve smaller class sizes, how do
they do it? Now there is a valid question you might ponder. And, the answer
is, "because they CHOOSE to." Yes, it is that simple. If district
schools wanted to limit their class sizes to 25 students per class (like many
charters do) they absolutely could. They could do it exactly the same way a
charter does it - spend the budget on classroom instruction. If you want to
argue that districts CAN'T do this, then please explain why they
can't.
Steven Jarvis | 10:29 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Bingo Karen!
The funding inequity does need to be addressed, but we also need higher levels of funding across the board. If we do what is being proposed, property taxes will go up because what is being collected automatically becomes insufficient to cover the bond debt. Instead an increased allocation of funds through the State makes more sense, especially while we are in the boom years.
The whole reason Charters are needing additional funds is many are in the process of buying the properties they are currently leasing through bonds. This wasn't a factor when the movement started, but will save more money in the long run.
The funding inequity does need to be addressed, but we also need higher levels of funding across the board. If we do what is being proposed, property taxes will go up because what is being collected automatically becomes insufficient to cover the bond debt. Instead an increased allocation of funds through the State makes more sense, especially while we are in the boom years.
The whole reason Charters are needing additional funds is many are in the process of buying the properties they are currently leasing through bonds. This wasn't a factor when the movement started, but will save more money in the long run.
Anonymous | 11:44 p.m. Dec. 10, 2007
Dear beentheredonethat,
districts pay for transportation, special education, teaching English as a second language, and a host of other services that they must provide. Also, charters are struggling financially which is why the legislature wants them off state funding and onto local funding.
districts pay for transportation, special education, teaching English as a second language, and a host of other services that they must provide. Also, charters are struggling financially which is why the legislature wants them off state funding and onto local funding.
Lining their pockets | 9:36 a.m. Dec. 11, 2007
Parent:
Are you telling me that charter schools are building comparable or better quality buildings than ASD for a lower cost? I don't think so!
Charter Schools, in general, are building to a lower standard. And the developer doesn't care. They lease you the building for a few years, then sell it back to you at some incredible mark-up, and they are done and gone. They have cashed out their investment and it doesn't matter to them whether the building lasts fifty years or five, or even whether from that point on you're able to make your payments or not. School Districts have to plan on building schools that will still be usable in fifty years. The developers behind some charter schools aren�t thinking that long term.
Also, cheaper is not necessarily better. I could build you a school for about $1.50/square foot. You make it sound like that would be perfect. It would be made with cardboard and wouldn't have a roof. But if you want low cost, I can do it for you.
Are you telling me that charter schools are building comparable or better quality buildings than ASD for a lower cost? I don't think so!
Charter Schools, in general, are building to a lower standard. And the developer doesn't care. They lease you the building for a few years, then sell it back to you at some incredible mark-up, and they are done and gone. They have cashed out their investment and it doesn't matter to them whether the building lasts fifty years or five, or even whether from that point on you're able to make your payments or not. School Districts have to plan on building schools that will still be usable in fifty years. The developers behind some charter schools aren�t thinking that long term.
Also, cheaper is not necessarily better. I could build you a school for about $1.50/square foot. You make it sound like that would be perfect. It would be made with cardboard and wouldn't have a roof. But if you want low cost, I can do it for you.
Anonymous | 6:16 p.m. Dec. 11, 2007
Dear Anonymous - The State (through the Legislature) pays most (about 80%) of
the transportation costs of districts. True - the districts pay about 20% of
their transportation costs. They also have the taxing authority to get that
money out of the property owners in the district. The legislature's desire
to move the "property tax replacement" funding from their budget to
the districts has nothing whatsoever to do with charters "struggling
financially" or not. It has everything to do with the belief among some
legislators (including Rep. Bigelow and Sen. Stephenson) that the districts
"double dip" tax funds by funding their budget with locally collected
property taxes when some of the students living within the district are educated
in charters, not district schools. Changing the funding mechanism solves the
perceived "double dipping" problem. Plus, it helps the legislature to
balance its own budget because it won't have to appropriate quite so much
to charter schools. Personally, I disagree with the "double dipping"
theory. I believe the present method for funding the schools is the best way to
minimize contention between districts and charters. But, apparently that
isn't as much of a motivator to legislators as it was four years ago.
