Let's have a public discussion about school issues

I appreciate the response to my letter about school elections by Ray Antley. At least someone is involved and through discussion all of us can learn about the issues which will help all of us make better decisions when casting our ballots.

For instance, Ray brought up Montana law, which he believes requires school issues to be voted on “the second Tuesday in the month of May.” I found this curious as I recalled one of the biggest bond issues ever voted on occurred Oct. 4, 2016, which propelled my taxes upward by 43 percent. Ray forgot to mention that the law provides for “exceptions” to this requirement in subsection (5) of 20-20-105. That particular bond issue got very little discussion and the number of votes cast was only about 6,000 people, a very small number for such a huge amount of money. But it seems the timing of the votes (for whatever reason) always glosses over or doesn’t leave time for questions and issues like I bring up below.

Our schools are always in “desperate need” of money no matter how much they receive. Advocates seem to ignore the fact that the cost of educating our students has grown exponentially from $6,326 per student in 2001/02 to $9,094 per student in 2010/11 to reportedly over $12,000 now (which does not include capital costs such as buildings which could push the per student cost over $15,000). Most of these escalations come from increased costs of salaries and benefits. It seems reasonable to me that the public should be given cogent reasons why we should continue to support these seemingly unstoppable trends.

However, there are multiple other issues implicit in this discussion such as: Are all the ancillary amenities of our schools necessary to a good education? And what about the cost of school lunches which now include breakfast and afterschool treats as well? Can we afford all that luxury? Collaterally, can we afford all of our sports programs? How about the cost of our “special needs” children; is it too much? Ignored is the overwhelming issue of why it is only SD5 which is growing — should Whitefish whose school population isn’t growing contribute to the funding of these new schools?

But there are even more fundamental concerns as well. One of my main concerns is the power of the educational community in our state. Why should they dominate our Legislature? Is that appropriate? Glossed over is the ever growing need for funding the teachers’ pension fund (and all public employees). Is that still affordable and is it appropriate that it is guaranteed by our state Constitution when no private citizen has such privileges? More egregious is that fact our schools are promoting the anti-Christian world view of secular humanism inside of their curriculum including the scientifically disproven theory of evolution.

On top of that, it is reputed that our history courses are spewing forth a derogatory view of America in general and a racist anti-white theory which corresponds with current liberal doctrines (I have requested a copy of history books from Mark Flatau so I can make my own judgment).

Finally, there is the inane push to actually expand education to include 3- and 4-year-olds at a time when the public is strained to the limit to support what we have. Will this never end?

I know the questions I am asking are hard ones but I think they are fair. I also know to question the request of a leviathan the size of our educational community is not a way to win a popularity contest. But has anyone explored these issues? Can anyone answer them briefly and cogently?

We have this wonderful paper which allows us to openly discuss these issues for all our citizens to see. Write in with answers to these questions. I would relish the information. Give me the reasons to support this levy.

An open public discussion is necessary so people can make appropriately informed decisions. But if we blindly approve all requests for additional funding, there is no incentive for our school districts and/or their supporters to more carefully answer these questions to our satisfaction.

Without this appropriate information I cannot feel right about supporting this levy at this time.

Agather is a resident of Kalispell.