Reader comments
Equalization = winners, losers

Equal is Good | 1:30 a.m. March 1, 2008

Equalization is the fair and right thing to do. Educational quality should not depend upon how rich a childs parents are. This wouldn't be good for the children nor for society.

Tab L. Uno | 4:15 a.m. March 1, 2008

I would hope that the East-Side Jordan School District voters who determined to form their own school district would be responsible for addressing their own Jordan District building equity issue and pay a larger portion of property taxes for their decision instead of getting the rest of the Salt Lake County school districts, Granite, Salt Lake, Murray to help pay for their decision. Salt Lake City residents have already committed huge amounts of their own property taxes to accept responsibiity to pay for the needed school building costs in their own District. It's time that Jordan School District - East Side residents do the same. Their tax base appears to be on par with Salt Lake City. It just seems unfair.

Bob G | 4:49 a.m. March 1, 2008

Since when has our legislators been concerned about citizen input and voting on how tax funds are spent? They never have, until one of them decides to use it as leverage. Even if the citizens were allowed to vote on spending they would ignore the vote. Schools, regardless of location, should have equal funding. The wealthy liveing in expensive homes with fewer children is imaterial. I could use the same argument saying I don't have any children in school so why should I pay school taxes? It's the same argument and I still have to pay the taxes that are based on the value of my property. What needs to be equalized is the number of children versus those with no children. The more children the more the taxes they pay. It would serve to control population and also put the burden of educating large families on those families. Large families are a burden on the rest of the citizens and they have come to expect us all to support and pay sustinance. Education taxes should be a state tax and not a county tax or district tax and not realitive to property value, then spread equally to every school.

Comments continue below

Sandy sucks | 7:35 a.m. March 1, 2008

Thanks for raising my taxes Sandy snobs. Why don't you all secede from the state?

to Bob G | 4:49 a.m | 9:38 a.m. March 1, 2008

Your idea of charging parents more who have more kids is nor fair nor is it reasonable. People that have the kids are the people who need the breaks, it is expensive to raise a kid.

Society needs a needs children. Those people who choose have no kids aren't doing their share by helping to raise the next generation unless they are also paying more taxes.

People with kids get a tax break for them, but they also put in a lot of time and effort to raise them. So the system is fair now as it is.

Ruby | 9:41 a.m. March 1, 2008

Dave Buhler (I believe he should get the credit)compared the situation to a couple that gets divorced in the neighborhood. Suddenly, they both realize, their standard of living will suffer from the divorce! Dad may need another house (can't stoop to an apartment); Mom needs daycare. SO, the couple sets about getting the neighbors to pay for their seflishness and inability to get along. Yup, just the same scenario on a bigger scale. And, similarly, it's about selfishness and no concern for the greater good of the community.

Schoolie | 10:00 a.m. March 1, 2008

I agree with Dave. Pay for your own @*!^*$%$# divorce!!!!!!

Missing the point | 10:57 a.m. March 1, 2008

The equalization problem did not start with the decision to create another district in SL County - it exists independant of that choice. The decision to create another district only brought light upon the problem (mostly 'cause somehow those on the west side of Jordan think that they're somehow "poor" even though their tax base per student will greater than 3/4 of all the other districts in Utah!!!).

Should equalization happen? That's up to you. Personally I think it ought to (even though it costs me money). If you think everyone should pay for their own, fine - and those one the west side of Jordan ought to do what everyone else in the county has already done. [please don't someone make the very false statements that somehow the west paid for schools on the east - that's patently not true, and paying for 10%-30% for something implies that someone else (east side in this case) paid the other 90%-70%]

Equalization is the right policy | 5:32 p.m. March 1, 2008

Ruby commenting about selfishness and the greater good while at the same time opposing equalization is hilarious. The whole point of equalization is that we're all in this together. What's so sad is that we as a society draw imaginary lines and once we cross some arbitrary boundary, we don't care about the kids across that line. Each child deserves an equal educational opportunity. And we all need to pay equally to fund it.

For the uninformed out there, Jordan District already pays DOUBLE the property taxes for buildings that Salt Lake, Murray, and Granite pay.
That's right - DOUBLE. So don't whine about Jordan not making its own effort. The west side of Jordan would have taxes three to four times as high as the other districts in the county when this is all done without equalization.

It all boils down to a simple question. Do we believe that all kids deserve an equal education or not?

I also enjoy the rich irony of so-called champions of public education, including Ralph Becker, arguing against an equal education for all kids. They support equal education, but only when someone else funds it. True colors emerge.

RE: Missing the point | 6:12 p.m. March 1, 2008

I'm not sure of your source, but even though Jordan will be far from the poorest school district, it will definitely be below the statewide average property tax base per student.

Hypocrisy? | 6:46 p.m. March 1, 2008

Isn't it a tad bit hypocritical to condemn Sandy residents for voting to split the district because they don't want to pay for Herriman schools if you are up in arms as a Salt Lake, Murray, or Granite resident because you don't want to pay for Herriman schools?

Anonymous | 3:10 p.m. March 2, 2008

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that Herriman is "poor".

RE: RE: Missing the point | 8:09 p.m. March 2, 2008

Source: the feasibility study done for the new district that outlines very clearly on pg. 11 that the taxable value per student for for the remaining Jordan School District would be $207,092 ($9.3 Billion (#7 in the state) in assessed value and 45,109 students) and ranked 10th in the state per the Utah State Auditor's Office. There are 40 district in the state of Utah. #14 is above average to start and with the inevitable commercial and other growth in that part of the county, that value will likely only go up.

Sorry if I quoted from actual figures and disappointed you.

RE: RE: RE: Missing the point | 8:19 a.m. March 3, 2008

Look closely at the feasibility study. The remaining Jordan District will be the 10th / 14th lowest (depending on year) out of the 41 districts. Less tax base per student than Ogden, for example, in feasibility study. In other words, roughly 65-75% of districts would have HIGHER taxable value per student. It will gradually get better over time as commercial properties come on line.

Missing data | 10:50 a.m. March 3, 2008

You assume that those district not listed have higher taxable value per student. This is not the case. Of those LISTED, you are correct, however the other 26 districts in the state all have lower assessed values per student.

RE: Missing data | 9:24 p.m. March 3, 2008

Wrong. Take a look at the data on the state office of education website under the finance section (sorry, can't add links). You'll see the entire current Jordan is right around the statewide average. The remaining portion of Jordan will simply have lower taxable values in the near future than more 65-75% of districts in the state. Largely due to minimal commercial value and lots of residential value taxed at 55% of market value. As commercial situation improves over time, so will tax base per student.

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.