Steven Jarvis | 6:58 a.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Lining their Pockets,
Actually these Charters are built to a very high quality. Step into one that was built from scratch and you will see how nice the buildings are. Where they save the most money is in property size and building plans. Districts pay stupid amounts for building plans so they end up building several schools exactly the same.
Actually these Charters are built to a very high quality. Step into one that was built from scratch and you will see how nice the buildings are. Where they save the most money is in property size and building plans. Districts pay stupid amounts for building plans so they end up building several schools exactly the same.
Homer | 5:18 p.m. Dec. 13, 2007
The selling point for charters (which are PUBLIC SCHOOLS) is not the
ever-alluring "better for less money". It's simply that they can
do it differently and therefore provide alternative educational services to
meet the specific needs of some students.
They actually do what they do for less money right now, but that doesn't seem like the best way to equitably meet the needs of Utah's students.
I agree with the post that mainstream public schools could make changes and do things differently if they wanted to. For example, a charter school doesn't usually allow a football coach to have three prep periods to watch game film and pencil out offensive plays. A big high school could choose to use that same time and money towards class instruction and teaching more students.
I'm glad that charter schools at least have a chance to prove themselves. Equitable funding would be nice. But we're all on the same side here--we don't need to have a fight between public schools.
They actually do what they do for less money right now, but that doesn't seem like the best way to equitably meet the needs of Utah's students.
I agree with the post that mainstream public schools could make changes and do things differently if they wanted to. For example, a charter school doesn't usually allow a football coach to have three prep periods to watch game film and pencil out offensive plays. A big high school could choose to use that same time and money towards class instruction and teaching more students.
I'm glad that charter schools at least have a chance to prove themselves. Equitable funding would be nice. But we're all on the same side here--we don't need to have a fight between public schools.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Springville has strong coaching staff 11:51 p.m.
- Man dead after home invasion 11:48 p.m.
- Man sentenced in child beating 11:46 p.m.
- 2 men sentenced for '06 slaying 11:46 p.m.
- I-15 driver may have suffered stroke 11:46 p.m.
- NFL notes: Belichick defends himself 11:43 p.m.
- Obama, Hu stress teamwork 11:38 p.m.
- Top 25 roundup: Wall leads Wildcats 11:29 p.m.
- UVU campus briefs 11:28 p.m.
- NHL roundup: Ovechkin set to return 11:23 p.m.
- MWC expand? Get rid of deadweight
- Relieved Cougs prep for Falcons
- Wounded Utes limp home
- Jazz rookies had to grow up quickly
- Big games keep UHSAA coffers full
- Barzee is expected to plead guilty
- Sloan misses practice
- RSL surprised by Chicago's Fire
- Low in vit. D? Beware heart disease
- Jazz notes: Young bigs ride bench
- TCU creams U.
233 - BYU happy to escape with victory232
- Editorial: Mormons and gay rights226
- Will state consider gay rights law?162
- RSL heads to MLS title game134
- Can BYU root for (ick) Utah Utes?133
- MWC expand? Get rid of deadweight122
- TCU stays 4th in AP; Y. 19th, U. 23rd115
- 5A: Bingham rolls to title game108
- Bennett at center of GOP storm89
The Gateway, 400 W. 200 South, will kick off the holiday shopping season...
I was a bit under the weather last week, which gave me some time to...
Advertisement
Latest comments
@G.S. 11:40 a.m.: "While the legislature is at it, be sure to stop all the...
The church may not need the BSA, but scouting is a worthwhile program and the...
I remember, as a kid, hearing about people who had been to all the LDS...
Wow. How sad. He adopted three children before being caught? Was in...
Glad they are safe. Glad the rescuers are safe. Glad the rescuers had the...
Comprehensive youth protection rules, guidelines and procedures have been put...
well the education level is easily matched...but that's not saying much
We will crush you JD crush you.
I think the public should be aware in part because this guy has been around...
He'll win it...best of the TEs for sure
Advertisements
This is what would eventually have happened had we been foolish to pass the Voucher legislation. We really need to vote in some decent upstanding types for legislators that won't constantly be attacking public education.