Utah Legislature: School-bus ads supported by public; bill dies in House

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • I want an Advertisement dept
    March 2, 2010 9:54 a.m.

    I think adding advertisement departments would be a welcomed department in our high school here in Utah. As a teacher, I see the budget cuts everyday, including cutting back on supplies, and opportunities for the students to get hands on learning.

    Developing a whole department around advertising would not only pay for itself, it would pay for a lot of other things. It would also give students a valuable learning tool to be successful.

    To "no to ads"; You are absolutely correct in saying we have a huge burden of taxes already, and thats where advertiseing would ease those needs big time. Money doesnt just come from the government. last time I heard anything our government was borrowing from China!

    Bring in the ads, its welcomed here to help bring in the revenue.

  • Dan Jones.....
    March 1, 2010 3:48 p.m.

    polls are never to be trusted.. His polls are biased and do not reflect the majority of Utahns.

  • zorro
    March 1, 2010 2:08 p.m.

    Working in school transportation has been a life long endeavor for me. Having ads on buses has been discussed by those who are in the business of transporting children. This is nothing new, just something that came up because of the lack of funds in the state. School buses are different from UTA. By law when the red lights are flashing on a school bus the public must stop, but everyday the public "runs our reds." UTA has no such system in place. Many of UTA's routes don't go anywhere near some the the school needing service. If school buses advvertised it wouldn't be like those UTA buses that are completely covered, but more like smaller signs on the side. Nothing could go in the back because there are emergency doors on many buses there with windows that can't be covered. I personally am against advertising on school buses but if it ever comes then it has to be like the legislator said. Specific and nothing that will harm the students in the state of Utah.

  • ummmm
    March 1, 2010 1:55 p.m.

    Why does the Utah Eagle Forum care? Don't they all home school their kids anyways? I am all for being conservative especially with kids, but come on already, enough of your crying and screaming, "Won't somebody please think of the kids". Thanks Simpsons for warning us of these types years ago.

  • Re: Shelly
    March 1, 2010 12:47 p.m.

    Honestly Shelly! If teenagers can't ride UTA because it is not safe then why even have public transportation? Do you have any clue what average teens hear, see and are exposed to everyday at school from other teens? Why is it that in D.C., NYC, Chicago, London, Paris and others that students take public transportation, but in Utah it is too dangerous. Make it safe or get rid of it. I agree with this idea. If teens don't use the bus, the cycle will continue and public transport will never be used.

  • No to taxes
    March 1, 2010 10:23 a.m.

    Since Utah has the highest per child ratio and refuses to pay for all thier kids to get an education through taxes, I guess we need ads. Let's put ads in every school too- every classroom, on every test, every piece of sports equipment. Teachers should be paid to wear clothes that advertise also. Let's get Utah's education back on track by marketing every thing we can.

  • Silva
    March 1, 2010 10:02 a.m.

    Not even the legislature believes Dan Jones anymore.

    Would ads give implied endorsement? Of course they would.

  • shelly
    March 1, 2010 9:01 a.m.

    My husband drives for UTA and has for over 25 years. And although I find it to be a much needed service, I for one wouldn't want my middle school/junior high school aged son or daughter riding public transit to school. There are too many loonatics and pedofiles out there. It's scarry enough as it is in today's society without adding this to the list of things for parents and children to have to worry about.

  • Speaking of UTA
    March 1, 2010 8:29 a.m.

    Why is UTA not used as true bus service for Secondary schools (Middle, Jr. High, High School). Scedules and stops could be readjusted and those 12 or older (or whatever age seems right) could get free bus passes. These UTA routes could run more regularly at times before and after school and more stops could be created by schools. This would also create a culture of public transportation use for young people. I know UTA drivers don't want to deal with this, but it is better than a half full school bus and a half full UTA bus. Major cities already do this across the U.S.

  • Ralph
    March 1, 2010 8:29 a.m.

    Then the representatives and sentators should not accept any money from any one either. There is no difference and they are hypocrites because all they worry about is them selves and not the school children or the school districts.

  • Once again
    March 1, 2010 8:09 a.m.

    Once again our legislature votes to keep things the way they are. Heaven forbid we pull in the private sector to help fund some of our educational needs.

  • UTA?
    March 1, 2010 7:27 a.m.

    UTA can advertise, and they are funded by the Taxpayer, so why not the schools?

  • Dixie Dan
    March 1, 2010 6:45 a.m.

    Gee, what a novel idea for schools to raise money without increasing taxes. Too bad that some special interest group didn't sponser the bill as it would have then probably passed.

  • Hmm
    March 1, 2010 6:39 a.m.

    Wouldn't it just be easier to share buses with UTA where possible and let them be the traveling billboards?

  • Legislative Response
    March 1, 2010 6:17 a.m.

    We conseratives in the legislature love the idea of creativity to help struggling districts.

    You want to dissolve the 12th grade and turn all those 17 year olds loose in the streets? Sounds like a great idea!

    You want to dissolve traditional public ed and give all the money to charter schools so a few of our buddies can make a killing? Awesome!

    You want vouchers to benefit not just the poor and dissadvantaged but also the rich who don't need help all in the name of "choice?" We love it!

    You want the funding to follow the student so kids can pick up and go anywhere with their full WPU? Why not!?!

    But an advertisement on the side of a school bus??? That's just too crazy! Please come back when you hae a more reasoned, level-headed, and less dissruptive idea.


    Your Republican Legislature

  • No to Ads.
    March 1, 2010 3:41 a.m.

    Not only should the buses bear no advertising, it should be banned from in the schools as well. All the schools sell advertising in the schools and the wall are plasterer with banners promoting unhealthy lifestyles and targeting children products.

    This school advertising takes away from education and the purpose of education. When people see the school buses they should always be reminded that children are likely aboard the buses and not divert their attention to ads on the side of the buses.

    Education is not in the business of earning funds or money, they are fully ant totally tax funded and we don't need new advertising departments in the school system. There is already a large tax burden placed on homeowners, we don't need to start funding advertising departments to the burden.