By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Your Views: Schools should control spending before taxes go up
Placeholder Image

NOTE: Letters addressing Tuesday's special purpose local option sales tax vote will run through Saturday. Letters on this topic must be received by noon Friday and confirmed in time for Saturday publication.

Letters policy: Send by e-mail to letters@gainesvilletimes.com (no attached files, please, which can contain viruses); fax to 770-532-0457; mail to The Times, P.O. Box 838, Gainesville, GA 30503; or click HERE for a form. Include full name, hometown and phone number for confirmation. They should be limited to one topic on issues of public interest and may be edited for content and length (limit of 500 words). Letters originating from other sources, those involving personal, business or legal disputes, poetry, expressions of faith or memorial tributes may be rejected. You may be limited to one letter per month, two on a single topic. Submitted items may be published in print, electronic or other forms. Letters, columns and cartoons express the opinions of the authors and not of The Times editorial board.

I have read with some interest the articles regarding the upcoming election for SPLOST. As a retiree on a fixed income and no children in school, I have had mixed feelings about the issue, as my wife and I are retired and living on a fixed income while our expenses continue to rise year after year.

I was leaning toward voting for the continuation of the tax until Sunday's article contained the comment that if SPLOST doesn't pass, we're likely to see a 2-mill increase in our property taxes.

I just don't take kindly to threats, nor do I wish to continue to support public schools that seem to have no accountability for how their funds are spent.

I have watched with great interest how administrative positions in the public school arena have continued to increase at much greater expense with no, or little, accountability for results in their respective positions.

We have "specialist" administrators for curriculum, counseling, building maintenance, deans, ad nauseam. How do we demonstrate whether the contributions of any of these specialists have improved our schools or the number of children who have completed school and are actually literate? What percentage of the students our counselors have "counseled" actually finished school?

Are our buildings any better off having a building maintenance specialist reviewing our needs than having principals with the assistance of outside contractors doing so? Are we able to demonstrate in real dollar amounts what value our "specialists" add to the eduction of our children?

What percentage of our teachers have been laid off because of lack of funding versus the percentage of administrators?

I support education and we obviously need to pay for education in some way. But until I see evidence of real efforts to cut back on wasteful and unnecessary spending, and more emphasis on spending money for classroom instruction rather than administration, I cannot vote for continuing SPLOST.

Steve Wentz
Flowery Branch